Receiving feedback like this from editors and reviewers can be a mix of feelings, but overall, it's a positive sign. "Minor revision and modification" typically means that your manuscript shows promise but may require some tweaks or improvements before it can be accepted for publication. It's an opportunity to refine your work and address any concerns raised by the reviewers, ultimately enhancing the quality and impact of your research. It's natural to feel a bit uncertain or anxious about the feedback, but try to see it as constructive criticism aimed at helping you improve your manuscript. Take some time to carefully consider the reviewers' comments and suggestions, and then proceed with making the necessary revisions. Remember, this is a normal part of the academic publishing process, and many successful researchers go through multiple rounds of revisions before their work is finally accepted.

I'd take it as a good sign. They seem to be saying if you revise your manuscript per their instructions then they will either review the paper or will publish it (I wasn't able to tell from your description what stage things were at).

If the paper is yet to be reviewed, I would make any revisions quickly, noting what you've done and how you attended to any feedback. If there is no feedback but they've suggested changes around structure, grammar, or fitting with the journal's aims/scope and guidelines then fix that.

If the paper has already been reviewed then what they're saying is if you fix things per their suggestions they'll probably publish. If so, go through each reviewer comment, make the changes, note what you did and why (you can even disagree if they're fundamentally wrong, but you have to indicate why they are wrong). Again, do this as soon as you're able.

Reply to the editor thanking them now, then when you send back your improved manuscript also thank the reviewers for any feedback.

Hopefully it's a sign you'll have a publication soon. This phase can be laborious, but it's part of the process and it isn't a rejection. It's extremely rare a paper is accepted with no changes. Some edits are always needed.

Thank you so mush Federico Del Giorgio Solfa and Petra Boynton

You're very welcome. There's a lovely chapter by Phyllis Noerager Stern

that was written a while ago now called "Strategies for Overcoming the Rage of Rejection" which is more about coping if the editor rejects your paper. But there's some good advice for revisions in there as well and one that I remember is putting the paper aside for a day, then re-reading the feedback and responding. It's often better than you think.

Also I don't know if you've done this before, but I find creating a table with the reviewer feedback point by point listed in one column and my responses noting what I've done next to it. You can send that back, along with your corrected manuscript, and it's much easier for the editor to follow.

Separately, if you're based in a low or middle income country and want a bit more practical support there's a free online course that starts in a couple of days all about getting published, which might help you focus on getting this paper revised and resubmitted https://www.authoraid.info/en/news/details/1933