Page Comparison

Announcements?

Old business

Lydia

1. ANW-664

2. ANW-691

3. ANW-214

• no - not for a community developer

• is there enough info. What should an unpublished archival object look like?

• Priority is ok at low.

4. ANW-538

• no - not for a community developer - I don’t know if a community developer would know how to do this.

• a nice usability feature

• priority is low because of existing workarounds

5. ANW-349

• possibly, but I don’t know if a community developer would know how to do this

• a nice usability feature

• priority is low and could be trivial instead

6. ANW-97

• no - not for a community developer - I don’t know if a community developer would know how to do this, particularly if it automatically strips permissions (which would be helpful)

• a nice usability feature

• priority minor ok

7. ANW-553

• no - not for a community developer, it sounds like the datepicker currently used is part of a larger discussion

• a nice usability feature

• priority minor ok

8. ANW-348

• no - sounds complex

• a nice usability feature

• priority minor ok

9. ANW-559

• no - this involves some architecture planning that probably the program team only knows

• a nice usability feature

• priority minor ok

10. ANW-564

• Close this ticket. This ticket was in response to an older method of reorder. I can’t currently think of another pressing need for an “undo” function.

11. ANW-738

• no - too complex for community dev.

• worthwhile project - is spec ok?

• minor priority seems ok

12. ANW-759

• no - too complex for community dev.

• worthwhile project - is spec ok?

• minor priority seems ok

13. ANW-808

• unsure if this is still an issue, could possibly close?

14. ANW-799

• no - unsure if community developers would have access to this security area, otherwise seems relatively straightforward to find the right code to fix.

15. ANW-806

• maybe? It sounds like an HM plugin for adapting the Staff Interface might be able to be copied to the PUI, but I don’t know if it’s that easy.

16. ANW-809

• no? not sure how complex it would be to fix

• priority of major is good because of accessibility being protected by law.

17. ANW-816

• no? not sure how complex it would be to fix

18. ANW-843

• no? not sure how complex it would be to fix

• priority major, not sure it should be minor, but it would be a helpful function

19. ANW-908

• maybe? I’m not sure how difficult it would be to copy code from the Resource record template and also map the data when it is spawned into a Resource.

• priority minor seems ok

William

1. ANW-616

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

2. ANW-215

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

3. ANW-453

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

4. ANW-468

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

5. ANW-332

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

6. ANW-340

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

Julia

1. ANW-255

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

2. ANW-256

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

3. ANW-277

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

4. ANW-273

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

5. ANW-615

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

6. ANW-601

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

7. ANW-638

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

8. ANW-658

   1. y/n to community developer?

   2. priority/other comments?

Jiras

Alicia

Edgar

William

Terra

Maggie