-
-
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]: SuchTree : A Python library for fast, thread-safe computations on phylogenetic trees #678
Comments
Hello human, I'm @whedon. I'm here to help you with some common editorial tasks. @giraola 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:
|
|
Article proof looks good to me, aside from missing a reference for FastTree. D'oh. |
@ryneches please add DOIs to all references listed in the manuscript. |
Done. I also added references for FastTree. Hmm... do I ask @whedon to make a new proof? |
@whedon generate pdf |
|
@whedon generate pdf |
|
Hmm. I'm not happy with the way the references are getting formatted. Multiple references look weird, and BibTeX is doing that thing where it turns repeated author lists into a long dash. :-/ Is there a formatting guide? I'm not so familiar with the MarkDown to LaTeX way of doing things. |
This is the standard style for our bibliography - it's because the author list of the second paper is the same as the one above it. |
Ah, OK. I've always thought looks weird. |
What's next? |
I think we're waiting for @giraola to finish their review? |
@ryneches please add installation guidelines and list SuchTree dependencies in the readme file. |
Anything else? |
@ryneches I just completed the revision. Sorry for this delay. |
@karthik - I think this paper is good to accept? |
@arfon Yes, definitely. I communicated with Russel before I left for my trip and am just returning to editorial duties. Will finish this up asap. |
@ryneches So sorry for the delay. This is good to go and thanks for your patience! Now, can you deposit the software on Zenodo and post a DOI here so we can complete the final steps towards acceptance? |
All right! After a little tidying up, here's the Zenodo DOI : |
@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.1294297 as archive |
OK. 10.5281/zenodo.1294297 is the archive. |
@whedon generate pdf |
|
@ryneches - I made a small fix to one of your bibtex entries which wasn't working in ryneches/SuchTree#14 @giraola - many thanks for your review here and to @karthik for editing this submission ✨ @ryneches - your paper is now accepted into JOSS and your DOI is https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00678 ⚡ 🚀 💥 |
🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉 If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippet:
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:
|
Submitting author: @ryneches (Russell Y. Neches)
Repository: https://github.com/ryneches/SuchTree
Version: 0.6
Editor: @karthik
Reviewer: @giraola
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.1294297
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
@giraola, 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 @karthik know.
Review checklist for @giraola
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
paper.md
file include a list of authors with their affiliations?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: