Versions Compared

Old Version 6

changes.mady.by.user Brian Lowe

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Andrew Woods

Saved on

Key

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

...

Attendees

(star) Indicating note-taker

...

  1. Andrei Tudor
  2. Christian Hauschke
  3. Ralph O'Flinn
  4. Benjamin Gross
  5. Kitio Fofack

...

  2. Mike Conlon  
  3. Brian Lowe (star)

...

  1. Robert Nelson
  2. Tim Worrall
  3. Steven McCauley
  4. Andrew Woods

...

  1. Huda Khan
  2. Don Elsborg
  3. Marijane White
  4. Muhammad Javed
  5. Greg Burton

Discussion items

  1. Tickets discussed last week
    1. Jira
      serverDuraSpace JIRA
      serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
      keyVIVO-1409
    2. Jira
      serverDuraSpace JIRA
      serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
      keyVIVO-1438

      1. Reopened, pending response to GitHub comments
    3. Jira
      serverDuraSpace JIRA
      serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
      keyVIVO-1459
  2. FYI, steps in closing JIRA tickets
    1. Squash-merge in GitHub
      1. Ensure that merge commit comment does not include trivial notes (e.g. Removed whitespace)
      2. Ensure that merge commit contains link to JIRA ticket (e.g. Resolves with <link-to-jira-ticket>)
    2. Close JIRA ticket
      1. Change status to Fixed
      2. Add link to GitHub commit in JIRA comment
      3. Select next release for appropriate project for Fix Version
  3. Review and testing needed
    1. Jira
      serverDuraSpace JIRA
      serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
      keyVIVO-1405

      1. Was Closed, moved to In-Review
      2. Pull requests have not been reviewed/merged
    2. Jira
      serverDuraSpace JIRA
      serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
      keyVIVO-1408

      1. Was Closed, moved to In-Review
      2. Pull requests have not been reviewed/merged
  4. Outcomes from March 1st project strategy meeting
    1. Product Evolution task force
    2. Vision and Mission task force
    3. Governance and Organization task force
    4. Defining the Community task force
    5. Resources task force
  5. Sprint topics
    1. What defines the 1.10 release?
      1. What remains to be done?
      2. Jira
        serverDuraSpace JIRA
        serverIdc815ca92-fd23-34c2-8fe3-956808caf8c5
        keyVIVO-1410
  6. Cloning a VIVO installation
    1. Moving your VIVO Instance
    2. Backup and Restore
  7. ...

...

      • Added a link to the JIRA ticket to the commit comment so there is traceability between the commit and the JIRA ticket.

  • After committed in Github, went over to JIRA ticket to close issue -- changed to ‘fixed’ and added a link to the commit in the JIRA comment.  

  • Release field: what release this will end up in.  For Jena tools, simply created a new 0.1 release.

  • Don’t need to be the committer who did the review of a pull request; any committer can move it forward if there are two thumbs up.

...

  • One outcome was creation of five task forces. All clearly relevant to everyone here, but 4a - Product Evolution Taskforce - Google doc is probably of most interest.  Product Evolution task force

    • Number of ideas floating around

    • Can revisit this document and its implications

    • Initial musings plus existing  are sources for what we want to be focusing on for the sprints that are coming up.

  • Benjamin: I was there and Alex Viggio was there as well in person.  Had 1-½ hour discussion on things that were our priorities and things that we though the community as a whole would be interested in.  Doc created by Paul summarizes some of the discussion we had during this time. Wanted to create an action plan: still blank. Don’t think that document should have been created with just five of us in the room anyway.  People on this call can contribute to that.

    • Document should be open to comments from everyone.  Feel free to make comments.

  • Mike:  I was at the meeting.  Not at the product evolution breakout.  The highest-level idea here is, perhaps, that the project wants to make progress and had significant concern about the progress that had been made over the last several years.  These five topics emerged as things that needed to be addressed. Five volunteers stepped forward to organized events related to these areas.

    • Goal is to create action plans that can be executed over the next twelve months.  Will be various report-back opportunities over the year to see the progress made in these five areas.

    • Other general direction is think creatively.  Absolutely an opportunity to do what needs to be done, to start doing what needs to be done to put us in a better place.  That is certainly the general direction for all the groups including Product Evolution.

  • Javed: in Google doc, lists of nominees.

    • Mike: only from the people in the meeting, just for facilitating the breakout session.  Will be calls for participation in all of these groups.

  • Huda:  Do you want to talk about the difference between vision and product evolution?

    • Mike: You’re right: vision is broader.  Product is about building a piece of software.  Vision people are on a short timeline (6-8 weeks) and have plenty to work from.  Not sure how much vision tweaking they’re going to do.

    • Dovetails into a product concept, which is that the world has changed a lot since VIVO was first conceived in 2003, since the grant began in 2009.  What can we give away? I.e., are there things in the world that we should use. New and exciting data sources and related efforts. E.g., ORCID did not exist when we started; open APIs didn’t exist.  Vision people will be doing some of that along with the product people. Vision people will be broader and finish first.

  • Don:  Will linked data and semantic technology still be pillars of the technical product?

    • Mike: Yes.  An interest in VIVO’s being a semantic product.  Absolutely. Semantics is a central principle. Need not be the method by which data are presented or analyzed.

  • Don:  Driving for having it be the interface.  Delivering JSON to other consumers. Is the goal of VIVO’s product to be able to deliver that semantic representation of the data so we can leverage linked open data?

    • Mike: Two issues.  1. Delivering data to the world: semantics are fundamental.  2. Within an organization, want to deliver data in whatever context makes sense.  Technology should be optimized for the use cases. Semantics as the foundation and local delivery methods to optimize delivery in various contexts.

    • A lot to be done to optimize the presentation layer.

    • Ralph:  I’m working on and have gotten quite far with a Bootstrap version of a VIVO them theme that works seamlessly on 1.9 and beta 1.10 snapshot version.  Got a thumbs-up from our communications department. Responds correctly on mobile devices. Includes all the front-end visual parts of VIVO; still working on the backend.  Looks and works correctly. Still cleaning up the libraries and some weirdness that had been in there previously. Posting it on Github for everyone to start looking at. Purpose to be a generic Bootstrap template that anyone can take and run with.  Out-of-the-box replacement for Wilma. Would be a quick way to get a quick win for us.

    • Mike:  Is there a ticket for this? I would like to follow the work and make comments.  

    • Ralph:  Was related to the JIRA ticket to take the Symplectic template and create a generic template from that.  Think is got closed and some point.

      • Some screenshots and links on Slack channel

      • Andrew:  Reopen ticket or create a new one.  

        • Any comments you put on Slack will eventually go away until we have a paid version.  Free version only retains last 10,000 messages.

      • Ralph:  I will fix it later today.

      • Benjamin: Ticket for responsive template here: https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/VIVO-114

    • Christian:  Presentation is also reporting to research administration.

    • Mike:  I think you’ll find a lot of comments in the Google doc and would encourage everyone to read through and make more comments.

  • Andrew:  Task forces that came out of strategy meeting.  Thinking about communication. Mike does a great job putting out a weekly blurb, but it’s vitally important that whoever is interested here be involved -- specifically in the Product Evolution Task Force -- or get a flow of information so that we all move in the same direction.  Don’t want task force and developers to move in different directions.

    • Mike: First approach is to participate.  Product Evolution Task Force should be everyone on this call.

    • Action plan group will be producing notes and process.  Calls this week; will share as soon as there is something I can share.

    • Fixing lack of notes from 1 March meeting as soon as I can.

...