-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
[REVIEW]: xtal2png: A Python package for representing crystal structure as PNG files #4528
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
Comments
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 |
Review checklist for @PeterKrausConflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
@dandavies99 and @PeterKraus, let me know if you have any questions about getting your reviews started! Feel free to file issues in the project repository as you do so; please link to this issue for easy tracking. |
@rkurchin it's on my todo list for tomorrow. |
Alright, this is quite an interesting software package, and it's in a fairly good state. I've made a couple of issues on the project github, I will play around with the software over the next few days. @sgbaird, please let me know (here or in the issues) once you want me to have another look. |
@PeterKraus thanks for your feedback! I've addressed each of your comments for the Software paper and the Documentation issues. It's ready for a second look! (p.s. I wasn't sure if I should be marking the tasks/checkboxes as done or not, so I left them unchecked) EDIT: the ones in the xtal2png repo issues |
(@sgbaird to clarify for you, the checklists are to be filled out by the reviewers, so leaving them unchecked was right 🙂 ) |
I'll have a look on Monday. Have a nice weekend! |
Review checklist for @dandavies99Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
Hi @sgbaird, this software is looking great. @PeterKraus - thanks for getting there first and carrying out such a thorough review! You've covered almost all of the main points I spotted already. I'll update comments in this thread and open specific issues as I go through the checklist. A few initial minor points from me (apologies if these are already being addressed in separate issues): Installation
Docs
Software paperThe paper is one of the longer JOSS papers I've come across, certainly within chemistry, but I like the level of detail so personally think this is fine. It hits all the criteria above in the checklist. |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
Looks really great. I'll give the paper another read, and I have a few crystal structures that I'd like to test out, but apart from that I'm more than happy. |
From my side, once the minor points I've mentioned above are addressed I will tick off Installation and Functionality. Other than that, I'm also happy and look forward to seeing this package in action - I'm sure it'll be very widely used. |
Alright, I have made two more issues, but they are not a blocker for me accepting. After you address the comments in sparks-baird/xtal2png#144, feel free to close the issue. The documentation issue, sparks-baird/xtal2png#146, can be closed already. @rkurchin, do I need to do anything with the bot to recommend accept? |
Done! version is now 0.9.3 |
@editorialbot recommend-accept |
|
|
IDREFS attribute rid references an unknown ID "ref-sahariaPaletteImagetoImageDiffusion2022" |
Ah... woops. I thought I had changed it back to |
Version: |
@editorialbot check references |
|
@editorialbot set 0.9.4 as version |
Done! version is now 0.9.4 |
@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.6941663 as archive |
Done! Archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.6941663 |
@editorialbot recommend-accept (my apologies for the extra delay fixing this very tiny thing 😆 ) |
|
|
👋 @openjournals/joss-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#3409, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command |
@editorialbot accept |
|
🐦🐦🐦 👉 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... |
@dandavies99, @PeterKraus – many thanks for your reviews here and to @rkurchin for editing this submission! JOSS relies upon the volunteer effort of people like you and we simply wouldn't be able to do this without you ✨ @sgbaird – 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: @sgbaird (Sterling Baird)
Repository: https://github.com/sparks-baird/xtal2png
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main
Version: 0.9.4
Editor: @rkurchin
Reviewers: @dandavies99, @PeterKraus
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.6941663
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
@dandavies99 & @PeterKraus, 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 @rkurchin 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 @PeterKraus
📝 Checklist for @dandavies99
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: