Topic: “Is Foo necessary to develop sustainable research software, or an unnecessary overhead for overworked RSEs?”
Example 1
What can you contribute to the discussion?
I firmly believe that Foo is an essential tool for effective research software engineering. I did not always think this way, however. Earlier in my career, while working as a postdoctoral researcher, I avoided Foo because I felt it got in the way of achieving my research objectives.
I moved into an RSE-focused role a few years ago to help rewrite a large and complicated piece of research software. During this work, I quickly recognized the value of Foo for managing complex software projects. I am now a strong advocate for Foo in research software.
I feel my experience on both sides of the debate will allow me to effectively advocate for wider adoption of Foo, offering perspectives on how some of the barriers to adopting Foo can be overcome from my own experiences.
Example 2
What can you contribute to the discussion?
I am on the fence about Foo, having utilised it to help manage my team’s output. While I see the benefits at the management level, I noticed my team would sometimes complain about having to utilise Foo, saying that it took up too much time.
I have collected a short list of pros and cons to Foo, based on how I use the tool and how my team does. I would like to participate in this discussion not only to talk about how Foo is seen in the upper levels of sustainability, but also to share the impact it has had on my team. I think it is very important to manage my team’s time well and for them to feel comfortable talking to me about tools which help or hinder them – so I value the opportunity to participate in a discussion on Foo.