[Refereeing] Automated refereeing deadline is wrong

Article 3.6.3 of the by-laws establishes that the duration of a refereeing round in the default cycle is 4 weeks for flagship journals, 3 weeks for Core journals and 8 weeks for Lecture Notes, counted from the moment one of the invited referees first accepts to provide a report. For the short cycle, the duration is 2 weeks. At the moment, the duration is counted starting the moment a Fellow takes charge of a submission instead of when a first referee accepts the invitation. The deadline should not be set until that event takes place, please fix that. Please keep in mind that even before a referee accepts the invitation, contributed reports should be allowed, even in the absence of a defined deadline.

added impacthigh priorityhigh typebug 🪲 labels

marked this issue as related to #221 (closed)

marked this issue as related to #222 (closed)

Other issues related to correcting/updating refereeing deadlines: #221 (closed), #222 (closed)

changed iteration to Two-week Sprint Sep 8, 2024 - Sep 21, 2024

changed title from Automated refereeing deadline is wrong to [Refereeing] Automated refereeing deadline is wrong

added time estimate of 30m

assigned to @gkatsikas

added workflowin-progress label

mentioned in commit 00a1f9d8

closed with commit fa7ad303

Unfortunately, this issue could not be implemented 100% as written here. The refereeing deadline cannot be null; doing so would require many changes around the codebase and was opted against. Instead, the refereeing deadline is set upon cycle selection, and then reset when the first invitation is accepted.

added workflowready label and removed workflowin-progress label

added 2h of time spent

mentioned in issue #221 (closed)

The full implementation of this has been achieved through painstaking replacing all mentions of the reporting_deadline with an appropriate handler for the None case (after #221 (closed)).

mentioned in commit fa7ad303

mentioned in commit 3bc14e8c