#duraspace IRC Log


IRC Log for 2015-02-04

Timestamps are in GMT/BST.

[0:45] * lyncodev (5ad17e1c@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip. Quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client)
[6:42] -hitchcock.freenode.net- *** Looking up your hostname...
[6:42] -hitchcock.freenode.net- *** Checking Ident
[6:42] -hitchcock.freenode.net- *** Found your hostname
[6:42] -hitchcock.freenode.net- *** No Ident response
[6:42] * DuraLogBot (~PircBot@ec2-107-22-210-74.compute-1.amazonaws.com) has joined #duraspace
[6:42] * Topic is '[Welcome to DuraSpace - This channel is logged - http://irclogs.duraspace.org/]'
[6:42] * Set by cwilper!ad579d86@gateway/web/freenode/ip. on Fri Oct 22 01:19:41 UTC 2010
[9:08] * lyncodev (c24b26fa@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip. has joined #duraspace
[9:25] * lyncodev (c24b26fa@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip. Quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client)
[10:15] * lyncodev (c24b26fa@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip. has joined #duraspace
[12:12] * DuraLogBot (~PircBot@ec2-107-22-210-74.compute-1.amazonaws.com) Quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
[12:12] * Disconnected.
[12:12] -asimov.freenode.net- *** Looking up your hostname...
[12:12] -asimov.freenode.net- *** Checking Ident
[12:12] -asimov.freenode.net- *** Found your hostname
[12:12] -asimov.freenode.net- *** No Ident response
[20:02] -sinisalo.freenode.net- *** Looking up your hostname...
[20:02] -sinisalo.freenode.net- *** Checking Ident
[20:02] -sinisalo.freenode.net- *** Found your hostname
[20:02] -sinisalo.freenode.net- *** No Ident response
[20:02] * DuraLogBot (~PircBot@ec2-107-22-210-74.compute-1.amazonaws.com) has joined #duraspace
[20:02] * Topic is '[Welcome to DuraSpace - This channel is logged - http://irclogs.duraspace.org/]'
[20:02] * Set by cwilper!ad579d86@gateway/web/freenode/ip. on Fri Oct 22 01:19:41 UTC 2010
[20:02] <tdonohue> rebooted DuraLogBot, so now we are back to "logging". Let's restart briefly from the beginning
[20:02] <tdonohue> Hi all, welcome. It's 20UTC, and time for our weekly DSpace Developers Mtg. Today's agenda: https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/DevMtg+2015-02-04
[20:02] <kompewter> [ DevMtg 2015-02-04 - DSpace - DuraSpace Wiki ] - https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/DevMtg+2015-02-04
[20:03] <tdonohue> So, as also mentioned, we are a small group today, but hopefully we have enough active folks even though we are smaller in numbers
[20:04] * hpottinger is throwing rocks at some people on IM
[20:04] <tdonohue> To start with today, I first wanted to send out a reminder about the Open Repositories 2015 proposal deadline. It's THIS FRIDAY (Feb 6).
[20:04] <tdonohue> http://www.or2015.net/
[20:04] <kompewter> [ OPEN REPOSITORIES 2015 | June 8-11, 2015, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA ] - http://www.or2015.net/
[20:04] * mdiggory (~mdiggory@cpe-76-176-128-229.san.res.rr.com) has joined #duraspace
[20:04] <tdonohue> Obviously, it'd be great to have folks submit proposals for OR15 on any/all of the following:
[20:04] <tdonohue> * Cool things you are doing / working on
[20:05] <tdonohue> * Cool things you built or helped build in DSpace 5.0
[20:05] <tdonohue> * DSpace 5.0 features in general, as obviously it'd be great to do some big promotion of this release at OR15
[20:05] * hpottinger already put in a submission, and is helping with another
[20:06] <tdonohue> which brings me to the question, is anyone interested in doing a general talk on "DSpace 5.0 - What's new & exciting"?
