Page MenuHomeSoftware Heritage

Put information (client, collection and deposit-id) inside metadata for metada-only deposit
Open, NormalPublic

Description

With the complete deposit, a revision is created with a commit message including the client, deposit number and collection.
These items will be lost with a metadata-only deposit in the ERMDS, since the revision or other elements aren't created in the archive.

To solve this discrepancy, deposit message should be added in the xml.
Here a proposal to add inside the <swh:deposit>:

<swh:receipt>
   <swh:client>HAL</swh:client>
   <swh:collection>HAL</swh:collection>
   <swh:number>160</swh:number>
   <swh:date>reception date</swh:date>
</swh:receipt>

reception date is equivalent to today's commit date
This information might be redundant with a property already used for ERMDS entries (if so, it can be deleted).

Event Timeline

moranegg triaged this task as Normal priority.Mon, Nov 16, 12:36 PM
moranegg created this task.

Possible option (discussion might be needed)
discovery_date from ERMDS = reception_date of the first deposit_request
swh:date = completed_date

I may have missed something (several actually) but where is this swh:deposit namespace specified?

I can see examples of the usage of the swh:deposit NS in docs/specs/spec-meta-deposit.rst in the context of the metadata deposit (to specify the targeted data in SWH the metadata is about), but no real specification.

To solve this discrepancy, deposit message should be added in the xml.

do you mean you want the (metadata) deposit loader to modify the deposited metadata file? Is it "acceptable"?

IMHO this is an information (well, a metadata) on the metadata loading process, so it should not be part of the original metadata. How would we then we handle say a gpg signature?

I may have missed something (several actually) but where is this swh:deposit namespace specified?

I guess it's the very purpose of T2625, isn't it?