Empathy List Archives

CH

Chris Hoffman

Thu, Nov 14, 2013 5:50 PM

Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,
Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.
Manager of Informatics Services
IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley
chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu
510-642-9643

Hello CollectionSpace community, I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums. Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work. For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along these lines? I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame? Regards, Chris Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. Manager of Informatics Services IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu 510-642-9643

JM

Jesse Martinez

Thu, Nov 14, 2013 6:46 PM

Hi Chris,

It is exciting to know that the CollectionSpace team is looking to adopt
community driven extensions into the core project. And I am happy to
announce that I have a number of extensions ready for contribution. As you
mentioned, Condition Check was contributed to the core development team (as
was the Work Authority too) a few months back. And I too have an Exhibition
authority that was developed for a client and is ready for contribution
review. Work the same client also produced a Valuation Control procedure, a
Presentation procedure and a Variable Media extension to CollectionObject.
All of which were developed for the v3.X branch and have recently been
copied over to work on v4.0 core with a good amount of testing.

Please see the following repos for the code I can contribute (replace
"application" in the URL with "services" and "ui" to see those repos as
well).
https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/domain-variablemedia
https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-exhibition
https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-presentation
https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-valuationcontrol

Thanks,

Jesse

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Chris Hoffman chris_h@berkeley.eduwrote:

Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that
Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We
talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building
on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations
they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition
tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley
are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition
Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it
to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a
few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something
more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already
along these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work
together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace
where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and
OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,
Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.
Manager of Informatics Services
IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley
chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu
510-642-9643

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org

http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

Hi Chris, It is exciting to know that the CollectionSpace team is looking to adopt community driven extensions into the core project. And I am happy to announce that I have a number of extensions ready for contribution. As you mentioned, Condition Check was contributed to the core development team (as was the Work Authority too) a few months back. And I too have an Exhibition authority that was developed for a client and is ready for contribution review. Work the same client also produced a Valuation Control procedure, a Presentation procedure and a Variable Media extension to CollectionObject. All of which were developed for the v3.X branch and have recently been copied over to work on v4.0 core with a good amount of testing. Please see the following repos for the code I can contribute (replace "application" in the URL with "services" and "ui" to see those repos as well). https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/domain-variablemedia https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-exhibition https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-presentation https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-valuationcontrol Thanks, - Jesse On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Chris Hoffman <chris_h@berkeley.edu>wrote: > Hello CollectionSpace community, > > I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that > Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We > talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building > on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations > they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition > tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley > are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums. > > Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition > Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it > to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work. > > For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a > few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something > more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already > along these lines? > > I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work > together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace > where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and > OMCA in the February through June time frame? > > Regards, > Chris > > Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. > Manager of Informatics Services > IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley > chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu > 510-642-9643 > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org > >

CH

Chris Hoffman

Thu, Nov 14, 2013 6:55 PM

Hi Jesse,

Thanks for this great information! I guess I should make clear that I'm speaking as a member of the UC Berkeley deployment team, not the CollectionSpace core project. I think we as the implementers and customers of CollectionSpace do need to push on the core project to find ways to make sure these contributions can happen. The museums on campus here have made it clear that they don't think CollectionSpace is "done".

Thanks also for the pointers to your existing procedures for the Walker. Did I understand correctly that these will work in a CSpace 4.0 system? If so, that's fantastic news. Is Condition Check also v4.0-ready?

Do you think Walker would be willing to let you share screenshots for these?

Cheers!
Chris

On Nov 14, 2013, at 10:46 AM, Jesse Martinez wrote:

Hi Chris,

It is exciting to know that the CollectionSpace team is looking to adopt community driven extensions into the core project. And I am happy to announce that I have a number of extensions ready for contribution. As you mentioned, Condition Check was contributed to the core development team (as was the Work Authority too) a few months back. And I too have an Exhibition authority that was developed for a client and is ready for contribution review. Work the same client also produced a Valuation Control procedure, a Presentation procedure and a Variable Media extension to CollectionObject. All of which were developed for the v3.X branch and have recently been copied over to work on v4.0 core with a good amount of testing.