[20:07] <tdonohue> I currently plan to put in a proposal for "DSpace Roadmap", which may touch very briefly on 5.0, but likely won't get into great detail on any specific features. So, it'd be nice to either get a general 5.0 talk as well, or have individual talks on specific "big features"
[20:07] <hpottinger> I know somebody really wants to do the ceremonial reading of the changelog, yeah? It's good fun.
[20:08] <hpottinger> I'll do it (again) if no one else wants to, but I don't know why you wouldn't
[20:08] <tdonohue> we do tend to have a talk highlighting the last release, most years. That's the only reason I felt it worth asking about. If no one steps forward now, rest assured the DSpace Interest Group Planning Committee (of which I am a member) may pester one or more of you into it later on ;)
[20:09] <mhwood> Fair enough.
[20:09] <mdiggory> hpottinger that’ll only be fun if its done in latin and they where a hat like the pope.
[20:09] <peterdietz> I'm not going to be at OR15, so I wouldn't want to steal anyone's thunder. Though I'll probably be needing to make some 5.x marketing materials.
[20:09] <hpottinger> sounds to me like mdiggory has some costume ideas, let's give him the job
[20:09] <tdonohue> hpottinger: if you are willing, by all means. It's usually a fun talk and mostly "writes itself"
[20:10] <peterdietz> Merlin and King Arthur discuss asset preservation in DSpace 5
[20:10] <hpottinger> I've done it, and I'm already there for a poster (if it gets accepted) and a panel (if it gets accepted)
[20:11] <hpottinger> adding another session, and I may not survive
[20:11] * kshepherd (~kim@ec2-184-73-177-234.compute-1.amazonaws.com) has joined #duraspace
[20:11] <hpottinger> kshepherd: need an excuse to get to OR15?
[20:11] <kshepherd> hm, maybe. didn't submit anything
[20:11] <tdonohue> So, I guess I'm just wondering who will submit a proposal for a talk on DSpace 5. If no one is going to, I may put in a placeholder with a "speaker to be named later"
[20:11] <hpottinger> kshepherd: want to do the ceremonial reading of the changelog?
[20:12] <kshepherd> heh if i'm there, sure
[20:12] <hpottinger> look, look, we have an actual volunteer!
[20:12] <kshepherd> i thought we could also do some pre-conf canvassing of the dspace community prior to the OR dev challenge
[20:13] <kshepherd> to help get some cool and maybe non-standard DSpace ideas into the mix
[20:13] <hpottinger> +1 dev challenge, I wanna play this year
[20:13] <tdonohue> and commit dcd243 beget cde143 which beget 524daf ;)
[20:13] <kshepherd> it definitely helps dev challenge teams to have a big pool of ideas and dreams from users, other devs, non-devs, etc.
[20:14] <tdonohue> +1 to some cool dev challenge stuff and or pre-canvassing. We do of course have a list of some "ideas" in the "use cases" work, but those may be less "dreams" and more "practical"
[20:15] <tdonohue> https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Use+Cases
[20:15] <kshepherd> tdonohue: heh, i wonder if there's a cool visualisation that could show contributions and contributors. i could look at that if youw ant
[20:15] <kompewter> [ Use Cases - DSpace - DuraSpace Wiki ] - https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Use+Cases
[20:15] <hpottinger> kshepherd: I can help with the abstract for the "what's new with DSpace 5.0" talk
[20:15] <kshepherd> tdonohue: good point re: use cases
[20:16] <tdonohue> so, are hpottinger & kshepherd collaborating on a "What's new with DSpace 5" proposal? Just wanting to ensure we get something in prior to OR deadlines, obviously
[20:16] <kshepherd> i can say yes to that, but i can't guarantee i'll be there
[20:16] <hpottinger> yeah, OK, I'll be the backup
[20:17] <tdonohue> ok, as long a we get the proposal in, I think we can always swap out speakers willy-nilly as needed ;)
[20:17] <kshepherd> i thought deadline was 30 jan, was it extended?
