2017-11-17 Meeting notes

Listserv:

• Megan Blair "Top Containers Not Showing," "Accessions of rare books in AS?"
• Bobbi Fox "bulk uploading of Archival Objects via Excel Spreadsheet- how large is too large?," "Running the (development) PUI on a separate server?," "batch re-ordering of controlled value lists; script/plugin, anyone?," "New version of A plugin to support bulk uploading of Archival Objects via Excel Spreadsheet"
• Patrick Galligan "Deleting Emtpy Top Containers," "batch delete dates saga continues"
• Maggie Hughes "Assistance with migrator plugin"
• Jason Loeffler "Deleting all the digital objects in a repository," "Failed connection to database issue," "can't view collections on the backend," "Looping indexer of death," "Digital objects in v2.1.1," "ArchivesSpace API - looking for working example of 'Update a Resource,'" "batch re-ordering of controlled value lists; script/plugin, anyone?"
• Rachel Maderick "Classifications dropping links to records after being edited"
• Dallas Pillen "Reports broken in 2.2.0 ??"
• Kari Smith "Assistance with migrator plugin," "Question about Container Profile extents -- use for separate Repos," "Having trouble with permission to Manage Top Containers," "Top-Container restrictions," "Having trouble with permission to Manage Top Containers," "Sub-series Indicator does not display in Container link"
• Trevor Thornton "ampersand issue with PDF button in 2.1.2 public interface," "Truncated searches in ASpace PUI"

Code:

• Mark Cooper "EAD3Serializer requires EADSerializer so require it first"
• Dallas Pillen "fix report orientation bug"
• Laney

Bug reporting:

• Jason Loeffler "As a Researcher and Staff User, I want to see breadcrumb trails with classification groups and subgroups in the PUI and the staff interface at the collection level," "Print-to-PDF via PUI is not as polished as staff-generated PDF," "As a user and archivist, I want published accessions to appear on the Subject or Name landing pages," "As a repository manager, I want to control which sets are available for harvest via OAI-PMH," "Use RightsStatements.org Statements in RightsStatements for Resources, Accessions, and Digital Objects," "Use Creative Commons Statements in Rights Statements Module for Resources, Accessions, and Digital Objects," "I want to search by subject in the new PUI," "Classification records should be included on Agent landing pages in the PUI in some fashion.," "Revision statement displaying in PUI," "ISO 8601 dates without a date expression could be transformed into human- readable, user-friendly display strings for the PUI, possibly via a supported/internationalized plugin," "Importing Digital Objects with multiple linked Agents and Subjects," "A facet for "role" that differentiates agent links between subject, creator, and source should be added to the new PUI," "Classification records shared across multiple repositories," "Updating classification terms destroys links," "Cataloged_note is not being imported via the accession CSV template," "Brackets "[]" in searches in the PUI causing errors," "Scrolling is too fast on the PUI with a Mac," "Bulk dates are not exported in the MARCXML export", "Other level values display as 'null' in record tree," "500 Server Response when API search method uses all_ids," "Accession sort dropdown does not obey field label changes," "Updating classification terms destroys links," "Search filter options disappear/get bumped to bottom of search results page," NoMethodError for #container on context object in ead_converter," "Other Level values do not render in the tree," "Bulk edit/delete"
• Kari Smith "As a user, I want to directly edit / modify my user account and password"

Christine: put out today: release 2.2.1, mostly bug fixes and community pull requests. Working on documents relating to making it clearer and more transparent on how contributions are evaluated; different kinds of development one can do and ways that plugins can be converted into the main code body. Engagement things going to be happening, including the webinar on testing next month.

Laney: migration tools:  co-op student, Sarah, from Georgia Tech working on upgrading migration tools; have a test version of the migration tool, getting good feedback from some users. Hoping to get release out early December, first AT, then Archon. Would like more Archon databases to test.  Promise to destroy it! after testing.  co-op student also working on documenting datamaps, plus some pointers to make migration go faster (like turning off PUI indexing

Core committers group  (Laney reports:)  working on making test less brittle; in December will make a plan for how to approach the testing work for January.

Development prioritization sub-team (cross council with UAC)

• 2017-2018 Development Prioritization Work Plan

(Jason:) continuing to work through already-developed process in grading, ranking bugs and feature requests.  Getting a decent number of issues being realized in releases.  Participating in the document circulating concerning the process of evaluation.  Would like to make the team's work more easily revealed to the AS member cohort.  Surveys and revising sub-team mission statement will be discussed in the next couple of meetings.

