Based on feedback from @bgyori :
Hello,
I think the paper is good, I PR-ed a few small edits but nothing major. I do think that given the JOSS reviewer checklist, more scrutiny will be given to the repo (installation, documentation, contribution guidelines, examples, notebooks etc.). I looked at the README and some notebooks and found some potential issues with the README code examples where I also made a PR but I think a more general review of these would be useful. Let me know if there is anything else I can help with!
Best,
Ben