Addressed points raised by Raul in previous commit

I removed the part emphasizing one journal, but about the comment at the
end of the conclusion (to say some negative things): we have already done
that in the discussion, mentioning the caveats ;-). But you are right, we
should summarize the caveats is well.

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/paper.tex b/paper.tex
index 5e92ead..f71d9be 100644
--- a/paper.tex
+++ b/paper.tex
@@ -237,9 +237,7 @@ However, designing a modular project needs to be encouraged and facilitated, oth
   2) avoid the programming language that is currently in vogue because it is going to fall out of fashion soon and significant resources are required to translate or rewrite it every few years (to stay in vogue).
   The same job can be done with more stable/basic tools, and less effort in the long-run.
 
-  \emph{Comparison with existing:} Most of the existing tools use the language that was in vogue when they were created, for example, a larger fraction of them are written in Python as we come closer to the present time.
-  \tonote{Raul: Maybe we can avoid the next sentences. That project is not the only one with this problem, and explicity point it could make think to someone that there are something personal here.}
-  Again, IPOL stands out from the rest in this principle.
+  \emph{Comparison with existing:} Most of the existing tools use the popular language/framework of when they were created. For example, a larger fraction of them are written in Python as we come closer to the present time.
 
 \item \label{principle:verify}\textbf{Verifiable inputs and outputs:}
 The project should contain automatic verification checks on its inputs (software source code and data) and outputs.
@@ -733,8 +731,7 @@ In this paper we introduced Maneage and how it is built upon the principles of c
 We showed how these principles are implemented in an already built structure that users just have to customize for the high-level aspects of their projects and discussed the caveats and advantages of this implementation.
 With a larger user-base and wider application in scientific (and hopefully industrial) applications, Maneage will certainly grow and become even more stable user and friendly.
 
-\tonote{One more paragraph will be added here.}
-\tonote{Raul: We have say nothing negative. Maybe we can point out that it would be necessary an effort from the user in order to adopt this template, for example learning Make (but at the end is not much more effort than learning any other language/tool).}
+\tonote{One more paragraph will be added here: don't forget to review the caveats}
 
 %% Acknowledgements
 \section{Acknowledgments}