The work looks very nice but...

I searched and searched the article to see where is the software available from and under what license. This information is nowhere in the manuscript (nor in the peer review materials). I suppose that this was only in a cover letter since the reviewers had no apparent problem to find the software. Searching in Google was not straightforward either because there are lots of other meanings of the word "arepa"... Finally I found it and was happy to see that code is available and open source. But this should be on the article!

I suggest that PeerJ develop guidelines for articles describing software that make sure this information is presented clearly (ideally on the abstract).