Please see the following repos for the code I can contribute (replace "application" in the URL with "services" and "ui" to see those repos as well).
https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/domain-variablemedia
https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-exhibition
https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-presentation
https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-valuationcontrol

Thanks,

Jesse

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Chris Hoffman chris_h@berkeley.edu wrote:
Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,
Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.
Manager of Informatics Services
IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley
chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu
510-642-9643

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

Hi Jesse, Thanks for this great information! I guess I should make clear that I'm speaking as a member of the UC Berkeley deployment team, not the CollectionSpace core project. I think we as the implementers and customers of CollectionSpace do need to push on the core project to find ways to make sure these contributions can happen. The museums on campus here have made it clear that they don't think CollectionSpace is "done". Thanks also for the pointers to your existing procedures for the Walker. Did I understand correctly that these will work in a CSpace 4.0 system? If so, that's fantastic news. Is Condition Check also v4.0-ready? Do you think Walker would be willing to let you share screenshots for these? Cheers! Chris On Nov 14, 2013, at 10:46 AM, Jesse Martinez wrote: > Hi Chris, > > It is exciting to know that the CollectionSpace team is looking to adopt community driven extensions into the core project. And I am happy to announce that I have a number of extensions ready for contribution. As you mentioned, Condition Check was contributed to the core development team (as was the Work Authority too) a few months back. And I too have an Exhibition authority that was developed for a client and is ready for contribution review. Work the same client also produced a Valuation Control procedure, a Presentation procedure and a Variable Media extension to CollectionObject. All of which were developed for the v3.X branch and have recently been copied over to work on v4.0 core with a good amount of testing. > > Please see the following repos for the code I can contribute (replace "application" in the URL with "services" and "ui" to see those repos as well). > https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/domain-variablemedia > https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-exhibition > https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-presentation > https://github.com/walkerart/application/tree/procedure-valuationcontrol > > Thanks, > > - Jesse > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Chris Hoffman <chris_h@berkeley.edu> wrote: > Hello CollectionSpace community, > > I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums. > > Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work. > > For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along these lines? > > I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame? > > Regards, > Chris > > Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. > Manager of Informatics Services > IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley > chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu > 510-642-9643 > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org > >

CP

Christopher Pott

Mon, Nov 18, 2013 1:47 PM

Hi Chris,

The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this may fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse's which you may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We've already planned to make some resources available for this work and we'd be able to extend this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we'll be working on this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area.

As far as conservation data is concerned, we'll be focusing on how we will link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace (under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014 February-June timeframe.

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we'd like to upgrade to 4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

Regards,
Chris

IT Developer
Statens Museum for Kunst

Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af Chris Hoffman
Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51
Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List
Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition Check/Conservation?

Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,
Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.
Manager of Informatics Services
IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley
chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu mailto:chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu
510-642-9643

Hi Chris, The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this may fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse's which you may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We've already planned to make some resources available for this work and we'd be able to extend this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we'll be working on this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area. As far as conservation data is concerned, we'll be focusing on how we will link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace (under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014 February-June timeframe. BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we'd like to upgrade to 4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? Regards, Chris IT Developer Statens Museum for Kunst ________________________________ Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af Chris Hoffman Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51 Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition Check/Conservation? Hello CollectionSpace community, I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums. Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work. For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along these lines? I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame? Regards, Chris Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. Manager of Informatics Services IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu<mailto:chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu> 510-642-9643

AR

Aron Roberts

Mon, Nov 18, 2013 5:26 PM

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

I suspect that was a very conservative estimate, and that we might be
able to get a new procedure integrated in some fraction of that time.
The hardest part - and this could literally take the bulk of that time

is getting the schema (and any expectations around workflow or other
subtleties) worked out, especially if there are multiple, disparate
community contributions. The actual coding and testing isn't that
time consuming.

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott
Christopher.Pott@smk.dk wrote:

Hi Chris,

The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition
Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this may
fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself
rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse’s which you
may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We’ve already planned
to make some resources available for this work and we’d be able to extend
this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be working on
this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and
discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area.

As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we will
link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace
(under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014
February-June timeframe.

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one
procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with
a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the
next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

Regards,

Chris

IT Developer

Statens Museum for Kunst

Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af Chris
Hoffman
Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51
Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List
Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition
Check/Conservation?

Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that
Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We
talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building
on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations
they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition
tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are
also eager to make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition
Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it
to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few
fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more
comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along
these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work
together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace
where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and
OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,

Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.

Manager of Informatics Services

IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley

chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu

510-642-9643

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

> BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? I suspect that was a very conservative estimate, and that we might be able to get a new procedure integrated in some fraction of that time. The hardest part - and this could literally take the bulk of that time - is getting the schema (and any expectations around workflow or other subtleties) worked out, especially if there are multiple, disparate community contributions. The actual coding and testing isn't *that* time consuming. On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott <Christopher.Pott@smk.dk> wrote: > Hi Chris, > > > > The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition > Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this may > fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself > rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse’s which you > may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We’ve already planned > to make some resources available for this work and we’d be able to extend > this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be working on > this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and > discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area. > > > > As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we will > link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace > (under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014 > February-June timeframe. > > > > BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one > procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with > a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the > next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? > > > > Regards, > > Chris > > > > IT Developer > > Statens Museum for Kunst > > ________________________________ > > Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af Chris > Hoffman > Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51 > Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List > Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition > Check/Conservation? > > > > Hello CollectionSpace community, > > > > I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that > Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We > talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building > on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations > they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition > tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are > also eager to make these procedures available to our museums. > > > > Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition > Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it > to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work. > > > > For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few > fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more > comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along > these lines? > > > > I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work > together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace > where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and > OMCA in the February through June time frame? > > > > Regards, > > Chris > > > > Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. > > Manager of Informatics Services > > IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley > > chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu > > 510-642-9643 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org >

