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

[PRE REVIEW]: Missingno: a missing data visualization suite #443

Closed
whedon opened this Issue Oct 29, 2017 · 27 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
8 participants
@whedon
Collaborator

whedon commented Oct 29, 2017

Submitting author: @ResidentMario (Aleksey Bilogur)
Repository: https://github.com/ResidentMario/missingno
Version: 0.3.7
Editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Reviewer: @rhiever

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @ResidentMario. The JOSS editor (shown at the top of this issue) will work with you on this issue to find a reviewer for your submission before creating the main review issue.

@ResidentMario if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread. In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission.

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 whedon added the pre-review label Oct 29, 2017

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon

whedon Oct 29, 2017

Collaborator

Hello human, I'm @whedon. I'm here to help you with some common editorial tasks for JOSS.

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

@whedon commands
Collaborator

whedon commented Oct 29, 2017

Hello human, I'm @whedon. I'm here to help you with some common editorial tasks for JOSS.

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

@whedon commands
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Nov 20, 2017

@whedon generate pdf

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon

whedon Nov 20, 2017

Collaborator
Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
Collaborator

whedon commented Nov 20, 2017

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

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon

whedon Nov 20, 2017

Collaborator
PDF failed to compile for issue #443 with the following error: 

 pandoc-citeproc: Could not find paper.bib
CallStack (from HasCallStack):
  error, called at src/Text/CSL/Pandoc.hs:224:39 in pandoc-citeproc-0.10.4-BdOyQb33rzG2TMOLj4Fbp9:Text.CSL.Pandoc
pandoc: Error running filter pandoc-citeproc
Filter returned error status 1
Looks like we failed to compile the PDF

Collaborator

whedon commented Nov 20, 2017

PDF failed to compile for issue #443 with the following error: 

 pandoc-citeproc: Could not find paper.bib
CallStack (from HasCallStack):
  error, called at src/Text/CSL/Pandoc.hs:224:39 in pandoc-citeproc-0.10.4-BdOyQb33rzG2TMOLj4Fbp9:Text.CSL.Pandoc
pandoc: Error running filter pandoc-citeproc
Filter returned error status 1
Looks like we failed to compile the PDF

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Nov 20, 2017

Member

@arfon if there are no references, do we need an empty paper.bib file?

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Nov 20, 2017

@arfon if there are no references, do we need an empty paper.bib file?

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Nov 20, 2017

Member

@pzwang @rhiever @tacaswell @wesm @jreback @bryevdv is this JOSS submission your cup of tea? Would you be willing to review this?

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Nov 20, 2017

@pzwang @rhiever @tacaswell @wesm @jreback @bryevdv is this JOSS submission your cup of tea? Would you be willing to review this?

@arfon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@arfon

arfon Nov 20, 2017

Member

@arfon if there are no references, do we need an empty paper.bib file?

I guess not but in this case the paper.md file should not be pointing to a paper.bib file that doesn't exist. IMO the current paper is rather too brief and lacking context. I'd encourage the author to flesh this out (and perhaps cite related work/packages?)

Member

arfon commented Nov 20, 2017

@arfon if there are no references, do we need an empty paper.bib file?

I guess not but in this case the paper.md file should not be pointing to a paper.bib file that doesn't exist. IMO the current paper is rather too brief and lacking context. I'd encourage the author to flesh this out (and perhaps cite related work/packages?)

@wesm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@wesm

wesm Nov 20, 2017

I don't have the bandwidth to help unfortunately

wesm commented Nov 20, 2017

I don't have the bandwidth to help unfortunately

@ResidentMario

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ResidentMario

ResidentMario Nov 20, 2017

I'm happy to edit the write-up for content, I wasn't too sure how much is enough or too much. In terms of citations, there's an R package that was inspired by this Python package here, as well as this blog post describing the issue the package tackles more generally. Hopefully that can cover references.

ResidentMario commented Nov 20, 2017

I'm happy to edit the write-up for content, I wasn't too sure how much is enough or too much. In terms of citations, there's an R package that was inspired by this Python package here, as well as this blog post describing the issue the package tackles more generally. Hopefully that can cover references.

@rhiever

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rhiever

rhiever Nov 20, 2017

Collaborator

Same as @wesm - bad time of the year for me. If you still need a review in mid-January, please feel free to ping me again.

Collaborator

rhiever commented Nov 20, 2017

Same as @wesm - bad time of the year for me. If you still need a review in mid-January, please feel free to ping me again.

@bryevdv

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bryevdv

bryevdv Nov 21, 2017

Sorry, I am in the middle of a selling a house and moving across the country, I am too swamped. Additionally I don't feel especially qualified to comment on MPL related things.

bryevdv commented Nov 21, 2017

Sorry, I am in the middle of a selling a house and moving across the country, I am too swamped. Additionally I don't feel especially qualified to comment on MPL related things.

