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]: gaussplotR: Fit, Predict and Plot 2D Gaussians in R #3074
Comments
Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @cddesja, @brunaw it looks like you're currently assigned to review this paper 🎉. Due to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, JOSS is currently operating in a "reduced service mode". You can read more about what that means in our blog post. ⭐ 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:
For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:
For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
|
|
|
I'm done with my review, a few comments justifying what I missed in the package & suggestions are below:
Please let me know if any of this isn't clear or if I can improve my suggestions, Bruna |
I will try to do my review this weekend or early next week.
…On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 10:15 AM Kristina Riemer ***@***.***> wrote:
Thanks for the quick turnaround time on the review @brunaw
<https://github.com/brunaw>! Your comments are useful, and I definitely
agree with adding contribution information and fleshing out the use cases
of the package in the paper. Hopefully @vbaliga
<https://github.com/vbaliga> will have a chance to address them soon!
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3074 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMIZ24EVJB3OXLYPFMJJYTTCDYRFANCNFSM4YM66MVA>
.
|
This is my first thing to do on Monday morning.
Chris
…On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 4:15 PM Vikram Baliga ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi everyone - Thanks sincerely to @brunaw <https://github.com/brunaw> for
your review. I am happy to incorporate your feedback. If it's OK, I'd like
to hold off until @cddesja <https://github.com/cddesja> has a chance to
submit his review too, so that he does not have to review a moving target.
Best regards,
Vikram
🐢
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3074 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMIZ22DI2FMRA2MH6DQTPDTDJY63ANCNFSM4YM66MVA>
.
|
I have waited too long and now my invitation has expired. Can I get a new
invitation so that I can work on this today?
…On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 12:36 PM whedon ***@***.***> wrote:
*Submitting author:* @vbaliga <https://github.com/vbaliga> (Vikram B.
Baliga <http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9367-8974>)
*Repository:* <https://github.com/vbaliga/gaussplotR>
https://github.com/vbaliga/gaussplotR
*Version:* v0.2.3
*Editor:* @KristinaRiemer <https://github.com/KristinaRiemer>
*Reviewer:* @cddesja <https://github.com/cddesja>, @brunaw
<https://github.com/brunaw>
*Archive:* Pending
*
|
👋 @brunaw, please update us on how your review is going (this is an automated reminder). |
👋 @cddesja, please update us on how your review is going (this is an automated reminder). |
I need a new invitation to complete the review and I can finish it.
…On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 1:37 PM whedon ***@***.***> wrote:
👋 @cddesja <https://github.com/cddesja>, please update us on how your
review is going (this is an automated reminder).
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3074 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMIZ235J7KDZJDVLY4HDKDTDZAT5ANCNFSM4YM66MVA>
.
|
OK, the reviewer has been re-invited. @cddesja please accept the invite by clicking this link: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/invitations |
Thanks for doing that @danielskatz! Let us know if that doesn't work @cddesja. |
I am done with my review as well.
Chris |
After I posted my review, I was thinking about my comment about the So in summary, I think this is up to the authors to decide on. I would personally not request a certain |
"I would personally not request a certain R version if my package really didn't depend on it (to avoided issues like I had)" This is a good reason to not require 4.0. So, I think @brunaw you're right that this requirement should be removed. |
Thanks sincerely to both of you for reviewing @brunaw
I agree. Forcing users to have R >= 4.0.0 was too stringent a requirement and not necessary for the package's current functionality. I scanned through all of
This was a great suggestion and one that motivated me to write custom
Thanks. The reason this wasn't there before was because it doesn't seem to be a requirement for JOSS. But in any case, I agree with the merit of adding it and have placed a section within the README that provides this info. Thanks for the suggestion.
Thanks for this as well. I have made several changes to the paper, particularly to the summary and statement of need, to give readers a clearer understanding of the basic problems and how @cddesja
Thanks for catching this. I believe I have now caught the errors in reference formatting.
I've opted to rephrase the last part of the sentence to give a couple more details.
Thanks -- as noted above, I have added a section to the README.
Thanks, I agree. I have added a citation to the
With all due respect, I disagree. This is not a standard practice, and I have only seen it done on the rare occasion that a package has strict requirements (e.g. needing a java installation on the computer, only working on MacOS, etc). Moreover, the requirements for
Thanks!
As noted above, I am comfortable with relaxing this requirement. It was not necessary and I thank you @brunaw for catching it
I have made large revisions to the beginning of the paper. From the outset, I have added an explanation of how 2D-Gaussians are used in Priebe et al., 2003 in relatively non-technical language. I would prefer to not go into detail about our in-prep paper, though I will note that much of the analysis in it follow methods used by Priebe et al. So I am hoping that with the revisions I've made to the summary and statement of need, I have now made the motivation behind writing Thanks again to both of you! Best regards, |
@vbaliga, I am fine with your changes. Regarding
I was just basing this off the Installation Instruction checklist. I agree that your package has few requirements and If the user does want to see them they can visit: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/gaussplotR/index.html |
|
Great, thanks for doing that @vbaliga! So we want the archived code to match the submission, so could you change the title on Zenodo to "gaussplotR: Fit, Predict and Plot 2D-Gaussians in R"? |
@KristinaRiemer sure thing! I just pushed an update to Zenodo (v0.2.5, see: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4657750). The corresponding release on the github repo is available here: https://github.com/vbaliga/gaussplotR/releases/tag/v0.2.5 |
@KristinaRiemer - is this ready for you to recommend acceptance at this point? |
@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.4657750 as archive |
OK. 10.5281/zenodo.4657750 is the archive. |
@whedon set v0.2.5 as version |
OK. v0.2.5 is the version. |
@whedon accept |
|
|
👋 @openjournals/joss-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published. Check final proof 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#2197 If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in openjournals/joss-papers#2197, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag
|
👋 @vbaliga - there are two small changes in vbaliga/gaussplotR#1 - if you can merge this, we should be able to proceed to publication. |
@whedon accept |
|
|
👋 @openjournals/joss-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published. Check final proof 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#2202 If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in openjournals/joss-papers#2202, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag
|
@whedon accept deposit=true |
|
🐦🐦🐦 👉 Tweet for this paper 👈 🐦🐦🐦 |
🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨 Here's what you must now do:
Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team... |
Congratulations to @vbaliga (Vikram B. Baliga)!! And thanks to @cddesja and @brunaw for reviewing, and @KristinaRiemer for editing! |
🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉 If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:
This is how it will look in your documentation: 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:
|
@danielskatz and @KristinaRiemer -- thank you so much! |
Submitting author: @vbaliga (Vikram B. Baliga)
Repository: https://github.com/vbaliga/gaussplotR
Version: v0.2.5
Editor: @KristinaRiemer
Reviewer: @cddesja, @brunaw
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.4657750
Due to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, JOSS is currently operating in a "reduced service mode". You can read more about what that means in our blog post.
Status
Status badge code:
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
@cddesja & @brunaw, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @KristinaRiemer know.
✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨
Review checklist for @cddesja
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
Review checklist for @brunaw
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: