[PRE REVIEW]: COINSTAC: Collaborative Informatics and Neuroimaging Suite Toolkit for Anonymous Computation

[whedon]

Submitting author: @hvgazula (Harshvardhan Gazula)
Repository: https://github.com/MRN-Code/coinstac
Version: v4.4.1-Alpha
Editor: @cMadan
Reviewers: @gkiar, @yarikoptic

Author instructions

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

@hvgazula 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 😸

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]

PDF failed to compile for issue #1847 with the following error:

/app/vendor/ruby-2.4.4/lib/ruby/2.4.0/find.rb:43:in block in find': No such file or directory - tmp/1847 (Errno::ENOENT) from /app/vendor/ruby-2.4.4/lib/ruby/2.4.0/find.rb:43:in collect!'
from /app/vendor/ruby-2.4.4/lib/ruby/2.4.0/find.rb:43:in find' from /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/bundler/gems/whedon-74bc29a6a731/lib/whedon/processor.rb:61:in find_paper_paths'
from /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/bundler/gems/whedon-74bc29a6a731/bin/whedon:50:in prepare' from /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/gems/thor-0.20.3/lib/thor/command.rb:27:in run'
from /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/gems/thor-0.20.3/lib/thor/invocation.rb:126:in invoke_command' from /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/gems/thor-0.20.3/lib/thor.rb:387:in dispatch'
from /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/gems/thor-0.20.3/lib/thor/base.rb:466:in start' from /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/bundler/gems/whedon-74bc29a6a731/bin/whedon:116:in <top (required)>'
from /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/bin/whedon:23:in load' from /app/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.4.0/bin/whedon:23:in

'

[danielskatz]

👋 @arfon - I assume this is a problem with the branch being submitted rather than a base repo - Is this correct? How do we fix it?

[arfon]

Whedon can't clone from https://github.com/MRN-Code/coinstac/tree/paper-branch which is currently listed at the top of the issue as the repository address. Instead the URL for the repo needs to be https://github.com/MRN-Code/coinstac and then we can ask Whedon to compile the paper from the paper-branch branch.

I'll do that now.

[arfon]

@whedon generate pdf from branch paper-branch

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch paper-branch. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

👉 Check article proof 📄 👈

[danielskatz]

Whedon can't clone from https://github.com/MRN-Code/coinstac/tree/paper-branch which is currently listed at the top of the issue as the repository address. Instead the URL for the repo needs to be https://github.com/MRN-Code/coinstac and then we can ask Whedon to compile the paper from the paper-branch branch.

Does this imply something that we should change in our docs, submission form, or Whedon's error messages?

[danielskatz]

👋 @cMadan - would you be willing to edit this submission?

[arfon]

Does this imply something that we should change in our docs, submission form, or Whedon's error messages?

I think this is a Whedon issue. I opened an issue to track this yesterday: openjournals/whedon#60

[whedon]

Failed to discover a valid open source license.

[danielskatz]

@hvgazula - note that you need to add an OSI-approved license to your repo before we can start any review.

[hvgazula]

Added License file. Thanks for pointing out. Apologies for the inconvenience.

[cMadan]

@danielskatz, sure, I can edit this one.

[cMadan]

@whedon assign @cMadan as editor

[whedon]

OK, the editor is @cMadan

[cMadan]

@hvgazula, can you suggest some potential reviewers?

[hvgazula]

@arokem

[arokem]

Hello! Thanks for suggesting me. Unfortunately, my current editing workload is rather full, so I would rather not take this one on. But let me know if you can't find other reviewers.

[hvgazula]

@arokem I found only two reviewers: @cMadan and yourself. I assumed that @cMadan may not have wanted to review it given that he asked me to suggest potential reviewers which is when I picked you. If not for the two of you, the next best one I could think of is @majensen.

[cMadan]

@hvgazula, I will be the editor for this submission, not a reviewer. So far everyone you've suggested are JOSS editors, have you had a chance to look at the reviewer list? (See link in first post in this issue.) You are also welcome to suggested people who develop software but are not on the JOSS reviewer list.

