Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 31 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign up[REVIEW]: DmpBbo: A versatile Python/C++ library for Function Approximation, Dynamical Movement Primitives, and Black-Box Optimization #1225
Comments
whedon
assigned
danielskatz
Feb 1, 2019
whedon
added
the
review
label
Feb 1, 2019
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @studywolf, it looks like you're currently assigned as the reviewer for this paper 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:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I'll note here that we expect a couple of weeks delay until this gets started. When you are ready to start, please see the comment above - your job is basically to review the paper and software according to your checklists, checking off items as they are deemed ok, and making either short comments or more detailed comments in the code repository as you find problems that need to be addressed by the author. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I'm still a couple weeks from being able to start reviewing.
…On Mon, Feb 18, 2019, 3:59 AM Daniel S. Katz ***@***.*** wrote:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@jenskober - How are you doing with your review? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I got started a little bit, but am now busy with conference deadlines till this weekend
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
whedon
unassigned
danielskatz
Mar 5, 2019
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
regarding the authorship checkbox, Gennaro Raiola has contributed about 1k vs 120k lines of code from Freek Stulp according to the commit history. I'm not sure exactly what the requirements for 'major contribution' are, but the authorship on the paper reflects Freek Stulp as primary author so I'm checking this box as complete. Edit: It is odd though that the bibtex citation in the README does not list Gennaro Raiola as an author. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
didn't see what versions are python are supported. leaving Installation instructions unchecked until stulp/dmpbbo#28 resolved edit: base conda install of python requires matplotlib to run demos |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
graiola
commented
Mar 13, 2019
@studywolf, the issue stulp/dmpbbo#28 should be fixed now. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@graiola |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
and a few little issues with the demos and tests |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
graiola
commented
Mar 14, 2019
@jenskober I fixed the missing DOIs, thanks. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon generate pdf |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
stulp
commented
Mar 14, 2019
I've taken the liberty of splitting your issue stulp/dmpbbo#31 into smaller ones 32-40, so that we can assign & conquer. As the other ones are now open, I've closed stulp/dmpbbo#31. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
stulp
commented
Mar 16, 2019
Here is a small update. Based on the feedback from the reviewers, following larger modifications have been made (apart from smaller bugfixes). These modifications are related to the demos and tests in the C++ version, not the core library.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@stulp Thanks for all the updates, looks great now from my side. @graiola One last thing about the paper itself: if you check the article proof above, on the second page in applications you have "(Stulp,2012,Stulp et al. (2013),stulp14simultaneous,Stulp & Sigaud (2015))" "stulp14simultaneous" is missing in the references, the first one "Stulp,2012" looks strange as well, and a few spaces after the commas (also first page "(A. J. Ijspeert, Nakanishi, & Schaal, 2002,A. Ijspeert, Nakanishi, Pastor, Hoffmann, & Schaal (2013))") would be nice... |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
graiola
commented
Mar 19, 2019
Thanks @jenskober , I will look into it now. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
graiola
commented
Mar 19, 2019
@whedon generate pdf |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
PDF failed to compile for issue #1225 with the following error: /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/bundler/gems/whedon-01ece1d1d135/lib/whedon/author.rb:58:in |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
graiola
commented
Mar 19, 2019
@whedon generate pdf |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@arfon @studywolf I'm done with my review. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Great! It looks like there's a number of checkboxes that aren't ticked - could you please take another look at them and tick what you can given you review? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Hmm, as far as I can see all mine are checked. @studywolf still has some that are not checked. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
You're right. Apologies. @studywolf - how are you getting along with your review? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry about the delay, I didn't get these notification reminders for some reason. Things have been hectic! I will try to finish the review tonight / tomorrow though. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
a few issues submitted to the repo as i was going through the examples. I haven't fully confirmed the functionality or looked at the functionality documentation. There are no unit tests for checking off the 'automated tests' box, I see it was mentioned above but didn't see it specifically addressed. What's the resolution on this? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon assign @danielskatz as editor |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
thanks for the help while I was out @arfon |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
The test do not need need to be automated, but there do need to be some tests. If there are tests, please check it off. If there are no tests at all, some need to be added |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon assign @danielskatz as editor |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Check it off if there are any tests at all? Or are we looking for some amount of functionality coverage? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I would say minimal functionality tests - something that verifies the basic functionality |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Was able to check off a few more, mostly available time is blocking me. I had one remaining issue on the repo (and just raised another), should I not be waiting for them to be resolved before checking off the corresponding box? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@danielskatz i've completed the review, and with the contributing documentation added it looks good aside from the documentation for one part of the code. This is currently an open issue on the github, so deferring to you on this. If you think it's fine to not have this resolved before approving then |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Let's go ahead at this point. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
And please make sure there is an archive of the current version, and let me know the DOI for it as well. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Thanks very much, @studywolf and @jenskober for your reviews! |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
stulp
commented
Apr 15, 2019
•
It would be nice if I could close issue 44 (which was opened by @studywolf) before assigning the next version number. That is the version I would like the DOI to be assigned with. Fixing 44 is quite a bit of work (involving an overhaul of the serialization functions), but I should be done within a week or so. @danielskatz, would it be possible to wait with the acceptance until I have fixed it? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
If it's that close to done, then yes, let's wait. My suggestion to go ahead was based on an assumption it would take longer. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
When you make the new version, please make the changes clear so one of us can quickly review them as well. |
whedon commentedFeb 1, 2019
•
edited by studywolf
Submitting author: @graiola (Gennaro Raiola)
Repository: https://github.com/stulp/dmpbbo
Version: v0.7-beta
Editor: @danielskatz
Reviewer: @studywolf, @jenskober
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) 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
@studywolf & @jenskober, 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 @danielskatz know.
Review checklist for @studywolf
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
paper.md
file include a list of authors with their affiliations?Review checklist for @jenskober
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
paper.md
file include a list of authors with their affiliations?