prioritization of issues in Arctos

How are issues prioritized in Arctos?

I'm really frustrated right now. I've filed an issue weeks ago regarding the burdensome multi-step login sequence, and all of the energy of this community at this moment is being used on cleaning up what apparently is a legacy attribute field of right gonad width??

Can we please make it a priority to work on things that the most important users of Arctos, the Collection Staff, whose collections budgets pay money to work every day in this frustrating environment, have identified as things that would improve their user experience, rather than things identified by the programmers that could sit for DECADES and nobody would really care about?

If there's something more that I need to do regarding this issue I filed, please let me know, but I don't remember anything being asked of me regarding this.

I believe you're referring to https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/5852. I did some stuff, I don't know how to do more stuff.

https://github.com/ArctosDB/internal/issues/258 is still being sorted out, but it is my usual plea for a way to do just what you're asking (along with not doing things that then get immediately un-done because apparently nobody was paying attention): prioritize the things that need prioritizing, don't get distracted by the things that don't need priority. The first step is to get something actionable, and as above I need help on that. I'm up for most anything regarding how the mechanics of any of that work - use the issue, show up to one of the office hour things, show up to most any scheduled meeting, schedule something new, send smoke signals, WHATEVER, I'll try to make it work (and I think everyone else feels the same way).

@catherpes issues with a lot of participation by the community get priority. The more users affected, the higher the priority. Also those that affect data quality (the right gonad width issue does) or are bugs (Arctos is not working). I understand your frustration, but nobody else in the community seems to have issues with the login process or they would have added to it. In the past, things have been changed based on a single user's request that have come back to haunt the community. If the login issue is very important to you, I suggest adding to the AWG Issues agenda and attending the meeting to plead your case or recruit other users from your institution to comment on the issue.

I have similar issues with our UI, many of which I have posted and which have not been resolved. This is not because these issues aren't valid - but most people in our user community are just trying to do their jobs and don't have time to post and follow issues. In the absence of a UI developer, this must be a priority role of the AWG and officers - to make the user environment functional. I suggest we continue our UI development as a standing committee meeting. I will send out a poll to schedule.

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023, 9:55 AM Teresa Mayfield-Meyer < @.***> wrote:

[EXTERNAL]*

@catherpes https://github.com/catherpes issues with a lot of participation by the community get priority. The more users affected, the higher the priority. Also those that affect data quality (the right gonad width issue does) or are bugs (Arctos is not working). I understand your frustration, but nobody else in the community seems to have issues with the login process or they would have added to it. In the past, things have been changed based on a single user's request that have come back to haunt the community. If the login issue is very important to you, I suggest adding to the AWG Issues agenda and attending the meeting to plead your case or recruit other users from your institution to comment on the issue.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/6192#issuecomment-1523659080, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADQ7JBFQMLEIT7UWR5M3YI3XDFANZANCNFSM6AAAAAAXMT4SLI . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

This is ridiculous. This feels like stonewalling. Recruit supporters? I'm not a politician. I have a job to do. We as collection managers all have jobs to do that aren't database development. Arctos should be helping us do our jobs. Give me something to try out. I didn't see any request for more information 5852.

I'm beyond frustrated, downright angry now. Taking a break from this before I say something I regret.

On 4/26/2023 9:55 AM, Teresa Mayfield-Meyer wrote:

[EXTERNAL]

**

@catherpes https://github.com/catherpes issues with a lot of participation by the community get priority. The more users affected, the higher the priority. Also those that affect data quality (the right gonad width issue does) or are bugs (Arctos is not working). I understand your frustration, but nobody else in the community seems to have issues with the login process or they would have added to it. In the past, things have been changed based on a single user's request that have come back to haunt the community. If the login issue is very important to you, I suggest adding to the AWG Issues agenda and attending the meeting to plead your case or recruit other users from your institution to comment on the issue.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/6192#issuecomment-1523659080, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJJOJ6FYOK6RECJ4F4MA5M3XDFANVANCNFSM6AAAAAAXMT4SLI. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

There are 4.8 M records in Artos and right gonad width affects 226 records

Is that a good use of resources???