@arfon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@arfon

arfon Jan 26, 2018

Member

👋 @rhiever - we're still looking for a reviewer for this submission. Any chance we could take you up on your offer 😁

Member

arfon commented Jan 26, 2018

👋 @rhiever - we're still looking for a reviewer for this submission. Any chance we could take you up on your offer 😁

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 26, 2018

@whedon assign @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman as editor

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon

whedon Jan 26, 2018

Collaborator

OK, the editor is @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Collaborator

whedon commented Jan 26, 2018

OK, the editor is @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Jan 26, 2018

Member

@zkamvar would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS?

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 26, 2018

@zkamvar would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS?

@rhiever

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rhiever

rhiever Jan 26, 2018

Collaborator

What type of review is needed - code review? Functionality review? I don't see a full paper attached to this submission.

Collaborator

rhiever commented Jan 26, 2018

What type of review is needed - code review? Functionality review? I don't see a full paper attached to this submission.

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Jan 26, 2018

Member

@rhiever thanks for your reply. We are currently in a pre-review issue. If you agree to review I'll open a review issue and you'll be able to see the paper as well (the author here still needs to update their paper).

Here is an example of a review issue with 3 reviewers taking part. Essentially reviewers tick boxes at the top of the review issue. From the tickboxes you can see most of the review focuses on the software functionality and documentation.

Papers are typically very short (e.g. see the paper submitted to the review issue I linked to).

You can also read more about our reviewer guidelines.

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 26, 2018

@rhiever thanks for your reply. We are currently in a pre-review issue. If you agree to review I'll open a review issue and you'll be able to see the paper as well (the author here still needs to update their paper).

Here is an example of a review issue with 3 reviewers taking part. Essentially reviewers tick boxes at the top of the review issue. From the tickboxes you can see most of the review focuses on the software functionality and documentation.

Papers are typically very short (e.g. see the paper submitted to the review issue I linked to).

You can also read more about our reviewer guidelines.

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Jan 26, 2018

Member

@ResidentMario please expand your paper as per our guidelines. You can also check out some accepted papers to get a better picture of the content and level of detail presented in them.

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 26, 2018

@ResidentMario please expand your paper as per our guidelines. You can also check out some accepted papers to get a better picture of the content and level of detail presented in them.

@rhiever

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rhiever

rhiever Jan 26, 2018

Collaborator

OK, I can act as a reviewer on this paper.

Collaborator

rhiever commented Jan 26, 2018

OK, I can act as a reviewer on this paper.

@ResidentMario

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ResidentMario

ResidentMario Jan 26, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman 👍 To review the status of this submission, I've gotten a smattering inquiries on how to cite this library, and this seemed like the perfect venue to achieve that. I made a pretty minimal submission to test the waters. Very happy to flush it out more.

ResidentMario commented Jan 26, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman 👍 To review the status of this submission, I've gotten a smattering inquiries on how to cite this library, and this seemed like the perfect venue to achieve that. I made a pretty minimal submission to test the waters. Very happy to flush it out more.

@zkamvar

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@zkamvar

zkamvar Jan 26, 2018

Collaborator

Hello! Yes, I would be happy to review this.

Caveats:

  1. I am primarily an R developer and use python on more of a monthly basis.
  2. I am the author of the R package that @ResidentMario mentioned in this comment (Though I don't see a citation necessary as the name was derived from a pokemon glitch).
Collaborator

zkamvar commented Jan 26, 2018

Hello! Yes, I would be happy to review this.

Caveats:

  1. I am primarily an R developer and use python on more of a monthly basis.
  2. I am the author of the R package that @ResidentMario mentioned in this comment (Though I don't see a citation necessary as the name was derived from a pokemon glitch).
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Jan 26, 2018

Member

Great. Two reviewers is perfect. I'll open the review issue with @rhiever as first reviewer. I'll then also add @zkamvar as second reviewer. Here we go.

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 26, 2018

Great. Two reviewers is perfect. I'll open the review issue with @rhiever as first reviewer. I'll then also add @zkamvar as second reviewer. Here we go.

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 26, 2018

@whedon assign @rhiever as reviewer

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon

whedon Jan 26, 2018

Collaborator

OK, the reviewer is @rhiever

Collaborator

whedon commented Jan 26, 2018

OK, the reviewer is @rhiever

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Jan 26, 2018

Member

@whedon start review magic-word=bananas

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 26, 2018

@whedon start review magic-word=bananas

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon

whedon Jan 26, 2018

Collaborator

OK, I've started the review over in #547. Feel free to close this issue now!

Collaborator

whedon commented Jan 26, 2018

OK, I've started the review over in #547. Feel free to close this issue now!

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Jan 26, 2018

Member

Okay review has started over at #547.

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 26, 2018

Okay review has started over at #547.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment