[PRE REVIEW]: DataInterpolations.jl: Fast Interpolations of 1D data

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @sathvikbhagavan (Sathvik Bhagavan)
Repository: https://github.com/SciML/DataInterpolations.jl
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v5.1.0
Editor: @arfon
Reviewers: @carstenbauer, @dawbarton
Managing EiC: Daniel S. Katz

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0524eb55e69a6aed3f029e637da62b0a"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0524eb55e69a6aed3f029e637da62b0a/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0524eb55e69a6aed3f029e637da62b0a/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0524eb55e69a6aed3f029e637da62b0a)

Author instructions

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

@sathvikbhagavan if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

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

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

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

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

@editorialbot commands

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

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.04 s (1284.1 files/s, 130702.1 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julia                           23            406            350           2840
Markdown                         8            164              0            515
YAML                            10             13              5            198
TeX                              1              9              0            105
TOML                             4              7              0             70
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            46            599            355           3728
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    95	Christopher Rackauckas
    85	Sathvik Bhagavan
    47	shubham maddhashiya
    35	Andreas Noack
    22	dependabot[bot]
    18	Diogo Netto
    12	Anshul Singhvi
    12	Arno Strouwen
    12	Jonathan Stickel
    11	Daniel González
    11	Glen Hertz
     8	Chris Rackauckas
     8	avik-pal
     8	github-actions[bot]
     7	user.email
     6	Tim Kim
     6	Venkateshprasad
     5	Avik Pal
     5	Pepijn de Vos
     4	Fredrik Bagge Carlson
     3	Anant Thazhemadam
     3	Yingbo Ma
     3	contradict
     3	mleseach
     3	xzackli
     2	Dilum Aluthge
     2	Lucas Pacheco
     1	ArnoStrouwen
     1	David Widmann
     1	Eeshan Gupta
     1	Helge Eichhorn
     1	Julia TagBot
     1	Kristoffer Carlsson
     1	KristofferC
     1	Lilith Orion Hafner
     1	Lyndon White
     1	Steven G. Johnson
     1	lassepe

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 406

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

🟡 License found: Other (Check here for OSI approval)

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1137/141000671 is OK
- 10.1145/321607.321609 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1145/3511528.3511535 may be a valid DOI for title: High-performance symbolic-numerics via multiple di...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: ModelingToolkit: A Composable Graph Transformation...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: On the stability of inverse problems
- 10.5194/amt-14-7909-2021 may be a valid DOI for title: Revisiting matrix-based inversion of scanning mobi...
- 10.1007/978-1-4612-3946-8_41 may be a valid DOI for title: On Pólya frequency functions IV: The fundamental s...
- 10.1090/qam/15914 may be a valid DOI for title: Contributions to the problem of approximation of e...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Lectures on Elementary Mathematics

INVALID DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9045(72)90080-9 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[danielskatz]

@sathvikbhagavan - thanks for your submission.

Some issues I see:

• The license is called the MIT "Expat" license, but appears to just be the MIT licenses: https://opensource.org/license/mit Can you explain/discuss?
• Please work on the invalid and possibly missing DOIs that editorialbot suggests, but note that some may be incorrect. Please feel free to make changes to your .bib file, then use the command @editorialbot check references to check again, and the command @editorialbot generate pdf when the references are right to make a new PDF. editorialbot commands need to be the first entry in a new comment.
• The .md file needs a references header at the end, so that this will appear before the references in the generated PDF. Please see the example paper

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot invite @jbytecode as editor

Thanks for volunteering via Slack, and please do ensure the items above are taking care of before starting the review.

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[jbytecode]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @jbytecode is now the editor

[jbytecode]

@sathvikbhagavan - Thank you for submitting your work to JOSS. I am the handling editor of this submission. Please firstly address the issues stressed by our track editor.

Secondly, I see many contributors including the ones with significant lines of code added in the repository. Why aren't they listed in the author list of the paper? Did you ask them to join writing the paper? Could you please clarify this issue?

Thank you in advance.

[ChrisRackauckas]

The license is called the MIT "Expat" license, but appears to just be the MIT licenses: https://opensource.org/license/mit Can you explain/discuss?

Calling it just the "MIT License" would be ambiguous which is why everyone refers to it as the MIT Expat License, originating from Expat. This is very standard and I do not know why something so standard would be flagged here?

https://memgraph.com/blog/what-is-mit-license
https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/mit-license
Even Wikipedia talks about this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License

[danielskatz]

👋 @ChrisRackauckas - I note the wikipedia page is for the "MIT license", and it includes "The MIT License has the identifier MIT in the SPDX License List. It is also known as the Expat License." This says to me that the MIT license is the standard term.

JOSS requires an OSI-approved license, as defined in https://opensource.org/licenses-old/category. Here, I see the "MIT license" defined. OSI doesn't list a license that includes expat in the name.

I accept that these are the same license, and that Expat is an alternative name in some cases, but it's not for OSI, so if would simply remove the first line of your LICENSE.md file, GitHub (and JOSS) would recognize this as the MIT license and our automated check would pass - see https://docs.github.com/en/communities/setting-up-your-project-for-healthy-contributions/adding-a-license-to-a-repository for GitHub's recommendation for LICENSE files.

[ChrisRackauckas]

Interesting, we just used the default MIT license generation from Gitkraken and that's how it gave it. Anyways, we can just make that look like the other standard. Odd that got flagged though since we've had other JOSS/JuliaCon Submissions (uses the same system) which didn't mention this.

