Today a few representatives of the Regulatory R Repo WG met with Posit, following a stakeholder interview targeting Admins led by @borgmaan.
As far as the Posit side of things, the tone was still very much in the planning stage, so I want to caveat my notes by emphasizing that Posit seemed to be reaching out to make sure any eventual plans for their PPM product are aligned with what we might deliver. New features were at this point still speculative proposals on how our two initiatives might work in tandem.
Repo WG Attendees:
@dgkf
@borgmaan
@kkmann
@AARON-CLARK
Discussion points:
On direction of repo WG solutions (diy vs curated cohort vs service)
Posit reps encourage our group to pursue at least a curated listing of pharma-ready packages, and would be interested in exploring support for curated listings of packages in PPM.
That said, also open to allowing a way to execute custom testing/validation scripts, which might make the "DIY" tools approach viable
On who owns "federated trust"
Posit is understandably hesitant to address. They want that input being driven by domain experts.
More likely outcome would be that the Repo WG curates a set of packages which can be ingested by PPM
Discussion around additional arbitrary checks (eg statistical methods)
For example, appending a script to a package which may also perform checks for statistical validity
We emphasized an interest in a public repo - possibly PPM - which might surface a pharma-ready cohort of packages.
A public repo would still need to work in tandem with in-house PPM to support in-house packages
Posit understandably does not want to host pipelines for arbitrary private packages, nor do pharmas want to upload in-house code to have it assessed. Likely solution for in-house code probably requires in-house solution, and Posit is interested in supporting this use case in PPM.
Actions
[ ] @dgkf to follow up with Submissions WG to clarify stance on pilots. Did they intend for packages used in pilots to meet some quality expectations? (To my knowledge this was out-of-scope, but we should clarify as apparently this is a point of confusion in how the initiative is shared)
[ ] Posit to follow up with repo WG member 1-on-1 (or more specifically company-to-Posit) meetings to gather perspectives of individual companies.
Today a few representatives of the Regulatory R Repo WG met with Posit, following a stakeholder interview targeting Admins led by @borgmaan.
As far as the Posit side of things, the tone was still very much in the planning stage, so I want to caveat my notes by emphasizing that Posit seemed to be reaching out to make sure any eventual plans for their PPM product are aligned with what we might deliver. New features were at this point still speculative proposals on how our two initiatives might work in tandem.
Repo WG Attendees:
@dgkf @borgmaan @kkmann @AARON-CLARK
Discussion points:
Actions