Removing the "easy hack" tag, because that's actually much harder than expected :D

can anybody point me to the relevant repo?

hi, I would like to get familiar with this, as mentioned in the wiki ,

(I've also noticed dry_run was = True, so I fixed that as well :P)

Tail of log:

The script is now running on getty.

https://forge.softwareheritage.org/source/swh-storage/browse/master/swh/storage/migrate_extrinsic_metadata.py

Another link for author roles: https://allcontributors.org/docs/en/emoji-key

In the task description there are two links, one to a blog post and another to the documentation.
If the docs aren't specific enough to complete the task, let us know, what is missing.
I prefer not to give further instructions to really see what is the limit of the documentation.
We are also trying to improve the documentation, so this would be a win win.

Hey @moranegg I had a discussion yesterday with @vlorentz on this. We came to the conclusion that the cff-converter should be used as it might cover some edge cases as well. So what should we do now? Please guide.

Hi @KShivendu, nice to see you claimed the task :-)
You don't have to use the cff-converter tool, but it can be a test (to ensure coherence).

Hi @moranegg, Do you want us to use https://github.com/citation-file-format/cff-converter-python for parsing or just use its CITATION.cff file while testing(and parse everything using pyYAML)?

Hello all, I'm one of the CFF co-leads. Let me know if you need help with anything.

https://github.com/citation-file-format/cffconvert-github-action
https://github.com/citation-file-format/cff-converter-python

@KShivendu Thanks for your interest!

Hi everyone, I am new here. I am excited by the idea of preserving open-source code and would love to contribute this year during GSoC. I do have a decent knowledge of Elasticsearch, Django, and Web Development in general.

Yeah let's go with option 3!

I'll assume for now that we're going to option 3 and add a dependency on T2703

currently, we can't. but it's easy to allow it, it's just a couple of lines to add in swh.model.model.

In T2779#55809, @vlorentz wrote:

If we can have metadata on metadata, then we can also have metadata on metadata on metadata, and metadata on metadata on metadata on metadata, ...

In T2779#55830, @moranegg wrote:

Another idea, adding this metadata to the indexed metadata:

1. raw xml in ERMDS
2. json object in indexer metadata table containing translated metadata + administrative metadata

at the end the web app wants to read translated metadata

Thank you for your patience @douardda
You are right changing the deposited metadata should not be "acceptable", but this information is lost between a regular de posit and a metadata-only deposit, since we do not have a revision for it.
This task was the result of the discussion "do we create an origin-snapshot- revision for metadata-only deposit" which we concluded with NO due to the upcoming ERMDS.

Another drawback to option 2: it means that this info must be optional (which means most clients will omit it, making it useless) or it would break generic SWORD clients.

So that might not be "such" a burden in the end (no idea really).

I don't like this either.

I don't like 1/ at all, and 2 seems indeed a burden for clients...

I see three ways to do this:

Sounds good to me.

Everything else currently shown under "show metadata" seems to be either already rendered elsewhere in the page and/or a machine-readable presentation of the same information, which would be best consumed via the Web API for programmatic needs.

Sounds good to me.

In T2848#53963, @zack wrote:

Oh, good point about the SWHIDs being already available as Permalinks.
I don't know exactly what you mean with "metadata associated to a SWH object", but I'm certainly in favor of reducing information duplication.

Oh, good point about the SWHIDs being already available as Permalinks.
I don't know exactly what you mean with "metadata associated to a SWH object", but I'm certainly in favor of reducing information duplication.

For the record, the "show metadata" pop-up was publicly reinstated in order to be able to display the revision metadata associated to a HAL push deposit (CodeMeta format).

yes

In T2779#52735, @douardda wrote:

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

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

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

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