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

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

@whedon commands

What happens now?

This submission is currently in a pre-review state which means we are waiting for an editor to be assigned and for them to find some reviewers for your submission. This may take anything between a few hours to a couple of weeks. Thanks for your patience 😸

You can help the editor by looking at this list of potential reviewers to identify individuals who might be able to review your submission (please start at the bottom of the list). Also, feel free to suggest individuals who are not on this list by mentioning their GitHub handles here.

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

👉 Check article proof 📄 👈

👋 @tesch1 - thanks for your submission to JOSS.

After giving your paper a quick read, I think it would be good to expand a little on this bullet from our paper requirements:

A summary describing the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience

We also have this requirement for our papers:

Mentions (if applicable) of any ongoing research projects using the software or recent scholarly publications enabled by it.

Are there ongoing research projects that make use of this software?

@whedon generate pdf

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

👉 Check article proof 📄 👈

I've recalibrated the summary a bit, is there anything more specific about what kind of diverse non-specialist audience is intended?

Thanks, I think that addition to the introduction helps.

Could you take a look at this list of potential reviewers and identify any good candidates to review this submission?

@danielskatz - would you be able to edit this submission?

@whedon assign @danielskatz as editor

OK, the editor is @danielskatz

👋 @tesch1 - I repeat Arfon's request:

Could you take a look at this list of potential reviewers and identify any good candidates to review this submission?

👋 @tesch1 - Any suggestions?

Perhaps @leios, @vyasr, @mlxd, or @StewMH would be good?

👋 @leios, @vyasr, @mlxd, or @StewMH - would a couple of you be willing to review this for JOSS? Or if not, would you have suggestions for others who might be good fits?

Hi Dan, Michael,

I'd be happy to review it.

Cheers,
Stewart

Thanks @StewMH - as soon as we get one more reviewer, we will start the actual review.

@whedon assign @StewMH as reviewer

OK, the reviewer is @StewMH

Sorry @tesch1 @danielskatz , don't think that I will have time for the coming 3 weeks.
If things haven't moved forward by then, I'll be happy to jump in.

Thanks @mlxd - let's see if we can find someone else in this case

👋 @poulson and @VivianePons - can you help with suggestions for a second reviewer for this submission?

👋 @mdavezac - you've been suggested as the perfect reviewer for this. Would you be willing to do this? (see JOSS reviewer guidelines)

Sorry I haven't been more responsive, I unfortunately won't be available to review this paper.

I'd be happy to review it.

Great, thanks - we'll start the review now then

@whedon add @mdavezac as reviewer

OK, @mdavezac is now a reviewer

@whedon start review

OK, I've started the review over in #1487. Feel free to close this issue now!