Batch Importer (Bib/Acq)
(UXPROD-47)
|
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | UX Product |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | Q4 2019 | Parent: | Batch Importer (Bib/Acq) |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | P3 |
| Reporter: | Charlotte Whitt | Assignee: | Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | cap-mvp, inventory, mandatory, migration-load, po-mvp, q4-2019-at-risk, sysops_mgt | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | Batch Importer (Bib/Acq) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimate: | Medium < 5 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimator: | Jakub Skoczen | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimate: | Large < 10 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimator: | Jakub Skoczen | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | Prokopovych | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PO Rank: | 110 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PO Ranking Note: | Put it at the top of the Q4 list, as it is the highest ranked not in Q3 2019 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chalmers (Impl Aut 2019): | R5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Chicago (MVP Sum 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Duke (Full Sum 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: 5Colleges (Full Jul 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: FLO (MVP Sum 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: GBV (MVP Sum 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: hbz (TBD): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Lehigh (MVP Summer 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Leipzig (Full TBD): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: TAMU (MVP Jan 2021): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: U of AL (MVP Oct 2020): | R1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
See details in Umbrella UXPROD-884, plus Slide Deck: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1D4yEPVhFbD8ZXlyKfInRafnJUfQWM8syakLu7v6_c8U/edit#slide=id.p1 Note that the maximum digits for the ID are 11 (slide deck says 8), and for the prefix are 10, so the HRID fields in Inventory Instances, Holdings, and Items must allow for up to 21 characters |
| Comments |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 29/Oct/19 ] |
|
Cate Boerema Just checking - do you think the Open "is defined by" stories linked to this feature will make it into Core-fxn's next sprint? |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 30/Oct/19 ] |
|
We'll pull in as much as Matt Reno thinks he can handle for the upcoming sprint. We might also be able to bring in Bohdan to help out if Matt Reno thinks it could be helpful. What do you think, Matt? |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 18/Nov/19 ] |
|
Hi Cate Boerema Any chance for the remaining MODINV stories in this feature to be handled in the current sprint? If not, I'll mark this as "at risk" for Q4. Thank you |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 19/Nov/19 ] |
|
Hi Ann-Marie Breaux - do you have a sense of how much work are remaining on this feature?
Total: Story Points: 39 |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 20/Nov/19 ] |
|
Hi Marc Johnson and Ann-Marie Breaux - I'll move the HRIDs in Inventory conversation out of UIIN-875: Marc Johnson added a comment - Yesterday It is clear I do not have the broader context of the HRID work. I am finding it difficult to follow the reasoning that it would have been better to leave the old behaviour in place, because I understand that wasn’t fit for purpose and did not allow clients to specify their own HRIDs, meaning migration wasn’t viable without it’s removal. It may well be that I misunderstood the urgency of replacing the existing work. I shall leave it to the three of you to decide upon the strategic direction for this work. I would caution that we do not know how much of this work we will or won’t have in place until the Q4 release development has ended, so whilst I understand the HRID feature is at risk for Q4, it is possibly too soon to be deciding that it won’t be sufficiently in place. Any advice on how to reduce the scope of that work without undermining it would be appreciated. Ann-Marie Breaux added a comment - Yesterday Charlotte Whitt and Cate Boerema interested in your thoughts as well. |
| Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 20/Nov/19 ] |
My thinking is: If HRIDs in Inventory will not be solved for Q4 2019 - then this work is a must for Q1 2020. We have early implementers who have absolutely no work arounds for this, if the HRIDs in Inventory is not enabled. The institution can not migrate their data if there is no HRIDs in instance, holdings, item records, and they must be able to continue their existing number sequence, when adding new records. |
| Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 21/Nov/19 ] |
|
Thanks for your comment, Charlotte Whitt. We understand the urgency on this and are pushing forward as quickly as possible. What doesn't get completed in Q4 will definitely be scheduled for Q1. |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 21/Nov/19 ] |
|
Thanks Cate Boerema I can see that Matt Reno is working on stuff, and it's clear that things are moving forward as fast as possible. I'm not totally clear on how the parallel MODINVSTOR and MODINV stories relate to each other, and whether they really add up to 13 points worth of work for each of the 3 Inventory record types. My hope is that after the first record type, it'll get quicker/easier for the next two. Charlotte Whitt once the Inventory work is done, we'll definitely make the corresponding SRS work high priority for Folijet. I can't speak to the MACRcat work because I don't have any understanding yet of when AtCult might be able to start on it, and how it fits with their other priorities. Eventually (and I would say sooner rather than later) we need to have all 3 apps accessing the same sequential number generator and referring to the same HRID settings. |
