SIG Jira review: focus on Acquisitions
Features targeted for Q3 release: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KVq1Tev9Y0q7YXLLI8vJFDXmEbL2YYpzqrg4ItDsBvU/edit#gid=0
Overview in JIRA:
"group" is added as a record to the finance app: allows to relate funds together and to see summary info for groupings of funds
KW: what is the difference to tags?
DW: group is searchable and filterable; becomes part of the actual fund structure
groups group funds within and across ledgers; it is a means of organising funds; groups are not required, libraries can choose whether they want to use them; tags exist in addition; you can search by tag
they moved away from a finance dashboard; group is to address the visibility challenge
KM: can you do calculations on groups - DB: you can pull information in from multiple records in the interface itself
The other feature that is ranked low so far: "Increase Order permissions granularity" - do libraries need this?; there were discussions in Washington about permissions where people asked for granularity
permissions in ACQ: users can assign one of the CRUD actions or specific ones
VM: view needs to be separate
A-M: but if you edit you have to be able to view etc.
Delete has more implications than create and update; can we i.e. put create and update together?; maybe that's what we could do for now and more granularity will be possible later
DB will update the feature and libraries are supposed to rank it; DB gave it a high rank because it is agreed on to be needed
example: I am on law team - there I can do everything connected to law; depending on what medical and main have set as permissions is deciding what law can do on their records
right now: if I want to view and edit, I need to assign view and edit; this will be reworked
Create container in inventory: it has fallen down the list because it has dependencies; for technical reasons there has to be implemented a container in Inventory first
VM: wherecan I see this information on such updates and their reasons? - A-M: we could add a comment in JIRA; this will help as far as context is concerned; A-M puts a note in the PO channel to check with Cate
"Search result summary widget": has not been ranked by many yet; the feature was shown at the Washington meeting briefly; it will be possible to show the calculated totals for the search results and there will be an export function selectable;
if this will not get done until go-live libraries have the possibilty to export csv files; the feature would be great to have, i.e. for selectors; but if the data is available via reporting this might be sufficient as a first step; relying on reports will not be real-time; so the feature is needed for fiscal year rollover
feature will most probably fall out of Q3, depending on the rankings of the libraries - that's why libraries have to rank
alternatively, it would help to create a group at any time in the course of a FY and thereby replace this functionality (as long as users do not need to create the group at the same time as the fund)
Is there another way to get real time information on a library's fund? - Yes, if I look at the fund and/or the group; but being able to have a quick snapshot i.e. on all encumbrances or any other type of category would be high priority for some libraries
"Claiming unreceived or unreceivable items" - needs ranking by libraries
|Cross-over apps: Data Import, Export, EDIFACT, Tags-Basic, and Tags-Central Management||Ann-Marie Breaux|
Link to A-M's features (5 tabs in the spreadsheet): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YjVzs-Oy0WHnhudxjp6Y_N_57m9ZdqzKh7uegvQBdnQ/edit#gid=1502129451
Please send questions or comments to A-M or comment in JIRA; A-M will start to break down the features
|Possible topics for next week:|
The week after next week (July 26th) we might talk about the batch importer.
Von Tim Whisenant an alle: 02:43 PM
Marmot experienced with open source discovery development. Pika - a variant of VuFind.
Von Owen Stephens an alle: 02:45 PM
I’m afraid I won’t be able to make next friday
I’ll be travelling and maybe able to join from a train, but generally connection isn’t good and I can’t commit
Von Dennis Bridges an alle: 02:48 PM
Von Ann-Marie Breaux an alle: 02:50 PM
Spreadsheet of Ann-Marie's PO features (5 tabs for the 5 different epics):
Von Owen Stephens an alle: 02:52 PM
Just out of general interest - the top 16 features in this list are all ranked higher than *any* feature in Agreements/Licenses –
I think this makes sense as Acq more fundamental and fully functioning Acq more likely to be a go live requirement for more institutions
Von Owen Stephens an alle: 02:58 PM
I’m afraid I have to drop out for a bit - will re-join if I can
Von Ann-Marie Breaux an alle: 03:05 PM
Hi Owen - hopefully you'll come back - that's something we talked about in MM SIG yesterday.
We can end up with consistent solid rankigs within individual epics/POs, but not across Epics/POs.
Also, the features without POs or without dev teams have not been fleshed out as well as the ones that do have POs and dev teams.
It will be up to the cap planning team to review across all the Epics/POs and compare to the available capacity.
Von Kirstin Kemner-Heek (VZG) an alle: 03:27 PM
Sorry, I need to leave earlier today. have a nice weekend.
Von Owen Stephens an alle: 03:33 PM
Apologies I had to drop out - if there is anything that I could have helpfully commented on please feel free to ask
Von mir Martina Schildt an alle: 03:48 PM
Another comment on groups: Current situation: When I set up an e-book budget and a print mono budget for a subject,
they do not "know" anything about each other, i.e. when I overrun the e-book budget,
the available funds in the print budget are not automatically reduced.
This can only be achieved by additional reporting (e.g. via SQL).
Useful would be a hierarchical budget system which could be used to create sub-budgets,
in which case expenses for e-books in the e-mono sub-budget would reduce the available sum
in the "parent" budget and thus automatically also for the print mono sub-budget.