Potential reorg of editor guide

[lwasser]

Some additional notes:

• Need note on when to remove New Submission! tag. I assume this is removed before 1/editor-checks but not mentioned in guide as far as I can tell

• The docs are thorough! but they are a bit difficult to read since there are so many top-level ToC items and each step has a different format. Recommend making three top-level ToC items: Editor Description, Editor Checklist, and Alternative Paths. The titles are also pretty conversational which adds to noise when trying to skim ToC.

So maybe current structure:

• Experience needed to become an editor

• Two types of editors

  • Guest Editors

  • "Full" Editors

• What does an editor do? (Responsibilities)

• Editor support of other reviews

• Editor-in-Chief rotation

• How long does an editor serve on the editorial board?

• Editor checklist: Get Started With Leading a Package Review

  • ✔️ 1. First, tag the submission issue on GitHub

  • ✔️ 2. Respond to the submitter in the GitHub issue

  • ✔️ 3. Identify scientific Python package reviewers

  • ✔️ 4. Onboard reviewers

• Editor responsibilities during the review

  • ✔️ 5. What to do when reviews are in

• Putting a review on hold & handling non-responsive authors

  • ✔️ 6. How to accept a package into the pyOpenSci ecosystem

• Closing notes about the editorial process

• ✔️ OPTIONAL: Instructions for Submitting to JOSS

• Last Steps Before Closing the Review Issue

can become something like this (sorry github markdown is transforming my numbers to letters)

• Editor Description

  • Types of Editors

  • Editor Responsibilities

    • Lead Reviews

    • Support Other Reviews

    • EiC Rotation

• Editor Checklist

  • 1. Editor Checks
  • 2. Seek Reviewers
  • 3. Onboard Reviewers
  • 4. Coordinate Review
  • 5. Complete Review

• Alternative Paths

  • Nonresponsive Authors

  • Nonresponsive Reviewers

  • Submitting to JOSS

Originally posted by @sneakers-the-rat in #252