[REVIEW]: QuantEcon.py: A community based Python library for quantitative economics #5585

editorialbot · 2023-06-22T23:34:06Z

Submitting author: @jstac (John Stachurski)
Repository: https://github.com/QuantEcon/QuantEcon.py
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss_paper
Version: 0.7.1
Editor: @sbenthall
Reviewers: @janosg, @mnwhite
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.10345102

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/55e166343438f3a075ed40504b7bb394"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/55e166343438f3a075ed40504b7bb394/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/55e166343438f3a075ed40504b7bb394/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/55e166343438f3a075ed40504b7bb394)

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

@janosg & @mnwhite, 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:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @sbenthall 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 @janosg

📝 Checklist for @mnwhite

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

editorialbot · 2023-06-22T23:34:08Z

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:

@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 · 2023-06-22T23:34:10Z

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.25 s (939.2 files/s, 119069.2 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                         152           5877           9408          12165
Markdown                         5            209              0            736
DOS Batch                        2             31              1            218
TeX                              1             22              0            196
make                             2             32              7            169
YAML                             5             32             41            159
reStructuredText                66             76            315            143
TOML                             1              8              0             62
INI                              1              0              0              3
Bourne Shell                     1              3              4              2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           236           6290           9776          13853
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

editorialbot · 2023-06-22T23:34:12Z

Wordcount for paper.md is 2221

editorialbot · 2023-06-22T23:34:42Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.11650/twjm/1500405875 is OK
- 10.1002/anac.200410015 is OK
- 10.1007/s10589-010-9329-3 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1016/0165-1765(86)90168-0 is OK
- 10.2307/j.ctv14163jx.16 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot · 2023-06-22T23:35:20Z

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

sbenthall · 2023-06-22T23:37:28Z

👋🏼 @jstac @janosg @mnwhite this is the review thread for the paper. All of our communications will happen here from now on.

As a reviewer, the first step is to create a checklist for your review by entering

@editorialbot generate my checklist

as the top of a new comment in this thread.

These checklists contain the JOSS requirements. As you go over the submission, please check any items that you feel have been satisfied. The first comment in this thread also contains links to the JOSS reviewer guidelines.

The JOSS review is different from most other journals. Our goal is to work with the authors to help them meet our criteria instead of merely passing judgment on the submission. As such, the reviewers are encouraged to submit issues and pull requests on the software repository. When doing so, please mention openjournals/joss-reviews#5585 so that a link is created to this thread (and I can keep an eye on what is happening). Please also feel free to comment and ask questions on this thread. In my experience, it is better to post comments/questions/suggestions as you come across them instead of waiting until you've reviewed the entire package.

We aim for reviews to be completed within about 2-4 weeks. Please let me know if any of you require some more time. We can also use EditorialBot (our bot) to set automatic reminders if you know you'll be away for a known period of time.

Please feel free to ping me (@sbenthall) if you have any questions/concerns.

janosg · 2023-07-05T09:35:28Z

Review checklist for @janosg

Conflict of interest

I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest (COI) policy and that: I have no COIs with reviewing this work or that any perceived COIs have been waived by JOSS for the purpose of this review.

Code of Conduct

I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the https://github.com/QuantEcon/QuantEcon.py?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Contribution and authorship: Has the submitting author (@jstac) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?
Substantial scholarly effort: Does this submission meet the scope eligibility described in the JOSS guidelines
Data sharing: If the paper contains original data, data are accessible to the reviewers. If the paper contains no original data, please check this item.
Reproducibility: If the paper contains original results, results are entirely reproducible by reviewers. If the paper contains no original results, please check this item.
Human and animal research: If the paper contains original data research on humans subjects or animals, does it comply with JOSS's human participants research policy and/or animal research policy? If the paper contains no such data, please check this item.

Functionality

Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the functionality of the software can be verified?
Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?
Quality of writing: Is the paper well written (i.e., it does not require editing for structure, language, or writing quality)?
References: Is the list of references complete, and is everything cited appropriately that should be cited (e.g., papers, datasets, software)? Do references in the text use the proper citation syntax?

mmcky · 2023-07-12T06:05:58Z

@janosg thank you for the issues and review. Greatly appreciated. I think I have now addressed both comments linked above. I have also opened this discussion to see if we can make improvements through a more direct example gallery. Currently examples are provided across our lecture series and in the QuantEcon.py documentation docstrings.

janosg · 2023-07-12T10:51:30Z

Thanks @mmcky. I added a suggestion to your discussion but that is not a prerequisite for acceptance.

quantecon.py is a great package and it was a pleasure to review it!