JM

Jesse Martinez

Mon, Nov 18, 2013 5:44 PM

Some recent work of mine for the Walker involved upgrading from v3.3 to
v4.0. Overall, this work took roughly a week and included making sure
existing schema extensions matched new app layer syntax (make sure tags and
attributes match/exist) and porting over new procedures. Porting over the
new procedures consumed the bulk of the week-long time as this involved a
small learning curve as how the app layer controls the configuration. And a
good amount of testing.

Ray shared to the list his workflow on upgrading a UCB client to v4.0 and I
recommend looking at his work. I believe it involved merging v4 onto his
branch and working out the differences/conflicts. I based my upgrade
workflow on Ray's but instead of merging code bases I started from a fresh
v4 branch and added my code changes piecemeal. It was a lot slower but I
was able to see piece-by-piece how things had changed.

Previous discussion w/Ray's workflow:
http://lists.collectionspace.org/pipermail/talk_lists.collectionspace.org/2013-October/001595.html

Jesse

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Aron Roberts aronroberts@gmail.comwrote:

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one

procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0
(with a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within
the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

I suspect that was a very conservative estimate, and that we might be
able to get a new procedure integrated in some fraction of that time.
The hardest part - and this could literally take the bulk of that time

is getting the schema (and any expectations around workflow or other
subtleties) worked out, especially if there are multiple, disparate
community contributions. The actual coding and testing isn't that
time consuming.

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott
Christopher.Pott@smk.dk wrote:

Hi Chris,

The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition
Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this

may

fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself
rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse’s which

you

may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We’ve already

planned

to make some resources available for this work and we’d be able to extend
this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be

working on

this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and
discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area.

As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we

will

link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace
(under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014
February-June timeframe.

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one
procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0

(with

a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the
next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

Regards,

Chris

IT Developer

Statens Museum for Kunst

Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af

Chris

Hoffman
Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51
Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List
Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition
Check/Conservation?

Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that
Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We
talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been

building

on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations
they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition
tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley

are

also eager to make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition
Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update

it

to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a

few

fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more
comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already

along

these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work
together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace
where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley

and

OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,

Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.

Manager of Informatics Services

IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley

chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu

510-642-9643

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org

http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org

http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

Some recent work of mine for the Walker involved upgrading from v3.3 to v4.0. Overall, this work took roughly a week and included making sure existing schema extensions matched new app layer syntax (make sure tags and attributes match/exist) and porting over new procedures. Porting over the new procedures consumed the bulk of the week-long time as this involved a small learning curve as how the app layer controls the configuration. And a good amount of testing. Ray shared to the list his workflow on upgrading a UCB client to v4.0 and I recommend looking at his work. I believe it involved merging v4 onto his branch and working out the differences/conflicts. I based my upgrade workflow on Ray's but instead of merging code bases I started from a fresh v4 branch and added my code changes piecemeal. It was a lot slower but I was able to see piece-by-piece how things had changed. Previous discussion w/Ray's workflow: http://lists.collectionspace.org/pipermail/talk_lists.collectionspace.org/2013-October/001595.html - Jesse On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Aron Roberts <aronroberts@gmail.com>wrote: > > BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one > procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 > (with a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within > the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? > > I suspect that was a very conservative estimate, and that we might be > able to get a new procedure integrated in some fraction of that time. > The hardest part - and this could literally take the bulk of that time > - is getting the schema (and any expectations around workflow or other > subtleties) worked out, especially if there are multiple, disparate > community contributions. The actual coding and testing isn't *that* > time consuming. > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott > <Christopher.Pott@smk.dk> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > > > The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition > > Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this > may > > fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself > > rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse’s which > you > > may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We’ve already > planned > > to make some resources available for this work and we’d be able to extend > > this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be > working on > > this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and > > discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area. > > > > > > > > As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we > will > > link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace > > (under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014 > > February-June timeframe. > > > > > > > > BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one > > procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 > (with > > a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the > > next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > IT Developer > > > > Statens Museum for Kunst > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af > Chris > > Hoffman > > Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51 > > Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List > > Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition > > Check/Conservation? > > > > > > > > Hello CollectionSpace community, > > > > > > > > I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that > > Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We > > talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been > building > > on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations > > they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition > > tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley > are > > also eager to make these procedures available to our museums. > > > > > > > > Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition > > Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update > it > > to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work. > > > > > > > > For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a > few > > fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more > > comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already > along > > these lines? > > > > > > > > I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work > > together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace > > where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley > and > > OMCA in the February through June time frame? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. > > > > Manager of Informatics Services > > > > IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley > > > > chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu > > > > 510-642-9643 > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk mailing list > > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > > > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org >

