Skip to content
Please note that GitHub no longer supports your web browser.

We recommend upgrading to the latest Google Chrome or Firefox.

Learn more
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

Updating suggested editor flow #665

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jan 12, 2020
Merged

Updating suggested editor flow #665

merged 2 commits into from Jan 12, 2020

Conversation

@arfon
Copy link
Member

arfon commented Jan 12, 2020

This is a small update to the submission flow when authors suggest the handling editor on the JOSS submission form. Currently an EiC has to decide between:

  1. Accepting the author's suggestion and then automatically assigning the JOSS editor before they have had a chance to say yes/no?
  2. Ignoring the author suggestion.

With this update, suggestions by submitting authors are just that. Even if the EiC keeps this suggestion on the JOSS dashboard, it will only show up in the reviews repository as a small amount of additional language from Whedon:

:wave: @joss_editor would you be able to handle this submission for JOSS?

Screen Shot 2020-01-12 at 11 56 21 AM

@openjournals/joss-eics

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

labarba commented Jan 12, 2020

This change aligns the behavior of whedon to the workflow already adopted by EiCs, which is to bypass automatic assignment of a handling editor, and ask for the editor's agreement—after considering not only topic of the submission but also editor load.

Because EiCs invite handling editors taking into account their load, and possibly if they are ooo, I would leave the Pre-Review language simply as "The author's suggestion for handling editor is @user".

@danielskatz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

danielskatz commented Jan 12, 2020

I agree with @labarba's suggestion, but otherwise this looks good to me

@arfon arfon merged commit d34d963 into master Jan 12, 2020
2 checks passed
2 checks passed
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build passed
Details
@arfon arfon deleted the suggested-editor-modification branch Jan 12, 2020
@arfon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

arfon commented Jan 12, 2020

Thanks for the feedback @labarba and @danielskatz!

arfon added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 12, 2020
* Updating suggested editor flow

* Updating language based on feedback
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.