Date

Call-in Information

Time: 10:00 am, Eastern Time (New York, GMT-04:00)

Attendees

(star)  Indicating note-taker

  1. Brian Lowe  
  2. Georgy Litvinov 
  3. Dragan Ivanovic 
  4. Huda Khan (star)
  5. Benjamin Gross
  6. Ralph O'Flinn

Regrets: 

  1. William Welling 

Agenda

  1. Releases management
    1. Status
      1. Making VIVO 1.12.2 functional
        1. https://github.com/vivo-project/VIVO/pull/3611 
    2. Next steps
      1. Possible solutions
        1. Docker container for preparation of a release
        2. Pair deployment / preparation of a release

  2. Moving forward reviewing PRs on VIVO and Vitro

    1. https://github.com/vivo-project/Vitro/pulls and https://github.com/vivo-project/VIVO/pull
  3. Preparation for the sprint
    1. Bran

Notes

  1. Releases management
    1. Making VIVO 1.12.2 functional
      1. Started with branch from this PR change so have functioning VIVO
      1. https://github.com/vivo-project/VIVO/pull/3611 
      2. Would be good to resolve this before the sprint and before merges at sprint completion
      3. Will need to connect with Ralph regarding this pull request
      4. Georgy: Plan to move branch to main Github but may be better to wait until this is resolved?
      5. Ralph: Today will be running through process to get it out to sonatype. Should finish making 12.2 fully functional.
      6. Dragan: So pull request merge and then set up release
    1. Possible solutions
      1. Enable any of us to run the Docker to prep for release
      1. Docker container for preparation of a release
      2. Pair deployment / preparation of a release
    2. Dragan: Ralph (and others?), please investigate these approaches and then see which approach works for April.
      1. Ralph: will work on documentation and then by April/May.  Then someone can run through the documentation and modify as needed.  
    1. Status
    2. Next steps
  2. Moving forward reviewing PRs on VIVO and Vitro
    1. Benjamin: From chat
      1. I think there’s an easier way to see PRs where you are a reviewer… there’s a link to Pull requests at the top of GitHub. Click that, then click ‘Review requests’ 😛
      2. https://github.com/pulls/review-requested
    1. https://github.com/vivo-project/Vitro/pulls and https://github.com/vivo-project/VIVO/pull
    2. Dragan generated list of actions which shows which pull request is assigned to whom. Benjamin had also suggested a search that can show who is assigned to which pull request.
  3. Preparation for the sprint
    1. Brian: Has been usually one branch for the sprint.  William had a different setup he suggested.
      1. Ralph: Seems like if testing completed and all agree, merge into main goes through
      1. Pull request for individual features get merged into sprint, and that sprint is merged into main
      2. Dragan: Strategy for merging the same as regular code or more flexible? Does it still need two reviewers?
    1. Two branches or just one branch. William had suggested a two branch approach.  
    1. Dragan: Did previous sprints have documentation or use JIRA tickets?
      1. Georgy:  Yes, plan on doing that
      1. Georgy: Separate discussion for custom roles
      2. Benjamin: Have created custom roles for query api user
      1. Dragan: Can post your comment on the GitHub issue with initial ideas
      1. Test to see if works as expected 
      2. Also to test if expressive enough for custom forms, to see if possible to apply code for some real cases
      3. Can this be done during this sprint? Or should be a task after the sprint? 
      4. Georgy: Some examples for actions, etc. that can be tested
      5. Dragan: Perhaps someone could start thinking about this at the beginning of the sprint?
      6. Georgy: One of important topics would be to make sure everyone has the understanding of how it works.  Then there would be modifications/additions.  Depends on how we feel about the complexity of the system.  
      1. Ralph: May as well keep it open
      2. Dragan: agree
      1. Ralph: Used JIRA tickets and kept notes for what needed to happen in the tickets themselves.  Could use GitHub issues tab
      2. The Dynamic API idea is pretty large.  Would the GitHub issues be sufficient? Seems like it would be good to have an overall document specifying the idea and elements.  Details and discussion would go into the GitHub issues.  List of 26 open issues. Not sure if all would be addressed in the sprint.  Would this be enough info for people to start the sprint?
      3. Ralph: Suggest that Dragan goes with best approach and we try it out.  It’s going to be a new approach anyway since moving away from JIRA documentation
      4. Dragan: https://github.com/orgs/vivo-project/projects/2/views/4 showing the Dynamic API tasks broken out and with as many as linkages available
      5. Huda: Could use GitHub project for sprint alone.  Having separate documentation will also be useful to describe the overall approach
      6. Dragan: Some of these tasks are not just implementation tasks but research or exploration tasks.  Georgy, please look at the project and see if there are any issues that need to be added there
      7. Dragan: To organize this work in parallel as much as possible and perhaps organize as teams
      8. Georgy: Some issues may not be about the components themselves but may be about processing workflow.  Universal approach for garbage collection.  How to extend RESTful endpoint.    
      9. Dragan: Should open issue for testing, unit tests, etc.
      10. Dragan: Roles for ontology.  Seems like there are four currently defined.  Role = who can run the action?
      11. Georgy: Defining conditions for steps in custom action
      12. Dragan: Which testing strategy should we apply? Would be good of course to have nice coverage of testing our solution. 
      13. Presprint meeting was scheduled for Tuesday. Suggestion to move that to Thursday but reserve Tuesday for regular community technical meeting.  So next Tuesday dev as usual, and next Thursday’s committer meeting to be reused instead for pre-sprint meeting.  Keep it open or closed only to sprint registrants?
    1. Georgy: Michel had comment regarding URI integration.  Yesterday sent some info to Christian.  Ok to leave it in same state and get back to it after sprint?
      1. Brian: Going forward, nice to switch to something different as default for naming individuals.  In neartime, good to be able to tap into URI creation logic already in VIVO.  Right now not available for API.  Whether getting access to that functionality best done using SPARQL extension or better to have separate API and grab n number of new individual URIs.  
        1. Weird we don’t give people access to that algorithm within VIVO and forcing them to use SPARQL extensions
      1. https://github.com/vivo-project/vivo/pull/250 
      2. Related to https://github.com/vivo-project/VIVO/issues/3594 
      3. Georgy: Discuss in this group or ontology group?  May be better approach for URI creation in VIVO and Vitro.  Right now, serves the purposes.  
      4. Dragan: useful to bring this up again in ontology group
    1. Sprint starts February 21st.
    2. Dragan: Created private slack channel for folks registered for sprint. Anyone who wishes to join can send Dragan message in slack and he will add them to the private channel. 
    3. Dragan: Branch setup for previous sprints?
    4. Dragan: decision for branch setup for this sprint?
    5. For sprint itself, we have a few documents such as specification for the VIVO dynamic API.  
    6. Other issues?


Draft notes on Google Drive

Actions

Previous actions 

  • No labels

All content on the LYRASIS Wiki is licensed under the CC BY (Attribution) license, unless otherwise noted.