AR

Aron Roberts

Mon, Nov 18, 2013 6:05 PM

Thanks, Jesse!

I'd missed some of what you were saying, Chris. If we have an
existing procedure (say, in a community contribution) using version
3.x, I concur with Jesse's (and Ray's) experiences that this should
take considerably less time than two weeks to update that to work with
version 4.x: although I haven't yet done this, it seems likely that it
could take anywhere from 2 days to one week, just off the top of my
head, across all the layers, depending on the quality of the
contribution. (Note that we're discussing full-time work, I believe;
if someone only has part-time to work on it, it could take longer in
calendar time.)

If any work needs to be done at the schema level, or there are
expectations around how this procedure will be integrated with the
rest of the system that go beyond supporting basic
create/read/update/delete/search/list operations, that could take
longer.

Again,

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Jesse Martinez mjesse@gmail.com wrote:

Some recent work of mine for the Walker involved upgrading from v3.3 to
v4.0. Overall, this work took roughly a week and included making sure
existing schema extensions matched new app layer syntax (make sure tags and
attributes match/exist) and porting over new procedures. Porting over the
new procedures consumed the bulk of the week-long time as this involved a
small learning curve as how the app layer controls the configuration. And a
good amount of testing.

Ray shared to the list his workflow on upgrading a UCB client to v4.0 and I
recommend looking at his work. I believe it involved merging v4 onto his
branch and working out the differences/conflicts. I based my upgrade
workflow on Ray's but instead of merging code bases I started from a fresh
v4 branch and added my code changes piecemeal. It was a lot slower but I was
able to see piece-by-piece how things had changed.

Previous discussion w/Ray's workflow:
http://lists.collectionspace.org/pipermail/talk_lists.collectionspace.org/2013-October/001595.html

Jesse

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Aron Roberts aronroberts@gmail.com
wrote:

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one
procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with
a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the
next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

I suspect that was a very conservative estimate, and that we might be
able to get a new procedure integrated in some fraction of that time.
The hardest part - and this could literally take the bulk of that time

is getting the schema (and any expectations around workflow or other
subtleties) worked out, especially if there are multiple, disparate
community contributions. The actual coding and testing isn't that
time consuming.

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott
Christopher.Pott@smk.dk wrote:

Hi Chris,

The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition
Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this
may
fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself
rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse’s which
you
may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We’ve already
planned
to make some resources available for this work and we’d be able to
extend
this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be
working on
this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and
discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area.

As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we
will
link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace
(under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014
February-June timeframe.

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one
procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0
(with
a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within
the
next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

Regards,

Chris

IT Developer

Statens Museum for Kunst

Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af
Chris
Hoffman
Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51
Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List
Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition
Check/Conservation?

Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that
Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We
talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been
building
on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations
they would probably want to include. They need procedures for
Exhibition
tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley
are
also eager to make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition
Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update
it
to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a
few
fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more
comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already
along
these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work
together to get some of these procedures into the core of
CollectionSpace
where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley
and
OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,

Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.

