[PRE REVIEW]: CompactObject: An open-source Python package for full-scope neutron star equation of state inference #7487
Comments
editorialbot
added
pre-review
Track: 1 (AASS)
|
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: |
|
Software report: Commit count by author: |
|
Paper file info: 📄 Wordcount for ✅ The paper includes a |
|
License info: 🟡 License found: |
|
@ChunHuangPhy — Thanks for your submission! All the suitable JOSS editors are currently working at capacity so I'm going to "waitlist" this review until an editor with the relevant expertise is available to take it on. I also noticed that our system hasn't automatically recognised your MIT License. I'm not quite sure why not but it might be because your specific text differs from the standard version. Specifically, I think these lines might need to be and you might even need to put all the authors back on one line. Have a look at other MIT Licensed code you might know of or browse past JOSS articles to see what might be the issue here, then run Also, the paper is failing to build at least because of a YAML error in the metadata, which is also flagged by the GitHub UI if you view the file there. Specifically, I think the If you think you've fixed this, you can try rebuilding the paper with |
warrickball
added
the
waitlisted
|
@editorialbot check repository |
|
Software report: Commit count by author: |
|
Paper file info: 📄 Wordcount for ✅ The paper includes a |
|
License info: 🟡 License found: |
|
@editorialbot generate pdf |
|
@editorialbot generate pdf |
|
I appreciate your efforts here @ChunHuangPhy. I'll try to debug why the paper doesn't compile. In the meantime, does someone in @openjournals/dev know why the pipeline isn't detecting the MIT License? Is it because the authors are spread over a line break? Aside from quotation-mark styles, the text looks exactly correct. |
|
@editorialbot generate pdf |
|
@editorialbot generate pdf |
|
Five most similar historical JOSS papers: CosmicProfiles: A Python package for radial profiling of finitely sampled dark matter halos and galaxies X-PSI: A Python package for neutron star X-ray pulse simulation and inference CoReCon: an open, community-powered collection of Reionization constraints Paicos: A Python package for analysis of (cosmological) simulations performed with Arepo Foam: A Python package for forward asteroseismic modelling of gravity modes |
|
@editorialbot generate pdf |
|
Five most similar historical JOSS papers: CosmicProfiles: A Python package for radial profiling of finitely sampled dark matter halos and galaxies X-PSI: A Python package for neutron star X-ray pulse simulation and inference CoReCon: an open, community-powered collection of Reionization constraints CWInPy: A Python package for inference with continuous gravitational-wave signals from pulsars The Pencil Code, a modular MPI code for partial differential equations and particles: multipurpose and multiuser-maintained |
The license detection is based on comparing the license file with the 'official' templates. My guess is that the line for authors here is so long, and the MIT license is so short, that it makes the text differ from the template a big enough percentage so it is marked as 'Other'. |
|
Do we need to change the MIT license to make it pass the test? |
No need. The bot check is just a tool to help editors, reading the license file I think is clear it's a valid MIT license. |
|
Great, thanks! |
|
Hi again @ChunHuangPhy, and sorry for the long wait. I'll take this on as an editor and start looking for (at least) two reviewers. If you have anyone you'd like to suggest, let me know here. You may wish to have a look at authors of previous JOSS papers and in our reviewer database. Note that we do have a conflict of interest policy. I'll start looking largely by these routes in the meantime. |
|
Thanks! I will wait for the reviews. |
|
@editorialbot assign me as editor |
|
Assigned! @warrickball is now the editor |
warrickball
removed
the
waitlisted
|
@editorialbot add @kelslund as reviewer |
|
@kelslund added to the reviewers list! |
|
@editorialbot add @rhaas80 as reviewer |
|
@rhaas80 added to the reviewers list! |
|
Hi @ChunHuangPhy, I've identified two reviewers and am ready to start the review. For transparency, note that both reviewers have indicated potential conflicts of interest that I've acknowledged and am happy to waive. @kelslund is on a conference organising committee that's vice-chaired by one of the authors and @rhaas80 co-authored a large review article in 2024 with another. I don't believe these conflicts will influence their reviews but I'll wait a few days to start the review in case you wish to comment. |
|
Thanks for your efforts, I happy to start the review process, and have no more comments to add on. |
|
@editorialbot start review |
|
OK, I've started the review over in #7759. |
Submitting author: @ChunHuangPhy (Chun Huang)
Repository: https://github.com/ChunHuangPhy/CompactObject
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.9.9
Editor: @warrickball
Reviewers: @kelslund, @rhaas80
Managing EiC: Warrick Ball
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @ChunHuangPhy. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
@ChunHuangPhy 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: