...

1. Ralph O'Flinn 
2. Brian Lowe 
3. Huda Khan 
4. Steven McCauley
5. Andrew Woods
6. María Amalia Flórez Huertas
7. Benjamin Gross
8. Mike Conlon
9. Don Elsborg

...

1. Status of In-Review tickets

   Expand
   Jira server DuraSpace JIRA jqlQuery filter=14416 serverId c815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5

   Received

   Bugs (1.11)

Notes 

...

Notes 

Draft notes in Google-Doc

• Next year’s VIVO conference: still under discussion.  Miami Vice theme? (I made the theme up) but maybe Miami.
• Andrew: What’d I miss?
• Ralph: Talked about release testing for 1.11.  This one time we had a pretty intense discussion.  Trying to get people to start testing.
• Conference updates?
  • Andrew: In context of modularization, people would like to be able to download and install VIVO (simple set of commands).  Reasonable to have products like database to be installed separately.
  • Anastasia Dimou. RML mapper. Don had heard of R2ML before.  
  • Mike: seems to have the same idea as VIVO pump. Take rectangular data/JSON, have an external mapping definition, and produce RDF.
  • Would be interesting to see how to use RML mapper within VIVO.  Can we create VIVO mapper starting from spreadsheets. 
  • Andrew: VIVO plays two different roles in CRIS environment.  Many use VIVO in CRIS as a display where a centralized CRIS system exports data.  The other scenario, such as is the case with TIB, is where VIVO is used as the CRIS system.  For smaller institutions, VIVO fits their CRIS requirements quite well. For the VIVO as display only use case, the lynchpin seemed to be the mapping between CERIF and VIVO.  Openness in helping move that forward. 
    • Ralph: pitching Brown as flip to Scholars
    • Steve: hope there is synergy as well.  Brown is a smaller institution and prior to VIVO, didn’t have research management tool.  Had the editing interface for a while. At conference, presented overhaul of editing system.
      • Sources for publication harvesting: PubMed, WoS, CrossRef
    • Django application communicating with VIVO installation by insinuating into form submission process.  New UI will take advantage of SPARQL update and query APIs. Hoping to build something modular. Uses Brown’s authentication system so faculty and affiliate faculty can login so can edit info there.  Includes simple forms for text areas as well as publication harvester and approval process for faculty.  
    • Initial roll out had included editing but changed over to display only.  Reason for editing interface due to issues with VIVO’s native editing interface. 
    • Have Rails front end but have a web service that sits between Rails and VIVO that does processing
    • Photo’s of Steve and Hector
      https://photos.app.goo.gl/Jq1WLaX2MsN8v7zYA
    • https://photos.app.goo.gl/2AbTFgtU4x7SfF8M9
    • Steve: Present people with autocomplete and try to create data within system.  
    • RDF actually helpful in this case because can handle bad data in back-end and disguise that from users. 
    • Important that we have support for smaller institutions as well and editing will be important for those users. 
  • Mike: Editing still important when VIVO plays the CRIS role. Steve, thoughts?
  • Andrew: Brown University has put together an editing UI for VIVO. Potentially analogous to Scholars work with editing UI.  
  • Mike: Russian doll issue.  If you want to add something, need to also add related entities.  E.g. got a degree from Stanford, but don’t want to put in Stanford because that’s an organization name that should be curated/come from a list.  Otherwise you’ll have 15 versions/literals(?) for Stanford.
• Ralph had a good time.  lol+ 1
• UI update discussions: showed/shared work on UI work but Freemarker still a player
• Docker: mixed feedback.  
• Don: Lots of CRIS discussions.
• Topics for future dev calls
  • Andrew: Not necessarily higher level topics, although that may be included.  Comments heard: people may need more time to consider a topic or development details ahead of time in order to formulate reactions or provide feedback. 
  • Ralph: Maybe?
  • Andrew: having a sense of a unified direction across the groups.  E.g. product direction description is an example, as the "Statement of Product Direction" document provides information about overall goals which can be implemented by other groups.  
  • Mike and Andrew
  • Steve is part of the answer of group bridging: chairing a task force around this idea.  
• Conference discussions around development calls: people who may not be tied into the day to day activities find these calls to be too focused on the details (the weeds). One suggestion: advertise topics in advance to community so people have a time to prepare, formulate ideas, and have conversation around known topic (as opposed to parachuting in like Rambo and hacking through the weeds and the note-taker only added “Rambo”, the visual metaphor provided by Andrew so richly describes an action adventure movie, the note-taker really didn’t have to do much here.)
• Current process: Andrew sends out agenda items before the next call.  
• Mike: Rolling agenda.  Posting to the mailing list would help - not everyone is on slack.e.g. Put out message saying we’ll be reading this paper (example is ontology call). 
• Andrew: Send out agenda further in advance?
• Ralph: This being a development call, pretty flexible. Different set of calls before?
• Don: Implementation calls
• Andrew: have a special topics call that we could do once a month or twice, and not have every call be a “special topic” call.  
• Huda: Integrating time for higher level topics to include more community participation?
• Don: Can we get more feedback/communication between the other groups (i.e. including the echelons of power) and us?
• Amalia: who is in charge of connecting all the groups together to make sure we make a product we all want? 

• Release testing
  1. Jim's acceptance-tests need to be fixed for 1.11 since Solr is no longer deployed with VIVO
  2. Andrew reports prior version took ~3 hours to complete
1. Release testing page: https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/VIVO/Release+Testing+-+1.11.0
2. Progress has been made!
3. Ralph would like to close testing by next Friday 
4. Ralph implores everyone to try 1.11.0. Upgrading is not that hard. No ontology changes.
5. “Ppppppllllleeeeeeease” - Ralph 
6. What’s the status of Jim’s testing framework? 
7. 1.9.x to 1.10.x was more difficult because of the upgrade to Jena. 1.10.x to 1.11.x makes a change to Solr so that is a barrier to upgrading 

Actions

Previous Actions

...