[PRE REVIEW]: Projit: An Open Source tool for Decoupled Data Science

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @john-hawkins (John Hawkins)
Repository: https://github.com/john-hawkins/projit
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.0.1
Editor: @arfon
Reviewers: @claresloggett, @Wytamma
Managing EiC: Chris Vernon

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d9ef7e44278dec2d5597763118e56e45"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d9ef7e44278dec2d5597763118e56e45/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d9ef7e44278dec2d5597763118e56e45/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d9ef7e44278dec2d5597763118e56e45)

Author instructions

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

@john-hawkins 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:

@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 1.90  T=0.03 s (1284.5 files/s, 151357.5 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          14            441            759           1415
TeX                              2             88             83            527
Markdown                         3             72              0            282
reStructuredText                 9            198            175            153
YAML                             3             11             12             62
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
Bourne Shell                     3             11              0             15
make                             1              4              7              9
JSON                             1              0              0              1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            37            833           1037           2490
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    86	John Hawkins
    47	John
    10	Hawkins
     2	Jesse Wu

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.tex is 2998

🔴 Failed to discover a Statement of need section in paper

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[arfon]

@john-hawkins – apologies for the slow response here. It looks like JOSS is erroneously picking up your paper.tex file here rather than the paper.md. A couple of options:

1. Prepare a new branch with only the files needed for the paper compilation (or with the paper.tex file removed)
2. Rename paper.tex to something else. e.g., otherpaper.tex

[john-hawkins]

@arfon -- Sorry for my slow response. I have followed the second suggestion and renamed the latex file for an extended piece of work on applications in escience.

[arfon]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

DrWatson: the perfect sidekick for your scientific inquiries
Submitting author: @tamasgal
Handling editor: @dpsanders (Retired)
Reviewers: @jpfairbanks, @kescobo, @apdavison
Similarity score: 0.6799

pactus: A Python framework for trajectory classification
Submitting author: @gvieralopez
Handling editor: @arfon (Active)
Reviewers: @JustinShenk, @miladmzdh
Similarity score: 0.6748

omni-fig: Unleashing Project Configuration and Organization in Python
Submitting author: @felixludos
Handling editor: @gkthiruvathukal (Active)
Reviewers: @julianpistorius, @jarrah42
Similarity score: 0.6686

PyExperimenter: Easily distribute experiments and track results
Submitting author: @tornede
Handling editor: @timtroendle (Retired)
Reviewers: @ArsamAryandoust, @schnorr
Similarity score: 0.6669

dtrackr: An R package for tracking the provenance of data
Submitting author: @robchallen
Handling editor: @ajstewartlang (Active)
Reviewers: @debruine, @craig-willis
Similarity score: 0.6645

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[arfon]

@Wytamma @claresloggett – 👋 would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. You can learn more about the process in these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

Based on your experience and contributions at PyCon AU, we think you might be able to provide a great review of this submission. Please let me know if you think you can help us out!

Many thanks
Arfon

[claresloggett]

Hi @arfon, I'd be happy to

…

On Sun, 29 Dec 2024, 9:18 pm Arfon Smith, ***@***.***> wrote: @Wytamma <https://github.com/Wytamma> @claresloggett <https://github.com/claresloggett> – 👋 would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. You can learn more about the process in these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html Based on your experience and contributions at PyCon AU, we think you might be able to provide a great review of this submission. Please let me know if you think you can help us out! Many thanks Arfon — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#7466 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAN3EQ7GHC42LZLTU7GMCND2H7D7HAVCNFSM6AAAAABRUDCBQCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKNRUGY3TONJYHE> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[Wytamma]

Also happy to review @arfon!

[arfon]

Apologies for the very slow responses here, thanks @claresloggett and @Wytamma – I'll go ahead and get you set up now.

[arfon]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @arfon is now the editor

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @claresloggett as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@claresloggett added to the reviewers list!

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @Wytamma as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @Wytamma is now the editor

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @Wytamma as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@Wytamma added to the reviewers list!

[arfon]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @arfon is now the editor

[arfon]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #7672.

[arfon]

@claresloggett, @Wytamma, @john-hawkins – see you over in #7672 where the actual review will take place.