[REVIEW]: PyRolL - An Extensible OpenSource Framework for Rolling Simulation #6200

editorialbot · 2024-01-10T09:46:21Z

Submitting author: @axtimhaus (Max Weiner)
Repository: https://github.com/pyroll-project/pyroll-core
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss
Version: v2.1.3
Editor: @philipcardiff
Reviewers: @philipcardiff, @rboman
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.10495163

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/651a81f7f8f5ce47120e760c1f9f3942"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/651a81f7f8f5ce47120e760c1f9f3942/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/651a81f7f8f5ce47120e760c1f9f3942/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/651a81f7f8f5ce47120e760c1f9f3942)

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) by leaving comments 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

@philipcardiff & @rboman, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review.
First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @philipcardiff know.

✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨

Checklists

📝 Checklist for @philipcardiff

📝 Checklist for @rboman

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

editorialbot · 2024-01-10T09:46:24Z

Hello humans, 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 · 2024-01-10T09:46:25Z

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.11 s (1058.8 files/s, 94871.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                         102           1985            858           5149
TeX                              1             94              0            993
Markdown                         8            111              0            292
TOML                             2             12              1             78
YAML                             1              1              4             18
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0            706              2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           115           2203           1569           6532
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

editorialbot · 2024-01-10T09:46:27Z

Wordcount for paper.md is 1270

philipcardiff · 2024-01-10T09:47:39Z

Review checklist for @philipcardiff

Conflict of interest

I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest (COI) policy and that: I have no COIs with reviewing this work or that any perceived COIs have been waived by JOSS for the purpose of this review.

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 https://github.com/pyroll-project/pyroll-core?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE or COPYING file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Contribution and authorship: Has the submitting author (@axtimhaus) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?
Substantial scholarly effort: Does this submission meet the scope eligibility described in the JOSS guidelines
Data sharing: If the paper contains original data, data are accessible to the reviewers. If the paper contains no original data, please check this item.
Reproducibility: If the paper contains original results, results are entirely reproducible by reviewers. If the paper contains no original results, please check this item.
Human and animal research: If the paper contains original data research on humans subjects or animals, does it comply with JOSS's human participants research policy and/or animal research policy? If the paper contains no such data, please check this item.

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 functionality 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

Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?
Quality of writing: Is the paper well written (i.e., it does not require editing for structure, language, or writing quality)?
References: Is the list of references complete, and is everything cited appropriately that should be cited (e.g., papers, datasets, software)? Do references in the text use the proper citation syntax?

editorialbot · 2024-01-10T09:48:03Z

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

editorialbot · 2024-01-10T09:50:57Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1098/rspa.1972.0025 is OK
- 10.12688/f1000research.23224.2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.commatsci.2005.01.009 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200806353 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.46.1458 is OK
- 10.1016/S1005-8850(08)60065-1 is OK
- 10.1179/030192304225011016 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200506068 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.196705760 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.12.007 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.rcim.2014.04.006 is OK
- 10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.07.043 is OK
- 10.1002/nme.1328 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200706280 is OK
- 10.1007/s11665-008-9289-2 is OK
- 10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00734-2 is OK
- 10.1016/S0921-5093(01)01964-5 is OK
- 10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00347-3 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.42.868 is OK
- 10.1016/0924-0136(96)02307-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.07.023 is OK
- 10.25518/esaform21.3987 is OK
- 10.5281/ZENODO.6053272 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.198801607 is OK
- 10.1051/metal/193936060257 is OK
- 10.1016/0890-6955(92)90022-9 is OK
- 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.038 is OK
- 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1961_175_043_02 is OK
- 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.09.149 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.04.124 is OK
- 10.1007/978-3-322-88346-9 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.40.65 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.25518/esaform21.3987 may be a valid DOI for title: A Computational Method for Pass Design of the Four-Roll Rolling Process Forsizing of Round Sections

