-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
[PRE REVIEW]: Pyafscgap.org: Open source multi-modal Python-based tools for NOAA AFSC RACE GAP #5516
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 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:
For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
|
|
Wordcount for |
|
Hello! Excited about this and thanks for taking us to this step. Please note that pyopensci had one more thing for us to change in our badges and the current version is 1.0.2. Thanks! See pyOpenSci/software-submission#93 We are approved by pyopensci and listed on their website. |
@editorialbot set v1.0.2 as version |
I'm sorry @sampottinger, I'm afraid I can't do that. That's something only editors are allowed to do. |
Oh ok 😅. Sorry I might need someone's help with updating that version. In the meantime, I'll take care of that DOI. I also read some recent JOSS reviews here so will try to take care of a few small things I've seen highlighted elsewhere. |
Try to shorten paper to meet length criteria, clarify that it is multiple survey programs / multiple datasets behind a common API, check ORDS DOI (there doesn't appear to be an appropriate one). See openjournals/joss-reviews#5516
@editorialbot generate pdf |
Regenerated the preview! Also wanted to mention the json line count… that json line count comes from the npm related files. Thanks! |
The ORDS DOI from editorial bot (10.1007/978-1-4842-6011-1_12) was not right. I think the citation as is might still be best. Thanks! |
@editorialbot check repository |
|
Wordcount for |
@editorialbot check repository |
|
Wordcount for |
Sorry for the noise. I saw we were getting a little above the length guideline. Just trimmed a little bit to get closer to the guidance. Thanks again for your consideration. |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@editorialbot set v1.0.2 as version |
Done! version is now v1.0.2 |
@editorialbot check references |
|
@sampottinger I am the AEiC for this track and here to help process initial steps. In the meantime, can you please see if you can address that potentially missing DOI ☝️ ? You can edit your .bib file and call |
@editorialbot invite @graciellehigino as editor |
Invitation to edit this submission sent! |
Hello! Thanks very much @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman and nice to meet you @graciellehigino.
Appreciate your flagging this. The paper is citing ORDS itself and the DOI offered is a book about getting started with ORDS. The technology itself does not appear to have a publication with a DOI. Thank you!
We appreciate your help. I just briefly wanted to mention that I noticed that some other submissions have a pyopensci tag but we do not. That in mind, I just wanted to note that pyopensci has accepted / approved us. See pyOpenSci/software-submission#93. Thank you both! Please let me know if there’s anything else I can do. |
@graciellehigino 👋 do you think you can help edit this one? |
Hello all! Just checking in. Is there anything we can do to help from our end? Thanks for your time! |
Hi all! This seems like a really interesting submission! However, I don't think I can help with this one because I always have a hard time finding Python users among ecologists. I think I'm on the wrong network for this... Sorry! |
Thanks @graciellehigino! @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman how would you like to proceed? Thank you both! |
@editorialbot invite @Bisaloo as editor |
Invitation to edit this submission sent! |
@editorialbot assign me as editor |
Assigned! @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman is now the editor |
This is a pyopensci related submission which was reviewed here: pyOpenSci/software-submission#93 |
@editorialbot start review |
Can't start a review without reviewers |
@editorialbot assign me as reviewer |
I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:
|
@editorialbot add @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman as reviewer |
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman added to the reviewers list! |
@editorialbot start review |
OK, I've started the review over in #5593. |
Submitting author: @sampottinger (A Samuel Pottinger)
Repository: https://github.com/SchmidtDSE/afscgap
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.0.2
Editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Reviewers: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @sampottinger. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
@sampottinger if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.
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:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: