Joss-reviews: [REVIEW]: cottoncandy: scientific python package for easy cloud storage

[whedon]

Submitting author: @anwarnunez (Anwar Nunez-Elizalde)
Repository: https://github.com/gallantlab/cottoncandy
Version: 0.1.0
Editor: @leeper
Reviewer: @vsoch
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.1402799

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/5af3df2912fd34f2cf3bb7fa1db90df5"><img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/5af3df2912fd34f2cf3bb7fa1db90df5/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/5af3df2912fd34f2cf3bb7fa1db90df5/status.svg)](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/5af3df2912fd34f2cf3bb7fa1db90df5)

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

@vsoch, 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 @leeper know.

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

Review checklist for @vsoch

Conflict of interest

• [x] As the reviewer I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest policy and that there are no conflicts of interest for me to review this work.

Code of Conduct

• [x] I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

• [x] Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
• [x] License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
• [x] Version: Does the release version given match the GitHub release (v.0.0.2)?
• [x] Authorship: Has the submitting author (@anwarnunez) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

• [x] Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
• [x] Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
• [x] 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

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

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

[whedon]

Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @vsoch it looks like you're currently assigned as the reviewer for this paper :tada:.

:star: Important :star:

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:

1. 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

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[leeper]

Hi, @vsoch, your review checklist is available here (above ^^). Please let me know if you have any questions about the process.

[vsoch]

Thanks @whedon and @leeper ! I'm much looking forward to reviewing this. To give you a time frame, I should be able to get this underway mid to end of this week, finishing up some things this weekend! :)

[vsoch]

I have posted my review and updated the boxes above thus far! Please see the linked issue for discussion on the submission.

[leeper]

Thank you @vsoch for the very detailed review!

[anwarnunez]

Thanks for the review! I'll start working on the fixes to address your comments this weekend.

[vsoch]

Awesome! And I don't know the rules for this sort of thing, but please let me know if I can be of any help! :candy:

[leeper]

Feel free to continue the dialogue here or over there as needed and ping me if I can help on any procedural issues.

[anwarnunez]

Hello!
I submitted my responses to the review:
https://github.com/gallantlab/cottoncandy/issues/63#issuecomment-414180814

I made a new branch containing all the changes requested here: https://github.com/gallantlab/cottoncandy/tree/joss_review

Looking forward to your feedback!

[leeper]

Great. Thanks, @anwarnunez. @vsoch, please take a look when you can.

[vsoch]

Yes thank you, already noted!

[vsoch]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Here are some things you can ask me to do:

# List Whedon's capabilities
@whedon commands

# List of editor GitHub usernames
@whedon list editors

# List of reviewers together with programming language preferences and domain expertise
@whedon list reviewers

🚧 🚧 🚧 Experimental Whedon features 🚧 🚧 🚧

# Compile the paper
@whedon generate pdf

[vsoch]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[vsoch]

Great job @anwarnunez and thank you @leeper and @whedon. My further comments are here:

https://github.com/gallantlab/cottoncandy/issues/63#issuecomment-414398356

Happy Monday!

[vsoch]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[vsoch]

@leeper my review is complete, I think we are good to go! @anwarnunez and @leeper we will need the release to be 0.1.0 to coincide with the rc versions, and the (updated) one in this issue board. Great work everyone!

[anwarnunez]

Great!
All done from my end, too.
I merged, tagged and uploaded to pip:
https://pypi.org/project/cottoncandy/
https://github.com/gallantlab/cottoncandy/releases/tag/0.1.0

[anwarnunez]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[leeper]

@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.1402799 as archive

[whedon]

OK. 10.5281/zenodo.1402799 is the archive.

[leeper]

@anwarnunez Please merge this PR: https://github.com/gallantlab/cottoncandy/pull/68

[anwarnunez]

merged!

[leeper]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[leeper]

@arfon over to you

[arfon]

@vsoch - many thanks for your review here and to @leeper for editing this submission ✨

@anwarnunez - your paper is now accepted into JOSS and your DOI is https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00890 :zap: :rocket: :boom:

[whedon]

:tada::tada::tada: Congratulations on your paper acceptance! :tada::tada::tada:

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.00890/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00890)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00890">
  <img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.00890/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

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: http://joss.theoj.org/reviewer-signup.html
• Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/Mjk3Nzk=

[anwarnunez]

Great, thanks @arfon!
Thanks @vsoch for the great comments and @leeper for editing!