INVALID DOIs

- None

philipcardiff · 2024-01-10T12:54:45Z

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

OK DOIs

10.1098/rspa.1972.0025 is OK

10.12688/f1000research.23224.2 is OK

10.1016/j.commatsci.2005.01.009 is OK

10.1002/srin.200806353 is OK

10.2355/isijinternational.46.1458 is OK

10.1016/S1005-8850(08)60065-1 is OK

10.1179/030192304225011016 is OK

10.1002/srin.200506068 is OK

10.1002/srin.196705760 is OK

10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.12.007 is OK

10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK

10.1016/j.rcim.2014.04.006 is OK

10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.07.043 is OK

10.1002/nme.1328 is OK

10.1002/srin.200706280 is OK

10.1007/s11665-008-9289-2 is OK

10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00734-2 is OK

10.1016/S0921-5093(01)01964-5 is OK

10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00347-3 is OK

10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK

10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK

10.2355/isijinternational.42.868 is OK

10.1016/0924-0136(96)02307-2 is OK

10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.07.023 is OK

10.25518/esaform21.3987 is OK

10.5281/ZENODO.6053272 is OK

10.1002/srin.198801607 is OK

10.1051/metal/193936060257 is OK

10.1016/0890-6955(92)90022-9 is OK

10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.038 is OK

10.1243/PIME_PROC_1961_175_043_02 is OK

10.1016/j.proeng.2014.09.149 is OK

10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.04.124 is OK

10.1007/978-3-322-88346-9 is OK

10.2355/isijinternational.40.65 is OK

MISSING DOIs

10.25518/esaform21.3987 may be a valid DOI for title: A Computational Method for Pass Design of the Four-Roll Rolling Process Forsizing of Round Sections

INVALID DOIs

None

Hi @axtimhaus, can you check this possible missing DOI? Thanks.

rboman · 2024-01-11T08:19:05Z

Review checklist for @rboman

Conflict of interest

I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest (COI) policy and that: I have no COIs with reviewing this work or that any perceived COIs have been waived by JOSS for the purpose of this review.

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 https://github.com/pyroll-project/pyroll-core?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE or COPYING file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Contribution and authorship: Has the submitting author (@axtimhaus) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?
Substantial scholarly effort: Does this submission meet the scope eligibility described in the JOSS guidelines
Data sharing: If the paper contains original data, data are accessible to the reviewers. If the paper contains no original data, please check this item.
Reproducibility: If the paper contains original results, results are entirely reproducible by reviewers. If the paper contains no original results, please check this item.
Human and animal research: If the paper contains original data research on humans subjects or animals, does it comply with JOSS's human participants research policy and/or animal research policy? If the paper contains no such data, please check this item.

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 functionality 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

Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?
Quality of writing: Is the paper well written (i.e., it does not require editing for structure, language, or writing quality)?
References: Is the list of references complete, and is everything cited appropriately that should be cited (e.g., papers, datasets, software)? Do references in the text use the proper citation syntax?

axtimhaus · 2024-01-11T14:28:49Z

@philipcardiff I have updated the DOI.

philipcardiff · 2024-01-11T16:05:01Z

@editorialbot check references

editorialbot · 2024-01-11T16:08:32Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1098/rspa.1972.0025 is OK
- 10.12688/f1000research.23224.2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.commatsci.2005.01.009 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200806353 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.46.1458 is OK
- 10.1016/S1005-8850(08)60065-1 is OK
- 10.1179/030192304225011016 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200506068 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.196705760 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.12.007 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.rcim.2014.04.006 is OK
- 10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.07.043 is OK
- 10.1002/nme.1328 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200706280 is OK
- 10.1007/s11665-008-9289-2 is OK
- 10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00734-2 is OK
- 10.1016/S0921-5093(01)01964-5 is OK
- 10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00347-3 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.42.868 is OK
- 10.1016/0924-0136(96)02307-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.07.023 is OK
- 10.25518/esaform21.3987 is OK
- 10.25518/esaform21.3987 is OK
- 10.5281/ZENODO.6053272 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.198801607 is OK
- 10.1051/metal/193936060257 is OK
- 10.1016/0890-6955(92)90022-9 is OK
- 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.038 is OK
- 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1961_175_043_02 is OK
- 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.09.149 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.04.124 is OK
- 10.1007/978-3-322-88346-9 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.40.65 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

