Joss-reviews: [PRE REVIEW]: Hypothesis: A new approach to property-based testing

[whedon]

Submitting author: @DRMacIver (David MacIver)
Repository: https://github.com/HypothesisWorks/hypothesis/
Version: 4.44.2
Editor: @danielskatz
Reviewers: @luizirber, @djmitche

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @DRMacIver. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@DRMacIver if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread. In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @whedon is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @whedon can do for you type:

@whedon commands

[whedon]

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

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@whedon generate pdf

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 :smile_cat:

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.

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

:point_right: Check article proof :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[labarba]

👋 @danielskatz — This submission falls in the general area of software engineering, and I think you could handle it as editor?
Hypothesis: A new approach to property-based testing
https://github.com/HypothesisWorks/hypothesis/

[luizirber]

I was going to volunteer as a reviewer, but I skimmed the paper and it cites hypothesis-bio as an example (and I'm involved in the development). Is it a conflict of interest?
https://github.com/HypothesisWorks/hypothesis/blob/master/paper.md

[danielskatz]

@whedon assign @danielskatz as editor

[whedon]

OK, the editor is @danielskatz

[danielskatz]

@luizirber - no, you are a stakeholder in some sense, which is good - I'll add you as a reviewer and try to find a second next.

[danielskatz]

@whedon assign @luizirber as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, the reviewer is @luizirber

[danielskatz]

👋 @DRMacIver - Can you suggest some additional reviewers? From this list perhaps?

[DRMacIver]

Sure!

Based solely on the process of looking for "testing" in the topics and "Python" in the primary language and excluding @Zac-HD because he's one of the authors, the following seem to be the valid choices of reviewers from that spreadsheet: @ctb @djmitche @camillescott

I don't believe I know any of them personally, and based on looking at their github profiles it doesn't look like any of them currently use Hypothesis, so I don't have any criteria I'd use to narrow it down further than that and I guess any of those three who are interested would be good choices.

[ctb]

someone else in my lab (@luizirber) I believe has experience. pinging him now.

[ctb]

Oh. He's already assigned. Well, @camillescott and @luizirber and I are all in the same lab so ...maybe we should only pick one? :)

[danielskatz]

👋 @djmitche - would you be willing to review this for JOSS?

[Zac-HD]

👋 everyone! Super excited to go from JOSS admirer to JOSS author 😁

The issue tags seem a little weird - we do have all those languages in the repo, but Hypothesis is a pure-Python library. For later stages, we've been archiving Hypothesis at 10.5281/zenodo.1412597

[danielskatz]

The archive isn't needed until later, and there may be changes that needed to be made and put in a new release/archive...

[Zac-HD]

No worries, we automated the release process years ago, so that's as easy as "approve and merge a PR".

[djmitche]

wave @djmitche - would you be willing to review this for JOSS?

I would. I'm a very casual user of hypothesis, so I'm excited to see it in JOSS.

[danielskatz]

Thanks very much - I'll add you and we can start the review process

[danielskatz]

@whedon add @djmitche as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, @djmitche is now a reviewer

[danielskatz]

@whedon start review

[whedon]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/1891. Feel free to close this issue now!