I'm sure many are aware, but might be worth noting that Peter Sefton at
USQ in Aus has used Subversion as the basis for a wordprocessor /
repository system, Integrated Content Environment:
http://ice.usq.edu.au/
JISC has funded work on this at Cambridge - the Theorem-ICE project:
https://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/trac/theorem
Neil
Chris Rusbridge wrote:
> If the repository moves upstream into the workflow, and actually does
> something useful for the researcher, it will have to support team
> working.
>
> BTW I'm seeing echoes of another resemblance, a lot less structured...
> with a wiki. Likewise does version control (in a way), and supports
> team working.
>
> I'm not trying to say any of these things are the same. I'm asking if
> there are features from these *slightly similar* things that we might
> find useful in *our* repositories!
>
> --
> Chris Rusbridge
> Director, Digital Curation Centre
> Email: [log in to unmask] Phone 0131 6513823
> University of Edinburgh
> Appleton Tower, Crichton St, Edinburgh EH8 9LE
>
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>
>
>
> On 12 Mar 2009, at 21:11, Paul Walk wrote:
>
>> Les has drawn the distinction between the essentially 'live' nature
>> of content in source-code repositories and the generally rather
>> static aspect of content in our average IR. Of course there are
>> plenty of examples of source-code repositories which are no longer
>> being used to support 'live' code (swathes of sourceforge.net
>> resemble a graveyard of abandoned software projects), but this
>> distinction is nonetheless true and important.
>>
>> I would like to point up another distinction: the source code
>> repository is, pretty much by definition, designed to support a
>> *team* (or at least a pair) working on the same project. Version
>> control is fundamental, but equally important are a set of tools and
>> practices supported by the repository to aid collaborative
>> development. A typical interaction with the average IR is, I venture,
>> a more solitary affair.
>>
>> Having said this, it has occurred to me that there may well be an
>> overlap, in terms of architecture at least, between LOCKKS and a
>> relatively new source-code version control system called 'Git'.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12 Mar 2009, at 18:50, Peter Burnhill wrote:
>>
>>> Without wanting to disappear up an ontology of ....
>>>
>>> On 12 Mar 2009, at 16:43, Leslie Carr wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12 Mar 2009, at 16:36, Peter Burnhill wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think repositories are a place to store things.
>>>> Store? Get? Keep? They're all services :-)
>>>
>>> well, they are verbs/actions, and as noted below, I am wary of using
>>> repository as a word for every set of managed data - as a variant of
>>> database, say.
>>>
>>> I need a bit of assistance to separate Store & Keep, but would
>>> expect that Put (deposit/ingest) & Get have to be among the minimum
>>> set of verbs. In a source repository, which has that set, there is
>>> greater need to attend to amend/edit and provenance/trail than is
>>> usual among the repositories of objects usually included in
>>> discussion. Being a 'data person', I am aware of some of the
>>> natural history of data generation (manufacture/collection) and the
>>> management of databases and datasets but not yet convinced that
>>> there is as much carry-over as supposed.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I've never signed up to the idea that they are a set of services,
>>>>> except that a repository might be thought to be capable of
>>>>> supporting three essential services: ingest (deposit), keep-safe
>>>>> and access (use). Of course, for a digital/network repository
>>>>> each of those may have multiple interpretation: typically m2m as
>>>>> well as hci for the ingest and access, say. At least that is how
>>>>> we conceived the minimally sufficient functionality for Jorum.
>>>>> Keep-safe also needs some interpretation.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps the key part of a source repository is that it is made to
>>>> look after (store, get, keep) a large number of highly
>>>> synchronised, formally interpretable modules. The services (oops)
>>>> that it offers are related to the business of using (and reusing)
>>>> software code. Of course, code is manufactured and used by users,
>>>> so the whole social network thingy might look very familiar.
>>>>
>>>> As for code preservation (language migration, version retrofitting
>>>> etc) well, that is an issue, but no-one is suggesting that a
>>>> specialised group of librarians will do it instead of the code
>>>> producers themselves.
>>>
>>> data librarians and data curators do deploy information management
>>> skills, rather than leave it to the data producers
>>> (nstrumentalists?) or even the researchers, but I digress
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Les
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
>>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> Paul Walk
>> Technical Manager
>> UKOLN (University of Bath)
>> http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
>> [log in to unmask]
>> +44(0)1225383933
>> --------------------------------------------
>>
--
---------------
Neil Jacobs <[log in to unmask]>
JISC Executive, Beacon House, Queens Road, Bristol, BS8 1QU
+44 (0)117 33 10772 / (0)7768 040179 / skype: neil.jacobs1
---------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anything in this message which does not clearly relate to the official work of the sender's organisation shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by that organisation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|