[REVIEW]: prysm: A Python optics module #1352
Comments
|
Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @aquilesC it looks like you're currently assigned as the reviewer for this paper 🎉. ⭐ Important ⭐ If you haven't already, you should seriously consider unsubscribing from GitHub notifications for this (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews) repository. As a reviewer, you're probably currently watching this repository which means for GitHub's default behaviour you will receive notifications (emails) for all reviews 😿 To fix this do the following two things:
For a list of things I can do to help you, just type: |
|
|
👋 @aquilesC What's your status with the continued review of this submission? |
|
Are there any updates or changes I need to make to the repository or the manuscript? |
|
I will update it soon!
I was overwhelmed by some other tasks, but this week is going to be easier
for me. Overall is OK, I have some comments regarding the documentation. As
soon as I can seat down on my PC, I'll update you.
…On Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 15:59 Brandon Dube ***@***.***> wrote:
Are there any updates or changes I need to make to the repository or the
manuscript?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1352 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AATA7CBJJEEO5CSKRPKAPCDPRXADNANCNFSM4HCHZF7Q>
.
|
|
I have finished reviewing Prysm. It is a very nice package and I think it fulfills all the criteria to be published in JOSS. I have two small suggestions to improve the repository for the future:
The suggestions above, however, do not change the code. Therefore, @brandondube can upload the program to Zenodo and get the doi. If I'm not mistaken, after this stage, things are back in the hands of @xuanxu ? |
|
Thanks @aquilesC! |
|
@whedon generate pdf |
|
|
@whedon check references |
|
|
|
@brandondube I just found a minor typo in the article proof: Once you fix the typo, please create an archive in zenodo/figshare/other and report the DOI here (if needed edit the deposit metadata so it matches the title and author name of the JOSS paper) |
|
@xuanxu Thanks for the catch! I fixed the typo in the paper. For Zenodo/etc, do I upload prysm@v0.15.1, 0.15.1 patched with the paper typo fix, or latest? And is the convention to zip up the entire contents of the root directory, less .git? Or just the minimum artifacts for the software to install? |
|
@brandondube usually you would release a new version with all the changes made during the review process, once you do that I'll update the version here and that would be the version you need to upload to Zenodo. BTW the typo is still there, are you sure you've push your changes? The convention is to upload the zip that GitHub provides in the release page (example: see link to zip here in the 'Assets' section). That will include the root directory you see in GitHub (no .git dir) at the moment that specific version was released. |
|
@whedon generate pdf |
|
|
@xuanxu thanks. The change was pushed, but to dev. It is on master now, along with about 90 commits of other changes :) I'm within spitting distance (a week or so) of releasing v0.16 -- would it be alright to save the finalization here until then? |
|
@whedon generate pdf |
|
|
@brandondube I'm ok with waiting for a week for the new release. Please tell us here once you are ready for the v0.16 and I'll ping aquilesC then for a quick re-review so we are sure everything is still fine. Is that ok with you @aquilesC ? |
|
It is fine with me! Let me know when the new version is out! |
|
@aquilesC v0.16 will have a final check-over tomorrow and assuming I find nothing derailing, a release monday. If you would like to begin your check-over, you can see the changes (summarized with git): cd prysm
git checkout master
git pull
git diff HEAD v0.15.1 --statThey are also summarized in the release notes, I also opened several issues on the repo with some features, bugs, etc, for future releases and adding a contributing guide to the docs. Cheers, |
|
@brandondube , everything is looking fine! Let me know when you publish to PyPI so I test the entire install cycle, and I guess that would be it. |
|
The release is up on PyPI! Once you've given the OK, I'll package it on Zenodo for the submission 🚀 |
|
@xuanxu I uploaded to Zenodo -- https://zenodo.org/record/2672954 DOI 10.5281/zenodo.2672954 🍾 |
|
@brandondube Great, thanks! |
|
@whedon set v0.16 as version |
|
OK. v0.16 is the version. |
|
@whedon generate pdf |
|
|
@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.2672954 as archive |
|
OK. 10.5281/zenodo.2672954 is the archive. |
|
OK, everything ready for publication. Thanks for the review @aquilesC! Pinging @openjournals/joss-eics for final acceptance |
|
@brandondube — I'm not sure if this matters, but it looks like you pushed v0.16 as a tag, without creating the release. You can see that the "Latest release" flag is not shown next to it: |
|
@whedon accept |
|
|
|
Check final proof 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#675 If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in openjournals/joss-papers#675, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag |
|
👋 @labarba not sure if it matters either (I uploaded the release on PyPi) - but I went ahead and turned the tag into a release on GH as well. RTD seems to be having some widespread issues w/ conda right now, so unfortunately the docs won't be updated until those are resolved. |
|
@whedon accept deposit=true |
|
|
🚨🚨🚨 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... |
|
Congratulations, @brandondube, your JOSS paper is now published? 🎉 Sincere thanks to our editor: @xuanxu, and the reviewer: @aquilesC — your contribution to JOSS is invaluable 🙏 |
|
🎉🎉🎉 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! 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:
|
whedon
added
published
Submitting author: @brandondube (Brandon Dube)
Repository: https://github.com/brandondube/prysm
Version: v0.16
Editor: @xuanxu
Reviewer: @aquilesC
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.2672954
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) 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
@aquilesC, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.theoj.org/about#reviewer_guidelines. Any questions/concerns please let @xuanxu know.
✨ Please try and complete your review in the next two weeks ✨
Review checklist for @aquilesC
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
paper.mdfile include a list of authors with their affiliations?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: