closes #197 WGs blog

[rossfarrugia]

Thank you for your Pull Request! We have developed this task checklist to help with the final steps of the process. Completing the below tasks helps to ensure our reviewers can maximize their time on your blog post.

Please check off each taskbox as an acknowledgment that you completed the task or check off that it is not relevant to your Pull Request. This checklist is part of the Github Action workflows and the Pull Request will not be merged into the main branch until you have checked off each task.

• [x] Place Closes # into the beginning of your Pull Request Title (Use Edit button in top-right if you need to update), and make sure the corresponding issue is linked in the Development section on the right hand side
• [x] Run the script from CICD.R line by line to first check the spelling in your post and then to make sure your code is compatible with our code-style. Address any incongruences by following the instructions in the file!
• [x] Choose (possibly several) tag(s) or categories from the current list: c("Metadata", "SDTM", "ADaM", "TLG", "Shiny", "Community", "Conferences", "Submissions", "Technical") for your blog post. If you cannot find anything that fits your blog post, add your own tag! We occasionally tidy up all tags for consistency.
• [x] Add a short description for your blog post in the description field at the top of the markdown document.
• [x] Blog post is short, personalized, reproducible and readable
• [x] Add a disclaimer at the top of your post, if appropriate (example: Disclaimer This blog contains opinions that are of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the strategy of their respective organizations.)
• [x] Address all merge conflicts and resolve appropriately
• [x] Assign two of us (@bms63, @manciniedoardo, @StefanThoma, @kaz462) as reviewers in the PR.
• [x] Pat yourself on the back for a job well done! Much love to your accomplishment!

[rossfarrugia]

I checked spelling on my side and is fine so seems CI is still broken. Also I wasn't able to render in my session, so please do let me know if anything doesn't look so great in final page such as if the image is too big or anything like that.

[rossfarrugia]

thanks @manciniedoardo - i also shared this PR with the pharmaverse council in case any comments so let's only merge say 1 week from now just to give time for any possible comments. chat at our call tomorrow!

[rossfarrugia]

Does the package maintainer have to give a case on why they should be included?

Yes they already have to do this via the New Package Request GH issue template. See https://github.com/pharmaverse/pharmaverse/issues/304 for example.

Who gets to vote? Can anyone who joins the slack channel get a chance to vote or is there a threshold to be able to vote.

All in our slack community have a voice

[rossfarrugia]

@StefanThoma any chance we could get this re-reviewed and merged early this week? would be good to post this blog out to the community soon given the first such open community package review has already started now last week. note that the link check fail is from an older blog. Also spelling is fine on my side so not sure if the CI check is still broken here.

[StefanThoma]

@StefanThoma any chance we could get this re-reviewed and merged early this week? would be good to post this blog out to the community soon given the first such open community package review has already started now last week. note that the link check fail is from an older blog. Also spelling is fine on my side so not sure if the CI check is still broken here.

Yeah no problem, I can do it today.

The spellcheck complains about: pageId workinggroupsupdates.qmd:53 viewpage workinggroupsupdates.qmd:53

[rossfarrugia]

thanks @StefanThoma - weird, i ran the CICD.R line by line for the spelling updates. maybe i don't have latest spelling package installed 😕

[manciniedoardo]

Hi @rossfarrugia, we discussed this post in the pharmaverseblog meeting today - we feel like the enhancements requested by @StefanThoma would improve the post and make it more referenceable in the future. We'd be happy to merge after they are added.

One idea is to make a flow chart of the decision-making process - what do you think?

[rossfarrugia]

@manciniedoardo i made an extra commit for Stefan's comments but happy to add more as needed dependent on the reply above. i think a flowchart would be overkill personally and my main thinking here is that we'll probably see how this goes and evolve it over time and i wouldn't want to keep coming back to update finer details here.

[manciniedoardo]

@rossfarrugia thanks, now merged - do you want to publicise given it's on behalf of the council?