From GO Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
<ben> morning
<sjcarbon_> mornin'
chris is at an SAB meeting today, so he won't be in for this.
<val> hi sorry I'm late
<sjcarbon_> no problem
how about rama? is she still away?
<pascale> yes
she emailed me that she'd be back dec 1
<sjcarbon_> ok, thanks.
<gwg> should we wait for her?
<sjcarbon_> who's left?
<pascale> sure ! 
<val> eurie?
<pascale> I dont know if Eurie still participates in this group? 
<gwg> btw, I will fix that problem with the accession search so that '32045' and similar strings return a result
<pascale> ok
<sjcarbon_> somehow i thought she wasn't anymore.
<pascale> same here
<sjcarbon_> so this would be everybody?
<val> oh I didn't know.
<ben> eurie is quit amigo
<sjcarbon_> ok, let's get started then.
first item: breakdown of testing
we need a logical way to break testing between WPWGers.
shall we do this by page?
or functionality?
<ben> well, there is:
<sjcarbon_> that number pretty much fits the number of people currently in the WPWG.
<ben> maybe we could combine enrich/slim since we have basically 4 testers
<sjcarbon_> any takers for each of the components?
<val> I don't mind doing enrich / and or slim
<ben> you should do "regular" testing on everything, and "hammer" your assigned area.  
<pascale> I can do blast 
<donghui> i can do browse
<sjcarbon_> search and enrich/slim are left.
<ben> "Hammer" means really try to break it.  Run 3 sessions, switch windows, pipe in raw SQL code to the boxes, pick the worse possible terms
<val> I "ll do enrich/slim
<sjcarbon_> who loves search?
<val> That leaves search for rama
<ben> maybe she can outsource it (nyuk, nyuk)_
<sjcarbon_> ok, great.
<pascale> just one request 
<gwg> go on...
<pascale> could you please put on the wiki the new features we currently need to 'hammer' 
<val> It would be nice to have a checklist of all those thinbgs ben. I wouldn't think to do many of those things, or others
<pascale> I was looking at enrich earlier, is that still relevant? 
<sjcarbon_> i'll put a little list on the wiki.
<pascale> thanks ! 
I like little
<val> pascale do you mean enrich has already been tested, or somethign else?
<sjcarbon_> i'll send out the URL when I post this meeting's notes.
<pascale> I was asking if we are still asking for enrich to be tested, yes
<sjcarbon_> everyone good?
<ben> ok, I will take a look at the wiki list and give comments
<sjcarbon_> let's go to the next item on the agenda:
<val> Seth, I think there are still some outstanding feedbacks from me, are they still 'in the pipeline'
<sjcarbon_> there are a couple in the pipeline; they are the ones that i need chris to help answer.
mapping, right?
<val> yep, 
<gwg> just quickly before we move on, there are also some subsidiary group members who don't always attend the chat - perhaps we can get them to do some testing too
<pascale> great idea
<sjcarbon_> who are they again?
<gwg> e.g. Rachael emailed me and said she'd be willing to test but she couldn't always make the meetings
there is also Susan Tweedie
<val> that wold be good if they could test too
<gwg> Perhaps they can be assigned to the broader things, like testing AmiGO core functionality, e.g. the search and browse functions
<pascale> right
<sjcarbon_> this brings us to the next action item: opening membership to the WPWG.
<pascale> I know Susan was into this from the 'web presence' side
<gwg> let's make her earn her keep!
<sjcarbon_> are they on the list?
<gwg> AFAIK, yes
<sjcarbon_> is there anyone else that people think should be added to the roll?
<pascale> do we know who's on the email list? that might be a good place to start
make sure everyone participates or gets removed if they dont want to
<sjcarbon_> i think i have that list from mike cherry at some point, let me check...
<gwg> I know there are a few people on the list who just like to keep in touch with what's going on, but aren't necessarily interested in being actively involved in AmiGO stuff
we should probably respect their wishes on that front, rather than pressganging them into testing!
<pascale> sure
<sjcarbon_> i found the list. at least the list from when this was the AWG:
sshu (!)
<pascale> that's susan
<sjcarbon_> mike
<val> yes so we need to ask rachel and susan. midori won't want to, shes just on the list to keep up
ah and varsh, we could ask her too
<gwg> and how about Shu? He hasn't done any testing in a while...
<sjcarbon_> and i assume that mary joined at some time (we emailed)
that's all
<val> i mean varsha
<gwg> I think Varsha, Susan and Rachael could all be asked to test the search and browse / annotation view stuff
<sjcarbon_> would you mind contacting them and seeing if that's possible?
<gwg> 'browse' should include the core AmiGO functions of viewing term details and annots and viewing gp details and annots
yup, I can do that
<sjcarbon_> thanks!
<val> if any of them can't can we next ask others on WPWG (if there are any?)
<sjcarbon_> i don't see why not, but i don't think many others are on there.
<val> ok whats next?
<sjcarbon_> next item: opening AmiGO to wider testing.
After the working group is happy (enough) with what they see,
which list should we announce to for broad testing?
GO list?
<gwg> the main GO list
<pascale> makes sense
<val> do you have time frame in mind for this?
<sjcarbon_> We're working on getting AmiGO installed at Stanford right now.
Until then, we can keep testing on the toy servers.
We can announce on the list as soon as people have tested their piece of AmiGO.
I'll post some instructions today.
<gwg> if we use a similar strategy to that used by the OBO-Edit wg, where people 'sign off' on their specific section of AmiGO
<sjcarbon_> So...this weekish sounds possible.
<gwg> and then if bugs appear afterwards that weren't found during testing, a can of whup-ass can be opened on whoever was testing that area ;)
<val> so should we aim to have done testing by Friady (provided we can get the others oinvolved)
<sjcarbon_> Either way, everybody has something they can work now.
<gwg> if people are happy with their segment before Friday, then I reckon we should open it to the GO list before then
<pascale> ok
<sjcarbon_> about twenty minutes left, shall we move on?
<gwg> let's go!
<sjcarbon_> next item: decision tree
no idea.
<pascale> oh yes 
I added this
<gwg> is this Karen's evidence code thing?
<sjcarbon_> (you might want to post to the thread too)
<pascale> I think Rama will deal with this when sahe gets back but I didn't want to forget
<gwg> did anyone alter the bits that need altering?
<pascale> guess not! 
<gwg> I'll see if one of the computers here has Illustrator on it, because I think I still have the email where Karen said what needed to be fixed
I can fix it and get it out of the way if so
next item?
<pascale> that'd be great 
<gwg> (I'll send the bill on to you, yes?)
<sjcarbon_> reading the next item, it looks like it has already been discussed: val's question about the mapper differences.
when chris is around again, we'll hash that out.
<val> ah yes thats OK if its in hand.
when will you speak to Chris?
<sjcarbon_> probably tomorrow when he is back.
<val> OK I won't hassle him yet....
is that it then?
<sjcarbon_> that got quick at the end. anything else that people want to chat about?
alrighty then, talk to y'all later!
<val> not me, but could you send the URL again, I might get chance to do some testing tonight and I can't access it from home
bye all
<pascale> bye
<ben> l8r
<donghui> bye
<gwg> au revoir
<sjcarbon_> i'll send the full list to everyone.
<sjcarbon_> bye