Page Comparison

• Reflect on the 2.1.0 Release Process

How did it go - what could we do differently next time?

Look at how things fit together - Lynette spent time to write up a process based on documented branching models.

(1) trunk-based development

(2) flow

That branch should be contained and ready to go - so when we cut a big release - the normal flow would be to deploy for QA testing and continue to develop on Master as that's going on. If there's a conflict between flow of QA testing and ensuringgood QA and release and good development - can branch a release branch.

Anything that happens on a long lived branch needs to be back-ported from master

Biggest problems with 2.1 release; uncertainty about numbering (resolved fairly easily)

Amount of resources we had to ask for from specific people isn't sustainable

the Hyrax WG will help with that in the future

Cut another release in a week as Hyrax WG works. Coordinate with SVT and Chris as QA lead (Diaz).

As Hyrax WG spins up - talk with Chris about QA on minor releases. Fairly good sense for what that looks like.

Big Kudos to QA testing (Lynette). And thanks to Lynette!

Refactoring falls into a few camps -

Backward Compatibility Legend:

BC - either no backward compatibility concerns or easy to make backward compatible
BC? - requires analysis to determine backward compatibility impact
BC - either difficult to make backward compatible or requires significant effort to achieve backward compatibility

A Few Key Proposed Refactors

• BC - 2.1.0 created lightweight versions of admin set and collection factories. A few tests were updated. Need to refactor remaining test that use Admin sets and collections to use lightweight factories and then remove heavy factories. (Issue #2940)
• BC - Works could also benefit from a lightweight refactoring.
• BC? - Drying up of code in Collection Views. (Issue #1677)
  
• BC? - Performance improvements around indexing (Issue #1826)
• BC - Make new Edit Collection UI look like Work UI. (Issue #3107)
• BC - Cleanup of participants organization - recorded in permission tempates or ACLs in Fedora. Ideally one place to check that. Should be ACLs. Refactor to get depositor info int ACL. (Issue #2474)
• Additional Potential Refactors: open issues in Hyrax - 21 marked as Refactoring

Some weigh in by responsible parties on priorities. See if there's another category that should be considered.

SVT and Tom bring back to Hyrax WG

• Hyrax Working Group
• Analytics
• Bulk
• Accessibility

Started yesterday. 2 weeks on, 2 weeks off. 3 of those - then reflect on that.

working on smattering of issues. Technical debt. Acessibility. Bugs. Leftover from 2.1.

3 weeks - focus on Accessibility issues raised during audit of 2017.

Holding on Analytics. Julie Allinson in charge of WG for bulk upload/ edit.

Accessibility expertise from teams (3 weeks out) would be welcome.

JR: UX issues - backlog - not yet moved over (left over from 2.0 and 2.1) - should move over to backlog - some could be closed and some moved over. Set up time in next few weeks to do that.

Permissions - Represent permission problems in Hyrax - put it on radar for Roadmap

• How do we want to position Hyrax to meet a variety of repository certification needs?
• FAIR Repositories - http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/13427
• Next Generation Repositories Report:
  
  • https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/working-group-next-generation-repositories/
• Core Trust Seal - https://www.coretrustseal.org/
• ISO 27001 - https://www.oclc.org/en/policies/security.html

Requirements can be specific to repository platform or technology.

Julie shared some docs -

FAIR - difficult to say how we meet the standard.

Do a security audit for Hyrax -allow us to take some action that allow us to meet requirements for things like "personal health" info. Convo at Partners: figure out how a security audit works, then bring back to Partners to have them push it up to Steering to get it paid for.

what is the menu of things they can check the repository for in relation to a security audit?

Would be useful to get a group together to start digging into the certification question. Outcome: create documentation addressing certification related question, point people to documentation as they go for seal.

Julie, SVT and Ryan maybe form a WG to address this issue - open call for folks to participate and get that going by Connect.

Valkyrie and Fedora 5 vis-a-vis the work on Hyrax.

• branch is a bit behind. Get in touch with the folks who did that dev work - current state of affairs and how things might be different on Hyrax and then additional reflection on work that's already been done. Valkyrie still on roadmap and still the future.
• Engaging Hyrax and Valkyrie devs to get that work in place.

Newspapers - (BMcB) - 10's of millions of obejcts to be stored - performance considerations - what would be a good avenue to bring up the way the placement of the objects is in the file system and scaling is in the system. What's the biggest collection in Hyrax?

Starting a thread on Samvera tech Google Group - may spin off a group of people with similar interests. Working on issues independtly, but there's stuff we have in common. Need to get a support group to tackle common issues.

JH: A hydra migrations channel on Slack

BMcB - can you write up your scenario and put it on Google Group and then we'll all keep an eye on it and participate?