...

1. Danny Bernstein 
2. Peter Winckles 
3. Jared Whiklo 
4. Ben Pennell 
5. Peter Eichman 
6. Daniel Lamb 
7. Ben Cail 
8. Andrew Woods
9. Thomas Bernhart
10. Jon Roby

...

1. Announcements
   1.  Fedora 6 documentation space: Fedora 6.x Documentation
      1. Updates/Corrections would be helpful... from top to bottom!
   2. Draft Fedora 6 test plan
      1. Feedback welcome!
   3. South Central States Fedora Users Group Meeting: 29-30 January 2020
2. Sprint Check-in
   1. Round robin
   2. Specific areas: 
      1. Migration
      2. CRUD
      3. Containment
      4. ArchivalGroups
3. Binary CRUD Demo
4. Decisions and Open Questions
   1. Where do we stand regarding Identifiers?
      1. Identifiers, RDF and Import Proposal
      2. Fcrepo6 Resource Identifiers
5. <Your topic here>Build Fedora 6 docker container(?)

Tickets

Full list of Fedora 6.0.0 Unclosed

...

1. In Review

   Expand
   Jira server DuraSpace JIRA jqlQuery filter=13100 serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5

   
   

2. Please squash a bug!

   Expand
   Jira server DuraSpace JIRA columns key,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution maximumIssues 20 jqlQuery filter=13122 serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5

   
   

3. Tickets resolved this week:

   Expand
   Jira server DuraSpace JIRA columns key,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution maximumIssues 20 jqlQuery filter=13111 serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5

   
   

4. Tickets created this week:

   Expand
   Jira server DuraSpace JIRA columns key,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution maximumIssues 20 jqlQuery filter=13029 serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5

   
   

Notes

1. Announcements
2. Sprint checking
   
   1. Round robin
      1. Ben Pennell
         1. Binary GET, POST done
         2. Binary PUT is in Review
         3. PATCH binary and Fixity checks might be the next steps
      2. Jon
         1. confirmed that FCREPO-3169 is fixed, currently have a PR in for FCREPO-3177 and will be working on FCREPO-3168, FCREPO-3026 and FCREPO-3122 and see how far I get by the end tomorrow
      3. Andrew
         1. 2020 Sprints - Fedora 6#2020SprintsFedora6-Migration-utils
         2. Migration utils this sprint is bug fixes and minor new features
         3. Doesn't know what to do with the .fcrepo directory stuff at the moment in the migration utils
         4. Q: is fedora 6 meant to be able to handle a ocfl repo that wasn't made for fcrepo6?
            1. Yes
         5. Can we start from OCFL copied from one fcrepo to another?
         6. What does rebuildability look like? On demand? Flag that has to be enabled? Command/User interaction?
      4. Peter Winckles
         1. Mostly local stuff
         2. Looked at bugs for resources not being closed in migration util
      5. Danny
         1. Done some refactoring in 3188
         2. PR for getting Archival groups working
   2. Rebuild on start would be a valuable next step for opening the door to revealing what happens next, over CRUD completeness. Danny may focus on this next.
   3. Check in with Peter E about containment and if support is needed.
3. -
4. Pairtrees:  
   1. Andrew Woods :  let's avoid creating  
      1. PUT to a/b/c  (where a does not exist :  should it 
         1. create a, b, and c as basic containers?
            1. would this be backwards compatible?
               1. No because it would change the LDP structure of the resources
         2. fail because a and b don't exist?
            1. this would be ideal 
         3. Succeed but create pairtrees
            1. should be avoided if we can
         4. Succeed, creating new resource at created URL, but not filling in missing parents as resources
            1. this would be the best scenario, makes the URIs semantics less important to functionality
            2. introduces complications:
               1. A number of parts of the code base make assumptions based on URI hierarchy.
               2. Situations where client creates a/b/c, and then creates a/b. Would fedora have to change containment of c from a to b? Or fail?
      2. Jared is willing to look at fcrepo4/5 to document existing behavior
      3. Danny concerned with user errors if semantics of uris don't matter anymore
      4. Andrew advocating for determining what degree of backwards compatibility is required, not just doing things because of what previous versions did.
         1. Danny will put together email to gather community feedback, might be helpful to create a document that users can comment on
5. Build Fedora 6 docker container
   1. Thomas - Could we build a docker at the end of the CI?
   2. Existing docker work: Deployment Tooling
   3. Thomas interested in just a fedora 6 docker container, without the additional environment
   4. Since we are building with Travis, all we need is one or two steps in the pipeline to produce this
   5. Would push the fedora 6 docker container to dockerhub. Might need an organization for it
   6. Thomas will create a few tickets:
      1) setup dockerhub org:
      

      Jira
      server DuraSpace JIRA serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5 key FCREPO-3194

      
      2) update travis with simple docker file:
      

      Jira
      server DuraSpace JIRA serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5 key FCREPO-3193

6. Sprint starting next week. 7 participants.
7. Fedora 6 documentation is up and ready to be reviewed/edited to remove Modeshape references or add OCFL stuff.
8. Technology Sub-group of Fedora Leaders working on a Fedora 6 Test plan. This is a general plan of things which we want to test. Some of this will be dealt with internally (to development) and others might require requesting support from the community. If you have any thoughts of what we should be testing before we present it to the community. This is currently a brainstorming task, so add any thoughts we can review/revise later.
9. Sprint planning, this is only a 1 week sprint
   1. 3 PRs to be reviewed, Danny to look at 1606 & 1608. Ben Pennell to look at one or more of these as well.
   2. Any concerns with any of the tickets that might require more thought/discussion.
   3. Priorities are:
      1. Read/Write binaries
      2. Implement containment index (including some simple Archival Group)
      3. Bring migration-utils up to speed.
   4. Lots of tickets around CRUD-related processes that are small and well scoped.
   5. State tokens - Do we order the RDF to allow for a checksum/fixity check? State token only needs to reflect the fact that a resource has/has not changed. i.e. last modified date. Fixity would be a much higher bar, but a great add.
   6. Tombstones - not currently being handled, this is likely to be larger task and will tie in with the other delete tickets
   7. Containment index - Peter will pick up where he left off.
   8. This meeting was the sprint planning meeting, so we will not try to do a kickoff next week.
   9. Focusing on the binary and containment sections would be the critical objectives for this sprint.
      1. Goal, create and retrieve binaries
      2. Goal, demonstrate containment - should be able to nest a resource inside another resource, whether it be a container in another, or binary in another. Not necessarily AGs.
   10. Danny may go through and tag priority
   11. Migration util goals for the sprint?
       1. Ben Cail - what its already doing is good with him. Might be helpful if he could run against a large set to test scale during the sprint
       2. Thomas - Will take time to run the tests on a large F3 repo. Keeping it aligned with f6 expectations.
10. What is the current understanding around what Fedora is expecting for identifiers.
    1. Perhaps part of this sprint is moving the above linked Google docs decisions to a wiki page for more formality. Disambiguation is another part that has to be done (FCREPO-3139)
11. BagIt Profiles
    1. Mike Ritter - Starting work on stuff from the "Beyond the Repository" grant
    2. New bag profile with the import/export tool
    3. Rosie from Emory is interested in using this profile, glad to know that someone else is looking to implement it.
    4. Does not add much beyond the base profile, in part because some components were added to the canonical profile.
    Time frame - already pretty far along

Actions

•  Clarify in in documentation that multiple simultaneous writes to OCFL are not supported

...