| Comment by Marc Johnson [ 21/Nov/19 ] |
By accessing the same sequence, do you mean that data import and MARCCat will take the HRID allocated to an instance and use that in their own records. That is what I understood, which is why the sequence is currently private to inventory. |
| Comment by Marc Johnson [ 21/Nov/19 ] |
My understanding is that the unknowns will have reduced after the first record type, and the work will be better understood. This might make it slightly faster, there is still quite a lot of changes to make. Instances are likely the most involved because of the different ways that instances can be created, there are two different batch APIs as well as the single record way |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 21/Nov/19 ] |
|
Hi Marc Johnson By accessing the same sequence, I mean that if a record is starting life in MARCcat or SRS, then the next HRID will be grabbed from Inventory (and will represent the Instance HRID), so that we can display that ID in the SRS and MARCcat versions of the record as well. If a record is starting life via SRS, the sequences would be: If a new HRID is to be assigned: If already an existing HRID (no new HRID to be created) |
| Comment by Marc Johnson [ 21/Nov/19 ] |
|
Thanks Ann-Marie Breaux I think the key statements here are:
Which means that an HRID is allocated to an instance, and then used by SRS. Rather than SRS being allocated a new HRID and that being used when creating the HRID. These are subtly different, in the first case the sequence itself is hidden from clients, in the latter it must (well allocated from it at least) be exposed. Does that make sense? |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 21/Nov/19 ] |
|
Yes, I get it - and it'll be similar with MARCcat. If a new record is being created, the HRID needs to come from the Inventory sequence. We've just got a "then a miracle occurs" step since we're still not quite sure yet about the MARCcat connection/synchronization with SRS/Inventory. That's why sorting out the MARCcat/HRID interaction is last |
| Comment by Marc Johnson [ 21/Nov/19 ] |
I hope my explanation / question didn't come across as condescending. If it did, I apologise. I'm aware the differences in this area are subtle and I like to periodically check if my explanations make sense, so I don't drift too far |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 21/Nov/19 ] |
|
No, not at all - just answering and in meetings at the same time, so keeping it short! |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 27/Nov/19 ] |
|
HI Marc Johnson What do you think are the chances of finishing this feature in Q4? I see several in progress, but a couple still open. Please let me know if I'll need to split it and spill some of it over into Q1. Thank you. |
| Comment by Marc Johnson [ 27/Nov/19 ] |
|
Ann-Marie Breaux I think you are best off asking Matt Reno as he is primarily working on this feature |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 27/Nov/19 ] |
|
No problem! Matt Reno What do you think are the chances of finishing this feature in Q4? I see several in progress, but a couple still open. Please let me know if I'll need to split it and spill some of it over into Q1. Thank you. |
| Comment by Matt Reno [ 27/Nov/19 ] |
|
Ann-Marie Breaux I expect the storage stories for HRID to be completed by and included in Q4. There is some minor work that will need to be done in the BL module, but I don't think that significantly blocks other stories. At this point, the HRID settings UI could be hooked up and we should be seeing generated HRIDs for instances and holdings. I just checked folio-snapshot and can confirm instance HRIDs and holdings HRIDs, but no item HRIDs in inventory. Item HRID work should be completed today. |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 02/Dec/19 ] |
|
Matt Reno Bohdan Suprun We have mocked backend data for the Inventory HRID settings page, until the backend work was completed. That means any changes to the start number or prefix are not being saved. Can we unmock that now, or should we wait until the HRID backend work is completed in Data Import and MARCcat as well? We have a small story
cc: Marc Johnson Charlotte Whitt Taras Tkachenko Mariia Aloshyna |
| Comment by Marc Johnson [ 02/Dec/19 ] |
|
Ann-Marie Breaux That UI depends upon the work in
I don't think that should wait until the data import and MARCCat work is done, even if those areas don't use this information at that point. |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 02/Dec/19 ] |
|
Perfect - thanks, Marc Johnson |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 10/Dec/19 ] |
|
Hi Marc Johnson Bohdan Suprun Matt Reno I've hunted but I can't find the comment or Slack message where the issue was raised last week of whether 8 digits for the HRID was long enough. Right now, it's looking like we'll need to expand from 8 digits to 10. I'll write the UI update story later tonight, and Folijet will take care of it. For the backend work, do you expect that will be much effort, or is it basically a simple update? I'm happy to draft the stories, if you confirm whether they should be MODINV or MODINVSTOR. And if it's a simple update, do you think it's something that Core-fxn can pick up in next sprint and can be included in a Q4 bugfix release? Thank you for your help! |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 10/Dec/19 ] |
|
Changing this feature back to In progress to accommodate the increase in number of digits |
| Comment by Bohdan Suprun (Inactive) [ 11/Dec/19 ] |
|
Hi Ann-Marie Breaux, I think it is about 3 story points. We mostly have to update our DB sequence: set the new max value and change the sequence return type to bigint. The story should be for MODINVSTOR. We don't have to change anything in MODINV. But maybe Matt Reno can better clarify this, he was mostly working on this feature. |
| Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 26/Dec/19 ] |
|
Re-closed this feature |