Skip to content

Updated editors guide #322

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Updated editors guide #322

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions appendices/editor-initial-response-template.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
---

## Editor comments
:wave: Hi @reviewer-one and @reviewer-two! Thank you for volunteering to review
for pyOpenSci! <Add any additional banter here that you wish..>
<Add additional banter here that you wish..>
<In step 3 you will add a welcome message to the reviewers>


### Please fill out our pre-review survey
Expand Down
23 changes: 15 additions & 8 deletions how-to/editors-guide.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ All reviews happen in GitHub issues. The template for the
`yaml` header of a review submission below will be
referenced multiple times in the steps below:

```{include} ../appendices/issue-review-template.md
```{include}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hey @crhea93, I'm curious about what removing these resources includes? They should render the content on the page for the user to copy. Was this intentional?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Weirdly, it's rendering in CI, but I don't understand how because the path to the include is removed? 🙃 i will come back to this later unless I am just missing some magic!

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah no it should not be removed!! Let me look into why it is doing this....


```

Expand All @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ Repository Link: REPO-LINK
Version submitted: VERSION-SUBMITTED
```

```{admonition} Editor in Chief checks for structure & scope should be completed first
```{admonition}
:class: note

The editor in chief who initially engaged with this review should have already evaluated the package level Editor Checks section for `Fit`, `Automated Tests`, `Documentation`, `License`, and `Repository`.
Expand All @@ -166,8 +166,9 @@ we are using our volunteer reviewer time effectively.

- Add a comment to the issue that contains an **exact** copy of the Editor Response template (see below) filled out with your response to the checks that begin the review.
- Change the label of the issue to `2/seeking-reviewer(s)`
- Note that, at this stage, you likely do not have reviewers yet!

```{include} ../appendices/editor-initial-response-template.md
```{include}

```

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -201,7 +202,7 @@ This type of communication just lets the author know that the process is
moving forward. Even if it takes longer to find reviews, authors generally
appreciate the communication and understand it's a volunteer-lead process.

```{admonition} Diversity in the editorial & reviewer team is important
```{admonition}
:class: important

Diversity is core to the pyOpenSci mission. As such it's important to have an
Expand All @@ -215,7 +216,7 @@ in the team supporting package review. Specifically both reviewers should have [

If you wish, you can use the email template below to invite reviewers.

```{include} ../appendices/reviewer-request-template.md
```{include}

```

Expand All @@ -225,10 +226,15 @@ deadline when you'll move on to looking for someone else to keep the processing
moving.

- Once you have assigned reviewers to the review, you will update the editor response above with:

1. reviewer GitHub handles and
2. the review deadline date.

```{info}
At this point you can add the following to the **Editor Response to Review** under **Editor Comments**:
`:wave: Hi @reviewer-one and @reviewer-two! Thank you for volunteering to review
for pyOpenSci!`
```

- Change the label on the issue to `3/reviewer(s)-assigned`

```{warning}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -319,7 +325,7 @@ Once the package has been accepted through the review process:
approved to the pyOpenSci website. They can perform this step regardless of the
JOSS submission process.

```{include} ../appendices/package-approval-template.md
```{include}

```

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -387,8 +393,9 @@ Once the package is accepted by JOSS and the DOI badge resolves properly:
Once the review is complete, you can close the issue. Before doing that:

- Be sure that the issue is correctly tagged with `6/pyOS-approved` (and `9/joss-approved` if authors decided to submit to JOSS and were accepted).
- Check the pyOpenSci website to ensure:

- Check the pyOpenSci website to ensure:

- The package was properly added to the [pyOpenSci website](https://www.pyopensci.org/python-packages/).
- Reviewers and maintainers are listed on the [contributors page](https://www.pyopensci.org/our-community/).
- Make sure the YAML at the top of the issue is fully filled out and up to date.
Expand Down
Loading