philipcardiff · 2024-01-11T16:58:10Z

FYI: pyroll-project/pyroll-docs#8

philipcardiff · 2024-01-11T16:58:32Z

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot · 2024-01-11T16:59:46Z

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

rboman · 2024-01-12T14:51:48Z

Hi, I have posted my review as a MR (pyroll-docs) and an issue (pyroll-core).

Globally, I think that this piece of software is very interesting and deserves a paper in JOSS.
As the authors say in their document, this kind of numerical model is usually kept private in companies. Consequently making it open-source is a real gift for researchers (and companies). It is also very modular and built in a modern way. The code is clean. I also like the plugin system with hooks. I haven't had enough time to understand how it internally works but I am sure I'll have a closer look in the future for my own projects.

I have been very happy with the documentation although I saw that there is an issue which says that it should be completely rewritten. PyRolL is very easy to install with PyPI and it is also straightforward to make a quick simulation (I like the "create-input-py" command of the pyroll executable which gives a first basic test for the new user). The input and outputs are easily understandable and the generated HTML report is very convenient to analyse the results. I have also played with the example Jupyter notebooks (pyroll-examples). Everything works as expected.

Therefore, I have no "major changes" to request. I will be happy to accept the paper as soon as my comments in the issue have been resolved.

philipcardiff · 2024-01-12T17:28:26Z

Thanks @rboman. My review is also in progress, and I agree with your comments and experiences.

philipcardiff · 2024-01-12T17:31:10Z

For future reference: pyroll-project/pyroll-core#158 (comment)

axtimhaus · 2024-01-15T19:38:11Z

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot · 2024-01-15T19:39:21Z

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

philipcardiff · 2024-01-17T16:20:50Z

@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.10495163 as archive

editorialbot · 2024-01-17T16:20:53Z

Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.10495163

philipcardiff · 2024-01-17T16:21:49Z

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot · 2024-01-17T16:21:52Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2024-01-17T16:23:42Z

👋 @openjournals/pe-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof 👉📄 Download article

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in openjournals/joss-papers#4919, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

philipcardiff · 2024-01-17T16:24:24Z

Hi @kyleniemeyer, this paper is ready for processing.

editorialbot · 2024-01-17T16:25:22Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1098/rspa.1972.0025 is OK
- 10.12688/f1000research.23224.2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.commatsci.2005.01.009 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200806353 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.46.1458 is OK
- 10.1016/S1005-8850(08)60065-1 is OK
- 10.1179/030192304225011016 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200506068 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.196705760 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.12.007 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.rcim.2014.04.006 is OK
- 10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.07.043 is OK
- 10.1002/nme.1328 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200706280 is OK
- 10.1007/s11665-008-9289-2 is OK
- 10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00734-2 is OK
- 10.1016/S0921-5093(01)01964-5 is OK
- 10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00347-3 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.42.868 is OK
- 10.1016/0924-0136(96)02307-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.07.023 is OK
- 10.25518/esaform21.3987 is OK
- 10.25518/esaform21.3987 is OK
- 10.5281/ZENODO.6053272 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.198801607 is OK
- 10.1051/metal/193936060257 is OK
- 10.1016/0890-6955(92)90022-9 is OK
- 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.038 is OK
- 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1961_175_043_02 is OK
- 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.09.149 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.04.124 is OK
- 10.1007/978-3-322-88346-9 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.40.65 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

ChRen95 · 2024-01-18T07:46:53Z

Just noticed, that we forgot to mention one valuable contributor which we want to thank. I just updated the paper.md.

philipcardiff · 2024-01-19T09:41:05Z

@editorialbot generate pdf

philipcardiff · 2024-01-19T09:41:15Z

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot · 2024-01-19T09:41:18Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2024-01-19T09:42:17Z

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

editorialbot · 2024-01-19T09:42:25Z

⚠️ Error preparing paper acceptance.

editorialbot · 2024-01-19T09:44:51Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1098/rspa.1972.0025 is OK
- 10.12688/f1000research.23224.2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.commatsci.2005.01.009 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200806353 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.46.1458 is OK
- 10.1016/S1005-8850(08)60065-1 is OK
- 10.1179/030192304225011016 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200506068 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.196705760 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.12.007 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.rcim.2014.04.006 is OK
- 10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.07.043 is OK
- 10.1002/nme.1328 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.200706280 is OK
- 10.1007/s11665-008-9289-2 is OK
- 10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00734-2 is OK
- 10.1016/S0921-5093(01)01964-5 is OK
- 10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00347-3 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.35.1100 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.42.868 is OK
- 10.1016/0924-0136(96)02307-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.07.023 is OK
- 10.25518/esaform21.3987 is OK
- 10.25518/esaform21.3987 is OK
- 10.5281/ZENODO.6053272 is OK
- 10.1002/srin.198801607 is OK
- 10.1051/metal/193936060257 is OK
- 10.1016/0890-6955(92)90022-9 is OK
- 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.038 is OK
- 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1961_175_043_02 is OK
- 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.09.149 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.04.124 is OK
- 10.1007/978-3-322-88346-9 is OK
- 10.2355/isijinternational.40.65 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

kyleniemeyer · 2024-01-19T18:01:27Z

Hi @axtimhaus, I noticed that the author lists differ between the paper and Zenodo archive. We typically ask that those match, unless for a particular reason. Can you fix that, or let us know a reason for the difference (if intentional)?

Also, I made some minor edits to the paper in pyroll-project/pyroll-core#164. Can you review and merge?

kyleniemeyer · 2024-01-22T17:24:36Z

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot · 2024-01-22T17:26:07Z

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

kyleniemeyer · 2024-01-22T19:21:48Z

@axtimhaus the paper edits are good; can you address or resolve the Zenodo archive author list?

axtimhaus · 2024-01-23T08:31:30Z

I have updated the Zenodo record. These were automatically filled from the Python metadata.

kyleniemeyer · 2024-01-23T15:32:26Z

@editorialbot accept

editorialbot · 2024-01-23T15:32:29Z

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

editorialbot · 2024-01-23T15:39:06Z

Ensure proper citation by uploading a plain text CITATION.cff file to the default branch of your repository.

If using GitHub, a Cite this repository menu will appear in the About section, containing both APA and BibTeX formats. When exported to Zotero using a browser plugin, Zotero will automatically create an entry using the information contained in the .cff file.

You can copy the contents for your CITATION.cff file here:

CITATION.cff

cff-version: "1.2.0"
authors:
- email: [email protected]
  family-names: Weiner
  given-names: Max
  orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8232-6877"
- email: [email protected]
  family-names: Renzing
  given-names: Christoph
  orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9250-4358"
- email: [email protected]
  family-names: Stirl
  given-names: Max
  orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3484-9849"
- email: [email protected]
  family-names: Schmidtchen
  given-names: Matthias
  orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2064-4124"
- email: [email protected]
  family-names: Prahl
  given-names: Ulrich
  orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6978-5721"
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10495163
message: If you use this software, please cite our article in the
  Journal of Open Source Software.
preferred-citation:
  authors:
  - email: [email protected]
    family-names: Weiner
    given-names: Max
    orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8232-6877"
  - email: [email protected]
    family-names: Renzing
    given-names: Christoph
    orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9250-4358"
  - email: [email protected]
    family-names: Stirl
    given-names: Max
    orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3484-9849"
  - email: [email protected]
    family-names: Schmidtchen
    given-names: Matthias
    orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2064-4124"
  - email: [email protected]
    family-names: Prahl
    given-names: Ulrich
    orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6978-5721"
  date-published: 2024-01-23
  doi: 10.21105/joss.06200
  issn: 2475-9066
  issue: 93
  journal: Journal of Open Source Software
  publisher:
    name: Open Journals
  start: 6200
  title: PyRolL - An Extensible OpenSource Framework for Rolling
    Simulation
  type: article
  url: "https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06200"
  volume: 9
title: PyRolL - An Extensible OpenSource Framework for Rolling
  Simulation

If the repository is not hosted on GitHub, a .cff file can still be uploaded to set your preferred citation. Users will be able to manually copy and paste the citation.

