[PRE REVIEW]: otoole: OSeMOSYS Tools for Energy Work

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @trevorb1 (Trevor Barnes)
Repository: https://github.com/OSeMOSYS/otoole
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss
Version: v1.0.3
Editor: @fraukewiese
Reviewers: @olejandro, @fneum
Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e93a191ae795b171beff782a68fdc467"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e93a191ae795b171beff782a68fdc467/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e93a191ae795b171beff782a68fdc467/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e93a191ae795b171beff782a68fdc467)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @trevorb1. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@trevorb1 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 @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

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

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

@editorialbot commands

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

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.09 s (685.4 files/s, 132039.0 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          29           1496           1708           5461
YAML                            11             38             36           1077
reStructuredText                12            365            183            984
TeX                              1             10              0            132
INI                              1             11              0             73
Markdown                         2             25              0             55
JSON                             1              0              0             26
Bourne Shell                     2              6              4             24
make                             1              6              8             15
TOML                             1              1              3              5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            61           1958           1942           7852
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 977

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.033 is OK
- 10.12688/openreseurope.15461.1 is OK
- 10.1038/s41597-022-01737-0 is OK
- 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.039 is OK
- 10.1007/s12532-017-0130-5 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.6522795 is OK
- 10.1016/j.esr.2021.100650 is OK
- 10.1016/j.envsci.2022.07.007 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

[kyleniemeyer]

@editorialbot invite @fraukewiese as editor

Hi @fraukewiese, could you edit this submission? It looks to be in your wheelhouse.

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[fraukewiese]

Thanks for the request. Yes I can edit this submission.

[fraukewiese]

@whedon assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

My name is now @editorialbot

[fraukewiese]

@trevorb1 : Do you have suggestions for reviewers?

[fraukewiese]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @fraukewiese is now the editor

[trevorb1]

Hi @fraukewiese, I will take a look at the list shortly and suggest some reviewers. Thanks for agreeing to be the editor!

[trevorb1]

Hi @fraukewiese. Looking through the list provided by JOSS, suitable reviewers that we have no conflicts of interest with may be:

• brynpickering
• fneum
• olejandro
• zoltanmaric

If you need more names, please just let me know!

[fraukewiese]

@fneum , @olejandro , @zoltanmaric – would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

[olejandro]

Thanks @fraukewiese! Yes, I can do it.

[fneum]

Hi @fraukewiese, the next weeks look a bit busy for me, so I could only do it from mid-June. Sign me up if that's ok and you don't find any reviewers with an earlier availability.

[fraukewiese]

@olejandro : Great, thanks! I add you to the reviewer list.

[fraukewiese]

@editorialbot add @olejandro as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@olejandro added to the reviewers list!

[fraukewiese]

@fneum : Thank you very much! I think mid June is fine, so I will add you as reviewer and know that you will not start before mid June

[fraukewiese]

@editorialbot add @fneum as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@fneum added to the reviewers list!

[fraukewiese]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #5511.

[fraukewiese]

@olejandro @fneum – many thanks for agreeing to review here! See you over in #5511 where the actual review will take place.