Manager of Informatics Services

IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley

chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu

510-642-9643

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org

http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org

http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

Thanks, Jesse! I'd missed some of what you were saying, Chris. If we have an existing procedure (say, in a community contribution) using version 3.x, I concur with Jesse's (and Ray's) experiences that this should take considerably less time than two weeks to update that to work with version 4.x: although I haven't yet done this, it seems likely that it could take anywhere from 2 days to one week, just off the top of my head, across all the layers, depending on the quality of the contribution. (Note that we're discussing full-time work, I believe; if someone only has part-time to work on it, it could take longer in calendar time.) If any work needs to be done at the schema level, or there are expectations around how this procedure will be integrated with the rest of the system that go beyond supporting basic create/read/update/delete/search/list operations, that could take longer. Again, On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Jesse Martinez <mjesse@gmail.com> wrote: > Some recent work of mine for the Walker involved upgrading from v3.3 to > v4.0. Overall, this work took roughly a week and included making sure > existing schema extensions matched new app layer syntax (make sure tags and > attributes match/exist) and porting over new procedures. Porting over the > new procedures consumed the bulk of the week-long time as this involved a > small learning curve as how the app layer controls the configuration. And a > good amount of testing. > > Ray shared to the list his workflow on upgrading a UCB client to v4.0 and I > recommend looking at his work. I believe it involved merging v4 onto his > branch and working out the differences/conflicts. I based my upgrade > workflow on Ray's but instead of merging code bases I started from a fresh > v4 branch and added my code changes piecemeal. It was a lot slower but I was > able to see piece-by-piece how things had changed. > > Previous discussion w/Ray's workflow: > http://lists.collectionspace.org/pipermail/talk_lists.collectionspace.org/2013-October/001595.html > > - Jesse > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Aron Roberts <aronroberts@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> > BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one >> > procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with >> > a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the >> > next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? >> >> I suspect that was a very conservative estimate, and that we might be >> able to get a new procedure integrated in some fraction of that time. >> The hardest part - and this could literally take the bulk of that time >> - is getting the schema (and any expectations around workflow or other >> subtleties) worked out, especially if there are multiple, disparate >> community contributions. The actual coding and testing isn't *that* >> time consuming. >> >> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott >> <Christopher.Pott@smk.dk> wrote: >> > Hi Chris, >> > >> > >> > >> > The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition >> > Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this >> > may >> > fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself >> > rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse’s which >> > you >> > may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We’ve already >> > planned >> > to make some resources available for this work and we’d be able to >> > extend >> > this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be >> > working on >> > this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and >> > discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area. >> > >> > >> > >> > As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we >> > will >> > link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace >> > (under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014 >> > February-June timeframe. >> > >> > >> > >> > BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one >> > procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 >> > (with >> > a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within >> > the >> > next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? >> > >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Chris >> > >> > >> > >> > IT Developer >> > >> > Statens Museum for Kunst >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > >> > Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af >> > Chris >> > Hoffman >> > Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51 >> > Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List >> > Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition >> > Check/Conservation? >> > >> > >> > >> > Hello CollectionSpace community, >> > >> > >> > >> > I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that >> > Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We >> > talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been >> > building >> > on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations >> > they would probably want to include. They need procedures for >> > Exhibition >> > tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley >> > are >> > also eager to make these procedures available to our museums. >> > >> > >> > >> > Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition >> > Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update >> > it >> > to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work. >> > >> > >> > >> > For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a >> > few >> > fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more >> > comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already >> > along >> > these lines? >> > >> > >> > >> > I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work >> > together to get some of these procedures into the core of >> > CollectionSpace >> > where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley >> > and >> > OMCA in the February through June time frame? >> > >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Chris >> > >> > >> > >> > Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. >> > >> > Manager of Informatics Services >> > >> > IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley >> > >> > chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu >> > >> > 510-642-9643 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Talk mailing list >> > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org >> > >> > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk mailing list >> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org >> >> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org > >

CH

Chris Hoffman

Mon, Nov 18, 2013 6:30 PM

Hi Chris,
Thanks for the information about your plans for extending Exhibition. I agree that we should work together to see if there's an opportunity to get Exhibitions into the core CollectionSpace code.
Regards,
Chris

On Nov 18, 2013, at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott wrote:

Hi Chris,

The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this may fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse’s which you may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We’ve already planned to make some resources available for this work and we’d be able to extend this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be working on this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area.

As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we will link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace (under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014 February-June timeframe.

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

Regards,
Chris

IT Developer
Statens Museum for Kunst
Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af Chris Hoffman
Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51
Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List
Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition Check/Conservation?

Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,
Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.
Manager of Informatics Services
IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley
chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu
510-642-9643

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

Hi Chris, Thanks for the information about your plans for extending Exhibition. I agree that we should work together to see if there's an opportunity to get Exhibitions into the core CollectionSpace code. Regards, Chris On Nov 18, 2013, at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott wrote: > Hi Chris, > > The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this may fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse’s which you may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We’ve already planned to make some resources available for this work and we’d be able to extend this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be working on this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area. > > As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we will link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace (under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014 February-June timeframe. > > BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to 4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? > > Regards, > Chris > > IT Developer > Statens Museum for Kunst > Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af Chris Hoffman > Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51 > Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org List > Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition Check/Conservation? > > Hello CollectionSpace community, > > I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to make these procedures available to our museums. > > Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work. > > For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along these lines? > > I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame? > > Regards, > Chris > > Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. > Manager of Informatics Services > IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley > chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu > 510-642-9643 > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

RM

Richard Millet

Mon, Nov 18, 2013 7:26 PM

It’s great to see this conversation happening! As the current Technical
Lead for CollectionSpace, I strongly believe it is absolutely critical
to the long term viability of CollectionSpace that community
contributions be reviewed and accepted frequently and promptly. An
active code base is a good indicator of a healthy and vibrant
open-source project.