[20:17] <hpottinger> yep, it always is
[20:17] <tdonohue> yep, deadline was extended until this Friday (Feb 6)
[20:17] <kshepherd> (i'm on annual leave unti feb 27, not keeping up with work stuff as much right now)
[20:18] <tdonohue> Also on the topic of OR15... you may (or may not) have noticed that the conference is *shorter* this year. It's just 4 days (M-Th) instead of the usual 5.
[20:18] <hpottinger> kshepherd: I have the copy of the proposal I wrote for the DSpace 4 talk in PEI, as well as Robin Taylor's proposal for the DSpace 3 talk
[20:19] <tdonohue> Because of that, meetings (like our normal OR Committers/Developers Meeting) are being scheduled up against *workshops & tutorials*.
[20:20] <tdonohue> I *will* be putting in a proposal to have an DSpace Committers/Developers/DCAT meeting at OR15...but it likely would directly conflict with workshops & tutorials on the Monday prior to the conference.
[20:21] <tdonohue> I just wanted to make everyone aware of this. It's not ideal, but it's either we work with that possible conflict, or we don't have our yearly face-to-face meeting
[20:22] <tdonohue> any other OR15 topics, thoughts, questions?
[20:22] <kshepherd> /m/me is back
[20:23] <mdiggory> I would recommend the possibility of it being in the evening and involving some libation
[20:23] <kshepherd> maybe we could have committer meeting at a pub after the day events ;)
[20:23] <kshepherd> mdiggory++
[20:23] <mdiggory> kshepherd++
[20:23] * aschweer (~schweer@schweer.its.waikato.ac.nz) has joined #duraspace
[20:24] <tdonohue> haha, well, that is another option. It gives us less time to talk more *formally* though, if we just have a meeting in the evening at a pub
[20:24] <hpottinger> aschweer is, I think, working on a workshop proposal, yes?
[20:24] <hpottinger> ++ less formal speaking
[20:24] <aschweer> hpottinger: um for a loose definition of "working"
[20:24] <tdonohue> The question is, do we want to have a formal Committers Meeting at OR15 (if so, it likely will conflict with workshops), or do we have a less formal "meetup" (over dinner & drinks or similar)?
[20:25] <hpottinger> well, aschweer, the timing of the dev meeting is up for discussion right now
[20:25] <aschweer> hpottinger: I was wondering about the timing; I could propose mine for the DSIG part instead, the CfP for DSIG looks like they'll be ok with various formats
[20:25] <aschweer> yup I saw in the logs, thanks :)
[20:27] <tdonohue> thoughts? Would we rather hold several DSpace workshops/tutorials (in which case, we're all likely "busy" on workshop day) and forgo the formal meeting? Or do you want me to put in a proposal for a couple hour Developers/DCAT meeting?
[20:27] <aschweer> I have wondered about the format of the dev meeting at OR in the past. It feels like it was more "community meets committers" in the past. Not wanting to cut the community out, but I think it would be useful for the committers to talk things through as well. Obviously keeping in mind that not everyone is at OR (I don't know whether I'll be)
[20:27] <aschweer> committers + DCAT sounds useful too
[20:28] <tdonohue> In the past few years, the "Developer Meeting" has morphed into more of a "Developer + Committers + DCAT + anyone who wants to come" meeting/brainstorm session
[20:29] <tdonohue> It often *does* seem useful to get feedback or share "works in progress" amongst members of the Community, and also get DCAT & Committers in the same room.... but, admittedly, with limited time for OR15 this year, we could try something different
[20:30] <tdonohue> (which is why I'm interested in your feedback on whether this OR Developer Meeting is still *useful*, or if we try something new for OR15)
[20:30] <hpottinger> the addition of libations would be nice, but I think we'd miss the projector
[20:30] <mhwood> Lots of tablecloths, though.
[20:31] <tdonohue> if we went for libations & talking over dinner, I expect we'd still get a lot of folks in the same room, but the discussions would obviously break up into smaller groups (which has both advantages and disadvantages)
[20:31] <hpottinger> true, post-it pads on the walls would work. MHwood, is there a venue you'd recommend?
