Daniel S. Katz

In my opinion, yes, since you said "supervised the main research" and "gave feedback for the software"

Splitting is fine, but I still would like to have the checklist in the reviewer page.

I'll change this to "Split About page", and leave it open.

I guess, though I still think a simple sample review criteria checklist would be helpful

Also, whedon should be able to work on pre-review issues - see https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/1930#issuecomment-560633591

Add: - Incoming submissions - Things that can go wrong, particularly when a paper fails to build

I think our policies are reasonable clear internally, but we likely could offer some changes in our docs to help submitters and reviewers. Specifically: > Depend on a proprietary service...

I was wondering about that too. Is there a reason a very short arXiv paper with an arXiv URL is better than a JOSS paper that has a DOI and...

Someone would have to contact arxiv to be sure, but my guess is that the 1-2 page typical JOSS paper is not something that arxiv is likely to consider sufficiently...

I agree with @arfon