Closed MarsBarLee closed 2 years ago
This came up in another discussion, but I agree we should consider a process where we either
or
I don't think we have either this time, but I could be wrong since I was not a part of this meeting. It can't be helped in the git history since these commits already exist, but it may be best to remove the name from here so the main branch at least does not have it so immediately available. What are your thoughts?
As of now, we don't have either process in place.
I can anonymize these notes here so they're not in the main branch.
In the internship meeting later, we can discuss how we want to move forward. I think it would be good to 1) check back with each volunteer about having their name (or any other potential identifying factors) in these public notes 2) anonymize before the public notes are put on Github. Afterwards, if they respond yes after the notes are on Github, we can change it. If no, then keep the ntoes the same.
I have anonymized the meeting notes with a initial. I've also changed the file name and Github issue title.
As discussed in the last Internship meeting, we now have a process set in place for anonymizing user research data. As Isabela mentioned, things can still be seen in the git history, which is not ideal, but with the process in place, we will do better moving forward.
Meeting notes and next steps. Feel free to review and add anything we've missed!
I've added the 'volunteer-meetings' folder in the main directory, as the 'weekly-update' folder didn't seem like a good fit. Let me know if you think a different folder or folder name would be better.
Fixes #17