enh: make the eic checklist more clear and add astropy label statement #323
Conversation
| ```{admonition} Diversity in the editorial & reviewer team is important | ||
| ### 4. ✔️ Ensure that the package onboarding survey is complete | ||
|
|
||
| Use [this spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jEk-DDpkz14Z07OX_o1cN2vHzVbJO6mQ83ihGXsWkLc/edit?gid=930774086#gid=930774086) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I removed emails and last names from this spreadsheet so it's a list of dates and github usernames which are all public already.
|
|
||
| :::{tip} | ||
| Need help unblocking a review? Contact the acting peer review lead (currently | ||
| the Executive Director of pyOpenSci). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The document mentions "peer review lead" and "Executive Director" but doesn't clarify who currently holds these roles. Consider linking out to a web page listing the current "board".
|
|
||
| Use the [editorial dashboard](https://www.pyopensci.org/metrics/peer-review/editorial-dashboard.html) | ||
| to check which editors are currently available. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| ### Factors to consider when assigning editors: | |
| - **Domain expertise**: Match the package's scientific domain | |
| - **Career stage**: Balance experienced editors with newer ones when appropriate | |
| - **Current workload**: Check the editorial dashboard for availability | |
| The Editor in Chief (EiC) is a rotating position, typically selected from the | ||
| current editorial team. It may also be held by a member of the broader | ||
| pyOpenSci community who is familiar with our organization and software peer | ||
| review. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| review. | |
| review. Expected time commitment is about 2 hours per week on average, with some weeks requiring more during high submission periods. |
| * Any challenges or ideas you’d recommend to future EiCs | ||
|
|
||
| Post your reflection in the `#private-editorial-team` Slack channel or share it with | ||
| the peer review lead directly. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| the peer review lead directly. | |
| the peer review lead directly. | |
| ### EiC Transition Checklist | |
| - [ ] Set calendar reminder 3 weeks before term end | |
| - [ ] Contact peer review lead about successor | |
| - [ ] Document active reviews and their status | |
| - [ ] Hand off any reviews you're personally handling | |
| - [ ] Write reflection summary | |
| - [ ] Schedule handoff meeting with incoming EiC |
|
|
||
| Keep the conversation respectful and clear. If the author has questions, | ||
| continue the discussion in the GitHub issue. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe add a section/templates on:
- How to follow up on a stalled review
- How to request clarification from authors
| :::{important} | ||
| Be sure to update both the **GitHub assignment** and the **YAML header** with the editors name. Our peer | ||
| review dashboard depends on both! | ||
| ::: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe add a section on contacts to handle issues like:
- Reviewer or author behavior concerns
- Potential conflicts of interest discovered during review
- Technical issues with the review repository
|
|
||
| :::{note} | ||
| If the EiC has limited time to handle pre-review checks for a package, a conflict of interest, or lacks relevant expertise, they may ask another editor to perform initial checks on a package at any time. | ||
| ::: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe add a note to see end of document for transition procedure?
| review lead to recruit a guest editor or onboard someone new. | ||
|
|
||
| Follow the [onboarding guide](onboarding-guide.md), and complete the full | ||
| [onboarding process](onboarding-a-new-editor) to ensure they have: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this have a .md on the end?
Though, I don't think this document exists in directory? https://github.com/pyOpenSci/software-peer-review/tree/cd31d5c80d0da0c319d6ed864b2b48a8faa240c5/how-to
Maybe this should be a URL segment added to the prior guide?
| If no current editor with relevant expertise is available, work with the peer | ||
| review lead to recruit a guest editor or onboard someone new. | ||
|
|
||
| Follow the [onboarding guide](onboarding-guide.md), and complete the full |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe reference the google document designed for the new editors that isn't public?
This ended up being a fairly large reorg of this page to make sure steps are clear