@sbenthall my review is complete.

sbenthall · 2023-07-20T16:28:48Z

Thank you @janosg !

sbenthall · 2023-07-20T16:29:11Z

Hello @mnwhite , this submission is still waiting for your review.
Please let me know if you have any questions about the process.

mnwhite · 2023-07-21T16:31:29Z

Getting to this soon.

…

On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 12:29 PM Sebastian Benthall < ***@***.***> wrote: Hello @mnwhite <https://github.com/mnwhite> , this submission is still waiting for your review. Please let me know if you have any questions about the process. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5585 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADKRAFMRKSEU4CHMH2AZLNTXRFMGFANCNFSM6AAAAAAZQ3VEAM> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

mnwhite · 2023-07-26T14:49:35Z

Review checklist for @mnwhite

Conflict of interest

I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest (COI) policy and that: I have no COIs with reviewing this work or that any perceived COIs have been waived by JOSS for the purpose of this review.

Code of Conduct

I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the https://github.com/QuantEcon/QuantEcon.py?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Contribution and authorship: Has the submitting author (@jstac) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?
Substantial scholarly effort: Does this submission meet the scope eligibility described in the JOSS guidelines
Data sharing: If the paper contains original data, data are accessible to the reviewers. If the paper contains no original data, please check this item.
Reproducibility: If the paper contains original results, results are entirely reproducible by reviewers. If the paper contains no original results, please check this item.
Human and animal research: If the paper contains original data research on humans subjects or animals, does it comply with JOSS's human participants research policy and/or animal research policy? If the paper contains no such data, please check this item.

Functionality

Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the functionality of the software can be verified?
Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?
Quality of writing: Is the paper well written (i.e., it does not require editing for structure, language, or writing quality)?
References: Is the list of references complete, and is everything cited appropriately that should be cited (e.g., papers, datasets, software)? Do references in the text use the proper citation syntax?

arfon · 2023-10-01T06:51:42Z

@mnwhite – how are you getting on here. Do you think you might be able to complete your review in the next week or so?

mnwhite · 2023-10-01T11:44:31Z

Yes, my schedule has opened up quite a bit and I can now prioritize this.

…

On Sun, Oct 1, 2023, 2:51 AM Arfon Smith ***@***.***> wrote: @mnwhite <https://github.com/mnwhite> – how are you getting on here. Do you think you might be able to complete your review in the next week or so? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5585 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADKRAFPMU5BOONNWAPZOADTX5EHIVANCNFSM6AAAAAAZQ3VEAM> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

jstac · 2023-10-30T04:08:29Z

@arfon @sbenthall Is there a target date for the first round referee process? Please let us know if we can help expedite by providing more information.

mnwhite · 2023-10-30T04:23:09Z

It was probably long ago. I am the holdup. I began working on my review, then got distracted, and now I have a newborn. I will try to get to this ASAP, I'm really sorry, John.

…

On Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 12:08 AM John Stachurski ***@***.***> wrote: @arfon <https://github.com/arfon> @sbenthall <https://github.com/sbenthall> Is there a target date for the first round referee process? Please let us know if we can help expedite by providing more information. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5585 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADKRAFLTAZYC5JJMVP65JSTYB4R4TAVCNFSM6AAAAAAZQ3VEAOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTOOBUGQ2DMMRSGQ> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

jstac · 2023-10-30T22:03:54Z

No problem @mnwhite, I've been in your shoes and I remember what it was like. We're looking forward to your review when you're ready to submit.

jstac · 2023-11-21T04:42:59Z

@mnwhite Sorry to keep pinging you but it would help some of the young people listed as coauthors. Hopefully it won't take too long.

mnwhite · 2023-11-21T05:04:19Z

"You're hurting young economists" is my trigger. I will get this done tomorrow.

…

On Mon, Nov 20, 2023, 11:43 PM John Stachurski ***@***.***> wrote: @mnwhite <https://github.com/mnwhite> Sorry to keep pinging you but it would help some of the young people listed as coauthors. Hopefully it won't take too long. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5585 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADKRAFIK5BMVV7SXQS63KRLYFQWN5AVCNFSM6AAAAAAZQ3VEAOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMRQGIZTCOBUGA> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

mnwhite · 2023-11-25T20:12:59Z

@jstac @sbenthall I finally, finally, finally got around to this. I am so sorry this took so long and kept slipping.

John: Are you in Canberra? If so, cookies (etc) will be sent to your office.

mmcky · 2023-12-07T20:11:26Z

thanks @sbenthall and @danielskatz. I appreciate the clarifications and guidance.
I will get the final items on the checklist completed and then notify via this issue.

mmcky · 2023-12-11T00:36:28Z

thanks again @danielskatz and @sbenthall.

I have now setup a Zenodo record of the quantecon==0.7.1 release.

