Decided that code comments are just highly recommended in tests. They are not required, as sometimes tests are self explanatory (and in Angular code, all tests must "describe" themselves in human terms anyways). When adding comments, they need not be JavaDocs (or TypeDocs), even inline comments are fine. Be aware that code reviewers can request code comments for tests. So, if you want a quick review, you may want to add comments.
Also noted that PRs that involve bug fixes should provide tests to prove the bug is fixed
Should we do a Preview release? That's more of a question for Steering.
Major outstanding features:
Submission and Workflow - Highest priority to complete. Most of the code already exists in PR form (but has integration tests that need to still be created), so it can get early reviews (see above).
4Science feels all the PRs (for both REST and Angular) should be completed by end of Feb.
Code reviews / testing may still take a few weeks, so they should be merged by early to mid March.
Entities - Second highest priority. Most of the code already on the "configurable_entities" branches (this branch exists in REST Contract repo, REST repo and Angular repo). It is immediately reviewable there.
All this code has received reviews from the DSpace 7 Entities Working Group. However, we want to give the DSpace 7 team and general Committers time to review it as well, since there are major changes here.
Tim will let Committers know this code could use immediate attention. However, members of the DSpace 7 team should prioritize Submission & Workflow over reviewing Entities – we will ensure this team has time to review Entities as well.
We should also make sure to also separate out "suggestions for improvement" or bugs (which can be logged and fixed later) versus actual "blockers" (which need to be fixed more immediately). We hope that there's more of the former than the latter.
Timeline is less nailed down. Work on the "configurable_entities" branch is not yet complete (but close). PRs to master do not yet exist. Once PRs exist, we'll want to allow for a minimum of two weeks for review (exact timeline TBD though).
Other discussion items were moved to next week.
Discussion on PR#355 (around usability issues) should move to the PR itself. Art recommends we merge the PR and consider logging the usability issues as a known bug. The way in which the (upcoming) Admin Edit functionality works also could provide a better option for the future. We may want to consider a future PR to make this work more like the (upcoming) Admin Edit functionality. Art will provide more info once Admin Edit PR exists (likely before next meeting).