-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Major Arctos release packaging #5331
Comments
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
Discussed at Arctos Lunch today. Based upon notes in the AWG meeting last week, we feel it is time for @dustymc to write up his plan for implementation for review and communication prior to any development. |
Here's a draft, I'll copy it over to arctos-dev when we get a little closer to the June 1 whatever-that-was-supposed-to-be that was specified at the last Issues Meeting. re: https://github.com/ArctosDB/internal/issues/258 - I'm assuming all of our meetings somehow add up to sufficient agreement to consider eventually posting this in arctos-dev, I'm still not at all clear what happens after that. Advise on any aspect of that, for this and/or in general, would be greatly appreciated.
|
This is my understanding of our discussions, and I support moving forward. |
Agreed |
Status
Discussed with AWG there are significant efficiencies in packaging a bunch of requests that will change the bulkloader up with the bulkloader change issue itself. This issue will serve as a way to link them, hopefully keeping me from getting lost and ultimately keeping me from rewriting code and then needing to immediately rewrite it again. No information should exist solely in this Issue, it is just a link. Anything that can be resolved and will change the structure of the bulkloader should be linked here. Anything that will change the structure of the bulkloader and cannot be resolved in a reasonable time will (barring significant developments, dedicated funding, fundamental changes in how we see the world, etc.) be delayed for ~5 years.
I'm going active to keep this on my radar, but some things (eg specific shape of the future bulkloader) still need discussed. At this time I don't believe there is any hard/timebomb (eg 'something will die unless...') timeline for proceeding; this can take as long as is needed, but lots of users are waiting on these things so there is a sense of urgency.
Bundled Issues:
REMOVED
Feature Request - more data entry/bulkloader columns #5193 - Feature Request - more data entry/bulkloader columns<!--- that's deadFeature Request - flatten collection objects #4707 - Feature Request - flatten collection objects- I'm removing this, I don't think it's sufficiently ironed out, particularly in light of recent observation/part/media discussionsUNRESOLVED: Catalog record (aka Specimen) Event and the Georeference Bot #6170 - refactor locality?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: