[REVIEW]: pyuca: a Python implementation of the Unicode Collation Algorithm about joss-reviews HOT 15 CLOSED

👍 thanks for the review @luizirber!

from joss-reviews.

/ cc @openjournals/joss-reviewers - would anyone be willing to review this submission?

If you would like to review this submission then please comment on this thread so that others know you're doing a review (so as not to duplicate effort). Something as simple as :hand: I am reviewing this will suffice.

Reviewer instructions

• Please work through the checklist at the start of this issue.
• If you need any further guidance/clarification take a look at the reviewer guidelines here http://joss.theoj.org/about#reviewer_guidelines
• Please make a publication recommendation at the end of your review

Any questions, please ask for help by commenting on this issue! 🚀

from joss-reviews.

✋ I am reviewing this

from joss-reviews.

• There are no performance claims, so should I will just check the box?
• Although test.py have examples, the usage in the README could include an example words list (like ["cafe", "caff", "café"] from this test)
• The author affiliation is missing in paper.md
• There are no community guidelines (Add a CONTRIBUTING file?)

Just some minor corrections, looks very good otherwise! @jtauber @arfon

from joss-reviews.

I'll add the ["cafe", "caff", "café"] example to README and add a CONTRIBUTING file.

As to affiliation, I normally leave it blank as my scholarly work is independent (on academia.edu I'm under independent.academia.edu). I could put my company but it's not really relevant to this work.

from joss-reviews.

@luizirber @arfon

I've updated the README.md and added a CONTRIBUTING.md.

One question (besides the outstanding affiliation question): do I need to re-release and mint a new DOI to include these changes?

from joss-reviews.

@jtauber I left a comment in the commit, I'll let @arfon answer about the affiliation and re-relase and new DOI questions.

from joss-reviews.

One question (besides the outstanding affiliation question): do I need to re-release and mint a new DOI to include these changes?

Ideally yes please!

from joss-reviews.

@luizirber I've addressed your comment. Thank you!
@arfon no problem doing another release. Did you want me to do anything about affiliation first?

from joss-reviews.

@arfon no problem doing another release. Did you want me to do anything about affiliation first?

Leaving it blank is fine.

from joss-reviews.

Okay, I'll re-release and mint another DOI.

from joss-reviews.

@luizirber @arfon re-released with new DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.51622

from joss-reviews.

Note the version has changed to 1.1.2 too.

from joss-reviews.

@jtauber http://dx.doi.org/10.21105/joss.00021 🎉

from joss-reviews.

Thanks @luizirber and @arfon. 🎉

from joss-reviews.