Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[REVIEW]: X.509 Compliant Hybrid Certificates for the Post-Quantum Transition #1606

Closed
whedon opened this issue Jul 29, 2019 · 44 comments

Comments

@whedon
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jul 29, 2019

Submitting author: @j-braun (Johannes Braun)
Repository: https://github.com/CROSSINGTUD/bc-hybrid-certificates
Version: 1.0.1
Editor: @danielskatz
Reviewer: @jbasney, @jteheran
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.3365786

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/04d39dd271866597b0f7f9bcc4434968"><img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/04d39dd271866597b0f7f9bcc4434968/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/04d39dd271866597b0f7f9bcc4434968/status.svg)](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/04d39dd271866597b0f7f9bcc4434968)

Reviewers and authors:

Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)

Reviewer instructions & questions

@jbasney & @jteheran, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:

  1. Make sure you're logged in to your GitHub account
  2. Be sure to accept the invite at this URL: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/invitations

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @danielskatz know.

Please try and complete your review in the next two weeks

Review checklist for @jbasney

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

  • Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
  • License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
  • Version: 1.0.1
  • Authorship: Has the submitting author (@j-braun) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

  • Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
  • Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
  • Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
  • Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
  • Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
  • Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the function of the software can be verified?
  • Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

  • Authors: Does the paper.md file include a list of authors with their affiliations?
  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • References: Do all archival references that should have a DOI list one (e.g., papers, datasets, software)?

Review checklist for @jteheran

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

  • Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
  • License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
  • Version: 1.0.1
  • Authorship: Has the submitting author (@j-braun) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

  • Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
  • Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
  • Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
  • Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
  • Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
  • Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the function of the software can be verified?
  • Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

  • Authors: Does the paper.md file include a list of authors with their affiliations?
  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • References: Do all archival references that should have a DOI list one (e.g., papers, datasets, software)?
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jul 29, 2019

Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @jbasney, @jteheran it looks like you're currently assigned to review this paper 🎉.

⭐️ Important ⭐️

If you haven't already, you should seriously consider unsubscribing from GitHub notifications for this (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews) repository. As a reviewer, you're probably currently watching this repository which means for GitHub's default behaviour you will receive notifications (emails) for all reviews 😿

To fix this do the following two things:

  1. Set yourself as 'Not watching' https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews:

watching

  1. You may also like to change your default settings for this watching repositories in your GitHub profile here: https://github.com/settings/notifications

notifications

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@whedon commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@whedon generate pdf
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jul 29, 2019

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jul 29, 2019

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jul 29, 2019

👋 @jbasney, @jteheran - Here's where we do the review - please read the comments in this issue for instructions, but basically, your job is to either check off your items in the first comment or explain why you can't - either briefly here, or by opening issues in the source repo and mentioning this issue in them to create a link from here to there.

Thanks for being willing to do this, and if you have any questions, please ask me

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

👋 @j-braun - note that there are a couple of issues waiting for your response

@j-braun

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

@whedon generate pdf

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 9, 2019

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 9, 2019

@j-braun

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

@whedon generate pdf

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 9, 2019

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 9, 2019

@j-braun

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

@danielskatz - we took care of the issues and fixed them

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

👋 @jbasney, @jteheran - please check and see what else needs to be done, if anything

@jbasney

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

looks good to me

@jteheran

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

looks good to me too

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

@whedon generate pdf

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 9, 2019

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 9, 2019

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

@whedon check references

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 9, 2019

Attempting to check references...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 9, 2019


OK DOIs

- 10.1007/978-3-319-59879-6_22 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.3364471 is OK
- 10.1109/SFCS.1994.365700 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

@j-braun - please merge CROSSINGTUD/bc-hybrid-certificates#4 or let me know any changes you don't agree with.

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 9, 2019

After that, please make a Zenodo archive of the software, and report the DOI here. If the version number has changed, please report that here as well.

@j-braun

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 10, 2019

@whedon generate pdf

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 10, 2019

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 10, 2019

@j-braun

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 10, 2019

@danielskatz I agreed to your changes, and only fixed one last typo.
Version is now v1.0.1
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3365225

@danielskatz, @jbasney, @jteheran - thank you very much for your quick review and support

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 10, 2019

@whedon set 1.0.1 as version

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 10, 2019

OK. 1.0.1 is the version.

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 10, 2019

@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.3365225 as archive

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 10, 2019

OK. 10.5281/zenodo.3365225 is the archive.

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 10, 2019

@j-braun - Can you change the title of the zenodo archive to match the paper title?

@j-braun

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 12, 2019

@danielskatz - Updating the title in Zenodo was not possible. Instead Icreated a new release matching the paper title. This triggered a new archive, but also created a new DOI.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3365786
hope this is ok.

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 12, 2019

@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.3365786 as archive

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 12, 2019

OK. 10.5281/zenodo.3365786 is the archive.

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 12, 2019

@whedon accept

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 12, 2019

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 12, 2019

Check final proof 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#893

If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in openjournals/joss-papers#893, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag deposit=true e.g.

@whedon accept deposit=true
@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 12, 2019

@whedon accept deposit=true

@whedon whedon added the accepted label Aug 12, 2019

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 12, 2019

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 12, 2019

🐦🐦🐦 👉 Tweet for this paper 👈 🐦🐦🐦

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 12, 2019

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

  1. Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#894
  2. Wait a couple of minutes to verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01606
  3. If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
  4. Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? notify your editorial technical team...

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 12, 2019

@jbasney, @jteheran - thanks very much for reviewing!

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Aug 12, 2019

🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:

Markdown:
[![DOI](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01606/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01606)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01606">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01606/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01606/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01606

This is how it will look in your documentation:

DOI

We need your help!

Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.