Page Comparison

Announcements and discussion

Maggie

How to publicize new Ready for Community Developer status?

• How and when?

Dev Pri survey draft

• Are the goals reasonable?

• Will the results be actionable?

• Category list missing anything? Should anything be collapsed?

• Who else should look at this – UAC and TAC? Jessica Crouch?

Please also fill out strengths in the Dev. Pri. roster! This helps us identify areas of specialization need: Development Prioritization subteam

Old business tickets

Maggie (for Lydia)

Selfishly, I would like this to PASS

Maggie (for Lydia)

This ticket is super old, vague, and probably very difficult to manage. LT proposes to CLOSE this ticket.

Maggie (for Lydia)

This ticket is super old, vague, I don’t know that we even do deaccession records (besides an event). LT proposes to CLOSE this ticket.

Patrick

Need more contextual information about what would "look better".

Also need clarity on on the "add into the Edit Basic Information the Resource or Accession number and links back to the component". Do they just want links back to the linked resource/accession?

Patrick

Ideally pass. Not exactly sure what's causing this, but can confirm that this bug appears. From what I can tell by researching <dao> structure standards, xlink attributes are technically not allowed. Would need to speak to development team about the best way to correct this.

Patrick

Would support closing this ticket. Additionally, do not fully know what the purpose for this work would be.

Reviewing Ready for Development tickets: Bug kanban board (58 tickets total)

Each person has been assigned 8 tickets from the bug kanban board that currently have the Ready for Implementation status. Please review the tickets assigned to you and make recommendations on:

• Candidate for Ready for Community Developer? YES/NO (primary concern)

• Whether the ticket is still relevant, its priority ranking, and the tags (secondary concerns)

We’ll discuss candidates for Ready for Community Developer as a group, and can also address any secondary concerns that arise during the ticket reviews.

Patrick

1. ANW-138

   1. y/n

   2. other concerns?

2. ANW-137

3. ANW-148

4. ANW-164

5. ANW-179

6. ANW-172

7. ANW-162

8. ANW-160
   

Terra

1. ANW-157

   1. y/n

   2. other concerns?

2. ANW-156

3. ANW-152

4. ANW-145

5. ANW-149

6. ANW-170

7. ANW-365

8. ANW-369

Alicia

1. ANW-194

   1. y/n

   2. other concerns?

2. ANW-205

3. ANW-206

4. ANW-347

5. ANW-234

6. ANW-251

7. ANW-262

8. ANW-261

William

1. ANW-249

   1. y/n

   2. other concerns?

2. ANW-276

3. ANW-275

4. ANW-288

5. ANW-345

6. ANW-292

7. ANW-316

8. ANW-308

Julia

1. ANW-323

   1. y/n

   2. other concerns?

2. ANW-604

3. ANW-425

4. ANW-635

5. ANW-652

6. ANW-664

7. ANW-665

8. ANW-691

Edgar

1. ANW-694

   1. y/n

   2. other concerns?

2. ANW-705

3. ANW-724

4. ANW-736

5. ANW-739

6. ANW-750

7. ANW-751

8. ANW-752

9. ANW-757

Maggie

1. ANW-758

   1. y/n

   2. other concerns?

2. ANW-760

3. ANW-782

4. ANW-783

5. ANW-784

6. ANW-787

7. ANW-792

8. ANW-823

9. ANW-880

Next meeting

All

Did this method work well?

Should we do anything differently for June meeting?