Time/Place

This meeting is a hybrid teleconference and slack chat. Anyone is welcome to join...here's the info:

• Time: 11:00am Eastern Daylight Time US (UTC-4)
• Audio/Video Conference Link: https://lyrasis.zoom.us/my/fedora
  
  • Dial-in: 
    +1 408 638 0968
    +1 646 876 9923
    +1 669 900 6833
    Meeting ID:
    812 835 3771

• Join fedora-project.slack.com on the "tech" channel

Attendees

Part 1:

1. Danny Bernstein  
2. Peter Winckles
3. Andrew Woods (out)
4. David Wilcox (out)
5. Peter Eichman
6. Joshua Westgard
7. Ben Pennell
8. Jared Whiklo
9. Bethany Seeger 
10. Paul Cummins

Part 2:

1. Danny Bernstein   
2. Peter Winckles
3. Ben Pennell 

Agenda

1. Announcements
2. Check-in regarding the double meeting format
3. Status of  https://github.com/pwinckles/ocfl-java-parent  move into ocfl Github repo
4. Opportunities to chip in:
   1. API Test Suite PRs
      
      1. https://github.com/fcrepo/Fedora-API-Test-Suite/pulls
   2.  Minimal 4 →5 migration needs testing  and code review:
      1. https://github.com/fcrepo4-exts/fcrepo-upgrade-utils/pull/17
5. Update on Fedora 6 Pilots 
6. Sprint Planning
   
   1. 6.0 Architecture Review
      1. Versioning review from last week:
         1. Clarification of the proposal: 
            1. OCFL transactions always result in new versions;  we will not support unversioned content in Fedora
            2. From Fedora's point of view, the current state of a resource is the most recent version (ie HEAD)
            3. By default Fedora will display only "significant" versions in the list of mementos.
            4. "Significant versions"  are OCFL objects that contain a marker file in the content directory (possibly something like content/.fcrepo/memento)
            5. Implication:  versions cannot be removed ( because removing content from OCFL is likely to be controversial).  Copy/Delete entire OCFL object would be the only way to remove version history.
         2. Questions: 
            1. Is it important to be able to have Memento timestamps synchronized across a multi-object transaction?  In other words, are users going to want to be able to version changes across a single time-slice? 
               Ie: 
                   http://localhost:8080/rest/object1/fcr:versions/20190822122001
                   http://localhost:8080/rest/object2/fcr:versions/20190822122001
                   http://localhost:8080/rest/object3/fcr:versions/20190822122001
      2.  Multi-object transaction implementation ideas
   2. Transaction Sidecar Spec Update
7. Status on organizing a Fedora documentation review
8. Your topic here...

Tickets

1. In Review

   Click here to expand...

   type	key	summary	assignee	reporter	priority	status	resolution	created	updated	due
   Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.

2. Please squash a bug!

   Click here to expand...

   key	summary	type	created	updated	due	assignee	reporter	priority	status	resolution
   Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.

3. Tickets resolved this week:

   Click here to expand...

   key	summary	type	created	updated	due	assignee	reporter	priority	status	resolution
   Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.

4. Tickets created this week:

   Click here to expand...

   key	summary	type	created	updated	due	assignee	reporter	priority	status	resolution
   Unable to locate Jira server for this macro. It may be due to Application Link configuration.

Notes

PART 1

OCFL Java Client  - let's get Peter Winckles and Aaron Birklandtogether for a discussion about a common java ocfl client interface / interaction model - hopefully we can discuss in part two of today's meeting.

Designed outcome:  a java interface that will support both the java client and a JNI-wrapped Go Client.

Bethany Seeger :  will take a look at Greg Jansen 's PR.

Danny Bernstein  to add a discussion point around API Test Suite modifications and overall spec compliance discussion.

Joshua Westgard  to look into fcrepo-upgrade-utils PR  the next week.

Danny Bernstein  to run upgrade routine on  sample (e.g. plant patents ) datasets

Paul Cummins  raising the concern about bloat with respect automated versions.  His Fedora 3 application performs frequent updates to binary content.   In a world of version on change,  he would quickly experience bloat.   "Copy into new OCFL object + Delete old OCFL object" mechanism for removing unwanted object history is an acceptable solution.

There was shared on the understanding of the new versioning proposal and its implications. 

PART 2

Ben Pennell , Peter Winckles  and Danny Bernstein  continued the discussion of the new versioning proposal.

Everyone seemed concerned that this would represent a significant departure from the current interaction model of Fedora.

Also storing "significant version" files in OCFL seems a bit convoluted.  In order to restore a previous version,  clients would need to indicate whether or not to make the restored version "significant".   Fedora or possibly the client would then need to remove or keep that marker file accordingly.

Question:  What is the standard for rebuildability from OCFL?   Are we still in agreement that you should be able to take an OCFL layout,  copy it to a new location, stand up a new fedora instance against it, and have the state of Fedora be exactly what it was before the move?  Can any non-derivative state live outside OCFL? 

The meeting was adjourned early due to the low turnout.

Actions

• Aaron Birkland  to look explore notion of OCFL client with database as authoritative metadata source + asynchronous writing of the inventory.json file
• Peter Eichman   and maybe Ben Pennell to make recommendations re transaction side car specification.
• Andrew Woods will look into java 11 transition