#Context

I'm starting to put some data analysis I'm asked to do on Github, and licensing all my work (mostly R scripts and markdown files  displaying statistics, graphs and brief result descriptions). These are mostly medical and health research projects.

## Reasons
The main reason for this is to provide the user an *always up to date* version of the current work in progress. If something is quick to fix, say in a graph, they have an *instant* updated version of the current report I'm writing (usually in markdown).

I also like the transparency I offer to the researchers that ask my help when I show the development, show what issues I have identified and the overall organization of the process.

Since most of them are not that tech-savy, I prepare the repo with plenty of README.md and other markdown files for them to just browse it, without the need to create a github account to interact with it. They usually report issues to me by email, and I open and close GH issues myself based on their feedback.

# Perceived problem

It just hit me that, while my own work is my own to license the way I want, the dataset is **not**. I didn't participate in the collection, or curation of it. The first step I take before pushing anything to the public repository is to anonymize the dataset.

I usually show the users the repositories of previous projects, and indicate they'll have such access to their results in a similar fashion. So far, no one has complained about their data being online.

# Questions

- Should I ask each user if they want me to remove the datasets from their repository?
- Should I remove all such datasets regardless? Why or Why not?
- Is there something else I might be missing about this scenario?