Integrations sub-team

• 2017-2018 Work Plan

(Patrick:) Coming out of first meeting, going to try to come up with a mission statement that would let them get more involved with the larger community on an on-going basis, whether it's being more active on listserv, or letting community know who in the community is doing interesting things.  Thinking about possibly creating/contributing to an AS blog, as well as possibly having regular open calls with the community. Possibly building out more information on integrations on the AS GitHub pages. Tracking ongoing integrations and maintaining the wiki.

Migration sub-team

• The Migrations sub-team will continue to serve as an as needed resource for providing migrations guidance to users, developers, and anyone else.

(Dustin:) had undergone a lot of turnover; still working on workplan; expect business as usual in terms of working with the community.

Technical documentation sub-team

• Tech Docs Workplan for 2017-2018

(Scott:) had a couple of calls; workplan focuses on 3 areas: 1.  moving main tech. documentation into a separate github repository to make it cleaner and easier for maintenance and contributions from community, allowing pull-requests more easily, etc.  2. enhancing provisioning documentation (setting up solr server, doing https, etc.) 3. plugin documentation, what can you do with them, best practices, etc.

Patrick: would the integrations sub-team documentation be welcome?  Scott: would like people to be in touch to work this out.

Testing sub-team (cross council with UAC)

(Ed:) were involved with 2.2 testing; there's another release coming in December with an expected full-test suite on.

API Documentation Working Group

Purpose: Create documentation and/or screencasts for using the ArchivesSpace API, including JSON examples for post bodies/responses. The need for this kind of information came up on the listserv as recently as (11/13). This working group would be responsible for determining the scope and timeline of this work (because it could be a huge amount of work!), its relationship to the existing API autodocs, its format, where it would live, etc., as well as how it it would be promoted and maintained going forward.

(Dallas:) People have talked about improving the API documentation. Very open to ideas about direction of this group. Try to write documentation for the endpoints that people generally would want to use – identifying subset, with realistic examples.  Sometime soon there will a be call for participants, and then will try to nail down directions for moving forward. Some of the work of this group might intersect with the Tech. Documentation group, so will need to work that out.

Q: is there a timeline?  A: not yet.  Next week, will send a call for interested people, then call a kick-off meeting. Unlikely to begin before end of the year.

Awesome ArchivesSpace Working Group

Create an Awesome List repository (or similar), to live in the ArchivesSpace or ArchivesSpace-Labs GitHub organization. The list would start with two categories (which could be expanded later) based on the interests of the current cohort of TAC members: migrations and plug-ins. It would point to items that are and aren't maintained by the ArchivesSpace program team, and that are inside and outside of the existing ArchivesSpace repos. Inclusion on the list wouldn't represent an endorsement of any kind. The working group would be responsible for the initial population of the list and provide a plan for promoting and adding to and maintaining it going forward. For an example of what this might look like, see the IIIF Awesome List.

(Maggie:) Would be looking to include technical documentation from the other working groups, soliciting from community, making sure there's ongoing maintenance. Plan to start working on the workplan more substantially after the new year.

ArchivesSpace Process for Evaluating Potential Feature Contributions to the Core Code

Comments?  Pointed out that there are substantive comments in the document.

Q: is commenting restricted to this group? A: TAC and UAC so far; the link can be sent to anyone.  Looking to finalize by end of the year, so looking for feedback by end of this month (November). Of course will be open to anyone once finalized.  "If we feel it's pretty thorough, maybe we can finalize it without distributing to the entire community" – Christine

Christine invites more comments on the document.

Max: discussion about contributing to blog, but not sure how it gets advertised.

Kari: tweeting out links to the wikis?  Would reach a different audience than posting to listserv

Laney: (Max has to-do to reach out to Christine Kim, who has ideas about outreach)

Max asks if other sub-teams want to participate.  Jason: want to make sure that whole life cycle of issue or bug is available. Putting that in capsule format would do a lot to encourage engagement, and dispel myth of "black hole"

Couple of discussions on the list on the relationship between the descriptive metadata of Dig. objects vs. arch. objects.

Kari: thought there was some issue for copying title over from archival object to digital object if digital objects were spawned from the archival object.

Jason: that got tabled because got folded into the question of the inheritance model.  Needs to be taken up.  He'll take an action item to raise with Christine.  There's an opportunity to refactor digital object model, considering inheritance, sketching out possible use cases.