[REVIEW]: gtk-fortran: a GTK+ binding to build Graphical User Interfaces in Fortran #1109

whedon · 2018-11-29T09:29:31Z

Submitting author: @vmagnin (Vincent MAGNIN)
Repository: https://github.com/jerryd/gtk-fortran
Version: v17.10
Editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Reviewers: @johnsamuelwrites, @sundmanbo
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.2544192

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/33eda34ec9fd549844fb43ca28dd879a"><img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/33eda34ec9fd549844fb43ca28dd879a/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/33eda34ec9fd549844fb43ca28dd879a/status.svg)](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/33eda34ec9fd549844fb43ca28dd879a)

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

@johnsamuelwrites & @sundmanbo, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:

Make sure you're logged in to your GitHub account
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 @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman know.

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

Review checklist for @johnsamuelwrites

Conflict of interest

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

I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Version: Does the release version given match the GitHub release (v17.10)?
Authorship: Has the submitting author (@vmagnin) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

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

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

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

Review checklist for @sundmanbo

Conflict of interest

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

I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Version: Does the release version given match the GitHub release (v17.10)?
Authorship: Has the submitting author (@vmagnin) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

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

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

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

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

whedon · 2018-11-29T09:29:34Z

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

⭐ Important ⭐

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:

Set yourself as 'Not watching' https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews:

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 · 2018-11-29T09:29:36Z

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

whedon · 2018-11-29T09:30:01Z

👉 Check article proof 📄 👈

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2018-11-29T09:32:03Z

@johnsamuelwrites, @devonrex, @sundmanbo this is where the review takes place. There are tick boxes at the top if this issue to guide you through the process. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! 🤖 🚀

sundmanbo · 2018-12-01T06:38:09Z

Hi Kevin I am not sure this is the right way to conatct you but I am very unhappy about whedon/JOSS sending me a lot of emails about the reviewing of papers I am not involved in. How do I stop that? Bo Sundman Den tors 29 nov. 2018 kl 10:32 skrev Kevin Mattheus Moerman < notifications@github.com>:

…

@johnsamuelwrites <https://github.com/johnsamuelwrites>, @devonrex <https://github.com/devonrex>, @sundmanbo <https://github.com/sundmanbo> this is where the review takes place. There are tick boxes at the top if this issue to guide you through the process. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! 🤖 🚀 — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1109 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AH3Mdl1q9VdTNqR7iOCe0AUSn3IODcuYks5uz6mVgaJpZM4Y5RCL> .

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2018-12-01T10:41:41Z

@sundmando yes that is annoying. The top of this issue contains instructions to avoid this. I.e. Set yourself as 'Not watching' https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews. Let me know if you need more help.

sundmanbo · 2018-12-01T11:00:30Z

Yes I need more help. Where do I find a "No watching" button? Den lör 1 dec. 2018 kl 11:41 skrev Kevin Mattheus Moerman < notifications@github.com>:

…

@sundmando yes that is annoying. The to of this issue contains instructions to avoid this. I.e. Set yourself as 'Not watching' https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews. Let me know if you need more help. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1109 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AH3MdqtZf3zrdYLQp-5u6tGK-sRaHxamks5u0lzpgaJpZM4Y5RCL> .

arfon · 2018-12-01T17:52:05Z

Yes I need more help. Where do I find a "No watching" button?

@sundmanbo - if you might want to change your settings in your GitHub profile here to stop emails being sent:

johnsamuelwrites · 2018-12-10T15:12:00Z

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman @vmagnin v17.10 is the specified version for the journal. gtk-fortran follows a different versioning scheme, making use of the gtk version as well. For example: https://github.com/jerryd/gtk-fortran/releases shows v17.10.gtk3.22.25 and v17.10.gtk2.24.31. Is it possible to specify these two versions?

vmagnin · 2018-12-11T20:40:19Z

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman @vmagnin v17.10 is the specified version for the journal. gtk-fortran follows a different versioning scheme, making use of the gtk version as well. For example: https://github.com/jerryd/gtk-fortran/releases shows v17.10.gtk3.22.25 and v17.10.gtk2.24.31. Is it possible to specify these two versions?

Each version of gtk-fortran is numbered using the Ubuntu version used to build it, for example 17.10: but each release comprises a GTK+ 2 version and a GTK+3 version. And 3.22.25 and 2.24.31 are the precise GTK+ versions used to build gtk-fortran.

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2019-01-04T10:31:14Z

Happy New Year to all!