As you all know, the CollectionSpace Steering Committee is working hard
to find a permanent home for CollectionSpace. Once found,
CollectionSpace will transition from a “project” to a “product.” During
this transition, we will need to work with the new CollectionSpace.org
organization to ensure that time and money is allocated for reviewing
and accepting community contributions. Also, I believe it will be the
responsibility of the community to work with the new CollectionSpace.org
organization to create both a vision and a concrete plan for future core
development work on the CollectionSpace product.

I spoke briefly with Michael Black (PAHMA) a few weeks ago about future
development work on CollectionSpace. We both agreed that the community
needs to drive future development work in two ways. The first is
through community contributions. The second is by proposing new feature
sets that will benefit a large portion of the current and future
community. Also, we talked about adding functional to the
CollectionSpace core that is currently available only via the web
applications extensions. Not all of current web application
functionality makes sense to put into the CollectionSpace core, but
certainly some of it would be great to be there.

The transition from "project" to "product" is going to be very
exciting. In some sense, it's only just the beginning for CollectionSpace.

-Richard

Chris Hoffman mailto:chris_h@berkeley.edu
Monday, November 18, 2013 10:30 AM
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the information about your plans for extending Exhibition.
I agree that we should work together to see if there's an opportunity
to get Exhibitions into the core CollectionSpace code.
Regards,
Chris

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
Christopher Pott mailto:Christopher.Pott@smk.dk
Monday, November 18, 2013 5:47 AM

Hi Chris,

The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition
Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and
this may fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a
Procedure in itself rather than an Authority this is a different
approach to Jesse’s which you may also want to consider as a candidate
for merging. We’ve already planned to make some resources available
for this work and we’d be able to extend this to include code
contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be working on this in the
same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and discuss the
requirements/possibilities around this area.

As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we
will link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with
Conservationspace (under development), but this will likely fall
outside of the 2014 February-June timeframe.

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade
one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at
3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to
4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update
on a live system?

Regards,

Chris

IT Developer

Statens Museum for Kunst

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
Chris Hoffman mailto:chris_h@berkeley.edu
Thursday, November 14, 2013 9:50 AM
Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that
Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We
talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been
building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple
customizations they would probably want to include. They need
procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition
Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to
make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition
Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to
update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of
weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with
a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have
something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on
something already along these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to
work together to get some of these procedures into the core of
CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in
working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,
Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.
Manager of Informatics Services
IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley
chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu mailto:chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu
510-642-9643

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

It’s great to see this conversation happening! As the current Technical Lead for CollectionSpace, I strongly believe it is absolutely critical to the long term viability of CollectionSpace that community contributions be reviewed and accepted frequently and promptly. An active code base is a good indicator of a healthy and vibrant open-source project. As you all know, the CollectionSpace Steering Committee is working hard to find a permanent home for CollectionSpace. Once found, CollectionSpace will transition from a “project” to a “product.” During this transition, we will need to work with the new CollectionSpace.org organization to ensure that time and money is allocated for reviewing and accepting community contributions. Also, I believe it will be the responsibility of the community to work with the new CollectionSpace.org organization to create both a vision and a concrete plan for future core development work on the CollectionSpace product. I spoke briefly with Michael Black (PAHMA) a few weeks ago about future development work on CollectionSpace. We both agreed that the community needs to drive future development work in two ways. The first is through community contributions. The second is by proposing new feature sets that will benefit a large portion of the current and future community. Also, we talked about adding functional to the CollectionSpace core that is currently available only via the web applications extensions. Not all of current web application functionality makes sense to put into the CollectionSpace core, but certainly some of it would be great to be there. The transition from "project" to "product" is going to be very exciting. In some sense, it's only just the beginning for CollectionSpace. -Richard > Chris Hoffman <mailto:chris_h@berkeley.edu> > Monday, November 18, 2013 10:30 AM > Hi Chris, > Thanks for the information about your plans for extending Exhibition. > I agree that we should work together to see if there's an opportunity > to get Exhibitions into the core CollectionSpace code. > Regards, > Chris > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org > Christopher Pott <mailto:Christopher.Pott@smk.dk> > Monday, November 18, 2013 5:47 AM > > Hi Chris, > > The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition > Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and > this may fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a > Procedure in itself rather than an Authority this is a different > approach to Jesse’s which you may also want to consider as a candidate > for merging. We’ve already planned to make some resources available > for this work and we’d be able to extend this to include code > contributions/merging. In any case, we’ll be working on this in the > same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and discuss the > requirements/possibilities around this area. > > As far as conservation data is concerned, we’ll be focusing on how we > will link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with > Conservationspace (under development), but this will likely fall > outside of the 2014 February-June timeframe. > > BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade > one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at > 3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we’d like to upgrade to > 4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update > on a live system? > > Regards, > > Chris > > IT Developer > > Statens Museum for Kunst > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org > Chris Hoffman <mailto:chris_h@berkeley.edu> > Thursday, November 14, 2013 9:50 AM > Hello CollectionSpace community, > > I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that > Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We > talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been > building on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple > customizations they would probably want to include. They need > procedures for Exhibition tracking and Condition > Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are also eager to > make these procedures available to our museums. > > Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition > Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to > update it to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of > weeks of work. > > For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with > a few fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have > something more comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on > something already along these lines? > > I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to > work together to get some of these procedures into the core of > CollectionSpace where they belong. Would anyone be interested in > working with Berkeley and OMCA in the February through June time frame? > > Regards, > Chris > > Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. > Manager of Informatics Services > IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley > chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu <mailto:chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu> > 510-642-9643 > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

