-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
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
[REVIEW]: EPyT-Flow: A Toolkit for Generating Water Distribution Network Data #7104
Comments
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:
For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
|
|
Software report:
Commit count by author:
|
Paper file info: 📄 Wordcount for ✅ The paper includes a |
License info: ✅ License found: |
👋🏼 @andreArtelt, @meghnathomas and @kbonney, this is the review thread for the submission. All of our communications will happen here from now on. As a reviewer, the first step, as mentioned in the first comment of this issue, is to create a checklist for your review by entering
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 We aim for reviews to be completed within about 2-4 weeks. Please notify me 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 don't hesitate to ping me ( |
Review checklist for @kbonneyConflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
Thanks a lot, Kirk and Meghna for agreeing to review my submission. I think you both have a great amount of knowledge and experience in the water domain. Looking forward to a constructive review process :) A quick note from my side: From tomorrow on, I will be on vacation for 6 weeks with only very limited internet access. However, my co-author @Mariosmsk will keep an eye on this issue as well as on the EPyT-Flow repository. Best, |
Review checklist for @meghnathomasConflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
👋🏼 @meghnathomas, @kbonney, just a friendly reminder for this review. |
@cheginit I have started my review over in WaterFutures/EPyT-Flow#9 |
@meghnathomas Awesome! thanks for the update. |
I've also started to review the materials and will start an issue with my comments soon. |
@kbonney Great, thanks for the update! |
@cheginit Review comments live at WaterFutures/EPyT-Flow#10 |
@kbonney Thanks for the update! It appears that @andreArtelt is on vacation till October 5th and will start addressing the comments once he's back. |
Thanks a lot for the reviews. I am back in office and will start working on the issues. |
@andreArtelt please update us on how the review is going. |
The review is going well. From my side, I have addressed all the reviewers' concerns and comments -- however, I am currently waiting for their feedback on whether they agree with me and consider their concerns and comments as resolved. |
@andreArtelt Awesome, thanks for the update and addressing the reviewers' concerns. |
Submitting author: @andreArtelt (André Artelt)
Repository: https://github.com/WaterFutures/EPyT-Flow
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): dev
Version: v0.6.0
Editor: @cheginit
Reviewers: @meghnathomas, @kbonney
Archive: Pending
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) 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
@meghnathomas & @kbonney, 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:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @cheginit 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 @kbonney
📝 Checklist for @meghnathomas
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: