Yannick has confirmed it works

check with Roberto and Zack if this can be done with a direct deletion.

Status:
UI and tests

Feedback is collected here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V35FMNcOvT6YUeiSXYse1g_0PqEoQFIc2GtPWPQHIOw/edit?usp=sharing

The page is now reviewed and updated.

With @rdicosmo, we have decided that the "save archives now" which is only open to ambassadors today, should be opened to the public and that ambassadors will receive access to moderate the "save code now" requests.

• create banner with the SWHAP tree
• change title to: The Pisa collection
• Add subtitle: Stories of landmark legacy code
• Beta version note
• Add link from "Archive" menu with "Browse Software Stories (Beta)" to stories.softwareheritage.org

My tasks before the event:

• prepare Google doc

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r5nIc5JdoiZmsTMqQhYYSGqW0fcfuO9WrbVi1amfJYY/edit?usp=sharing

• invite Alain and a SWH team memeber (if validated)
• send information to the RDA SSC IG, FAIR4RS, RDA France and Force11 mailing lists (maybe also the SWH open science community?)

Yannick hasn't answered yet. Will try again on the 15th.

I'm not sure where we are at on this evolution.
Maybe we can discuss this next week.

This is an example of a use-case in Open Science:
An institution has a forge and wishes to add the forge as a whole to SWH.

• https://gricad-gitlab.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/explore
• https://gitlab.inria.fr/explore

I think we can resolve this.
Checking with Yannick (HAL) that it works.

In T3677#72924, @vlorentz wrote:

Oh and another use-case we discussed: when browsing an origin/directory/..., showing on the side the set of sources that provided metadata for that origin/directory/.... This is, again, to improve discoverability.

Following our discussion, we might call the tag metadata-source, since using the term origin for metadata can be misleading.

Why do we want that:

1. as you analyzed: recognize the deposit in the UI
2. recognize in the deposit storage, what is the source (origin) of the deposit
   • here it happens that the deposit itself is only metadata
3. identify which deposits are metadata-only deposits

This can be resolved :-)

In T3677#72872, @vlorentz wrote:

The same might be true when the target is an origin-url.

It's not

This should be tested with a deposit of metadata-only with the target origin.
When the SWHID is without context the column origin in the deposit admin view shows the SWHID, which is very confusing by the wey.

I think we (or I should say- I) missed ambiguity of the concept origin.

Yes context is a better option.
Then target is not in the grouped context.

this is old. I think this is resolved..
@ardumont , @anlambert ?

@anlambert here is another task to improve the deposit moderation/admin view

@anlambert here is the task we have briefly discussed as step 2 this morning

https://docs.softwareheritage.org/devel/contributing/tutorial-docs-contribution.html#doc-contribution

We have followed the plan on the hedgedoc (in the last comment).
Just realized we haven't decided if the support-tools should be in sys-admin dimension, so I'm adding this to this task to decide.

@olasd , @ardumont and @vsellier : I think that we can gently resolve this task.

1. September 2021 update

The features page is online and accessible for admins and ambassadors to get feedback:
https://www.softwareheritage.org/features/

Checklist available here:
https://hedgedoc.softwareheritage.org/InevnioRDM-SWH-checklist?both

Good idea to add this documentation!
I have added a few comments.