Versions Compared

Old Version 8

changes.mady.by.user Bethany Seeger

Saved on

compared with

New Version 9

changes.mady.by.user Stefano Cossu

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  1. Service provider idea? https://groups.google.com/d/msg/fedora-tech/UovyLGZeToE/lNRtWZZ4JM4J

  2. Does fcrepo-webapp belong in the fcrepo4 github project?

    1. One issue is that there are two webapp modules: one for core, one for core+optional modules. This may not be ideal, especially as more optional modules become available (e.g. fcrepo-audit)
    2. Another issue is that putting fcrepo-webapp in core ties the reference implementation to a particular deployment strategy (tomcat/jetty). Other strategies, however, may be more appropriate for some adopters (e.g. OSGi or "containerless"). The counter argument is that a reference implementation should be minimally deployable. 
  3. F4 core, extras, and labs (mailing list thread)
    1. What are the "core" Fedora capabilities/projects?
    2. Which projects are always included in any given release?
    3. Should we decouple the version number schemes of optional projects from core releases?
    4. Should optional projects share the same "org.fcrepo" package namespace?
    5. What are the criteria for graduating from (1c)? - Practices from Islandora? Hydra?
    6. What is the policy for deprecating a project from (1a) or (1b)?
    7. What should the name of a third GitHub organization be, if such an organization is needed?

  4. OSGi:

    No Format
    fcrepo-kernel -> fcrepo-kernel-api
fcrepo-kernel-impl -> fcrepo-kernel

  5. ...

  6. Current Priorities

    Expand
    1. Performance
      • Jira
        serverDuraSpace JIRA
        columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
        serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
        keyFCREPO-1609
    2. Single subject
      • Jira
        serverDuraSpace JIRA
        columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
        serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
        keyFCREPO-1474
      • Jira
        serverDuraSpace JIRA
        columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
        serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
        keyFCREPO-1540
      • Jira
        serverDuraSpace JIRA
        columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
        serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
        keyFCREPO-1447
      • Jira
        serverDuraSpace JIRA
        columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
        serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
        keyFCREPO-1411
    3. fcr:metadata as a container
      • Jira
        serverDuraSpace JIRA
        columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
        serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
        keyFCREPO-1590
    4. Point-like objects
      • Jira
        serverDuraSpace JIRA
        columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
        serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
        keyFCREPO-1470
    5. Camel RDF serializer
      • Jira
        serverDuraSpace JIRA
        columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
        serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
        keyFCREPO-1519
    6. Migration-utils
      • Wait for Mike
    7. Bugs
      • Expand
        • Jira
          serverDuraSpace JIRA
          columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
          maximumIssues20
          jqlQueryfilter=13122
          serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5

  7. Tickets resolved this week:

    Expand

    Jira
    serverDuraSpace JIRA
    columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
    maximumIssues20
    jqlQueryfilter=13111
    serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5

  8. Tickets created this week:

    Expand
    Jira
    serverDuraSpace JIRA
    columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
    maximumIssues20
    jqlQueryfilter=13029
    serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5

Minutes

  • Welcome Bethany Seeger - Library dev at Amherst, working with A. Coburn
  1. Service provider
    1. Elliot + Aaron - moving conversation forward soon
    2. Working group?
    3. Pass initial proposal to the community once that is drafted
    4. Add capability through community contribution
  2. fcrepo-webapp in fcrepo4
    1. Esme: it would be nice to have one project: more coherent releases, less confusion; however demoting frepo-webapp does not look good
    2. Adam: the only reason we have webapp-plus is because of bad deployment architecture. Ideally we would have one deployable artifact for both 
    3. Danny: agree; expect to have a deployable and configurable artifact. I should be able to enable specific features, not an all-or-nothing deal. 
    4. Andrew: We have 2 possibilities: 
      1. OSGi, which offers a high degree of runtime configurability
      2. externalizing components and make them more configurable than current ones
    5. Adam: there is a difference between configuration (how you make your components work) and wiring (which components you enable). Those are the same as of now, due to Maven which is not the ideal tool for this job
    6.  Andrew: Webapp-plus is mostly wiring
    7. Adam: That is because Modeshape owns that configuration; there has been extensive discussion about unpacking that config
    8. Aaron B: Regarding API extension arch: as far as implementation, we would design it as modular as possible - that is conceptualized and outside of Fedora, not dealing with Modeshape stuff. We need to discuss how to approach modularity; also how to live with specific Modeshape config
    9. Adam: you need to configure Modeshape options somewhere to enable any of the webapp-plus modules
    10. These modules cannot do their thing via a client?
    11. Adam: No, unless you want to run them on pure LDP (HTTP) - and performance would suffer
    12. Andrew: confirm that auth modules are relying on Modeshape because they pass through it before they are delegated to our custom module 
    13. Andrew: Back to the original question: is there anything that we can focus our energy on to improve the way we have wiring and config in one?
    14. Adam: There are some options: 
      1. Configuration: OSGi, very powerful and not too hard to configure - there are some standard patterns on how to store config
      2. Wiring: There are OSGi services; Spring can even do wiring with some care. for module level wiring, OSGi is the best - maybe Java 9
    15. Danny: We are about to push out an OSGi deployment but not many have the resources to do that
    16. Adam: there is a difference between OSGi frameworks and containers. You can put OSGi in containers (e.g. Karaf). The hard part is actually the OSGi part, which is a lot of work
    17. Aaron C: leaving webapp where it is is fine; the question is moving toward OSGi which happens step by step. Once there, deployment will be more flexible. Rather than expending resources in figuring out how to separate current webapps we should focus on how to move to OSGi
    18. Andrew: seems like there is a recognition toward moving OSGi - let’s put together a plan
    19. Aaron C: Not everyone knows what OSGi is and what it can do; we can explain that and what those incremental steps are to make Fedora deployable as OSGi
    20. Aaron will create a page on the Wiki and inform the community
  3. core, extras, labs:
    1. There is consensus on having three separate Github organizations: fcrepo, fcrepo–labs, and fcrepo-extras.