hvwaldow
commented
4 weeks ago In my mind we are aiming at providing exactly that: Foundational aka basic competencies. "Complete" is something different. This paper is presenting competencies that we have identified. It's not about "identifying".
If the problem is that "foundational" is perceived as implying "complete", we could use for example "basic"? Also, we could strengthen the notion that this isn't intended as an exhaustive enumeration and we don't mention a lot of skills from the domain of traditional software engineering that are, indeed, foundational.
annalenalamprecht
BeastyBlacksmith
CaptainSifff
In the discussions at Dagstuhl it also turned out that several people are having issues with the "foundational" qualification of the competencies in the title.
Suggested change: "Identifying Competencies and Responsibilities of a Research Software Engineer".
This version just does not qualify if the competencies in the paper are foundational, basic, complete, whatsover (as people really cannot agree on this), and also emphasizes that this is an ongoing discussion.