ArchivesSpace 3.0.2 Upgrade (draft)

I. Problem/Value Statement

Harvard's version of ArchivesSpace is two years old, leaving the system without the latest security improvements and desired enhancements for users which have been included in later releases.  Installation of new releases has been made more difficult and time consuming by the large scale of Harvard's ArchivesSpace metadata. The functions, scope of metadata, and refresh and support expectations for the suite of ArchivesSpace environments has become muddled over the years, resulting in frustrations and delays for both developers and archives staff. The existing QA environment has become unreliable and is unable to support testing necessary for the bulk loading of containers, delaying some libraries' adoption of Aeon to fulfill user-submitted requests for materials.

II. Vision and Approach

The solution:

• Create a subset of Harvard's metadata for use by developers in their local environments and in the development environment to reduce time to deployment for this and future updates.

• Formalize the functions, access, and support model for each instance in the suite of ArchivesSpace environments.

• Install and migrate data into version 3.0.X in all environments (production, QA, development, sandbox) and ensuring that all necessary plugins are working correctly to bring Harvard fully up to date. 

• Load containers through QA for testing and into production for Schlesinger Library and the Law School Library.

Deliverables/Work Products:   

• A coherent subset of Harvard ArchivesSpace records, together with the scripts used to produce it.

• A 3.0.2 Development environment with plugins, populated with the subset of metadata.

• 3.0.2 QA, Production, and Sandbox environments with plugins, populated with the full production metadata.

• Bugs and enhancements listed as "In Scope" below have been resolved.

• Containers loaded and linked for Schlesinger Library and the Law School Library.

Definition of ”done":

The new environments, plugins, in-scope tickets, and migrated metadata have been tested and blockers have been resolved. Non-blocking issues may be deferred.

Technical, support, and library staff documentation has been updated where applicable. 

In Scope:

• Configure PUI request plugin to add new repositories.

• Correct PUI Request form handling of photoduplication requests for Botany Libraries.

• Resolve intermittent issue where, after bounce, extra Request button appears and Request does not work.

• Reinstate 25-items-per-page result setting instead of 10-per-page.

• Recover ARN and GRA Resources that become unavailable when ArchivesSpace is re-indexed or upgraded, and eliminate the cause of the problem.

• Bugs identified in the attempted upgrade to 2.8.1 early in 2021.

Out of Scope (for medium and large projects):

• Enhancement requests and bugs not listed as in scope.

III. Stakeholders and Project Team

Stakeholders

Project Team

Roles: Project Manager, Business Analyst, Quality Assurance Analyst, Architect, Software Engineer, Systems Engineer, UI Designer, Metadata Analyst, Subject Matter Expert

Testing Team

ArchivesSpace Working Group

• Johanna Carll (Schlesinger Library)

• Danielle Castronovo (Harvard University Herbaria and Libraries)

• Adrien Hilton (Houghton Library)

• Benjamin Johnson (Baker Library)

• Jennifer Pelose (Harvard University Archives)

• Megan Schwenke (Harvard Art Museums)

• Jessica Sedgwick (Countway Library)

• Christopher Spraker (Law Library)

• Melanie Wisner  (Houghton Library)

ArchivesSpace Public User Interface Working Group

• Kate Donovan (Houghton Library)

• Tim Driscoll (Harvard University Archives)

• Jennifer Fauxsmith (Schlesinger Library)

• Jessica Murphy (Countway Library)

• Heather Oswald (Baker Library)

• Leslie Schoenfeld (Law Library)

• Ines Zalduendo (GSD Loeb Library)

IV. Cost and Schedule

All work, including container testing and loading to be completed by mid-October 2021.

Once the testing environment for staff has been deployed and populated, testers will be asked to test and return feedback within a week.

IV. Key tasks and outcomes

VI. Assumptions, Risks, and Constraints

Constraints:

• Deadline of mid-October has been committed, which includes completion of container loading. This means that the bulk of the project (deployment of all environments and production turnover) must be done by or before end of September.

Assumptions:

• Stakeholders have identified the appropriate subject matter experts to participate in the Working Group and who can accurately and completely define the business requirements for the project

• Stakeholders will have made available the time required to participate in project activities and to complete tasks as requested

• Project sponsor and other stakeholders are empowered to make the decisions required for the project to be a success

• Project sponsor will provide written approval to move forward with system development when requested as part of incremental/iterative system demonstrations

Dependencies:

Potential Risks (description, plan, impact, owner):