[danielskatz]

@ChrisRackauckas - it might be that we changed our checking code a little while ago, with the idea of trying to automate more things. In any case, thanks!

[jbytecode]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.04 s (1171.8 files/s, 119624.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julia                           23            409            351           2864
Markdown                         8            166              0            499
YAML                            10             13              5            198
TeX                              1              9              0            105
TOML                             4              7              0             70
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            46            604            356           3736
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    96	Christopher Rackauckas
    88	Sathvik Bhagavan
    47	shubham maddhashiya
    35	Andreas Noack
    22	dependabot[bot]
    18	Diogo Netto
    12	Anshul Singhvi
    12	Arno Strouwen
    12	Jonathan Stickel
    11	Daniel González
    11	Glen Hertz
     8	Chris Rackauckas
     8	avik-pal
     8	github-actions[bot]
     7	user.email
     6	Tim Kim
     6	Venkateshprasad
     5	Avik Pal
     5	Pepijn de Vos
     4	Fredrik Bagge Carlson
     3	Anant Thazhemadam
     3	Yingbo Ma
     3	contradict
     3	mleseach
     3	xzackli
     2	Dilum Aluthge
     2	Lucas Pacheco
     1	ArnoStrouwen
     1	David Widmann
     1	Eeshan Gupta
     1	Helge Eichhorn
     1	Julia TagBot
     1	Kristoffer Carlsson
     1	KristofferC
     1	Lilith Orion Hafner
     1	Lyndon White
     1	Steven G. Johnson
     1	lassepe

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 406

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[jbytecode]

@sathvikbhagavan - Setting the license is now complete. Please clarify the other issue mentioned above before taking any further actions. Thank you in advance.

[sathvikbhagavan]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1137/141000671 is OK
- 10.1145/3511528.3511535 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2103.05244 is OK
- 10.5194/amt-14-7909-2021 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4899-0433-1_17 is OK
- 10.1016/0021-9045(72)90080-9 is OK
- 10.1145/321607.321609 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4899-0433-1_1 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: On the stability of inverse problems
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Lectures on elementary mathematics, by Joseph Loui...

INVALID DOIs

- None

[ChrisRackauckas]

Secondly, I see many contributors including the ones with significant lines of code added in the repository. Why aren't they listed in the author list of the paper? Did you ask them to join writing the paper? Could you please clarify this issue?

I don't understand, who would you suggest? The next on the list had just a few trivial bug fixes and mostly just version bumps and CI changes. Then next on the list is Avik with one PR for adding derivative overloads: SciML/DataInterpolations.jl#72 . I'll go with the ruling of whatever is the standard with JOSS, but my understanding was that it's not normal for folks who made one PR awhile back to be in the author list and it's mostly for the maintainers of the package?

[jbytecode]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[danielskatz]

@ChrisRackauckas - please remember that questions and comments are generally well-intentioned. Regarding this case, it's really up to you to decide. Different software projects have different authorship policies, as reflected in different JOSS publications. Making your project's policy and decision process clear is what was being asked.

[jbytecode]

@ChrisRackauckas, @sathvikbhagavan - Thank you for explaining why only a few of the participants in the project were designated as authors on the paper.

Now it is time to find reviewers for the process. Do you have any suggestions for the potential reviewers? You can use the search tool https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/lookup to look up GitHub handles.

It seems the reviewers with Julia and math expertise is okay for this submission. Please mention their usernames without using the @ character just because we don't want to bother them.

If you don't have any suggestions, I will find and assign two reviewers.

Thank you in advance.

[ChrisRackauckas]

please remember that questions and comments are generally well-intentioned

And indeed my questions are also well-intentioned. In the future it would be helpful for the questions to be more concrete so that they don't require clarifying questions to be understood (I'm still not entirely sure what you were asking for in a few cases here but it sounds like you're okay with the submission now so I guess all is well 🤷😅)

[jbytecode]

The submission is okay, but I think the communication style used in this thread is a little bit tense. I don't think I can continue a process that could take months with this style of communication. May I withdraw from my editorial duties on this submission @danielskatz? I wanted to edit it especially because it was related to Julia. I am very sorry if I am causing you any trouble.

[ChrisRackauckas]

I am sorry if anything is being misread and I agree @danielskatz made things a bit tense but I think everyone means well here. You haven't caused any trouble. I still don't entirely understand what was being asked, but it sounds like we're good.

For reviewers, I've worked with a good chunk of them so I'll try and make suggestions from the group that I haven't published with. matbesancon, crstnbr, dawbarton are folks who would have relevant background for which I don't think there's any COI to note.

[danielskatz]

@ChrisRackauckas - given the issues here, we'll pass this to our editor-in-chief to be the editor.

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot assign @arfon as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @arfon is now the editor

[arfon]

👋 @matbesancon, @crstnbr, @dawbarton – would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The submission under consideration is " DataInterpolations.jl: Fast Interpolations of 1D data".

The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. You can learn more about the process in these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

Based on your experience, we think you might be able to provide a great review of this submission. Please let me know if you think you can help us out!

Many thanks
Arfon

[carstenbauer]

Hey @arfon! Yes, I'd be willing to review this submission.

[arfon]

Thanks @carstenbauer! I'm going to see if I can get a second reviewer before actually opening up the review thread.

[dawbarton]

I’m happy to review.

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @carstenbauer as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@carstenbauer added to the reviewers list!

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @dawbarton as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@dawbarton added to the reviewers list!

[arfon]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #6917.

[arfon]

@carstenbauer, @dawbarton, @sathvikbhagavan, @ChrisRackauckas – see you over in #6917 where the actual review will take place.