|
⇤ ← Revision 1 as of 2009-01-07 13:13:34
Size: 3919
Comment:
|
Size: 1274
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 30: | Line 30: |
== 3. 'The Danish Newspapers' == What is needed to be able to put [:De_Danske_Aviser: 'The Danish Newspapers'] into a DOMS? * Content models * Maybe templates. If we use the same pre-ingest framework we used for the yearbooks, we need a different kind of templates... * ABR assessed we are talking less than 1000 objects... * EK, HL, PKO will set up a meeting; maybe this friday; otherwise january Can [:De_Danske_Aviser: 'The Danish Newspapers'] use the (gui-object-manipulation), object-manipulation, bit-storage, file-characterizer web service chain directly, or do we want to build a bulk-ingest module? We decided that since this collection is small, it will work. We can then do some performance tests, and if needed build a mass-ingest module for the next collections. == 4. How Many Systems? == How many systems are we talking about? I think we agreed that we now have 4 different systems: * the mini-DOMS with the yearbook collection (old data model) * mini-DOMS II with [:De_Danske_Aviser: 'The Danish Newspapers'] (no GUI) * testbed + DOMS-GUI for test purposes (no Summa integration, no bit storage) * 'true DOMS' under development == 5. Discussions == * Discussed access-control and licenses. This is however not one of the highest priorities, so we can settle this discussion later. * Discussed the 4 web-services: * gui-object-manipulation: Should this functionality be moved to the GUI? * object-manipulation * bit-storage * file-characterizer[[BR]] Should the 3 last services be combined to 1? I think our lunch-discussion ended up with a no, but the file characterizer should be used by object-manipulation rather than bit-storage! * Generated list of 'maintenance-agreements still to do' on the whiteboard[[BR]] PHOTO TO BE INSERTED[[BR]] and we talked about active bit-preservation... * We discussed how important validation was, and agreed since this is Fedora3 work, it is important! == 6. AOB == * ABR and JRG had a small meeting with JHLJ about setting up a DOMS + DOMS-GUI for test purposes before Christmas. * The expected Open Source license for both DOMS and DOMS-GUI is Apache 2.0. And Open Source should also be on the agenda. * The meeting will be continued tomorrow 2008-12-17. * A short meeting with BJA produced [:Priorities: this priority list] * DAY 2: The meeting 2008-12-17 produced a [:DOMSBetaEstimates: time estimate for the DOMS-beta] * Fedora3 project time (ABR): My (BAM) notes say Fedora for DOMS will be upgraded on Fedora3 project time and the Validator is estimated 14 md, also Fedora3 project time. |
2008-12-17 DOMS Planning Day
0. Who is here?
EK, TSH, JRG, ABR, BAM
Post-meeting minutes: JRG
1. Agenda
For the different parts of the DOMS system that were examined yesterday, we have to look at the ones that are not yet finished enough for a "DOMS-Beta" that could contain 'De Danske Aviser'. These parts we will break down and estimate md-consumption of each.
The goal is to have estimates that will enable us to inform Eva whether or not it will be possible to have "DOMS ready - including De Danske Aviser" by April.
We have now realized that in order to deliver the answer to Eva by Friday, we will have to focus on this only. That unfortunately means postponing the update of risk analysis + stakeholder analysis to January.
2. DOMS Art
We examine the DOMS-parts that would be necessary to build a DOMS-Beta good enough for hosting De Danske Aviser. These are the parts with bold-faced percentages in the first table on [:DOMSBetaEstimates: this page]. As each part was examined, we made estimates on the whiteboard - pictures of whiteboards were taken:
These numbers are also summarized on the first part of [:DOMSBetaEstimates: this page].