[20:31] <mhwood> The trouble with being from Indy is I actually don't know my own downtown that well. I'll ask around.
[20:33] <aschweer> What's happening with the dev part of OR, wasn't there going to be a new track? Is that a space for sharing work in progress type stuff?
[20:33] <tdonohue> yea, there will be a new dev track at OR.... http://www.or2015.net/developer-track/
[20:33] <kompewter> [ Developer Track at OR2015 | OPEN REPOSITORIES 2015 ] - http://www.or2015.net/developer-track/
[20:34] <tdonohue> It is focused on "sharing" work in progress, etc...much more info there. And I'd HIGHLY encourage you all to submit things to that Dev Track
[20:34] <peterdietz> Longsight had a "dev camp" in Indy in December. We rented a room in the Hyatt Regency. I think renting a whiteboard would be $500/day
[20:34] <aschweer> oooh, I had missed completely that it has a separate deadline
[20:34] <tdonohue> There's also the 24x7 talks, which are short & sweet and also often "works in progress"
[20:35] <tdonohue> Yes, the Dev Track sessions are due *March 13*. So there's much longer to submit Dev Track ideas
[20:35] <kshepherd> sweet
[20:35] * kshepherd has to run off to the supermarket now
[20:35] <kshepherd> bye all
[20:36] <tdonohue> bye, kshepherd...enjoy your shopping
[20:37] <peterdietz> The top floor of Hyatt regency, is circular, and the room actually spins in a circle, thus, over the course of your dinner, you see every angle of the city a few times. (We had a someone with us acrophobia, so no team dining up there)
[20:37] <tdonohue> So, it sounds like we're a little "undecided" on the idea of a formal Developers Meeting at OR15? Or at least that's what I'm gathering from this discussion. I guess I can always ask this same question more broadly on Committers list, DCAT, etc.
[20:38] <tdonohue> We definitely *at least* want a "meetup" at some point. Just not certain on the formal meeting
[20:39] <hpottinger> I agree, it's worthwhile to meet, venue doesn't much matter, but we do need a way to focus on one person talking and then discussions, and probably need a white board
[20:40] <tdonohue> hpottinger: that sounds like a "formal meeting" to me. I don't see how we could do a "one person talking" thing at a pub, without finding funding to rent out a larger room, etc :)
[20:41] <mhwood> And walking around downtown with a whiteboard under one arm is bound to cause comment.
[20:41] <tdonohue> I think if we moved to have a "pub meetup", it'd literally be..."everyone meet up at this location, we'll try to sit near each other, but honestly no guarantees"
[20:41] <mhwood> That sounds about right.
[20:42] <hpottinger> I don't see how that would lead to any business getting done, but, perhaps we don't actually need to conduct any business?
[20:42] <tdonohue> If we want to have a real group discussion, that'd require a formal meeting
[20:43] <tdonohue> Each year, I think we wonder whether there's any "business" and then realize there's more than enough to talk about ;) This year, I suspect the main business will be "Where do we go from here with DSpace?" given we have a Steering Committee, and all that
[20:44] <tdonohue> Speaking of which, this segues into a topic I forgot to add to today's Agenda
[20:44] <hpottinger> I must be insane, why would I sign up for yet another thing, but, thoughts on a live demo of Vagrant-DSpace as part of the OR15 dev track?
[20:44] <mdiggory> tdonohue: I think we certainly need to consider the middle ground between steering and developers, my thoughts are that this is where this meeting might be of some importance
[20:44] <tdonohue> mdiggory: I agree...wassn't implying Steering Group members would be at this meeting, they likely would not
[20:45] <tdonohue> I just meant that Steering Group now has some "ideas" on where they'd like to see DSpace move, and this meeting might be a good opportunity to dig into those further
[20:46] <tdonohue> The topic I neglected to add to today's meeting was just that... The Steering Group had a meeting earlier today. There are now plans in place to develop a *rough draft* RoadMap / Product Plan *prior to* OR15, which will be presented there for Community feedback
[20:46] <aschweer> tdonohue: I agree this would be good to have. But this is sounding like "not at a pub" to me. (Totally agree that a committers' / DCAT pub "session" would be good though.)
