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

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

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

@whedon commands

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

👉 Check article proof 📄 👈

@Amudtogal Looking through the repository I didn't find any tests or other ways to check if the software is operating correctly (See Automated tests section of the checklist above).

I also opened an issue (dfki-ric/phobos#179) about some issues in the Wiki.

@CameronDevine I will fix the issues in the wiki soon. Sorry for the delay, I had some issues with my computer...

The issue with tests for Phobos has been discussed for a long time. Setting up tests for a Blender addon is a cumbersome process (see dfki-ric/phobos#121). For now, we decided that the additional effort maintaining a CI environment for Phobos is not really worth the trouble. This will be revisited, if we can actually see a growing user base and can also nail down real testing scenarios for the different operators.

Does this make sense, or do you think the tests are absolutely necessary? I'd be ready to discuss this further :)

@Amudtogal I don't think tests are absolutely necessary. However, I do think it wouldn't be too hard to add in a limited number of tests. For example, calculateBoxInertia, writeURDFGeometry, and similar functions could be tested without installing blender in a test environment.

I agree with @CameronDevine. In software engineering, we often refer to these tests as model tests. That is, the part of your code that perhaps isn't entangled with the user interface. If there are patterns being used (e.g. Model-View-Controller) you might be able to focus on the model part. The methods @CameronDevine showed strongly suggest this possibility as the code is independent of Blender per se.

I opened two more issues today, dfki-ric/phobos#180 and dfki-ric/phobos#181. Both of these issue relate to a minor difficulties I experienced while configuring Phobos.

I have just closed these issues.
Furthermore, I added the model tests to our agenda. Do you expect us to finish the test before advancing the publication?

@CameronDevine, have the issues you reported all been addressed satisfactorily?
@trallard Do you have any additional input on this submission?

@gkthiruvathukal The only outstanding item for me is the lack of automated tests. Since neither automated or manual tests are provided I do not yet feel comfortable checking that item off.

@Amudtogal I am seeing that we (or I, more precisely) did not respond to your question about model tests. Sorry for the delay as it has been a busy ending to my academic year here.

Can you please add some basic model tests so we can check off the last box? I'd feel a lot better if there were at least a few tests, which would establish a basis for more expanded testing at a later date. As soon as you can take care of this and @CameronDevine gets a final look, I can proceed.

HI sorry for taking so long @gkthiruvathukal AND @Amudtogal from my part the thing missing as well is that corresponding to the tests.

I believe some model tests would be essential even if to have a baseline of the software performance / behaviour at the current state.

Apart from that I do not see any major issues or blockers

Thanks, @trallard.
@Amudtogal, based on the feedback from the reviewers--and my own relatively strong opinions about the need for tests--please act upon this input so we can proceed to the next steps.

@gkthiruvathukal sorry for responding so late, too. The same academic madness is happening here right now :)
I will work on the tests as soon as I can find some spare time. When I am done, I will come back to you.
Thank you for the reviews and help you have been providing!

@Amudtogal Just a nudge here. Any update on tests?

@Amudtogal Please update on when you will be able to work on some tests.

I am planning to start the tests within the next three weeks. Next weekend there is a big event I am part of, which has been devouring my spare time... When it is over, I can shift my focus back to coding...

Sorry for delaying this whole process (I don't want to waste your time)! Is there a time limit I need to consider or can I pursue this plan?
Thanks again for your patience!

@whedon remind @Amudtogal in 2 weeks

Reminder set for @Amudtogal in 2 weeks

@danielskatz Thanks for setting the reminder.

@Amudtogal Please try to work on this as soon as you can. Even if you can get some initial tests in place, this would be satisfactory and allow us to move to the next steps.

Hi folks, I am just checking how this is going and if you need any help with the review

Hi folks,
a short update on my progress:

I have setup a Travis CI, which runs and installs Phobos and is able to run different tests from the test folder.
https://travis-ci.org/Amudtogal/phobos
Right now, all these changes sit on my fork on github (https://github.com/Amudtogal/phobos), as there are still some minor issues to be resolved before I can merge it into the master:

• proper error code propagation from the test files to the Travis commandline (otherwise the build never fails)
• fix the current tests (I wrote a bunch of tests which do not rely on any of the Blender functionality)

Let me know whether you think this is promising or you expected something else :)
Have a nice week,
Simon

@trallard Thanks for checking in! We definitely can use your help with the remaining work on this review. Would you be willing to take a look at @Amudtogal's updates for Travis CI/testing? If it is on the right track, I think we can move toward acceptance pretty soon.

@gkthiruvathukal, I will take a look at this as well.

No archive DOI set. Exiting...

@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.3581101 as archive

OK. 10.5281/zenodo.3581101 is the archive.

@whedon set v1.0.1 as version

OK. v1.0.1 is the version.

@whedon accept

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

Reference check summary:

OK DOIs

- None

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

Check final proof 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#1203

If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in openjournals/joss-papers#1203, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag deposit=true e.g.

@whedon accept deposit=true

👋 @arfon - note that ref 2 in the xml has the same problem as we've seen before with an incomplete URL...
This is otherwise ready for accepting.

OK thanks @danielskatz. Let's accept here and I'll fix post publication.

@whedon accept deposit=true

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

PDF failed to compile for issue #1326 with the following error:

@whedon accept deposit=true

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

🐦🐦🐦 👉 Tweet for this paper 👈 🐦🐦🐦

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

Here's what you must now do:

0. Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#1204
1. Wait a couple of minutes to verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01326
2. If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
3. Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? notify your editorial technical team...

Thanks to @CameronDevine & @trallard for reviewing!
And to @gkthiruvathukal for editing!
And congratulations to @Amudtogal and co-authors!

👋 @arfon - can you fix the XML, and then close this?

@danielskatz I'm worried that I am missing problems in the XML when finishing up submissions. What do you see that is incorrect?

see line 89 of the XML in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/1204/files where the "https" is missing at the start of the URL

How did you find that? Were you looking for that type of error in particular? I have been only checking the first few lines for name and title.

just through scanning the XML to see if everything looks ok - sorry I can't be more helpful

Thanks everyone!
Just checking back:
The Zenodo Archive is currently a draft, I have not published it, because I was not sure, whether I should put any information about the Journal into the Zenodo form...

We reached the final stage:

• Make a tagged release of your software, and list the version tag of the archived version here.
  Where can I do this? The release tag is 1.0.1 "Capricious Choutengan"
• Archive the reviewed software in Zenodo
• Check the Zenodo deposit has the correct metadata, this includes the title (should match the paper title) and author list (make sure the list is correct and people who only made a small fix are not on it); you may also add the authors' ORCID.
• List the Zenodo DOI of the archived version here. 10.5281/zenodo.3581101

I haven't published the Zenodo archive yet, as there are a few options I could fill in (e.g. the Journal section). Just give me a call what I shall do with it and I can get it online!

Shall I go online or fill in this stuff:

👋 @arfon - can you fix the XML, and then close this?

This is fixed.

@Amudtogal - I don't think you need to put the journal information into this form.

In that case,
🎆 🍾 🎆

Thank you so much for your time and effort! I am glad, this went through and excited to maybe meet some of you one day!

🎉🎉🎉 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](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01326/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01326)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01326">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01326/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01326/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01326

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:

• Volunteering to review for us sometime in the future. You can add your name to the reviewer list here: https://joss.theoj.org/reviewer-signup.html
• Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://numfocus.org/donate-to-joss