@sbenthall please let me know if you need anything further. Many thanks.

mmcky · 2023-12-18T03:28:54Z

@sbenthall can you please let me know if there is anything else required? Many thanks.

sbenthall · 2023-12-18T17:24:40Z

@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.10345102 as archive

editorialbot · 2023-12-18T17:24:43Z

Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.10345102

sbenthall · 2023-12-18T17:25:14Z

@editorialbot set 0.7.1 as version

editorialbot · 2023-12-18T17:25:17Z

Done! version is now 0.7.1

sbenthall · 2023-12-18T17:26:59Z

Thanks @mmcky. I believe this review is complete and the materials are in order. I recommend this submission for acceptance.

Thank you to all the authors for their patience with the process. Thank you @janosg and @mnwhite for your reviews. Thanks to the editorial team for weighing in.

sbenthall · 2023-12-18T17:27:02Z

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot · 2023-12-18T17:27:04Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2023-12-18T17:28:18Z

👋 @openjournals/sbcs-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#4853, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

editorialbot · 2023-12-18T17:29:13Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.11650/twjm/1500405875 is OK
- 10.1002/anac.200410015 is OK
- 10.1007/s10589-010-9329-3 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1016/0165-1765(86)90168-0 is OK
- 10.2307/j.ctv14163jx.16 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

jstac · 2024-01-03T04:25:18Z

Hi @sbenthall , happy new year and thanks again for your help in shepharding this paper through!

Just quickly: one of the junior coauthors is applying for a scholarship and it would be very helpful if this was published on the main site. Is there a timeline? (I'm writing a recommendation letter for him so if you can let me know I'll adjust it accordingly.)

Thanks in advance.

oliviaguest · 2024-01-06T16:38:03Z

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot · 2024-01-06T16:38:05Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2024-01-06T16:38:48Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.11650/twjm/1500405875 is OK
- 10.1002/anac.200410015 is OK
- 10.1007/s10589-010-9329-3 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1016/0165-1765(86)90168-0 is OK
- 10.2307/j.ctv14163jx.16 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot · 2024-01-06T16:39:19Z

👋 @openjournals/sbcs-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#4874, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

oliviaguest · 2024-01-06T16:41:50Z

@editorialbot accept

editorialbot · 2024-01-06T16:41:53Z

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2024-01-06T16:43:18Z

Ensure proper citation by uploading a plain text CITATION.cff file to the default branch of your repository.

If using GitHub, a Cite this repository menu will appear in the About section, containing both APA and BibTeX formats. When exported to Zotero using a browser plugin, Zotero will automatically create an entry using the information contained in the .cff file.

You can copy the contents for your CITATION.cff file here:

CITATION.cff

cff-version: "1.2.0"
authors:
- family-names: Batista
  given-names: Quentin
- family-names: Coleman
  given-names: Chase
- family-names: Furusawa
  given-names: Yuya
- family-names: Hu
  given-names: Shu
- family-names: Lunagariya
  given-names: Smit
- family-names: Lyon
  given-names: Spencer
- family-names: McKay
  given-names: Matthew
- family-names: Oyama
  given-names: Daisuke
- family-names: Sargent
  given-names: Thomas J.
- family-names: Shi
  given-names: Zejin
- family-names: Stachurski
  given-names: John
- family-names: Winant
  given-names: Pablo
- family-names: Watkins
  given-names: Natasha
- family-names: Yang
  given-names: Ziyue
- family-names: Zhang
  given-names: Hengcheng
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10345102
message: If you use this software, please cite our article in the
  Journal of Open Source Software.
preferred-citation:
  authors:
  - family-names: Batista
    given-names: Quentin
  - family-names: Coleman
    given-names: Chase
  - family-names: Furusawa
    given-names: Yuya
  - family-names: Hu
    given-names: Shu
  - family-names: Lunagariya
    given-names: Smit
  - family-names: Lyon
    given-names: Spencer
  - family-names: McKay
    given-names: Matthew
  - family-names: Oyama
    given-names: Daisuke
  - family-names: Sargent
    given-names: Thomas J.
  - family-names: Shi
    given-names: Zejin
  - family-names: Stachurski
    given-names: John
  - family-names: Winant
    given-names: Pablo
  - family-names: Watkins
    given-names: Natasha
  - family-names: Yang
    given-names: Ziyue
  - family-names: Zhang
    given-names: Hengcheng
  date-published: 2024-01-06
  doi: 10.21105/joss.05585
  issn: 2475-9066
  issue: 93
  journal: Journal of Open Source Software
  publisher:
    name: Open Journals
  start: 5585
  title: "QuantEcon.py: A community based Python library for
    quantitative economics"
  type: article
  url: "https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05585"
  volume: 9
title: "QuantEcon.py: A community based Python library for quantitative
  economics"

If the repository is not hosted on GitHub, a .cff file can still be uploaded to set your preferred citation. Users will be able to manually copy and paste the citation.

