Skip to content

/joss-reviews

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]: KADE: A desktop application for Q methodology #1360

Closed
whedon opened this Issue Apr 1, 2019 · 25 comments

Comments

Assignees

@alexhanna alexhanna

Labels
accepted review
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
5 participants
@whedon @davekinkead @alexhanna @shawnbanasick @danielskatz
@whedon
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 1, 2019 •
edited

Submitting author: @shawnbanasick (Shawn Banasick)
Repository: https://github.com/shawnbanasick/kade
Version: v1.0.0
Editor: @alexhanna
Reviewer: @davekinkead
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.2649145

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/03aa8811938551809c37394c4b97869c"><img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/03aa8811938551809c37394c4b97869c/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/03aa8811938551809c37394c4b97869c/status.svg)](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/03aa8811938551809c37394c4b97869c)

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

@davekinkead, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:

  1. Make sure you're logged in to your GitHub account
  2. Be sure to accept the invite at this URL: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/invitations

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.theoj.org/about#reviewer_guidelines. Any questions/concerns please let @alexhanna know.

✨ Please try and complete your review in the next two weeks ✨

Review checklist for @davekinkead

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

  • Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
  • License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
  • Version: Does the release version given match the GitHub release (v1.0.0)?
  • Authorship: Has the submitting author (@shawnbanasick) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

  • Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
  • Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
  • Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
  • Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
  • Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
  • Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the function of the software can be verified?
  • Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

  • Authors: Does the paper.md file include a list of authors with their affiliations?
  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • References: Do all archival references that should have a DOI list one (e.g., papers, datasets, software)?

@whedon whedon assigned alexhanna Apr 1, 2019

@whedon whedon added the review label Apr 1, 2019

@whedon whedon referenced this issue Apr 1, 2019

Closed

[PRE REVIEW]: KADE: A desktop application for Q methodology #1300

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 1, 2019

Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @davekinkead 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:

  1. Set yourself as 'Not watching' https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews:

watching

  1. You may also like to change your default settings for this watching repositories in your GitHub profile here: https://github.com/settings/notifications

notifications

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@whedon commands
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 1, 2019 

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 1, 2019

👉 Check article proof 📄 👈

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 5, 2019

@alexhanna @shawnbanasick outstanding review issues raised here https://github.com/shawnbanasick/kade/issues

I've only been able to review the software on MacOS (demo works as per readme) so can't comment to its functionality on Windows or Linux.
@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 15, 2019

@alexhanna all review issues have been addressed - I'm happy to accept this paper noting I've only been able to test the software on OSX.
@alexhanna

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 21, 2019

Thanks @davekinkead! Happy to accept this then.
@alexhanna

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 21, 2019

@whedon accept
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 21, 2019

No archive DOI set. Exiting...
@alexhanna

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 21, 2019

@whedon check references
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 21, 2019 

Attempting to check references...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 21, 2019 


OK DOIs

- 10.1177/104973239600600408 is OK
- 10.1177/1558689815610998 is OK
- 10.1007/s11116-010-9315-8 is OK
- 10.1007/s11528-018-0314-5 is OK
- 10.4135/9781446251911 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
@alexhanna

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 21, 2019

You'll need to get a DOI for your repository, @shawnbanasick. You'll need to create an archive (on Zenodo, figshare, or somewhere else, if you haven't already) and post the archive DOI here.
@shawnbanasick

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link

commented Apr 23, 2019

Thanks @alexhanna for your help. The archive doi is 10.5281/zenodo.2649145
@alexhanna

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 23, 2019

@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.2649145 as archive
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 23, 2019

OK. 10.5281/zenodo.2649145 is the archive.
@alexhanna

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 23, 2019

@whedon accept
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 23, 2019 

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 23, 2019

Check final proof 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#639

If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in openjournals/joss-papers#639, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag deposit=true e.g.

@whedon accept deposit=true
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 23, 2019 


OK DOIs

- 10.1177/104973239600600408 is OK
- 10.1177/1558689815610998 is OK
- 10.1007/s11116-010-9315-8 is OK
- 10.1007/s11528-018-0314-5 is OK
- 10.4135/9781446251911 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
@alexhanna

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 23, 2019

Hi @openjournals/joss-eics, this is ready for acceptance.
@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 23, 2019

Thanks for reviewing @davekinkead and for editing @alexhanna
@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 23, 2019

@whedon accept deposit=true
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 23, 2019 

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

@whedon whedon added the accepted label Apr 23, 2019

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 23, 2019

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

  1. Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#641
  2. Wait a couple of minutes to verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01360
  3. If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
  4. Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? notify your editorial technical team...

@danielskatz danielskatz closed this Apr 23, 2019

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 23, 2019

🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:

Markdown:
[![DOI](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01360/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01360)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01360">
  <img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01360/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: http://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01360/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01360

This is how it will look in your documentation:

DOI

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:
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.