CP

Christopher Pott

Wed, Nov 20, 2013 9:53 AM

Thank you Jesse, and others, who responded to my concerns about upgrading. There's some great information here to get us started. From what I read I get the impression that the upgrade does not result in structural changes to the nuxeo or cspace databases and that it's 'merely' a question of code merging and deploying over the existing implementation (ie, no new tables need generating or data migrated). Have I understood correctly?

Regards,
Chris

Fra: Jesse Martinez [mailto:mjesse@gmail.com]
Sendt: 18. november 2013 18:44
Til: Aron Roberts
Cc: Christopher Pott; talk@lists.collectionspace.org
Emne: Re: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition Check/Conservation?

Some recent work of mine for the Walker involved upgrading from v3.3 to v4.0. Overall, this work took roughly a week and included making sure existing schema extensions matched new app layer syntax (make sure tags and attributes match/exist) and porting over new procedures. Porting over the new procedures consumed the bulk of the week-long time as this involved a small learning curve as how the app layer controls the configuration. And a good amount of testing.

Ray shared to the list his workflow on upgrading a UCB client to v4.0 and I recommend looking at his work. I believe it involved merging v4 onto his branch and working out the differences/conflicts. I based my upgrade workflow on Ray's but instead of merging code bases I started from a fresh v4 branch and added my code changes piecemeal. It was a lot slower but I was able to see piece-by-piece how things had changed.

Previous discussion w/Ray's workflow:
http://lists.collectionspace.org/pipermail/talk_lists.collectionspace.org/2013-October/001595.html

Jesse

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Aron Roberts <aronroberts@gmail.com mailto:aronroberts@gmail.com> wrote:

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we'd like to upgrade to 4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

I suspect that was a very conservative estimate, and that we might be
able to get a new procedure integrated in some fraction of that time.
The hardest part - and this could literally take the bulk of that time

is getting the schema (and any expectations around workflow or other
subtleties) worked out, especially if there are multiple, disparate
community contributions. The actual coding and testing isn't that
time consuming.

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott
<Christopher.Pott@smk.dk mailto:Christopher.Pott@smk.dk> wrote:

Hi Chris,

The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition
Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this may
fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself
rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse's which you
may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We've already planned
to make some resources available for this work and we'd be able to extend
this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we'll be working on
this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and
discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area.

As far as conservation data is concerned, we'll be focusing on how we will
link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace
(under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014
February-June timeframe.

BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one
procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with
a large number of extensions), and we'd like to upgrade to 4.0 within the
next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system?

Regards,

Chris

IT Developer

Statens Museum for Kunst

Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org] På vegne af Chris
Hoffman
Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51
Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org mailto:talk@lists.collectionspace.org List
Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition
Check/Conservation?

Hello CollectionSpace community,

I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that
Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We
talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building
on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations
they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition
tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are
also eager to make these procedures available to our museums.

Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition
Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it
to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work.

For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few
fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more
comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along
these lines?

I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work
together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace
where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and
OMCA in the February through June time frame?

Regards,

Chris

Chris Hoffman, Ph.D.