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2019-01-04T10:31:36Z

@johnsamuelwrites, @devonrex, @sundmanbo can you provide an update on the review process? Let me know if I can help with anything. Thanks.

sundmanbo · 2019-01-04T11:16:17Z

Hi Kevin I have finished my review and accept the software. But I had big problems receiving a lot of messages from reviews of other papers and had to turn off some obscure feedback buttons inside GITHUB not be be overloaded by emails. So maybe I did not finish the review properly. Best wishes Bo Sundman Den fre 4 jan. 2019 kl 11:31 skrev Kevin Mattheus Moerman < notifications@github.com>:

…

@johnsamuelwrites <https://github.com/johnsamuelwrites>, @devonrex <https://github.com/devonrex>, @sundmanbo <https://github.com/sundmanbo> can you provide an update on the review process? Let me know if I can help with anything. Thanks. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1109 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AH3MdlTN0mcgHGruGshmD5VDxqQn8QOBks5u_y2JgaJpZM4Y5RCL> .

johnsamuelwrites · 2019-01-06T11:28:18Z

gtk-fortran is GTK+/Fortran binding helping the Fortran programmers to build cross-platform GUI applications (though the authors mainly focus on Linux based machines). The need for the software is clear considering the lack of such tools with
an open licence. The tool has an associated Wiki on the GitHub page which explains the functionality and the installation procedures. In addition to this, the Wiki page also gives links to other external documents on how to build applications using gtk-fortran. A number of examples are given in the examples/ folder for the new comers. All the examples in the examples/ folder can be run as tests. These tests, however require manual intervention (e.g., the need to close the GUI windows.) But given the scope of this tool, I think it's not a major issue.

GitHub issues are used for reporting any problem. There is a 'How can I help?' section on the Wiki page for developers who visit to contribute.

I accept this software. The authors also have responded, clarified and made corrections to the issues/comments previously opened by me during the review/preview process.

There are some minor corrections/suggestions that need to be made on the Wiki page:

The link 'How to use GTK-Fortran with Code::Blocks IDE' is broken in the section 'Some external docs about gtk-fortran'
A quick start tutorial could be useful (something similar to the one given in the Fortran Tools - Chapter 16: GTK) on the main Wiki page.
Explore the possibility of fully automating the test run.

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2019-01-07T08:52:42Z

@vmagnin can you work on / formulate a reply to @johnsamuelwrites 's comments? Thanks

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2019-01-07T08:53:48Z

@devonrex are you able to review this software soon? Thanks

vmagnin · 2019-01-07T17:00:05Z

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Thank you @johnsamuelwrites for that review. Concerning your three final comments:

I clicked on the link 'How to use GTK-Fortran with Code::Blocks IDE' on two different PCs today and it works fine. Perhaps there was a server problem the day you try it ?
A quick start tutorial is a good idea and I can work on it during the next months.
Fully automating the test run could be a long term project. I guess there is applications to test softwares with GUI, but I have no experience of that kind of software. If you have some idea on how it could be done, I am interested.

Finally, I can say that such a review process is very interesting because users generally only post bug reports or questions on how to do something with the soft, but there is very rarely comments or critics or even requests concerning the documentation of the soft.

devonrex · 2019-01-07T18:30:02Z

I respectfully request that I be removed as a reviewer. Not only do I not have time to conduct a review, but I have no idea how to go about doing a review, locate what it is I am suppose to be reviewing, or how to navigate about the Github environment. I'm an engineer and not a computer science professional. James Miller

…

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 3:53 AM Kevin Mattheus Moerman < ***@***.***> wrote: @devonrex <https://github.com/devonrex> are you able to review this software soon? Thanks — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1109 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AQf7PFFZ-ERi1TTsfn8kNFD2h8b0-i3wks5vAwsfgaJpZM4Y5RCL> .

johnsamuelwrites · 2019-01-08T09:16:46Z

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman @vmagnin Thanks for the response. I verified the link (review comment 1) and it's working now. Regarding review comment 3 on full automation, I am aware that it may be little difficult and may not be the immediate focus of gtk-fortran. As I mentioned in the review, the manual tests are fine, especially considering that this is a GUI building tool and some users may wish to run through all the tests manually.

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2019-01-08T09:35:46Z

@devonrex thanks for letting us know. I'll remove you as reviewer. For future reference the review entails downloading (e.g. the zip file for the repository if you like without using GIT) and testing the software. Then boxes are ticked at the top of this review issue. Editors are also here to help with the process. Thanks for your time.

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2019-01-08T09:36:02Z

@whedon remove @devonrex as reviewer

whedon · 2019-01-08T09:36:08Z

OK, @devonrex is no longer a reviewer

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2019-01-08T09:37:28Z

@whedon generate pdf

whedon · 2019-01-08T09:37:31Z

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2019-01-31T14:53:02Z

@whedon check references

whedon · 2019-01-31T14:53:04Z

Attempting to check references...

whedon · 2019-01-31T14:53:08Z


OK DOIs

- http://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2991(08)80304-7 is OK
- http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2015.12.003 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman · 2019-02-10T08:34:25Z

@arfon @danielskatz @kyleniemeyer @labarba I recommend we accept this work in JOSS. The new version tag and DOI are:

I have created a new release: v17.10.gtk3.22.25_2

And have obtained its DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.2544192

arfon · 2019-02-12T18:52:55Z

@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.2544192 as archive

whedon · 2019-02-12T18:52:58Z

OK. 10.5281/zenodo.2544192 is the archive.

arfon · 2019-02-12T18:53:26Z

@whedon accept

whedon · 2019-02-12T18:53:28Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

whedon · 2019-02-12T18:53:56Z

PDF failed to compile for issue #1109 with the following error:

Can't find any papers to compile :-(

arfon · 2019-02-12T18:55:48Z

@vmagnin have you removed the paper.md file from your repository? @whedon doesn't seem to be able to find it any longer.

vmagnin · 2019-02-12T19:58:38Z

@arfon The paper.md, paper.bib and paper.png files are still in the master branch of the gtk-fortran repository. But some days ago I have changed the default branch of the repository from master (gtk2) to gtk3. Perhaps @whedon is searching in the default branch.
=> So, I have just copied and pushed the three paper.* files in the gtk3 branch. I hope it will solve the problem.

