Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
closes #197 WGs blog #198
closes #197 WGs blog #198
Changes from 1 commit
6b11001
cf11a1d
b9bf062
2bf22d5
e123d23
f2f601b
427edba
6ddae44
d30cd8f
1b6ae09
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this mean that this is now a democratic process, i.e. with voting on the packages or something? Or how exactly will the community decide to include the packages under the pharmaverse?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I didn't want to make it overly prescriptive and rules-based as we should be able to evolve this as we learn from how it goes, but general thinking:
So everyone has a voice... even 1 single member could stop a package being included if they have a good enough justification! If we don't hear any concerns (and the package fits scope of pharmaverse and inclusion criteria) then we'll go ahead and add it.
If at any time in future a member of the community raises a concern then we could re-visit and see if any package should be removed.
I'll add a little bit more to the blog but don't want to go over the top either with explaining this.
FYI @bms63
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would you mind adding this to the blog as well?
Or maybe hint towards this, if it is not quite clear yet?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@StefanThoma which bit exactly?
sorry, i added the following as a more concise summary of the above but happy to add some extra lines for whichever bits missed which you feel i should add
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @rossfarrugia
I don't quite understand what the council is now responsible for, if not deciding on which packages go into the pharmaverse.
Is there a list of responsibilities?
What do you mean exactly with:
[...] we plan
to channel any working group type energy towards
PHUSE DVOST
given our strong partnership with PHUSE.
Does this mean that any ro most future work done by the council will be done to support DVOST or in consultation with DVOST?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@StefanThoma the council always delegated the responsibility of package inclusion to the WGs which we are now disbanding in favour of letting the community decide.
Council responsibilities are explained on a separate page: https://pharmaverse.org/contribute/council/
The council is fully committed to continue to grow and strengthen pharmaverse independent of any PHUSE support. The blog is therefore not changing anything in the council - it's about our WGs where we see more potential by utilising PHUSE DVOST and channeling energy that way instead of starting our own pharmaverse WGs to solve specific industry OS challenges. This was already happening really - as although we gave our WGs freedom to decide their own scope they all only focused on pharmaverse package inclusion, as any other wider OS topics already have industry WGs that could be joined and supported.
I'll add a note to the blog to reiterate that none of this impacts council.