[REVIEW]: GRDzhadzha: A code for evolving relativistic matter on analytic metric backgrounds #5956
Comments
editorialbot
added
C++
Makefile
Python
review
Track: 1 (AASS)
|
Hello humans, 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: For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type: |
|
|
Wordcount for |
|
|
Hi @rashti-alireza and @ekwessel, and thanks again for agreeing to review. This is the review thread for the paper. All of our correspondence will now happen here. Please read the "Reviewer instructions & questions" in the first comment above, and generate your checklists by commenting The JOSS review is different from most other journals. We aim to work with the authors to help them meet our criteria instead of merely passing judgment on the submission. We also encourage reviewers to submit issues and pull requests on the software repository. When doing so, please mention We aim for the review process to be completed within about 4-6 weeks but start whenever you can. JOSS reviews are iterative and the authors can start responding while you continue to review other parts of the submission. Finally, don't hesitate to ask many any questions you might have about the process. |
|
Hi too to @dinatraykova, and apologies for the relatively long wait while we found an editor (me!) and reviewer for your submission, but we're at last ready to start! |
|
Hello! Just checking in to apologize for the delay! I have looked over the submission, but had some other tasks pre-occupy me in the previous week. Those are now done, so I will begin making progress on the checklist items tomorrow |
|
Hi all! Thanks for agreeing to review our submission and no worries about the delay :) |
Review checklist for @ekwesselConflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
|
Hi all, hope you're all doing great. I have started the review. |
Review checklist for @rashti-alirezaConflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
|
@dinatraykova : |
|
@rashti-alireza Regarding the contributions, some of the authors contributed in writing the code at earlier stages, before it was moved to a separate repository and some authors have their own forks where they tested the code for specific problems and shared feedback with the developers, and where this was sufficiently significant we included them in the author list. |
|
I have completed my review, and as far as I can see, everything looks good! The biggest hold-up for me was figuring out how to install GRChombo (which I have never used before) on a new cluster. The process involved some trial and error, drawing on a good amount of experience configuring codes in HPC environments. However, for performant NR codes such as this, cluster-specific configuration is essential, and it is reasonable to expect any potential users ought to have the necessary technical skills. Additionally, I found the GRChombo documentation provided very helpful guidance. In particular the repository of common issues and their resolutions was crucial to enabling me to identify and fix issues with my configuration. So, while this slowed me down, I don't believe it is a issue. After GRChombo was installed and the tests were passing, installing GRDzhadzha based on the provided instructions in this repository was easy. I built and ran the tests, which passed, as well as the examples, and was able to plot their output, which looks sensible. The only statement about performance in the paper involved a very rough comparison between comparable situations in GRChombo and GRDzhadzha: I was able to compare the runtime of one of the GRChombo examples to the similar BoostedBH example here, and can verify that the claims about the relative speedup are accurate. I am therefore recommending acceptance of this code. Well done! |
|
@dinatraykova I do have one small question: what inspired the name "GRDzhadzha"? |
|
@editorialbot recommend-accept |
|
I'm sorry @ekwessel, I'm afraid I can't do that. That's something only editors are allowed to do. |
|
@dinatraykova
|
|
@dinatraykova |
|
@dinatraykova |
@ekwessel hanks for your review! The name comes from the Bulgarian word for dadget, джа-джа (dzha-dzha), to keep in line with the naming of GRChombo/GRTeclyn, where combo and teclyn mean tool in Swahili and Welsh |
@rashti-alireza Thanks for the useful comments and questions! We have added citations or clarifications to the text as requested (with the exception of the statement in line 19:"...one imposes significant symmetries”, which is quite general, and so there is no specific citation that can be provided. )
We specify this in more detail in the statement of need section.
Thanks for pointing this out, the caption was missed and is now added.
This paper is still in preparation, so we removed the false link from the citation.
This was a typo in a previous version of the draft, it's been corrected. |
|
Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.10839756 |
|
@editorialbot set v1.0 as version |
|
Done! version is now v1.0 |
|
Hi @dinatraykova, I'm not sure if you noticed that I opened a PR with one last typo. |
|
Ah thanks @warrickball ! Just merged it :) |
|
@editorialbot generate pdf |
|
@editorialbot check references |
|
|
Hi again @dinatraykova, I have to sheepishly admit I introduced a syntax error in my fix (citations should be separated by |
|
@warrickball no worries, I should've also noticed! And thanks again :) |
|
@editorialbot generate pdf |
|
@editorialbot check references |
|
|
@editorialbot recommend-accept |
|
|
|
👋 @openjournals/aass-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published. Check final proof 👉📄 Download article If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in openjournals/joss-papers#5226, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command |
editorialbot
added
the
recommend-accept
|
@editorialbot accept |
|
|
Ensure proper citation by uploading a plain text CITATION.cff file to the default branch of your repository. If using GitHub, a Cite this repository menu will appear in the About section, containing both APA and BibTeX formats. When exported to Zotero using a browser plugin, Zotero will automatically create an entry using the information contained in the .cff file. You can copy the contents for your CITATION.cff file here: CITATION.cff
If the repository is not hosted on GitHub, a .cff file can still be uploaded to set your preferred citation. Users will be able to manually copy and paste the citation. |
|
🐘🐘🐘 👉 Toot 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... |
|
Many thanks to @rashti-alireza and @ekwessel for reviewing and to @warrickball for editing! JOSS relies upon the volunteer effort of people like you and we simply wouldn't be able to do this without you!! @dinatraykova — Your paper is now accepted and published in JOSS! ⚡🚀💥 |
|
🎉🎉🎉 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! The 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:
|
Submitting author: @dinatraykova (Dina Traykova)
Repository: https://github.com/GRChombo/GRDzhadzha.git
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.0
Editor: @warrickball
Reviewers: @rashti-alireza, @ekwessel
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.10839756
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
@rashti-alireza & @ekwessel, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review.
First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @warrickball 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 ✨
Checklists
📝 Checklist for @ekwessel
📝 Checklist for @rashti-alireza
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: