How to connect: https://notredame.zoom.us/j/94030214208 (link will launch Zoom client – if you do not have Zoom, expand the instructions below)
Time: 9:00am PDT / Noon EDT
Moderator: Jeremy Friesen
Notetaker: James Griffin
Roll call by timezone per following order - ensure notetaker is present (moderator)
folks outside North and South America
folks who were missed or who dialed in during roll call
- Remind everyone to sign in on agenda.
- Welcome all newcomers!
- Agenda (moderator)
- Call for new agenda items (moderator)
- Deprecation message style guide
- Should we make one?
- Passive third-person vs. accountable "we"
- Normalizing location of CONTRIBUTING document (see related PR for discussion) (Jeremy Friesen )
- Samvera help follow-up
- Custom renderer is ignored -- what do I need to look for? https://groups.google.com/g/samvera-tech/c/JZ2q2ZNe73s/m/qc8qiXrqBwAJ?pli=1
- Pull request review
- https://github.com/samvera/hyrax/pull/4158 (Jeremy Friesen) I want to look at the failing specs
- https://github.com/samvera/hyrax/pull/4397 (Jeremy Friesen) I'd like to see if others get these errors locally
- https://github.com/samvera/hyrax/pull/4402 (Lynette Rayle) Move valkyrie create strategy to share specs
- https://github.com/samvera/hyrax/pull/4403 (Lynette Rayle) Fix comments and one test that was testing the wrong thing
- Moderator & notetaker for next time
- After call, this week's notetaker should create the agenda for the next call:
Open template agenda titled "Samvera Tech Call 2020-xx-xx"
- Click on ... in the top right corner, and select copy.
- Popup will open for location. It should contain:
- Space: Samvera
- Parent page: 2020
- Select copy. New page should be created.
- Modify the title to remove "copy of", update it with the next date, add moderator, notetaker, and any carry-over agenda info. Click Publish.
- PR Review
- Review issues:
- PR review coordinator for next time:
- Deprecation Message Style
- Jeremy submitted a PR where a method was deprecated, active voice used, "we will be deprecating"
- Question: Who is "we"?
- Passive voice: "Will be deprecated" is used elsewhere, there is a lack of accountability
- Active voice has more accountability, but perhaps shouldn't be "we"
- Perhaps "Samvera will deprecate..."
- Doesn't a deprecation message already give some indication as to where in the code base the message is originating?
- Yes, usually the line is referenced
- Some feel as if determining whether "we" is used might not that be that important, the deprecation warning itself is the essential factor
- Also, ensuring that the line of code where the deprecation message originates should be in place
- Conclusion: Usage of "We" is inconclusive
- Renaming GitHub repository `master` branches
- Connotations of slavery with the usage of `master`
- Emory is switching to using `main`, Cornell supports this change
- We should be mindful of links to URLs containing branch names in documentation or elsewhere
- There should be a time period for when this is occurring
- We can use this opportunity to then also explain to the community why this change is being introduced
- Emory: Created a separate "main" branch without deleting "master", and fast-forward pushing commits to "main"
- git merge --ff-only
- In the process of issuing pull requests against "main"
- Still in the process of switching to "main" as the default
- Will retain "master" for a time period, just to ensure backwards compatibility
- Samvera should frame the rationale, and then draft a series of action items for the migration plan
- Gemfile Support
- Adopters of Gems and forks use `master` against GitHub projects can break when the `master` branch is specified
- Also, coordinating builds between repositories which explicitly reference to specific commits on `master` or referencing `master` generally can introduce issues
- Renaming the git branch `master` is possible
- But, it might be an easier transition to support two branches for the immediate future
- Specify a date by which to permanently end support for `master`
- Offer a README detailing why adopters should not use `master` any longer
- Nurax Cases
- There are customizations atop of GitHub `master` branches
- This could break automated deployments
- How to determine the new name of the default branch
- When the initial message is sent to the community, no name should be given
- `main` and `trunk` have been proposed
- Perhaps a very short-lived WG could be formed in order to draft a document?
- This has been successful once before
- All attendees agreed that this would be good, Jeremy volunteered to investigate what would be necessary
- The WG, then, would produce the document shared with the community
- Rachel will investigate the impact that these updates will have on Nurax
- samvera-tech Group Question
- Pull Request Review
- Fixing a comment relating to "IDs"
- GitHub has a configurable side-by-side view
- This primarily improved test suites which weren't testing functionality
- Delay on merging
- Restructuring for the usage of Valkyrie shared test suites
- Why was it originally slow before ValkyrieCreateStrategy was shared?
- One can also swap in the Valkyrie metadata_adapter used in test suites
- This was merged
- (Postponing the discussion for the CONTRIBUTION.md until the next call)
- Next Call
- Moderator: Jeremy Friesen
- Notetakers: Tom Johnson
- Meeting adjourned at 09:37 PDT/12:37 EDT