Another reason could be the ownership transfer one month ago from https://github.com/jerryd/gtk-fortran to https://github.com/vmagnin/gtk-fortran, but theoretically everything is automatically redirected from the old URL to the new.

arfon · 2019-02-12T20:14:28Z

@whedon generate pdf

whedon · 2019-02-12T20:14:31Z

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

whedon · 2019-02-12T20:14:54Z

👉 Check article proof 📄 👈

arfon · 2019-02-12T20:15:41Z

@arfon The paper.md, paper.bib and paper.png files are still in the master branch of the gtk-fortran repository. But some days ago I have changed the default branch of the repository from master (gtk2) to gtk3. Perhaps @whedon is searching in the default branch.

Ah yes. @whedon only picks up files in the default branch.

arfon · 2019-02-12T20:15:55Z

@whedon accept

whedon · 2019-02-12T20:15:58Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

whedon · 2019-02-12T20:16:01Z


OK DOIs

- http://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2991(08)80304-7 is OK
- http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2015.12.003 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

whedon · 2019-02-12T20:16:32Z

Check final proof 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#486

If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in openjournals/joss-papers#486, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag deposit=true e.g.

@whedon accept deposit=true

arfon · 2019-02-12T20:17:12Z

@whedon accept deposit=true

whedon · 2019-02-12T20:17:15Z

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

whedon · 2019-02-12T20:17:59Z

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited 👉 Creating pull request for 10.21105.joss.01109 joss-papers#487
Wait a couple of minutes to verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01109
If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? notify your editorial technical team...

arfon · 2019-02-12T20:20:25Z

@johnsamuelwrites, @sundmanbo - many thanks for your reviews and to @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman for editing this submission ✨

@vmagnin - your paper is now accepted into JOSS ⚡🚀💥

whedon · 2019-02-12T20:20:29Z

🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉

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.01109/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01109)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01109">
  <img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01109/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: http://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01109/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01109

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=

whedon · 2019-02-12T20:25:14Z


OK DOIs

- http://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2991(08)80304-7 is OK
- http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2015.12.003 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

whedon assigned Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Nov 29, 2018

whedon added the review label Nov 29, 2018

whedon mentioned this issue Nov 29, 2018

[PRE REVIEW]: gtk-fortran: a GTK+ binding to build Graphical User Interfaces in Fortran #1014

Closed

whedon assigned johnsamuelwrites and Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman and unassigned Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Jan 8, 2019

whedon added the accepted label Feb 12, 2019

arfon closed this as completed Feb 12, 2019

whedon added published Papers published in JOSS recommend-accept Papers recommended for acceptance in JOSS. labels Mar 2, 2020

editorialbot mentioned this issue Oct 13, 2023

[PRE REVIEW]: libtrixi: an interface library for using Trixi.jl from C/C++/Fortran #5943

Closed

[REVIEW]: gtk-fortran: a GTK+ binding to build Graphical User Interfaces in Fortran #1109

[REVIEW]: gtk-fortran: a GTK+ binding to build Graphical User Interfaces in Fortran #1109

Comments

whedon commented Nov 29, 2018 • edited Loading

Status

Reviewer instructions & questions

Review checklist for @johnsamuelwrites

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

Review checklist for @sundmanbo

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

whedon commented Nov 29, 2018

whedon commented Nov 29, 2018

whedon commented Nov 29, 2018

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Nov 29, 2018

sundmanbo commented Dec 1, 2018 via email

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Dec 1, 2018 • edited Loading

sundmanbo commented Dec 1, 2018 via email

arfon commented Dec 1, 2018

johnsamuelwrites commented Dec 10, 2018

vmagnin commented Dec 11, 2018

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 4, 2019

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 4, 2019

sundmanbo commented Jan 4, 2019 via email

johnsamuelwrites commented Jan 6, 2019

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 7, 2019

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 7, 2019

vmagnin commented Jan 7, 2019

devonrex commented Jan 7, 2019 via email

johnsamuelwrites commented Jan 8, 2019

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 8, 2019

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 8, 2019

whedon commented Jan 8, 2019

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 8, 2019

whedon commented Jan 8, 2019

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jan 31, 2019

whedon commented Jan 31, 2019

whedon commented Jan 31, 2019

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Feb 10, 2019

arfon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

arfon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

arfon commented Feb 12, 2019

vmagnin commented Feb 12, 2019

arfon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

arfon commented Feb 12, 2019

arfon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

arfon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

arfon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Feb 12, 2019

whedon commented Nov 29, 2018 •

edited

Loading

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Dec 1, 2018 •

edited

Loading