Find more information on .cff files here and here.

editorialbot · 2024-01-23T15:39:09Z

🐘🐘🐘 👉 Toot for this paper 👈 🐘🐘🐘

editorialbot · 2024-01-23T15:39:10Z

🚨🚨🚨 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.06200 joss-papers#4943
Wait five minutes, then verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06200
If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...

kyleniemeyer · 2024-01-23T17:05:10Z

Congratulations @axtimhaus on your article's publication in JOSS! Please consider signing up as a reviewer if you haven't already.

Many thanks to @rboman for reviewing this, and @philipcardiff for editing.

editorialbot · 2024-01-23T17:05:12Z

🎉🎉🎉 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](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06200/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06200)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06200">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06200/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06200/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06200

This is how it will look in your documentation:

We need your help!

The 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: https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/join
Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://numfocus.org/donate-to-joss

editorialbot added Jupyter Notebook Python review TeX Track: 3 (PE) Physics and Engineering labels Jan 10, 2024

editorialbot assigned philipcardiff Jan 10, 2024

editorialbot mentioned this issue Jan 10, 2024

[PRE REVIEW]: PyRolL - An Extensible OpenSource Framework for Rolling Simulation #5937

Closed

philipcardiff mentioned this issue Jan 12, 2024

Suggested additions to the documentation pyroll-project/pyroll-docs#8

Closed

This was referenced Jan 12, 2024

fix some typos pyroll-project/pyroll-docs#10

Merged

Review of the paper for JOSS pyroll-project/pyroll-core#158

Closed

philipcardiff mentioned this issue Jan 17, 2024

"sequence.out_profile.temperature > sequence2.out_profile.temperature" command gives an error pyroll-project/pyroll-docs#11

Closed

editorialbot added the recommend-accept Papers recommended for acceptance in JOSS. label Jan 17, 2024

editorialbot added accepted published Papers published in JOSS labels Jan 23, 2024

kyleniemeyer closed this as completed Jan 23, 2024

[REVIEW]: PyRolL - An Extensible OpenSource Framework for Rolling Simulation #6200

[REVIEW]: PyRolL - An Extensible OpenSource Framework for Rolling Simulation #6200

Comments

editorialbot commented Jan 10, 2024 • edited Loading

Status

Reviewer instructions & questions

Checklists

editorialbot commented Jan 10, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 10, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 10, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 10, 2024 • edited Loading

Review checklist for @philipcardiff

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

editorialbot commented Jan 10, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 10, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 10, 2024

rboman commented Jan 11, 2024 • edited Loading

Review checklist for @rboman

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

axtimhaus commented Jan 11, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 11, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 11, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 11, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 11, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 11, 2024

rboman commented Jan 12, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 12, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 12, 2024

axtimhaus commented Jan 15, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 15, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 17, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 17, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 17, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 17, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 17, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 17, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 17, 2024

ChRen95 commented Jan 18, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 19, 2024

philipcardiff commented Jan 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 19, 2024

kyleniemeyer commented Jan 19, 2024

kyleniemeyer commented Jan 22, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 22, 2024

kyleniemeyer commented Jan 22, 2024

axtimhaus commented Jan 23, 2024

kyleniemeyer commented Jan 23, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 23, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 23, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 23, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 23, 2024

kyleniemeyer commented Jan 23, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 23, 2024

editorialbot commented Jan 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

philipcardiff commented Jan 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rboman commented Jan 11, 2024 •

edited

Loading