[PRE REVIEW]: Metrics As Scores: A Tool- and Analysis Suite and Interactive Application for Exploring Context-Dependent Distributions

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @MrShoenel (Sebastian Hönel)
Repository: https://github.com/MrShoenel/metrics-as-scores
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): paper
Version: v1.0.8
Editor: @mikldk
Reviewers: @mdhaber, @jstvssr
Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/eb549efe6c0111490395496c68717579"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/eb549efe6c0111490395496c68717579/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/eb549efe6c0111490395496c68717579/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/eb549efe6c0111490395496c68717579)

Author instructions

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

@MrShoenel 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=0.06 s (492.5 files/s, 55355.0 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          15            507            102           1864
TeX                              1             21              0            299
Markdown                         5            108              0            234
HTML                             3             13              4            123
JSON                             2              2              0             87
TOML                             1              4              0             44
CSS                              1              5              0             24
YAML                             1              1              4             21
JavaScript                       1              1              0             14
DOS Batch                        1              0              0              2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            31            662            110           2712
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1396

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1109/ISSRE.2000.885858 is OK
- 10.1109/ICSM.2010.5609747 is OK
- 10.1007/s11219-021-09568-9 is OK
- 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2990567 is OK
- 10.1145/2507288.2507314 is OK
- 10.1109/32.544352 is OK
- 10.1145/3338906.3341462 is OK
- 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2924040 is OK
- 10.1109/32.295895 is OK
- 10.1145/3183440.3195103 is OK
- 10.1109/METRIC.2004.1357891 is OK
- 10.1080/03461238.1928.10416862 is OK
- 10.1080/01621459.1974.10480196 is OK
- 10.1214/aoms/1177704477 is OK
- 10.1080/00949658608810963 is OK
- 10.1201/9780203738535 is OK
- 10.2307/3001913 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1016/0950-5849(93)90091-g may be a valid DOI for title: Practical Software Metrics For Project Management And Process Improvement

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

[MrShoenel]

The missing DOI is the only one related to this reference. However, it is not the correct one. The DOI found refers to an article about the book, not the book itself. But we have an ISBN at least :)

[MrShoenel]

I would like to suggest any of these reviewers (unordered list):
Tiago L. Alves, Christiaan Ypma, Joost Visser, Cem Kaner, Saida Benlarbia, Khaled El Emamb Nishith Goelc, Shesh Raid

[arfon]

@MrShoenel - thanks for your submission to JOSS. We're currently managing a large backlog of submissions and the editor most appropriate for your area is already rather busy.

For now, we will need to waitlist this paper and process it as the queue reduces. Thanks for your patience!

[kthyng]

Hi @mikldk! Can you edit this submission?

[kthyng]

@editorialbot invite @mikldk as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[mikldk]

@kthyng Sorry, this and next week is packed for me so I have to decline. Sorry.

[kthyng]

@mikldk Totally understand. If you will have the time after next week, it would still be great to have you edit this submission. What do you think?

[mikldk]

@mikldk Totally understand. If you will have the time after next week, it would still be great to have you edit this submission. What do you think?

That's fine by me.

[mikldk]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @mikldk is now the editor

[mikldk]

@MrShoenel

I would like to suggest any of these reviewers (unordered list): Tiago L. Alves, Christiaan Ypma, Joost Visser, Cem Kaner, Saida Benlarbia, Khaled El Emamb Nishith Goelc, Shesh Raid

Do you have their Github usernames (please, without the @ to avoid tagging)?

[MrShoenel]

I think some of my suggestions are not on GitHub or I cannot find the associated user names.
However, I found the following people on GitHub that should be qualified to conduct a review: Maurício Aniche (mauricioaniche), Joost Visser (jstvssr), Matt Haberland (mdhaber), Ralf Gommers (rgommers), and Evgeni Burovski (ev-br).

[mikldk]

@mdhaber, @rgommers: Would you be interested in reviewing this submission to The Journal of Open Source Software? Reviews are open and based on a checklist. The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. If you have any questions or concerns please let me know.

[mdhaber]

Yes, I can review it.

[mikldk]

@editorialbot add @mdhaber as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@mdhaber added to the reviewers list!

[rgommers]

Thanks for asking @mikldk. I'm going to have to decline - I'm too swamped with other open source topics.

[mikldk]

@mauricioaniche, @ev-br: Would you be interested in reviewing this submission to The Journal of Open Source Software? Reviews are open and based on a checklist. The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. If you have any questions or concerns please let me know.

[mikldk]

@mauricioaniche, @ev-br, @jstvssr: Would you be interested in reviewing this submission to The Journal of Open Source Software? Reviews are open and based on a checklist. The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. If you have any questions or concerns please let me know.

[ev-br]

@mikldk thanks for the ping. Sadly, I won't be able to review it at this time.

[mikldk]

@editorialbot add @jstvssr as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@jstvssr added to the reviewers list!

[mikldk]

@jstvssr has kindly agreed. (Due to a busy schedule, the review is not expected to be completed before the end of January 2023.)

[mikldk]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #4913.

[mikldk]

@MrShoenel : Do you have a suggestion for a new second reviewer? (Writing here to avoid too much noise in the review thread.)

[MrShoenel]

Hey, I have the following suggestions:

• angeloschatzimparmpas
• kostiantyn-kucher
• rafaelmessias, and
• tobias-dv-lnu.

Edit: I have added the Github username for rafaelmessias.

[mikldk]

@angeloschatzimparmpas: Would you be interested in reviewing this submission to The Journal of Open Source Software? Note that the submission is already reviewed by one reviewer (#4913), but reviewer 2 does not respond and thus we need a new reviewer.

Reviews are open and based on a checklist. The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. If you have any questions or concerns please let me know.

[angeloschatzimparmpas]

Hello @mikldk ,

I regret to inform you that my current workload includes numerous review commitments for this and next month. In light of these circumstances, I would like to suggest kostianty-kucher as a suitable alternative. Thank you for your understanding.

[mikldk]

@kostiantyn-kucher : Would you be interested in reviewing this submission to The Journal of Open Source Software? Note that the submission is already reviewed by one reviewer (#4913), but reviewer 2 does not respond and thus we need a new reviewer.

Reviews are open and based on a checklist. The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. If you have any questions or concerns please let me know.

[kostiantyn-kucher]

Dear @mikldk ,

Yes, I think I will be able to act as a reviewer, although I cannot guarantee that I would submit my review until the beginning of July (but I will do my best).

For a full disclosure regarding potential conflicts of interest, please note that one of the submission co-authors, Morgan Ericsson, and I were among the co-editors of the SweDS21 workshop: https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Alnu%3Adiva-108364 , and I was also employed at Linnaeus University (the affiliation of all the submission authors) until August 2022 (I am currently not affiliated with LNU anymore and I have not had or currently have any co-authored publications, funding, etc. with the submission authors, though).

[mikldk]

Thanks, @kostiantyn-kucher

[mikldk]

@kostiantyn-kucher Please see issue #4913 for the review.