Manager of Informatics Services

IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley

chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu mailto:chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu

510-642-9643tel:510-642-9643

Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org

Thank you Jesse, and others, who responded to my concerns about upgrading. There's some great information here to get us started. From what I read I get the impression that the upgrade does not result in structural changes to the nuxeo or cspace databases and that it's 'merely' a question of code merging and deploying over the existing implementation (ie, no new tables need generating or data migrated). Have I understood correctly? Regards, Chris ________________________________ Fra: Jesse Martinez [mailto:mjesse@gmail.com] Sendt: 18. november 2013 18:44 Til: Aron Roberts Cc: Christopher Pott; talk@lists.collectionspace.org Emne: Re: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition Check/Conservation? Some recent work of mine for the Walker involved upgrading from v3.3 to v4.0. Overall, this work took roughly a week and included making sure existing schema extensions matched new app layer syntax (make sure tags and attributes match/exist) and porting over new procedures. Porting over the new procedures consumed the bulk of the week-long time as this involved a small learning curve as how the app layer controls the configuration. And a good amount of testing. Ray shared to the list his workflow on upgrading a UCB client to v4.0 and I recommend looking at his work. I believe it involved merging v4 onto his branch and working out the differences/conflicts. I based my upgrade workflow on Ray's but instead of merging code bases I started from a fresh v4 branch and added my code changes piecemeal. It was a lot slower but I was able to see piece-by-piece how things had changed. Previous discussion w/Ray's workflow: http://lists.collectionspace.org/pipermail/talk_lists.collectionspace.org/2013-October/001595.html - Jesse On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Aron Roberts <aronroberts@gmail.com<mailto:aronroberts@gmail.com>> wrote: > BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with a large number of extensions), and we'd like to upgrade to 4.0 within the next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? I suspect that was a very conservative estimate, and that we might be able to get a new procedure integrated in some fraction of that time. The hardest part - and this could literally take the bulk of that time - is getting the schema (and any expectations around workflow or other subtleties) worked out, especially if there are multiple, disparate community contributions. The actual coding and testing isn't *that* time consuming. On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:47 AM, Christopher Pott <Christopher.Pott@smk.dk<mailto:Christopher.Pott@smk.dk>> wrote: > Hi Chris, > > > > The team at SMK is planning on significantly extending our Exhibition > Procedure (to replace our current exhibition management system) and this may > fit with some of the requirements from Oakland. As a Procedure in itself > rather than an Authority this is a different approach to Jesse's which you > may also want to consider as a candidate for merging. We've already planned > to make some resources available for this work and we'd be able to extend > this to include code contributions/merging. In any case, we'll be working on > this in the same timeframe so it would make sense to get together and > discuss the requirements/possibilities around this area. > > > > As far as conservation data is concerned, we'll be focusing on how we will > link/integrate CollectionSpace collections data with Conservationspace > (under development), but this will likely fall outside of the 2014 > February-June timeframe. > > > > BTW I was concerned to read that it takes two weeks work to upgrade one > procedure to version 4.0 as our entire system is currently back at 3.0 (with > a large number of extensions), and we'd like to upgrade to 4.0 within the > next half year. Has anyone attempted a similar update on a live system? > > > > Regards, > > Chris > > > > IT Developer > > Statens Museum for Kunst > > ________________________________ > > Fra: Talk [mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:talk-bounces@lists.collectionspace.org>] På vegne af Chris > Hoffman > Sendt: 14. november 2013 18:51 > Til: talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:talk@lists.collectionspace.org> List > Emne: [Talk] CSpace procedures for Exhibitions and Condition > Check/Conservation? > > > > Hello CollectionSpace community, > > > > I talked with Al Bersch yesterday about his exciting announcement that > Oakland Museum of California (OMCA) will be using CollectionSpace. We > talked mainly about the web applications that UC Berkeley has been building > on top of CollectionSpace, but we also discussed a couple customizations > they would probably want to include. They need procedures for Exhibition > tracking and Condition Checking/Conservation/Treatments. We at Berkeley are > also eager to make these procedures available to our museums. > > > > Back in July, Jesse Martinez submitted a contribution for Condition > Checking. You might think that is then ready to go. However, to update it > to version 4.0 of CollectionSpace will take a couple of weeks of work. > > > > For Exhibitions, we know that SMK has developed a basic procedure with a few > fields but that they are hoping CollectionSpace will have something more > comprehensive. Jesse or others: Are you working on something already along > these lines? > > > > I told Al I think there is an opportunity for several deployers to work > together to get some of these procedures into the core of CollectionSpace > where they belong. Would anyone be interested in working with Berkeley and > OMCA in the February through June time frame? > > > > Regards, > > Chris > > > > Chris Hoffman, Ph.D. > > Manager of Informatics Services > > IST-Research Information Technologies, UC Berkeley > > chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu<mailto:chris.hoffman@berkeley.edu> > > 510-642-9643<tel:510-642-9643> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org> > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org > _______________________________________________ Talk mailing list Talk@lists.collectionspace.org<mailto:Talk@lists.collectionspace.org> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org