[20:46] <mdiggory> Where has the Technical Advisory group lead to in this regard?
[20:46] * tdonohue is realizing this does sound more and more like "not at a pub" now...my brain was slow to get around to all this ;)
[20:48] <tdonohue> The "Technical Advisory Group" and the "Product Planning Group" (brainstormed at OR14, last year) have never been fully formed, and we may actually move forward without those groups, as they may not be necessary.... "Technical Advisory" will be the Committers, and Product Planning will be DCAT + Committers
[20:48] <mhwood> It will be good to know what the SG thinks is important.
[20:48] <tdonohue> The main point that came out of todays meeting (and in past SG meetings) is this:
[20:49] <tdonohue> (1) DSpace really needs a true RoadMap / Product Plan, and we need something quickly so we can start making steps towards implementing the Use Cases brainstormed by DCAT
[20:50] <tdonohue> (2) We were unable to obtain enough funds to hire a full-time Product Manager (like Fedora has, for example), so the SG wants to move forward with a "part time" Consultant in that role in the coming months.
[20:51] <mdiggory> Many of the use cases came from the Technical Advisory group (and a combination of Commiters and DCAT was present)
[20:51] <tdonohue> (3) As of today, it was just decided that James Evans (from Open Repository) will act as that "part time" Consultant (in a Product Manager-like role). He's going to work with DCAT & Committers (and SG) to start to draft up a possible Product Plan for DSpace. The goal is to draft it by mid-April, so that SG can review prior to OR15. Then, at OR15, we'd hopefully have a better "draft" plan to submit for community feedback
[20:52] <tdonohue> So, we likely *do* want to have a formal meeting of DCAT & Committers, simply to discuss whatever "Product Plan" is established by that point, and brainstorm any ways it might need improving/enhancing, etc
[20:53] <mhwood> Whether it can be done...
[20:54] <tdonohue> I fully anticipate that the Product Plan built in time for OR15 will be more "high level". There will need to be some "bringing it down" a few levels and looking at technologies, etc. that we (the Committers) will need to help make happen
[20:54] <mdiggory> I still feel there needs to be a clearer organization around this DCAT+Commiters entity and some transparency on how information/discission making is going back and forth between the Steering group, the Product manager and the community.
[20:54] * lyncodev (5ad17e1c@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip. has joined #duraspace
[20:55] <hpottinger> I think there was a notion that the steering group would "steer" by way of marshaling resources? Is that still the case?
[20:55] <mdiggory> My view is that Duraspace is getting organized / busy, which is a good thing. How will DCAT and the Commiters participate in this seems to be our responsiblity to organize
[20:56] <mdiggory> That where I thought the Technical Advisory group was going to lead.
[20:56] * kshepherd (~kim@ec2-184-73-177-234.compute-1.amazonaws.com) Quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
[20:57] <tdonohue> mdiggory: The reality here is that this decision was just made 1 hour ago :) I suspect there will be some more "organizing" of DCAT & Committer participation coming up... Some of that will be setup when James gets started (and he's already in touch with myself and Bram/Maureen of DCAT). We still have the opportunity to "form" a informal team here of DCAT & Committers both
[20:58] <tdonohue> But, the reality also is *we need to move very fast* in order to hope to have anything ready for OR15
[20:58] <tdonohue> Too large of a group will be too hard to convene quickly enough.
[20:59] <tdonohue> But, I do agree completely that we need to make sure James gets plenty of feedback directly with DCAT & Committers (or even subsets of both), so I'll talk more with him about this
[21:01] <tdonohue> And to get back to hpottinger's point..yea, the Steering Group is merely "steering" here by "asking the tough questions" (e.g. the "why do we have 2 UIs still?" question), and pointing out gaps. They also have their own resources they can "marshal" (i.e. their own developers) to help get things done
[21:01] <mhwood> What, specifically, needs doing by technical people right now? If we just start doing it, we're leading. We just need to make sure that we are doing stuff that is valued, and that the people who value it notice that.
