[PRE REVIEW]: bumbl: An R package for modeling growth-switchpoint-decline in bumblebee colony size

[whedon]

Submitting author: @Aariq (Eric R. Scott)
Repository: https://github.com/Aariq/bumbl
Version: v1.0.0
Editor: Pending
Reviewer: Pending
Managing EiC: Daniel S. Katz

⚠️ JOSS reduced service mode ⚠️

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:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7a652c8b3ef4356bfd675f1ebb7375a4"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7a652c8b3ef4356bfd675f1ebb7375a4/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7a652c8b3ef4356bfd675f1ebb7375a4/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7a652c8b3ef4356bfd675f1ebb7375a4)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @Aariq. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@Aariq if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @whedon is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @whedon can do for you type:

@whedon commands

[whedon]

Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

⚠️ JOSS reduced service mode ⚠️

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.

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]

Wordcount for paper.md is 845

[whedon]

Software report (experimental):

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.05 s (591.1 files/s, 78641.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Markdown                         8            342              0            879
R                               10            114            252            648
XML                              1              0              2            441
Rmd                              5            245            496            371
YAML                             4             20              6            119
TeX                              2              9              0             47
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            30            730            756           2505
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistical information for the repository 'f334f684fd49f61a549065c1' was
gathered on 2021/07/23.
No commited files with the specified extensions were found.

[whedon]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1111/ele.12581 is OK
- 10/bqhp9z is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[whedon]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[danielskatz]

👋 @Aariq - thanks for your submission. Due to the relatively small amount of code, the editors will now discuss if it meets the substantial scholarly effort criterion for review by JOSS. You should hear back in a week or so.

[danielskatz]

@whedon query scope

[whedon]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[danielskatz]

👋 @Aariq - I'm sorry to say that after discussion amongst the JOSS editors, we have decided that this submission does not meet the substantial scholarly effort criterion for review by JOSS. Please see https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#other-venues-for-reviewing-and-publishing-software-packages for other suggestions for how you might receive credit for your work.

I also apologize for the longer-than-expected decision process.

[danielskatz]

@whedon reject

[whedon]

Paper rejected.

[Aariq]

Thanks, I understand. Out of curiosity, was this decision based in part on me being the sole author, or was it just the relatively small amount of code? I understand if you can't say.

…

On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 6:44 PM Daniel S. Katz ***@***.***> wrote: 👋 @Aariq <https://github.com/Aariq> - I'm sorry to say that after discussion amongst the JOSS editors, we have decided that this submission does not meet the substantial scholarly effort <https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#substantial-scholarly-effort> criterion for review by JOSS. Please see https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#other-venues-for-reviewing-and-publishing-software-packages for other suggestions for how you might receive credit for your work. I also apologize for the longer-than-expected decision process. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3532 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGB2K35Y3J4JE7QSSQBHUB3T3G7FRANCNFSM5A4SMNMQ> . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS <https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675> or Android <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&utm_campaign=notification-email> .

[danielskatz]

You being sole author was not a factor.