Member Node Wranglers 
    Fridays at 10:00 am AK
                    11:00 AM PDT
                    12:00 MDT
                    1:00pm CDT
                    2:00pm EDT) 

https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/430697153

4 October 2013

Main goal of this meeting is to go through the MNDeployment redmine tickets, focusing first on those that are targeted for PY5 and then looking at those whose status is "new" and determining if they are good candidates to move up in the queue.

Attendees:  Rebecca, John Cobb, Laura, Bruce, Dave, Rob

Regrets:  

See redmine tickets for Y5Q1-Y5Q4.

Want to consider the backlog, how to move potential MNs from backlog to Q3/Q4.  To consider: we're reaching capacity for CCIT resources to work on MNs, so we need to carefully choose/schedule new MNs for Y5

D1 has some "extra" money, proposal in process to create stack for OPeNDAP (and maybe DSpace) to enable us to have more options from the backlog to pull up in the schedule.  Dave/Bruce to get paperwork to Rebecca to enable this effort. 

If we get the immutability issue resolved soon, Bob Cook thinks that there are 5-6 additional MNs from ORNL that could be implemented.  Can potentially put these in Y5Q3.

Documentation issue: duality of what is a MN - is it the organization or the software implementation?  Dave suggests adding a clarifier, such as "MN organization" when it refers to the organization specifically.  
    Rob:  also use of the word "repository" 
    >>> discussion of the "revised" landing page - http://129.24.63.92/member-nodes-revised# - and discussion at CCIT meeting; Rob seemed to be getting conflicting direction re: level/type of information on the landing page
    We want the landing page to be simple and straightforward (fewer words, direct, etc.)
    "Leverage existing infrastructure" - 
    When considering benefits of joining DataONE, a potential MN wants its data to be more discoverable and more usable with less effort.
     - asking Rob for editing of phrasing on landing page and ordering of items, 
     "preservation" (and replication) - a benefit is that D1 provides a reliable resource for preservation/reproduction of data; 
     Does D1 replication have anything to do with an entity's disaster recovery plan?  John thinks no.  But, from a user perspective, there is some disaster recovery value in D1.
     
Consider that the MN landing page will be looked at by many audiences with different perspectives, needs, etc.

-----------------------------------------
Agenda: (if time permits, otherwise hold for next week)
        1. High profile issues (or current items of interest)
        Documentation - Laura shared Rob's mock-up of MN webpage http://129.24.63.92/member-nodes-revised#  in its then-current state with UT DataONE group; everyone liked the new approach, the separation of content by target audience, the use of graphics, etc.
        
        Immutability - Huge topic of conversation at the CCIT meeting last week.
       
        OPeNDAP (Hyrax)  member node:  We think Jing Tao is looking at the level of effort to do  this.  Bruce, Matt, Dave telecon with James Gallagher and Dave Fulker  yesterday (9/26/13):  http://epad.dataone.org/20130919-opendap-mn-implementation  
        - another meeting on 10/3/13, enthusiasm but still lots of questions


Discussion on wording on MN landing page
Bruc's missing items (high priority)
- improved data availability
- wider audience
Rebecca: cvisual confusionm: illustrations on right start on bullet 2 not bullet one

Rob Nahf: clarificaiont CI includes more tha HW.

        Interest in another MN workshop -- ACTION: Bruce to work wtih Dave and Matt to   see if we can schedule one (look for 10-ish people to attend) - to be discussed in LT meeting
        
        2. Status of MNs  - to be updated in redmine during the meeting
        3. Old action items
         - eBird/AKN
        
        4. Not-high profile issues
         
        5. Around the room