Find more information on .cff files here and here.

editorialbot · 2024-01-06T16:43:21Z

🐘🐘🐘 👉 Toot for this paper 👈 🐘🐘🐘

editorialbot · 2024-01-06T16:43:22Z

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited 👉 Creating pull request for 10.21105.joss.05585 joss-papers#4878
Wait five minutes, then verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05585
If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...

oliviaguest · 2024-01-06T17:04:14Z

@jstac do you want to have your orcids added here?

oliviaguest · 2024-01-06T17:05:51Z

Hi @sbenthall , happy new year and thanks again for your help in shepharding this paper through!

Just quickly: one of the junior coauthors is applying for a scholarship and it would be very helpful if this was published on the main site. Is there a timeline? (I'm writing a recommendation letter for him so if you can let me know I'll adjust it accordingly.)

Thanks in advance.

You can definitely use the DOI to refer to this now, if needed, see above. Apologies for slow reply; Xmas, new year, etc. Good luck with the application.

oliviaguest · 2024-01-30T20:19:54Z

Huge thanks to the reviewers @janosg, @mnwhite and editor @sbenthall! ✨ JOSS appreciates your work and effort. ✨ Also, big congratulations to the authors! 🥳 🍾

editorialbot · 2024-01-30T20:19:55Z

🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:

Markdown:
[![DOI](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05585/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05585)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05585">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05585/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05585/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05585

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:

Volunteering to review for us sometime in the future. You can add your name to the reviewer list here: https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/join
Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://numfocus.org/donate-to-joss

editorialbot added review TeX Track: 4 (SBCS) Social, Behavioral, and Cognitive Sciences labels Jun 22, 2023

editorialbot assigned sbenthall Jun 22, 2023

editorialbot mentioned this issue Jun 22, 2023

[PRE REVIEW]: QuantEcon.py: A community based Python library for quantitative economics #5483

Closed

editorialbot added Makefile Python labels Jun 22, 2023

This was referenced Jul 5, 2023

Link to notebook gallery in README is not working QuantEcon/QuantEcon.notebooks#94

Closed

License mismatch between repo and JOSS paper QuantEcon/QuantEcon.py#711

Closed

editorialbot added the recommend-accept Papers recommended for acceptance in JOSS. label Dec 18, 2023

editorialbot added accepted published Papers published in JOSS labels Jan 6, 2024

oliviaguest closed this as completed Jan 30, 2024

[REVIEW]: QuantEcon.py: A community based Python library for quantitative economics #5585

[REVIEW]: QuantEcon.py: A community based Python library for quantitative economics #5585

Comments

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2023 • edited Loading

Status

Reviewer instructions & questions

Checklists

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2023

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2023

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2023

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2023

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2023

sbenthall commented Jun 22, 2023

janosg commented Jul 5, 2023 • edited Loading

Review checklist for @janosg

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

mmcky commented Jul 12, 2023

janosg commented Jul 12, 2023

sbenthall commented Jul 20, 2023

sbenthall commented Jul 20, 2023

mnwhite commented Jul 21, 2023 via email

mnwhite commented Jul 26, 2023 • edited Loading

Review checklist for @mnwhite

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

arfon commented Oct 1, 2023

mnwhite commented Oct 1, 2023 via email

jstac commented Oct 30, 2023

mnwhite commented Oct 30, 2023 via email

jstac commented Oct 30, 2023

jstac commented Nov 21, 2023

mnwhite commented Nov 21, 2023 via email

mnwhite commented Nov 25, 2023

mmcky commented Dec 7, 2023

mmcky commented Dec 11, 2023 • edited Loading

mmcky commented Dec 18, 2023

sbenthall commented Dec 18, 2023

editorialbot commented Dec 18, 2023

sbenthall commented Dec 18, 2023

editorialbot commented Dec 18, 2023

sbenthall commented Dec 18, 2023

sbenthall commented Dec 18, 2023

editorialbot commented Dec 18, 2023

editorialbot commented Dec 18, 2023

editorialbot commented Dec 18, 2023

jstac commented Jan 3, 2024

oliviaguest commented Jan 6, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 6, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 6, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 6, 2024

oliviaguest commented Jan 6, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 6, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 6, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 6, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 6, 2024

oliviaguest commented Jan 6, 2024

oliviaguest commented Jan 6, 2024

oliviaguest commented Jan 30, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 30, 2024

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2023 •

edited

Loading

janosg commented Jul 5, 2023 •

edited

Loading

mnwhite commented Jul 26, 2023 •

edited

Loading

mmcky commented Dec 11, 2023 •

edited

Loading