[PRE REVIEW]: DemeterWatch: A Java tool to detect Law of Demeter violations in Java collections

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @youngkaneda (Juan Pablo Pessoa de Aquino)
Repository: https://github.com/youngkaneda/DemeterWatch
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): master
Version: v1.0.0
Editor: @vissarion
Reviewers: @saaikrishnan, @msultan14
Managing EiC: Daniel S. Katz

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/dcfc5131b32457894dba296df3bdbee8"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/dcfc5131b32457894dba296df3bdbee8/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/dcfc5131b32457894dba296df3bdbee8/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/dcfc5131b32457894dba296df3bdbee8)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @youngkaneda. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@youngkaneda 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:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

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:

@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]

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

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1145/62084.62113 is OK
- 10.1145/361598.361623 is OK
- 10.1145/2507288.2507314 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: The Paperboy, The Wallet, and The Law of Demeter
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.05 s (1259.0 files/s, 128704.2 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Java                            56            837           1196           4124
Maven                            6              5              0            232
Markdown                         2             48              0            171
JavaScript                       1              5              0             75
HTML                             1              9              0             74
TeX                              1              4              0             69
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            67            908           1196           4745
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    70	Juan Pablo
    52	Ricardo Job
    10	Diogo Moreira

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 703

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

🟡 License found: GNU General Public License v3.0 (Check here for OSI approval)

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

Annotation Sniffer: A tool to Extract Code Annotations Metrics
Submitting author: @phillima
Handling editor: @gkthiruvathukal (Active)
Reviewers: @arcuri82, @danieledipompeo
Similarity score: 0.6496

ELDAM: A Python software for Life Cycle Inventory data management
Submitting author: @GustaveCoste
Handling editor: @sjpfenninger (Retired)
Reviewers: @konstantinstadler, @romainsacchi
Similarity score: 0.6388

Cacatoo: building, exploring, and sharing spatially structured models of biological systems
Submitting author: @bramvandijk88
Handling editor: @Bisaloo (Retired)
Reviewers: @emilydolson, @TimKam
Similarity score: 0.6256

chronovise: Measurement-Based Probabilistic Timing Analysis framework
Submitting author: @federeghe
Handling editor: @danielskatz (Active)
Reviewers: @lkosmid
Similarity score: 0.6256

A Framework to Quality Control Oceanographic Data
Submitting author: @castelao
Handling editor: @kthyng (Active)
Reviewers: @jessicaaustin, @evanleeturner
Similarity score: 0.6236

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[danielskatz]

👋 @youngkaneda - thanks for your submission. As it's not completely clear to me that this is research software as defined by JOSS, the editors will now discuss this. You should hear back in a week or so.

If you have any comments that will help the editors better understand this, please feel free to add them here.

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot query scope

[editorialbot]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[youngkaneda]

👋 @youngkaneda - thanks for your submission. As it's not completely clear to me that this is research software as defined by JOSS, the editors will now discuss this. You should hear back in a week or so.

If you have any comments that will help the editors better understand this, please feel free to add them here.

Hello Daniel 👋. I believe that the DemeterWatch is a fitting example of research software as defined by JOSS criteria. It supports the functioning of research instruments by providing a sophisticated platform for analyzing and understanding complex Java codebases. Specifically, the software aids in the detection of design pattern violations and code smells, which are crucial for maintaining the quality and integrity of software systems used in research environments.

Additionally, DemeterWatch excels in extracting knowledge from large datasets, where the datasets in question are substantial Java code. By employing advanced analysis techniques and generating actionable insights from these projects, the software enables researchers to derive meaningful patterns and anomalies from extensive code collections. We the developers, believe that this functionality is essential for researchers who seek to improve code quality and maintainability in their software systems, thus directly aligning, in our perception, with the JOSS definitions of research software.

[saaikrishnan]

@danielskatz can I please co-review this paper ?
My joss reviewer profile for reference - https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/reviewers/4562
Thank you in Advance.

[danielskatz]

@saaikrishnan - if this passes the scope review, I will assign an editor, and the editor will assign reviewers, so please stand by

[saaikrishnan]

@danielskatz thank you for the information.

[danielskatz]

@youngkaneda - this has now passed our scope review, so I will work on finding an editor

[danielskatz]

👋 @drvinceknight - I wonder if you could take this one on as editor. Note that we already have one volunteer reviewer. And I know you are at your limit, but it looks like one of yours is almost done...

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot invite @drvinceknight as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[youngkaneda]

@youngkaneda - this has now passed our scope review, so I will work on finding an editor

Hello @danielskatz, I am really happy that it passed the query scope check, thanks, I will look forward for the updates, and do what I can to quickly answer the demands.

[danielskatz]

👋 @vissarion - Are you able to edit this submission?

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot invite @vissarion as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[vissarion]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @vissarion is now the editor

[vissarion]

Hi @saaikrishnan are you still interested to review this paper?

[vissarion]

Hi @msultan14, @louiseadennis, @Kraks would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

[louiseadennis]

@vissarion I'm pretty overcommitted with reviewing tasks until the new year. I could take this on then but you might prefer to assign someone who can get to it sooner.

[saaikrishnan]

@vissarion Yes, I am interested to review this paper. Thank you for reaching back to me.

[msultan14]

Hi Yes I can review it, please can you send a detailed separate email. Thanks, Saleem Sultan

…

On Tue, Oct 1, 2024 at 3:07 AM Vissarion Fisikopoulos < ***@***.***> wrote: Hi @msultan14 <https://github.com/msultan14>, @louiseadennis <https://github.com/louiseadennis>, @Kraks <https://github.com/Kraks> would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#7209 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BKOAOXYTS3B32M2FBILXBTLZZJJ4HAVCNFSM6AAAAABN6DCMN6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGOBVGA3TKMJSGA> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[vissarion]

@editorialbot add @saaikrishnan as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@saaikrishnan added to the reviewers list!

[vissarion]

@editorialbot add @msultan14 as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@msultan14 added to the reviewers list!

[vissarion]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #7308.