Our primary work will continue to be reviewing and prioritizing tickets for development. What else? A few possibilities from last year’s workplan and ideas for discussion from the retrospective:
Share agendas with TAC and UAC and extend an open invitation to council members to join if there are any tickets they are interested in commenting on.
Improve documentation of the process of consulting with other subteams on certain tickets.
Present at 2023 ArchivesSpace online forum about the work of the group.
Select a few “Awaiting More Information” tickets of particular value and seek additional community feedback or otherwise attempt to resolve them.
Create a running list of tickets that require additional community feedback and share list with broader community.
Ticket and video clearly explain the bug. I’ve replicated it and think we should pass.
It’s hard for me to imagine a use case for this scenario at my institution. I’d like to get a sense from Dev/Pri members if they think this feature would have broad utility across the community (as a side note, if this this moves forward it probably would mean doing something similar within the resource record). If this involves complex development, my inclination would be to recommend using existing methods for doing this.
Pass
Pass for Community Development. Recommend that same change be made to Resource Record.
@Tom Steele
Couldn’t duplicate, tried altering Scope and General notes, 65000 characters seems to be the max to save a record, anything less exports to MARCXML.
Seems reasonable to be able to sort results by other categories. Pass, minor.
Send to Metadata/Standards for input.
Request Specification.
@Matthew Neely
Ticket is requesting a change to EAD generation from resource records. Ticket suggesting this should be a background job as experiencing time out issues. Not been able to replicate this in the sandbox but have been able to successfuly export a resource with 5000+ archival objects from own institution’s instance. Could the time out issue just be fixed by a config change?
This ticket is requesting a resource spawn functionality to create a duplicate. Use case is for editing a duplicate whilst maintaining access to a published version. Can see advantages for this but unclear how much development work this might require as ticket is requesting ability for the duplicated resource to mainting links to associated digital objects, top containers and agents etc.
Could not replicate. Ask for specific example where this is happening.