Page tree

Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  1. In Review

    Expand

    Jira
    serverDuraSpace JIRA
    jqlQueryfilter=13100
    serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5


  2. Please squash a bug!

    Expand

    Jira
    serverDuraSpace JIRA
    columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
    maximumIssues20
    jqlQueryfilter=13122
    serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5


  3. Tickets resolved this week:

    Expand

    Jira
    serverDuraSpace JIRA
    columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
    maximumIssues20
    jqlQueryfilter=13111
    serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5


  4. Tickets created this week:

    Expand

    Jira
    serverDuraSpace JIRA
    columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
    maximumIssues20
    jqlQueryfilter=13029
    serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5


Notes

  1. announcements
    1. barriers to migration survey
      1. why are people still on F3
      2. people like the idea of linked data
      3. sharing data is valuable, people recognize that
      4. we do hear a lot about how people don't like linked data
        1. main pushback sources:
          1. people designing against the API (e.g. Samvera), may not be as easy as other models
          2. people who want to have a non-exposed/buried Fedora
      5. linked data is more useful/popular with users than developers
      6. general approach: emphasize linked data is optional
      7. there is value in showing how to replicate F3 models in F4+
        1. Jared has a presentation for OR about Fedora without linked data
      8. missing features in F4
        1. query support
        2. validation in the repository
        3. field ordering; difficult in RDF
      9. file system layout in F3 is very possible
    2. Fedora Camp
      1. there is still room
      2. encourage people to come if it would benefit them
    3. Fedora 6 sprint Doodle
      1. dates when Danny and/or Andrew are available
      2. ideally 3 sets of 2 week sprints
      3. please fill out the dates when you think you could be available
      4. once we have dates, come up with broad goals for each sprint
  2. Fedora 5.1.0 release
    1. Jared is release manager
    2. raised and resolved a couple issues regarding binary descriptions (FCREPO-2996, FCREPO-2997)
    3. state token issue merged
    4. 3 outstanding bugs
      1. been open a while
      2. may be difficult to fix under Modeshape
    5. Andrew will have PRs for FCREPO-2782 with DuraSpace checkstyle rules
      1. contains suppressions for new DuraSpace rules Fedora doesn't conform to
      2. future conversation about whether to adopt these
      3. release buildtools with updates
      4. then update the maven stuff to use the new release of buildtools
    6. 5.1.0 RC once checkstyle updates are in place
      1. goal is RC this week, 3 weeks before OR
      2. 2 week window for community review
  3. import/export
    1. Mohamed started testing at UMD
    2. there might be a way to import a F4 export to F5 if we can ignore ACLs and versions
      1. UMD is not using versions, and only has a tiny number of ACLs
    3. no work happening on Danny's end next week (Fedora camp)
      1. maybe target week after next
    4. process:
      1. export with F4 tool
      2. remove ACLs (by hand) from exported files
      3. import with F5 tool
    5. not a formal release per se
      1. wait for F5-to-F5 round tripping to release
    6. resumability is a huge feature for UMD
      1. borrow features from plastron, UMD's batch tool
      2. use an embedded SQL database to track progress?
  4. Fedora 6 sprint planning
    1. David put together a public high-level roadmap
    2. there is also a committer-generated development roadmap
    3. F6 high-level roadmap
      1. synchronous query, i.e., synchronously updating index for querying
        1. is this for Samvera?
        2. synchronous is not in the design document
        3. maybe it means that they want a bundled query service
        4. want a query service that talks to the same store as persistence; guarenteed consistency
        5. F3 had a simple synchronous query service
          1. indexed a defined subset of content
          2. F3 also had integration with triplestore, could be either synchronous or asynchronous
        6. need to pilot these query services with folks who have these use cases
          1. determine to what extent synchronicity is required
          2. could there be an optional way to enable synchronous indexing? header? config setting?

Actions

...