Migration Contacts

Name(s)

Role(s) and Organization

Contact information

Corson-Rikert, Jon

VIVO Development Lead
Cornell University

 

Blake, Jim

Quality Assurance
Cornell University

 

Caruso, Brian

VIVO Architecture Lead
Cornell University

 

Lowe, Brian

VIVO Semantic Lead
Cornell University

 

Cappadona, Nick

VIVO UI Lead
Cornell University

 

Barnes, Christopher

VIVO UF Development Lead
University of Florida

 

Skaggs, Nicholas

VIVO UF Team Lead
University of Florida

 

Williams, Stephen

VIVO UF Team Lead
University of Florida

 

Revision History

Date

Author

Change Description

12/??/2010

Stephen Williams

Document Initially Created

1/10/2011

Stephen Williams

Formatting Changes

1/20/2011

Stephen Williams

Moved to Wiki

Purpose

To migration the subversion repository for VIVO from the repository at Cornell University to the repository at SourceForge.

Executive Summary

=Objectives=

Scope

=Assumptions=

  1. That the revision history is important to continued development and must be maintained through the migration
  2. That further revisions of the VIVO source will deploy from SourceForge
  3. That all developers will need to update their SVN source

Risks

  1. Co-Mingling Repositories with other project libraries will complicate the revision history
  2. The Migration will affect development by causing an outage

Repository Structure

Analysis of Current Repository Structure

SourceForge

  • Connectors
    • CTSAFedSearch
    • PHPVIVO
    • VIVOtoWordPress
  • Core
  • Harvester
  • Ontology
  • RefworksJavaTranslator
  • SPARQLQueryBuilder
  • ShibAuth (empty)
    Cornell
  • VIVO
  • VITRO
    Proposed Changes

Affected Support Systems

Necessary Components

Documentation:

Patch Guide - This guide covers how non core developers submit patches to the team. This guide should provide a pathway for outside developers to have their material reviewed by the group and accepted into VIVO core. Possible pathway

  1. Outside Developer Notifies List/Tracker of a patch (attaches patch and diff)
  2. A developer “sponsors” the patch by reviewing their work
  3. If the feature would benefit VIVO commit it to the repository and notify the list.
  4. If the feature would benefit VIVO but is poorly implemented commit to the repository and notify the list its revision number and what you intend to revise.
  5. Unnecessary or Useless Features should be placed to the list or development lead for a vote
  6. Provide Feedback to the user about their patch.
    Developers Guide (one on confluence)
  • Downloading the application for development
  • Compiling the program
  • Executing from compilation
  • Testing methodologies
  • Libraries Used
  • Communication Channels
    • IRC
    • List Serves

Limitations

  • Source Forge Projects are allowed a single repository.

Organization

=Costs=

TimeLine & Budgets

Janurary 28th - VIVO releases 1.2

Feburary 14th - Development Freeze on all VIVO SVN’s Developers must have code checked in by 7pm EST

Feburary 15th - Development Leads Site Meeting (complete plan for execution)

Feburary 16th - Migration Day