2021-10-13 Data Import Subgroup meeting

Owned by Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated)
Last updated: Oct 20, 2021
2 min read

 Recordings are posted Here

Slack channel for Q&A, discussion between meetings

Additional discussion topics in Subgroup parking lot

Attendees: Ann-Marie Breaux (Deactivated)  Timothy Watters Lisa McCollMcColl Jennifer Eustis, leeda.adkins@duke.edu, Jenn Colt, Raegan Wiechert Monica Arnold, Christie Thomas

Development update: 

  • Kiwi release timeline: 
    • 1st week of Sprint 125
    • Kiwi Bugfest prep this week
    • Bugfest starts next week
    • A-M still adding test cases; thank you to folks who wrote some
    • Kiwi Bugfest environment not yet available; A-M still needs to clean out old profiles before Monday
  • Kiwi Folijet planning: dashboard where you can see the current scope and status of Data Import work for Kiwi
  • Current Data Import feature development dashboard and bugfix support
  • Most recent development work
    • Finished Juniper hotfixes (mainly stabilizing EDIFACT invoices with acquisitions groups)
    • All Kiwi initial releases
  • Optimistic locking: POs and Dev Leads met yesterday to start planning testing for Lotus
  • Import/Export/quickMARC sandbox environment
    • First draft created, but not yet ready for use
    • Khalilah, Magda, and A-M met yesterday to discuss guidelines
  • From last week's meeting:
    • When an updated MARC-to-Instance map is delivered as part of a release, how does it affect a library's customized map?
    • Once the map has been updated, it possible to do a refresh of the instances to take the updated mappings into account? (can we crib Ian's script?)
    • See new wiki information page
    • And possible formalized script in Lotus

Agenda topic: 

  • Lotus Feature Prep: Update Inventory records based on POL/VRN matches
    • See notes on the feature page
    • A-M to clean up the edited feature page - DONE 
    • Subgroup folks
      • Send A-M examples of MARC records with 9xx data meant to update multiple holdings or items
      • Think about scenarios where you're trying to match from a MARC field that is repeatable (e.g. a 9xx field) and to a field that is repeatable (e.g. POL's Vendor Reference. Number) - would this affect the matching logic?
  • Next week: continue refining this feature