search

RConsortium / submissions-pilot3-adam

Development repo for pilot3 submission to FDA - ADaM
https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-pilot3-adam/
GNU General Public License v3.0
16 stars 11 forks source link

Closes #135 Feedback from January 2024 Meeting #136

Closed bms63 closed 9 months ago

bms63 commented 9 months ago
bms63 commented 9 months ago

Here is Site updated with the vignette. Any wordsmithing or additional thoughts can be added in this branch and then we can update the website.

https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-pilot3-adam/main/articles/feedback_jan2024.html

bms63 commented 9 months ago

Okay to merge in? Did you all have time to look at the website? It is updated with this feedback.

https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-pilot3-adam/main/articles/feedback_jan2024.html

laxamanaj commented 9 months ago

Okay to merge in? Did you all have time to look at the website? It is updated with this feedback.

https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-pilot3-adam/main/articles/feedback_jan2024.html

Thanks, @bms63 and @robertdevine . Since this is where we want to keep track of Pilot 3 feedback, I'm fine with this, though I wonder if we should also include our initial feedback from late last year as well. For example : https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes/2023-10-06/ to now.

Another thought is since these notes may be a duplicate of notes taken from the R consortium R submission WG meeting minutes, albeit with our further interpretation of the feedback, I wonder if it would be more efficient to just source the source minutes and mirror this page : https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes/ on our site as well and just note that Pilot 3 feedback started on October 6, 2023.

bms63 commented 9 months ago

Okay to merge in? Did you all have time to look at the website? It is updated with this feedback. https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-pilot3-adam/main/articles/feedback_jan2024.html

Thanks, @bms63 and @robertdevine . Since this is where we want to keep track of Pilot 3 feedback, I'm fine with this, though I wonder if we should also include our initial feedback from late last year as well. For example : https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes/2023-10-06/ to now.

Another thought is since these notes may be a duplicate of notes taken from the R consortium R submission WG meeting minutes, albeit with our further interpretation of the feedback, I wonder if it would be more efficient to just source the source minutes and mirror this page : https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes/ on our site as well and just note that Pilot 3 feedback started on October 6, 2023.

I do think we should add previous discussion around Pilot 3 from the WG to our website.

I was thinking we should split it out from the meeting minutes from the core WG group. This way we can add more context to what we need to work on, add links, etc.

bms63 commented 9 months ago

but yes it is a bit redundant, but I think that is okay.

laxamanaj commented 9 months ago

Okay to merge in? Did you all have time to look at the website? It is updated with this feedback. https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-pilot3-adam/main/articles/feedback_jan2024.html

Thanks, @bms63 and @robertdevine . Since this is where we want to keep track of Pilot 3 feedback, I'm fine with this, though I wonder if we should also include our initial feedback from late last year as well. For example : https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes/2023-10-06/ to now. Another thought is since these notes may be a duplicate of notes taken from the R consortium R submission WG meeting minutes, albeit with our further interpretation of the feedback, I wonder if it would be more efficient to just source the source minutes and mirror this page : https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes/ on our site as well and just note that Pilot 3 feedback started on October 6, 2023.

I do think we should add previous discussion around Pilot 3 from the WG to our website.

I was thinking we should split it out from the meeting minutes from the core WG group. This way we can add more context to what we need to work on, add links, etc.

Agree with splitting out the the Pilot 3 only minutes/notes/feedback from the core WG to only be included in our Pilot 3 site. Would you be okay to update to include the previous feedback, @bms63 ?

bms63 commented 9 months ago

Okay to merge in? Did you all have time to look at the website? It is updated with this feedback. https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-pilot3-adam/main/articles/feedback_jan2024.html

Thanks, @bms63 and @robertdevine . Since this is where we want to keep track of Pilot 3 feedback, I'm fine with this, though I wonder if we should also include our initial feedback from late last year as well. For example : https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes/2023-10-06/ to now. Another thought is since these notes may be a duplicate of notes taken from the R consortium R submission WG meeting minutes, albeit with our further interpretation of the feedback, I wonder if it would be more efficient to just source the source minutes and mirror this page : https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes/ on our site as well and just note that Pilot 3 feedback started on October 6, 2023.

I do think we should add previous discussion around Pilot 3 from the WG to our website. I was thinking we should split it out from the meeting minutes from the core WG group. This way we can add more context to what we need to work on, add links, etc.

Agree with splitting out the the Pilot 3 only minutes/notes/feedback from the core WG to only be included in our Pilot 3 site. Would you be okay to update to include the previous feedback, @bms63 ?

Yes no problem.

@laxamanaj and @bms63, the URL to link the WG Meeting Minutes is: https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes.html [i.e. https://rconsortium.github.io/submissions-wg/minutes/ returns 404 Not found]. Thanks again.