[21:02] <tdonohue> one of the *specific* things we can do, is work on the 2 UI problem (which is exactly why I brought it up). It's a huge elephant in the room, and makes a Product Plan twice as hard to create
[21:03] <tdonohue> IMHO, our having 2 UIs has been a bit of a "roadblock" for some time...it's hard to plan out a long term roadmap when we are split down the middle (in the community & Committers) about which UI to do it with
[21:03] <aschweer> oh, I thought the Product Plan would be more around areas of functionality / use cases, in which case the UIs don't really matter. Quite the contrary, making it clear which functionality is a part of the core thing might help us make good decisions around the UIs.
[21:03] <mhwood> But that's not really a technical decision. We have two good UIs, and several good proposals for more.
[21:04] <hpottinger> OK, so, pub is out, we need a room
[21:04] <mhwood> I think this is why the decision is so hard: it has to be decided on nontechnical issues.
[21:04] <mdiggory> I tend to agree with aschweer in regards to the roadmap.
[21:05] <mhwood> Definitely, decluttering the UI code will help a lot of things.
[21:05] <mdiggory> I tend to agree with tdonohue about our role in clarifying the technical issues, such as the 2 UI issue
[21:05] <mhwood> Getting a good grip on boundaries between presentation and operation will help.
[21:06] <hpottinger> 21UTC
[21:06] <tdonohue> while it is true that a Product Plan doesn't rely on a UI decision, it becomes very difficult to "bring it down a level" *until* UI issue is resolve. So, you were right to point out I mistated things.. The Product Plan and 2 UI problem are not directly dependent on one another
[21:07] <tdonohue> but, we don't really have any other technical decisions to make *until* we have a high-level Product Plan. In the meantime, we *know* we have a 2 UI problem, which we can start to brainstorm a resolution to
[21:07] <tdonohue> (does that make more sense?)
[21:07] <mhwood> List XMLUI, JSPUI, and the newer proposals, roll a D20 and go with that one. :-)
[21:08] * tdonohue is sorry for running long on this meeting...not wanting to cut off this discussion though
[21:09] <aschweer> tdonohue: it does, but it feels like we might make decisions now that then won't work with the product plan. Eg, submission steps and review workflow. These won't work too well with REST IMHO, they might need something like Spring Web Flow. Are they a part of the core deal? How modular / customisable do we want these to be? These are questions I'd like to see answered in the Product Plan.
[21:09] <aschweer> (sorry for not weighing in on the 2 UI discussion earlier, I have a lot on my plate at the moment)
[21:10] <mdiggory> I think the roadmap and the required user stories inform the requirements for the UI going forward
[21:10] <tdonohue> The reason the "Technical Advisory Team" has sorta disappeared (and mdiggory was a member) is that we are faced by a lot of higher level decisions right now. We really need a Product Plan, and then work to bring that down to a technical level
[21:10] <aschweer> mdiggory++
[21:10] <mhwood> I think I disagree. The product plan would say something like "we need to keep the workflow and extend it", and then technical advice is needed on how best to implement that. Which will affect our choice of frameworks.
[21:11] <tdonohue> +1 aschweer & mdiggory - I'm not disagreeing. I'm NOT arguing that we can *decide* on a new UI before a product plan. I'm stating that we can start to decide *we need ONE UI*, and we can begin trying out options (which may or may not "mesh" with the Product Plan)
[21:11] <tdonohue> I think we are in agreement, actually.
[21:11] <aschweer> oh right tdonoue, I hadn't understood it that way :) Yes we are mostly in agreement
[21:12] <mhwood> If we commit to ONE UI, without knowing which one, then what we can do now is start working out how to push the other out into a more separate project. Because we know we won't actually be able to delete one (or both) of the UIs.
