...
In Review
Expand Jira server DuraSpace JIRA jqlQuery filter=13100 serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5 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 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 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
- announcements
- OCFL client
- no updates regarding S3 support
- doodle poll for next sprint is open
- looking for clarity on who is available early Q1
- steering meeting report: mostly prep for f2f leaders meeting
- David Wilcox did a well-attended Fedora 6 webinar last week
- there is a lot of interest in Fedora 6
- recording will be forthcoming
- posted video demo form last Fedora 6 sprint
- keeping the community informed and in the loop
- some community testers for migration utils have come forward
- OCFL client
- state of the development
- check-in on status and who is available to push to demo capability
- Ben Pennell has been the primary person in the codebase recently
- file layout should be persisted (headers and content)
- working on full front-to-back persistance path
- at least binary headers are getting written
- updating binaries is not complete
- Mohamed's PR: https://github.com/fcrepo4/fcrepo4/pull/1592
- the rebase of Mohamed's PR will likely take a lot of work
- descriptions may not be getting persisted yet
- demo will comprise creating and retrieving a container
- plus creating archival group and nested resources
- as other features are completed they can be rolled out in future demos
- release short videos demoing new features as they come online
- binaries are not part of the first demo
- identify unit tests that we want to re-enable and use those as a basis for demo
- LDP tests should still work because nothing of the API expectations have changed
- should get the containment index implemented soon
- maybe not for first demo
- will help for performance speed
- Jared will build Fedora 6 and run the Fedora 4 tests against it
- will do some hands-on work with tests in 1pm ET meeting slot today
- check-in on status and who is available to push to demo capability
- demos
- demo approach for migration utils worked well
- next Wednesday (Dec 11) for recording the next demo
- volunteers for scripting the demo?
- need to determine the functionality to demo
- basic steps: create container, AG link header, creating a nested resource in AG
- show what resources look like on disk
- Java 11 issue with Jetty; Andrew working on that today
- Danny B will look at what integration tests break
- volunteers to participate in demo?
- Bethany will commit to working on demo with Danny B
- Ben Pennell may be available as well
- spec api versioning
- want to get committer feedback before tech subgroup meeting in a couple of weeks
- assumes that committers are in charge of the spec
- should present policy to spec editors
- we should nominate a new group of spec editors
- future spec work could be done on an ad hoc basis
- support for multiple versions of API in a single Fedora release?
- will community version track the latest version of the API?
- may be better to do different versions of Fedora for different versions of the API
- get comments before tech subgroup
- if there are no concerns, leaders would vote on the policy
- if a desire for a new editor group, will determine process at that point
- given the lack of multiple implementations, some reluctance to a 1.0 release
- original spec editors view their work as done
- want to get committer feedback before tech subgroup meeting in a couple of weeks
- open questions: https://wiki.lyrasis.org/display/FF/Decisions+and+Open+Questions
- are pair-trees as a web resource still a thing in Fedora 6?
- probably not a need for it; it was a performance hack
- with Fedora 6 that need should go away
- Aaron raises question about Fedora 4 to 6 migration of pair-trees
- three options: collapse the pair-tree, retain pair-tree as containers, or retain Fedora 4 behavior
- is there deployed Samvera behavior that depends on pair-tree nodes?
- to be continued next week
- are pair-trees as a web resource still a thing in Fedora 6?
Actions
- Clarify in in documentation that multiple simultaneous writes to OCFL are not supported
...