enh: editor guide -- make toctree / header hierarchy more clear in . #320
Description
It would be nice to make the steps in the guide match the steps in the review. Currently the ToC here doesn't lend itself to being a quick reference to use during a review, mostly because a lot of the background information needs to be collapsed into second-tier ToC elements and the titles for the process checklist should probably be changed to match the review stages
Currently it looks like this:
| Guide | Tags |
|---|---|
| Editor Checklist: : Get Started With Leading a Package Review | |
| 1. First, tag the submission issue on GitHub | 1/editor-checks |
| 2. Respond to the submitter in the GitHub issue | 2/seeking-reviewers |
| 3. Identify scientific Python package reviewers | |
| Finding package reviewers | |
| 4. Onboard reviewers | 3/reviewers-assigned |
| Editor responsibilities during the review | |
| 5. What to do when reviews are in | 4/review-in-awaiting-changes |
5/awaiting-reviewer-response |
|
| 6. How to accept a package into the pyOpenSci ecosystem | 6/pyOS-approved |
| OPTIONAL: Instructions for Submitting to JOSS | 7/under-joss-review |
9/joss-approved |
|
| Last Steps Before Closing the Review Issue |
Which is sort of hard to follow. I think with some simple restructuring we could make each phase in the review match across the docs and the tags - "if i am on step 3/reviewers-assigned, i go to the "3: Reviewers Assigned" section in the docs to see what to do"