[21:12] <tdonohue> The point of the "Brainstorms on a future UI* was to (1) First make sure we all agree that *ONE UI* is the way to go forward, and (2) start to brainstorm options for what *might* be a good fit
[21:12] <tdonohue> https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Brainstorms+on+a+Future+UI
[21:12] <kompewter> [ Brainstorms on a Future UI - DSpace - DuraSpace Wiki ] - https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Brainstorms+on+a+Future+UI
[21:12] <aschweer> I personally don't have much time to try out options, I appreciate the situation may be different for others. So to me it feels like we might waste time trying things out that then won't work with the PRoduct Plan.
[21:13] <mhwood> I think there's been substantial agreement for some time that one UI is the way to go. The disagreement is around which one. :-)
[21:14] <aschweer> I still think that knowing what we're aiming for (=Product Plan) might help us figure out what to go for. At the moment I can't say "yes let's go REST + JS all the way", for example, because I don't know whether REST will be suitable for all use cases
[21:14] <mdiggory> mhwood: say something like "we need to keep the workflow and extend it" is the type of requirements that inform making technology decisions for the UI, if its easier to do REST without workflow then that kinda excludes moving that functionality into REST
[21:14] <aschweer> Depending on use cases, it may need to be REST + something else, and is that 2 UIs again already?
[21:15] <tdonohue> aschweer: yea, the "trying out UI options" may not happen as much prior to OR15, time permitting.... But, we can already start to learn "what folks have used before", and start to gage opinions on various frameworks. I also admit this tends to be a busy time of year for that sort of thing.
[21:15] <hpottinger> I do think we need to beware of the consensus trap, I don't think there is any to be found here, except with a "third way", a new UI, but it will likely take a core group sprinting towards making it to actually get us to a point where we can disucss it as an option.
[21:16] <tdonohue> aschweer: I completely agree with that statement (Product plan leads to "where to go" with a UI). The Brainstorms page is literally meant as a "let's lay all options on the table, and then we'll start to narrow things down" (as the Product Plan comes)
[21:16] <aschweer> hpottinger: I agree. And that's my worry, if someone starts sprinting now before we have the product plan, will the product plan guide things? Or will what's in the sprint override the Product Plan?
[21:16] * tdonohue doesn't think *anyone* is going to start sprinting on a new UI. It's all brainstorms, and even I don't have time to "sprint" on this stuff
[21:17] <mdiggory> I think the product plan is just going to clarify the features of DSpace that are important tot he community. And that is probibly not technology specific.
[21:17] <tdonohue> The reality here is that, while we've *started* brainstorming a new UI, there is unlikely to be any actual movement/development on such anytime before the rough Product Plan (expected in April timeframe)
[21:17] <aschweer> tdonohue: if it's just collecting ideas at this point, I'm not worried. But some of the discussion seems already to have gone towards eliminating some options (maybe I just got that wrong, haven't had much time to follow the discussion), and that feels wrong with the product plan still to come
[21:18] <tdonohue> aschweer: I see it more as "strong opinions" in some areas, but I get your point. I haven't actually removed anything from that table of options, so it's all still "on the table" as possiblities
[21:19] <mdiggory> a sprint may lead some folks down a wrong path, but testing paths is a necessary step in the decision making process.
[21:19] <mhwood> We certainly do need to know what we're expected to do before making detailed plans of how to do it.
[21:19] <mdiggory> tdonohue: are you bringing the 2UI problem to any talks at OR?
[21:19] <tdonohue> mdiggory ++ we definitely need testing of UI options at some point...likely post-Product Plan. I wouldn't want to "jump" to anything new (if that's the decision) without some testing/prototyping
[21:21] <tdonohue> mdiggory: I will be submitting a general "DSpace Roadmap & Planning" discussion/talk for the "DSpace Interest Group" sessions at OR15. It's going to be recommended at 1 hour long, and the speakers will be TBD, as it may include folks talking on this Product Plan, etc. I'd expect that might also be the best place to talk about the 2 UI problem
[21:21] <mhwood> Heh, I just realized something. When we adopted XMLUI, it's kind of like we forked DSpace, but (mostly) the same people are working on both forks.
