...
- Should we color the issues on the board?
- Not necessary to add any more labels to issues on the board
- Labels are per repository..."ready" label is different across respositories
- Importantly, not "ready" for "maintenance", but for other repositories
- Try and pick colors for those three "maintenance" labels
- Johnson: Shall align the colors for the labels maintenance, maintenance-ready, maintenance-in-progress
- Deprecation E-mails
- om, jetty-wrapper, and hydra-jetty sent
- Sufia and CurationConcerns have not been sent
- Further refinement for the draft will be addressed
- Scheduling the Next Sprint
- Doodle Poll was submitted
- Please respond before the start of next week
- Johnson: Since last week's meeting, it seems very likely that the Hyrax WG will run sprints 6 months, July 9th, two weeks on, two weeks off
- 97% certain that July 9th is the starting date, everything else is confirmed
- Expectation for the sprint weeks
- Same time across time zones?
- Amount of effort?
- Coordination/communication?
- Pendragon
- 100% participation in the week
- 50% minimum
- Daily checkin
- Retrospective at the end
- Sprints only last one week
- Johnson
- Sprint planning/backlog grooming?
- Pendragon
- Hoping to begin addressing some of that today
- Johnson
- How should we address communicating with product owners
- Pendragon
- That is yet to be determined
- Unlikely that we're going to be focusing upon a single Gem at a time
- For these cleanup issues
- Should probably pick a number of issues from a number of repositories
- Move to "ready", notify the product owners of the upcoming work
- Should have some sort of communication with all of the product owners
- Provide them with guidance regarding labeling for issues
- Send to product owners directly?
- Pendragon was going to tag them all in
- Instead, samvera-tech, and CC'ing members of the product owners list
- Better than a private e-mail
- Pendragon will send that e-mail
- We don't have a "groomed" column
- Do we want one?
- Should have a column which represents that we looked at it
- Johnson doesn't object to the existing names
- Has had challenges where new issues come in at the top, problematic if an existing order was in place
- Rails releases
- When a new Rails release is supported, this WG has the responsibility of ensuring that Samvera Gems also support this new release
- This should be documented somewhere, or at least reported out to Samvera Partners
- Could add it to the charter for this WG, or could add it to the requirements to be promoted from samvera-labs
- Pendragon: Adding it to the charter for the WG has the lowest impact
- Armintor: When reporting out during the Partners Meeting in Fall: , it should be noted that the CCMWG involved some maintenance tasks requiring the tracking of Rails releases (ensures ensuring that the CI has this addressed)
- Johnson: There is a are similar case cases with tracking Ruby releases
- Issues
- Standardized contact information is beneficial for Gems
- Template for contacting the CCMWG
- Select all of the kind of issues simultaneously, or select all of the issues for the same project?
- It seems valuable for checking projects off of the list?
- Scheduling for the first sprint
- hydra-pcdm and active_fedora
- Added ldp
- First Sprint
- Should announce to the community that the sprint is being undertaken before the work is addressed
- Invite those outside of the WG to contribute
- Meeting adjourned at 15:46 EDT