Member Node Wranglers  - please note time change to half-past the hour
    Fridays at 10:30 am Alaska
                    11:30 am Pacific
                    12:30 noon Mountain
                    1:30 pm Central
                    2:30 pm Eastern

Please note new GTM info, also:
8 August 20140808
                                                         
Attending:  John Cobb, Bruce Wilson, Dave Vieglais, Mark Servilla, Rebecca Koskela, Amber

Regrets:  Laura


Agenda: 

NOTE:  New meeting time at least through the end of July - 2:30p Eastern

        1. High profile issues (or current items of interest
        
        FOLLOW-UP -- DUG activities/outcomes:

        1.5   Current MNs
                 Dryad listObjects issue, see https://redmine.dataone.org/issues/6010 
                    Robert queried a particular date range but results returned records out  of bounds; Robert has talked with Ryan and he is aware of the issue and  will address next week; potential for impact in synchronization if  dates are being interpreted incorrectly (doesn't look like a time zone  issue - conversation with BEW and LM yesterday)  <<<<< At MNF yesterday, Ryan said it is related to Dryad dropping the time stamp, so the date stamp gets out of whack.  He has assigned a developer to it on their end.  No Wrangler actions needed.
                   
                    LTER transitioning from metacat instance to PASTA GMN; In process.  No Wrangler actions needed.
                
        2. Status of upcoming MNs
     
    Future
        3. Old action items
              MN Documentation - MN Deployment and MN Ongoing Operations - Laura to do  this  -- working on identifying needs and best methods to address those  needs, including ask.dataone.org, documentation in mule1 or on  dataone.org, etc.

             
        4. Not-high profile issues
        
            Process for end-of-implemention (when/how to indicate a MN is "upcoming" on the dashboard, etc.) - Laura and Amber - we had previously decided that when a MN goes into stage testing, it is appropriate to show them as an upcoming MN.  However, in redmine we don't currenty have a status indicating what stage a MN is working in.  We have a "testing" status, so we had thought we'd use that - when a MN changes status to "testing", we can show it as upcoming.  We still need to explicitly define the process and who does what when, and try it out on the next MN(s) in the queue.
            Amber: maybe list them on web as "upcoming" when we go to staging -- but we need a redmine state to show that staging has started.  Dave to look and see if can notify Amber and Laura (and Bruce?) when there are changes to the stage and production node lists. Need a redmine state to show that staging has started.
            
            (Was under Current MNs related to SANParks, CDL, etc.)
            LT  to address Memorandum of Understanding (re: operations and service expectations) between DataONE and MNs  -  is there anything I (LM) can be doing to move this along, draft something up, pull out the work previously done, etc.?? (Rebecca, Mark, & Laura have been tasked with this and will begin work week of 8/11)

       
        5. Around the room

Discussed the idea of whether to move this back to 2:00 ET.  Consensus was that we should go ahead and leave this as a 2:30 ET meeting (1:30 CT, 12:30 MT, 11:30 PT), to allow for a break between the LT call and this          


Tickler (things to revisit periodically)

Purpose of MN Description Document (past and future) 
     Intent is to describe the (potential) MN, identify the  types/quantity/formats of data they hold, - perhaps we need a   "friendlier" format, perhaps an interview process;
     Workflow: should this information (MNDD) be collected at the beginning  of the process, or is the way we've been doing it lately (after the  fact) a new way of doing business??  Also consider if  this information  gathering (form or interview) is the best use of resources for those  potential MNs who may or may not become a MN if implemented as a first  step.  Possibly change the workflow? Is a pdf the best way to view the  information?
    Next steps:  Laura to come up with alternative(s) to current MNDD - content is good, but format/mechanism needs some work.  
    Another thing: Laura and Amber to look at workflow for last stages of implementation, test with EDAC  too late for that, need to pick another one.
    Also -- how does the MN DD relate to: 
                    the node document:  https://cn.dataone.org/cn/v1/node  - developers have/create this information (node registration, see updateNodeCapabilities)
                    and redmine??    <--- work with redmine as mostly-authoritative source
     Could a spreadsheet be a viable solution?  Maybe.  A database would  work.  In any case, some information is appropriately "private" -  how   would we handle that?
                

Revisit the default "only results with data"  checkbox to unchecked; plan is to move the   checkbox from search page  to results page but remain checked by default, initial draft in  development environment.
               
Bob's feedback about the dashboard - he suggested a count of MNs on the dashboard (MNs, RNs), probably/maybe an easy thing to do a count of MNs and RNs and display