JOSE paper

[rempsyc]

Preparing to submit to JOSE

Real time PDF: https://github.com/easystats/performance/blob/JOSE_paper/papers/JOSE/paper.pdf

Edit: reminder to use [skip ci] in this PR

Follow-up on #568

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #586 (ba4fa05) into main (4ec706e) will decrease coverage by 0.06%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head ba4fa05 differs from pull request most recent head c6d5115. Consider uploading reports for the commit c6d5115 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #586      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   54.95%   54.90%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files          84       84              
  Lines        5852     5852              
==========================================
- Hits         3216     3213       -3     
- Misses       2636     2639       +3     

see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[rempsyc]

I've tried submitting the JOSE paper yesterday, and again today, but I keep getting an error on submission ("something went wrong"). So I am not able to submit.

openjournals/jose#22

[rempsyc]

Our paper now in prereview at openjournals/jose-reviews#211

[rempsyc]

@strengejacke reviewers have finished their review of the JOSE outliers paper. There is usually the checklist below to complete:

Additional Author Tasks After Review is Complete

• Double check authors and affiliations (including ORCIDs)
• Make a release of the software with the latest changes from the review and post the version number here. This is the version that will be used in the JOSS paper.
• Archive the release on Zenodo/figshare/etc and post the DOI here.
• Make sure that the title and author list (including ORCIDs) in the archive match those in the JOSS paper.
• Make sure that the license listed for the archive is the same as the software license.

Which involves making a new release of the software and putting it on Zenodo. There is a bit of ambiguity relative to what exactly should be put on Zenodo, but usually it is the whole repository. Furthermore, it seems performance already has a Zenodo page with a specific doi, do you think I need to create a new one? Given that we use a branch here, I wonder if we need to merge first as well?

[rempsyc]

According to this Stack Overflow answer,

The documentation on the Zenodo homepage doesn't seem to explain this explicitly but the documentation on Github does: Zenodo creates releases from the releases on Github, so to update your entry on Zenodo, you need to create a new release on Github.

And I can see the performance Zenodo archive indeed seems up-to-date. So I think we only need to make a new release and provide that doi? But we probably need to merge first?

---

Edit: Actually let's wait to close #636 before merging Ready to merge 🙃

[rempsyc]

Congratulations everyone @mattansb, @IndrajeetPatil, @strengejacke, @bwiernik, and @DominiqueMakowski, our JOSE paper is basically accepted at this point and so now is the last time to check affiliations or make last minutes changes. The final version of the paper is available here (scroll down to download the artifact file): https://github.com/easystats/performance/actions/runs/6408158062

[bwiernik]

Thanks for all of your efforts!

[IndrajeetPatil]

@rempsyc Woot!!! Thanks for all the hard work you put into this. Congrats! 🎉