Samvera Tech Call 2018-03-07
How to connect: https://psu.zoom.us/j/613720745 (link will launch Zoom client – if you do not have Zoom, expand the instructions below)
Time: 9:00am PDT / Noon EDT
Moderator: @Steve Van Tuyl
Notetaker: @James Griffin
Attendees:
@Steve Van Tuyl (oregon state uni)
@Michael Joseph Giarlo (Stanford)
@Glen Horton (Deactivated) (Cincinnati)
@Jim Coble (Duke)
@tamsin woo (DCE)
@James Griffin (Princeton University)
@Justin Gondron (Notre Dame)
@Lynette Rayle (Cornell)
@LaRita Robinson (Notre Dame)
@Chris Colvard (Deactivated) (Indiana University)
@Collin Brittle (Emory)
@Jennifer Lindner (DCE)
@Chris Diaz (Northwestern University)
@Andrew Myers (WGBH)
Agenda
Roll call by timezone per following order - ensure notetaker is present (moderator)
folks outside North and South America
Eastern timezone
Central timezone
Mountain timezone
Pacific timezone
folks who were missed or who dialed in during roll call
Welcome all newcomers!
Agenda (moderator)
Call for new agenda items (moderator)
Information gathering & discussion for feature specs refactor (@LaRita Robinson)
I created some starting notes and questions to begin the thought process
Link to the notes page is on this issue: https://github.com/samvera/hyrax/issues/2738
Hyrax 2.1 Release Update (@Steve Van Tuyl et al.):
15 open blocking issues: https://github.com/samvera/hyrax/projects/4
QA testing will finish up this week
Hyrax 2.0-stable support? (@tamsin woo)
The build has been broken due to bad dependencies whose fixes haven't been backported.
This blocks bug fixes to 2.0-stable
What is the support timeline for 2.0-stable?
Notetaker and moderator for next time
Notes:
Moderate:
After call, this week's notetaker should create the agenda for the next call.
If desired, stay after the call to assist in grooming PR backlog
Notes
Information Gathering and Feature Specs
Robinson
Working with collection sprints
Document (rather than refactor) for feature specs
Pull them out into a separate route
Linked to Documentation WG
Created an issue in response to these needs
Easier to publish a page outlining the feature spec. refactoring proposal
Collaborated with Giarlo and Rayle
Rayle
Basic proposal is that the feature tests woiuld be extracted out of main test suite
Own run in CI, run weekly or monthly
Wouldn't block builds for each Pull Request
The proposal details this approach
Hyrax 2.1 Release Update
Van Tuyl
First round of QA testing will finish this week
Diaz
Tests in script have been executed on at least one browser and on O/S
Continuing to work through this process later today
Aim for a beta release by next week
Van Tuyl
14 blocking issues to the release exist
Call for collaboration on resolving these issues
Rayle
8 are being actively resolved
Van Tuyl
If you've done work on an issue related to this project, you might be contacted
Any questions?
Robinson
Files that a Work contains when Work is public but the Files are private
Blocks the file name (changed to "File"), but still renders that the file is there
Thumbnail is also hidden, but is rendered in IIIF Viewer
Clicking on the link directs to an "Unauthorized" page
Is that the desired behavior?
Not a bug from the Collections Extensions Sprint
Rayle
Was it intentional to render those private Files to unauthenticated users?
Robinson
Can extend a SearchBuilder to filter by access controls
Should this be undertaken?
Van Tuyl
Interested in contacting the Repository Managers IG
Rayle
Should also contact the Tech. List (samvera-tech)
Two use cases
Shouldn't render the files at all
Perhaps permit configuration to render or hide these Files?
Hyrax 2.0 Stable Support
Johnson
Two weeks, the 2.0 stable build has been broken
5 individual dependency shifts caused some problem
SimpleForm breaks, for example
Fixes were not backported
Johnson has been addressing technical debt in order to ensure that 2.0 stable continues to be stable when these updates are applied
How best to address this collectively?
https://github.com/samvera/hyrax/pull/2765
Was merged this morning by Colvard
2.0 is now, once again, stable
What commitment do we have to stable releases?
Van Tuyl
Has the community had a policy or standard around this?
If not, what does everyone see as the best practices
Colvard
No established practices
Adopters are expected to undertake the backporting
Certain institutions might want to stay with 2.0 build given the issues involved in supporting dependency updates
Giarlo
Demand for maintenance on existing builds has far exceeded the resources available to undertake this work
Johnson
Many of the solutions required more time to sort through the commit history
Ideally, this time could be reduced significantly through improving reviewing of commits
Lindner
Code Stability WG is attempting to address these types of problems
Beyond simply regression tests, how can one diagnose a particular problem
Myers
Might this be related to Gemspecs with too loosely-versioned Gem dependencies
Johnson
No, for example, SimpleForm had a bugfix which broke hydra-forms functionality
Myers
But, when moving to a stable release, if a Gemspec versions were tighter, perhaps these problems could be mitigated
Not advocating that every Gem be pinned down for a patch release, but this should be addressed for a stable release
Rayle
Addressing changes in dependencies by pinning releases can be done
But more broadly, labeling which commits/pull requests resolve specific bugs might resolve this more effectively
Gondron
Perhaps could research which releases are affected by a given bug before one starts to resolve the bug
Rayle
That's ideal, but requires a system in place to support back-releases
Requiring one to analyze other releases before resolving a bug might further reduce the number of potential contributors
Giarlo
Governance WG has released recommendations around how this could be better organized
Resourcing
Finding adequate resourcing is essential
Forming a new WG to develop a model for better resourcing (particularly for addressing maintenance)
Invitation for others to become involved
Colvard
Feedback for the findings of the Governance WG is due today
Van Tuyl
Is there a more immediate need to deal with backporting issues before process is defined
Johnson
It could be fine right now
Triaging before a bug is resolved sounds fine
Finding which Hyrax versions are supported, and which features are being backported
If you are doing code review, you might be looking for this type of difference
Answering that for supported Hyrax releases would be an improvement
Van Tuyl
Added this topic to the next Hyrax Roadmap Advisory IG meeting
Any other issues can come to the tech. call as they arise
Moderator:
Lindner
Notetaker:
Colvard
(Hyrax Pull Request Grooming Follows)