[hvgazula]

@spinicist

[cMadan]

@engfranco @richford @AkiNikolaidis, would you be available and interested in reviewing this submission?

You can find some additional information about JOSS here: https://joss.theoj.org/about

[hvgazula]

Hello @cMadan! How are you doing? If you didn't hear from anyone yet, I have a few more recommendations- satra, yarikoptic and chrisgorgo. I'd appreciate it if there's anything you can do to expedite the review process. It's been sitting there for a while now and they are important for some grants we have applied. I hope you will understand the situation. Thank you very much.

[cMadan]

@hvgazula, that's understandable, I'll continue to try and find reviewers here.

@FelixHenninger, would you be able to review the software side of things here, even if not the neuroimaging-specific aspects? Your suggestions earlier were much appreciated!

[cMadan]

@gkiar @satra @yarikoptic, would you be available and interested in reviewing this submission?

You can find some additional information about JOSS here: https://joss.theoj.org/about

[yarikoptic]

Interested - yes. Available - depends on timeline.

[gkiar]

@cMadan similar to @yarikoptic here, as well, though I don't work much in JavaScript so believe I'm a bit under-qualified to evaluate the quality of software.

[cMadan]

@yarikoptic @gkiar, the review process here is a back-and-forth between the authors and reviewers, so it usually goes on for a few weeks. For this particular submission I've been having troubling finding suitable reviewers, so I think we can accomodate what works for both of you.

@gkiar, as long as another reviewer is able to judge that side of things, I think that's fine and it would be great to have you. I think @FelixHenninger had the opposite set of expertise, understanding the software infrastructure but not the neuro background. I'll wait to see if he is able to be part of the full review here, but I think together your expertises would complement each other well.

[satra]

@cMadan - sorry don't have the time right now, and also a conflict of interest.

[cMadan]

@satra, no problem, thanks for the response!

[AkiNikolaidis]

Hi Chris, Thank you for thinking of me for this review. I'm sorry I can't commit to reviewing at this time, but this project looks interesting!! Best regards, Aki

…

On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 9:06 PM Christopher Madan ***@***.***> wrote: @engfranco <https://github.com/engfranco> @richford <https://github.com/richford> @AkiNikolaidis <https://github.com/AkiNikolaidis>, would you be available and interested in reviewing this submission? You can find some additional information about JOSS here: https://joss.theoj.org/about — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1847?email_source=notifications&email_token=ABA5GNFHK23U23GFOSOLNCDRDM7BPA5CNFSM4JGVUP4KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEMAI3RQ#issuecomment-587238854>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABA5GNEXSJ3ADUIDHOO3PGDRDM7BPANCNFSM4JGVUP4A> .

[cMadan]

@AkiNikolaidis, thanks for letting me know!

@FelixHenninger @gkiar @yarikoptic, please let me know if you'd be able to review here. We've been having trouble finding reviewers with the right skill set here, so it really would be appreciated! :)

[gkiar]

Sure, @cMadan, I can do it!

[arfon]

Dear authors and reviewers

We wanted to notify you that in light of the current COVID-19 pandemic, JOSS has decided to suspend submission of new manuscripts and to handle existing manuscripts (such as this one) on a "best efforts basis". We understand that you may need to attend to more pressing issues than completing a review or updating a repository in response to a review. If this is the case, a quick note indicating that you need to put a "pause" on your involvement with a review would be appreciated but is not required.

Thanks in advance for your understanding.

Arfon Smith, Editor in Chief, on behalf of the JOSS editorial team.

[yarikoptic]

@cMadan I can review, just will need at least a week to get to it.

[cMadan]

@gkiar @yarikoptic, great, thank you for both agreeing! I'll start the review, but do consider that we understand that you may need more time than normally to work on reviews based on current world events (particularly in relation to COVID-19).

[cMadan]

@whedon add @gkiar as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, @gkiar is now a reviewer

[cMadan]

@whedon add @yarikoptic as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, @yarikoptic is now a reviewer

[cMadan]

@whedon start review

[whedon]

OK, I've started the review over in #2166.