Hello, I keep thinking about "what's next" and "how should we reach out to professionals in the field". Well, I mean, those who are not already with us. If our audience is medical doctors then they need a proof that our packages
a) just work b) their own data fits in easily. For a) I see a set of routine workflows that we run. For b) I see tutorials. Other than I first thought, a) and b) can evolve independently. I am not sure yet about what I want a tutorial to look like - a wiki page plus a YouTube video maybe? I am not sure about a) either. In my current mindset this is a Debian package with data and a routine to test it. What Debian yet cannot do is to allow for a manual inspection of test results, right? The pigx workflows for instance generate HTML documents which many will find appealing and us running analyses and many different browsers inspecting them would give some extra confidence - both technically and for the semantics behind the analyses, i.e. maybe we manage to run different workflows on the same data and some of our eyeballs find biologically relevant differences between these analyses. On the spreadsheet I added a new tab "Data" where I hope to gather ideas on how decide on data sources with which we feed the workflows. When we combine a set of data sources with a workflow then we have an analysis, right? And then we could have meta analyses that just depend on multiple analyses packages to perform automated comparisons? So, I don't really know where this is going, yet. I suggest whoever is interested to feed some thoughts please leave some footprints on https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tApLhVqxRZ2VOuMH_aPUgFENQJfbLlB_PFH_Ah_q7hM/edit?usp=sharing Best, Steffen
