- 1 Agenda
- 2 Notes
|TC conference call - 23 February 2016|
|Title||TC conference call|
- General progress on GitHub and discussions...
- seqdb - progress update
- dw-collections-ui - Carl makes progress on the Collections Manager UI
- dw-dmail - dmail runs since a couple of weeks and works well
- dw-classifications - progress since last meeting
- dw-cco - no progress since last meeting - discuss next steps and mtg for Complex Collections Object (the POC)
- Suggested Release Guidelines - discussion
- Referential Integrity Use Case - update
General progress on GitHub and discussions. Some nice progress being made.
- Satpal reported on the testing and feedback by their genotyping team. This is leading to new fields being included.
- They will now share the test files with Ingimar for more testing to be carried out.
- Ingimar and team are getting ready to roll out the new SeqDBcomponent and are meeting with the IT dept to set it up on a server using docker scripts.
- The docker could go into the DINA repo but discussions on release guidelines and bundling need to take place first.
Collections Manager UI
- Carl has been making good progress on the web based UI.
- First test deploy system made, based on front end implemented in similar stack as Estonian team, Ember.
- Back end REST based Specify version 0.
- beta.dina-web.net hosts the test version.
- QA testing still to be done.
- Good responses so far, eg autocomplete.
- More optimisations could be made but also looking at including more data to see at what scale problems come up.
- Sample data provided by Specify is being used in the beta version at the moment and this needs to be built up.
DINA Web Classifications Component
- Not so much progress on this over the last few weeks
- Importing taxonomic data in csv format.
- Kessy uploaded a python script for a csv import this morning (into GitHub?)
DINA web complex Collections Object package
- ACTION POINT: Ingimar to set up meeting with James and Paul to discuss the next steps.
- No progress to report since last meeting.
- Release guidelines have been sent round by Markus for people to comment on.
- Recommendations should potentially include:
- Releases should be bundled in a package so that they can be absorbed into the DINA system.
- If you don’t have an existing build system, then use TRAVIS for builds which take under 15 minutes (TRAVIS has a limit of 15 minutes after which it shuts down) when a release is made, inform DINA who can then run the QA tools to check accessibility and security.
Additional discussion revolved around:
- Semantic versioning being is included, eg major, minor, patch number etc
- Manual tagging to execute the release deploy – you can ask TRAVEL to deploy a release, can it tag a release in GitHub?
- What will be compulsory and what will be recommended – ie building and tagging should be guidelines but where artefacts are stored should be compulsory?
- Release artefacts should be stored as GitHub releases?
- No-one had any objections to the guidelines, so they could potentially now be adopted. At present, they will just be guidelines and people will not be forced to comply.
- ACTION POINT: all partners need to review the release guidelines and feed back for a decision to be made at the next meeting.
Referential Integrity Use Case
Not much to report on this at this meeting. Steps to scale up being taken.
Any Other Business (AOB)
Discussion about status of Roadmap
- Has the roadmap been agreed between partners?
- Overview of progress on various modules
- List of different integration projects (many have happened)
- Group redmine issue tracking system & document store
ACTION POINT: Roadmap needs to be clarified to some extent before the next meeting and then it should be on the agenda for the next meeting so that we are in a better position for the Berlin meeting in June.
Next TC call 15. March 2016, 13.00 UCT