Attendees

Agenda


TimeTopic
10:00am - 10:15am

Welcome and introductions

  1. Name, institution, role on project
  2. High-level description of the pilot
10:15am - 10:35am

Project goals

  1. What is the desired end-state for the pilot?
  2. What goals do we want to achieve?
  3. Are there any concerns about these goals?
10:35am - 11:15pm

Project plan

  1. Timelines and deliverables
  2. Roles and responsibilities
  3. Requirements gathering
11:15pm - 11:25pmBreak
11:25pm - 11:45pm

Project infrastructure

  1. Communication channels and frequency
  2. Issue reporting and tracking
11:45pm - 12:00pmWrap-up and next steps


Resources

Notes

Introductions:

Amy Blau:  project manager on the Whitman side

Kun Lin :  technical / development (Whitman)

Paige Morfitt : metadata librarian at Whitman

Noah Smith: Born Digital lead

Dara Virks:  technical project manager at Born Digital

Ben Murphy:  archivist and head of digital services at Whitman

Dana Bronson :  Associate librarian at Whitman

Alan Stanley - Islandora Developer

Andrew Woods and Danny Bernstein :  Fedora co-technical leads  : will be supporting the effort.

High level description: 

We're using the pilots as opportunities to lower barriers to migrations for everyone in the ecosystem

Project Goals

  1. Successful migration from  to Islandora8 deployed in production environment (Lyrasis)
  2. Thorough documentation of all aspects of the migration. (Whitman)
  3. Use the Isle project as the vehicle for deployment (Born Digital)
  4. Theme development to support successful deployment of newspaper repos (Born Digital)
  5. Ideally fully migrate to Islandora 8 with standard newspapers and oral histories themes. (Whitman)
  6. Clarify what components/features will be delayed (if anyone) (Whitman)
  7. Minimize bespoke development

We should go through the gaps analysis with a fine-toothed comb in order to make sure that everything that is a hard requirement is on the development schedule.

Project Plan

See link above.

Does the scope sound reasonable? 

(no objections)

It is important for us as a group to be clear about what features/development/etc will be covered by the grant versus what will not.

We should have a plan for  a "content freeze"  in order to allow for  an orderly migration.

Question:  are we interested in bringing over metadata revision history along in the migration?  

    Whitman:  probably not - that is less important than making sure that everything that is working for us in 7 continues to work in 8? 

Funders are concerned fundamentally with successful migrations of the data from one version of the user facing software to the next. Not so  much having a "complete" (read versions included) migration of Fedora.

Whitman: interested in S3 support (in order to control costs),  new content ingesting (post migration).  

The S3 support is needed at the Fedora layer for clarification.


Who will  Whitman be working with on the metadata modeling/mapping piece (content remediation, etc)?
      David Wilcox will be supporting/shepherding that activity.

        The Whitman team is eager to get a jump on this process.


To what extent can Whitman  influence/control how metadata fields are displayed?  

Project infrastructure:

Communication:

(Private) Google Group (everyone will be added)

(Private) Google Drive shared folder

(Private) Slack Channel

Issue Tracking:

(Public) Project Board in Github Project (to do, in progress, done)


Any questions, concerns, suggestions, next steps?