/
CCMWG - 06/18/18

CCMWG - 06/18/18

Jun 18, 2018

Attending

Time:12:00PM PDT/03:00PM EDT - 01:00PM PDT/04:00PM EDT

Zoom: https://princeton.zoom.us/j/397525264

 

Participants

  • @Trey Pendragon  (Princeton University Library)

  • @bess  (Data Curation Experts)

  • @Noah Botimer (University of Michigan Library)

  • @Benjamin Armintor  (Columbia University Libraries)

  • @James Griffin (Princeton University Library)

 

Agenda

Notes

  • Action Item:

    • Provide permissions for other users to edit the Confluence Pages for Samvera

 

Maintenance Issues

  • Which kind of issues should be made

    • Botimer

      • ActiveFedora

        • License is there, Apache 2

        • Copyright statement from 2011 for Stanford and MediaShelf

        • Do we want to continue to update the dates on the copyrights?

        • No proper legal entity to hold the IP

        • One retains copyright to the code itself (not transferred with Apache for foundations)

        • Community-distributed copyright is held by all new code

    • Pendragon

      • Create a ticket with the maintenance label

      • Our responsibility is finished if product owner needs to determine if the license statement is accurate

    • Botimer

      • This group might be expected to resolve licensing questions

    • Pendragon

      • That may be more appropriate for Steering to determine

    • Botimer

      • Is it worth creating an issue in active_fedora?

    • Pendragon

      • Only go as far as asking the product owners if it is okay

    • Armintor

      • Samvera is not an organization which can hold rights

      • Governance WG: Do CLAs have an obligation regarding rights statements?

        • Are the licenses in line with the contributor CLAs?

      • E-mailed Steering

    • Gemnasium

      • Does not exist anymore

      • ActiveFedora has a badge for this service

      • Should we explore GitLab auditing?

      • Create an issue for that?

      • Pendragon

        • Created a ticket to remove it

        • GitHub audits for free (it is no longer necessary)

      • Create an issue to remove it

    • Documentation links to Dive into Hydra

      • Should suffice in place of installation instructions

    • Documentation point 11

      • Contributors...have they all signed the CLAs?

      • Is this WG responsible for doing those checks?

    • Pendragon

      • Contributor list is public

      • Always check the CLA...it's been socially enforced

    • Botimer

      • There is a CLA bot for GitHub

      • Might be at the level of individual repositories

    • Sadler had to leave at 03:17 EDT

    • If someone did not have permission, we should contact that contributor privately

    • We should still check it

  • Discussion on the Channel

    • Pendragon

      • Three partners requirement

      • Putting forward work to keep it working?

      • Three partners are only required to use it

      • Should we change that wording?

        • If so, should we create tickets?

      • Maintenance plan may or may not be our group

      • But the CCMWG involves three partners

    • Botimer

      • We do care about it as a WG

      • Are we using it? More difficult to determine

    • Pendragon

      • Do we want to change the wording on samvera.github.io?

    • Armintor

      • Contributions are required from three or more institutions

      • Just usage alone isn't reasonable

    • Pendragon

      • Five institutions use a Gem

      • One contributes by served on the CCMWG

      • Does that fulfill the requirement?

    • Armintor

      • Support doesn't require code contributions

      • Just consuming downstream...

        • This WG alone isn't enough to support that

      • Opened a ticket addressing this on samvera-labs/maintenance

    • Botimer

      • Project should be around for at least 6 months

      • What does active use mean?

    • Pendragon

      • Confirms that "for at least" (more than) 6 months old

      • What does active use mean?

    • Botimer

      • How do we track whether or not it has been used in the past 6 months

    • Pendragon

      • If it falls out of use, we should deprecate it

    • Action Item: Documentation site Pull Request issued by Botimer

  • Botimer

    • Does not have permission to create labels on the active_fedora GitHub repositories

    • Did sign a CLA

  • Pendragon

    • Ensured that repository permissions issues were resolved for everyone

 

Deprecating Projects

  • om

  • hydra-jetty

  • jetty-wrapper

    • None of these have Product Owners

  • Pendragon

    • Following the documentation

    • One e-mail per project to the community

  • Action Item: Pendragon sends three e-mails

  • Botimer:

    • One e-mail makes more sense for the first deprecation by this WG

 

Projects without Maintenance Plans

  • Sufia and Curation Concerns

    • Have active use in the past 6 months...but no maintenance plans

  • "There has been a shift in community focus" is stated in the README

  • Action Item: Pendragon will send a different e-mail for these discussions

  • Botimer

    • Does it go back to samvera-labs or samvera-deprecated?

    • Consulting firms who use either Sufia or Curation Concerns (e. g. DCE) still have a stake in ensuring that these appear to be maintainable by knowledgable persons

      • Might not be prudent to use the term "deprecated" in these situations

      • Perhaps another more positive term

 

Scheduling Sprints

  • Pendragon will fill out the form and send it to everybody

 

Additional Items

Todo Lists

 

  • Botimer:

    • Some of the outstanding todos can be easily converted to issues for projects

    • But, does not want to provide issue cleaning for the CCMWG

    • Can just as easily start resolving existing issues for maintenance

  • Pendragon:

    • Those new issues should receive the "maintenance" label

    • We are the cleanup crew...

    • Ask the product owner if that would be useful

 

Meeting adjourned at 03:45PM EDT