[21:22] <tdonohue> (so, it's really more of a "placeholder" for a talk-to-be-named later, based on this upcoming Product Plan)
[21:22] <tdonohue> mhwood: yep, it is a bit of a "fork" in some ways
[21:24] * tdonohue realizes we are well "over time" here today. But, I don't want to close this out until there are no further pressing concerns/questions. Anything others?
[21:25] <aschweer> I've got to run, sorry
[21:25] * aschweer (~schweer@schweer.its.waikato.ac.nz) Quit (Quit: leaving)
[21:25] <mdiggory> mhwood: what happened with the xmlui was that a decision was blocked to drop jspui in the process, reminds me of the process where we end up with lots of different window managers in Linux…
[21:26] <mhwood> Yes. The community couldn't reach a consensus, and split. Except that we all still work together.
[21:26] <mdiggory> is having alot of different window managers good for linux? most distributions and forks seem to happen primarily on the topic of window management alone
[21:27] <tdonohue> One last note, I didn't recognize the point about the "consensus trap". Yes, thanks for bringing that up, hpottinger. It may very well be that we'll never achieve a full "consensus" in this area, which actually is OK with me. But, it may mean that we'll essentially "split" the UI support groups into separate committer teams (rather than all in one team)
[21:28] <mhwood> Is lots of window managers good for Linux? It's probably neutral. Is it good for *me*? Well, it means I get to go on using FVWM, so yes.
[21:28] <tdonohue> In any case, it sounds like we *definitely* all want a Developers/DCAT meeting at OR15. I'll get a proposal in for one
[21:28] <hpottinger> yeah, I think the best we can hope for is finding a good way, and bring along as many people as we can
[21:28] <mhwood> Thank you tdonohue.
[21:28] <mdiggory> tdonohue: I think the concensus trap is what got us here in the first place.
[21:29] <mdiggory> thank you tdonohue
[21:29] <mdiggory> :-)
[21:31] <hpottinger> so, anyone know anything about this new dev track at OR?
[21:32] <hpottinger> there seems to be a place to upload a file, but I have no idea what one would upload for a "live demo"
[21:32] <hpottinger> perhaps a promisory note?
[21:34] <hpottinger> I'm guessing one page summary, like a poster or a 24x7
[21:34] <tdonohue> sorry, got pulled away for a moment
[21:35] <tdonohue> hpottinger: I think it's the same sort of one page summary...describe the talk, demo, or whatever
[21:36] <tdonohue> It's a brand new track though, so I don't know that they actually have anything specific "planned" for what to submit. I'd assume adding description of the talk, links to code/demo stuff, etc. would all be very relevant
[21:37] * lyncodev (5ad17e1c@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip. Quit (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client)
[21:38] <hpottinger> tdonohue: I gave DSPR#857 a +1, waiting for one more
[21:38] <kompewter> [ https://github.com/DSpace/DSpace/pull/857 ] - Fix DS-2427 for 5.1 by consolidating problematic schema code into DatabaseUtils... by tdonohue
[21:38] <tdonohue> as it looks like we've wrapped up discussions here, I'll formally "close" out the DevMtg (in case you are still hanging around for that). I'll still be around though, just switching over to #dspace
[21:39] <hpottinger> gotta run, it's snowing
[21:39] * hpottinger (~hpottinge@mu-162188.dhcp.missouri.edu) Quit (Quit: Leaving, later taterz!)
[22:01] * mhwood (mwood@mhw.ulib.iupui.edu) Quit (Remote host closed the connection)
[22:58] * tdonohue (~tdonohue@c-98-215-0-161.hsd1.il.comcast.net) has left #duraspace
[23:17] * lyncodev (5ad17e1c@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip. has joined #duraspace
[23:50] * awoods (~awoods@c-67-165-245-76.hsd1.co.comcast.net) Quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
[23:51] * awoods (~awoods@c-67-165-245-76.hsd1.co.comcast.net) has joined #duraspace

These logs were automatically created by DuraLogBot on irc.freenode.net using the Java IRC LogBot.