On 4/26/2023 9:55 AM, Teresa Mayfield-Meyer wrote:

[EXTERNAL]

**

@catherpes https://github.com/catherpes issues with a lot of participation by the community get priority. The more users affected, the higher the priority. Also those that affect data quality (the right gonad width issue does) or are bugs (Arctos is not working). I understand your frustration, but nobody else in the community seems to have issues with the login process or they would have added to it. In the past, things have been changed based on a single user's request that have come back to haunt the community. If the login issue is very important to you, I suggest adding to the AWG Issues agenda and attending the meeting to plead your case or recruit other users from your institution to comment on the issue.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/6192#issuecomment-1523659080, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJJOJ6FYOK6RECJ4F4MA5M3XDFANVANCNFSM6AAAAAAXMT4SLI. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

@catherpes Appreciate your thoughts. First I wanted to say generally the use of github issues is for a community input and action. A lot of the detailed work can be done in working groups or taken up by one of our monthly meetings. "Hot" topics does not mean it's a priority for development -- That said, the github forum is handy for weighing in on a lot of conversations and it can be overwhelming. We always recommend that people tweak their personal preference for what works for you (eg turn off all notifications but just receive specific ones, get a digest, use email filters). And pay attention to Labels and Milestones. Some issues are filed specifically for discussion!

As for development prioritization, we will be discussing and introducing at the next monthly Working Group meeting (4th Thursdays at 11 am PT) some new measures to make this hopefully more transparent.

OK, now to some specifics: Streamlining login Seems like there are some incremental things that Dusty is doing. Password managers definitely streamline and obfuscate the need to address for many users so this is a difficult one to suss out unless we see it in action. (for ex., I get logged in immediately after clicking log in, and just close the window (red X in the upper right) reflexively; BUT sometimes I do go straight to notifications because I have to fish out an error or IP address). AND I think we can work on the re-logging in after time-out issue IMO. Regardless, we wont close until we're good with all aspects. I also added to UI project so that the UI working group can consider.

As for right/left/ unknown gonad measurements, yes now it affects few records but there is an active NSF grant to record traits so I imagine this is better to sort out now when it affects few before it becomes another "hot and urgent" topic and they are trying to load many. We do need a space for discussions and if the diverse viewpoints can be gathered before the Code Table committee convenes all the better (plus the legacy CT just needs cleaning up so these tend to be constantly brought up).

To anyone reading: Everything Teresa said BTW applies but I hope I added a little more detail. I personally am grateful when people get involved constructively on issues they are passionate about (for whatever work or research reasons) and speaking for the Arctos officers, we appreciate people understanding that we are similarly all working at our respective museums with only two fulltime Arctos staff, a handful of Arctos volunteer officers, and a committed collection community. Feel free to reach out to us directly too anytime: Arctos Working Group Officers arctos-working-group-officers@googlegroups.com

Thanks Michelle.

I'll lay out my perspective as constructively as I can here one last time because I don't think I've ever posted a version of this email to github, although individuals have received similar versions over the years. Some I wrote and never sent. Call it a rant if you must.

I've been trying to participate here on github lately when things really seemed to be accelerating off the rails with respect to institutional catalog numbers, or in the past when male? and female? was proposed for elimination but I don't see myself getting involved more than at that level because it is an emotional burden that I don't need in my life. I'm not inclined to spend any more time than I already do participating in these generally frustrating discussions. Decision by committee is painfully inefficient, especially when everyone but two people involved has another full-time job to do, and that seems to be all that Arctos does - decision by committee.

MSB Birds got in to Arctos shortly after I got here nineteen years ago and I've never found functionality for CMs to be a top priority for the Database. The strategy from Joe and Gordon was to get as many collections in so it's too big to fail, get functionality unique to this platfrom (linking Arctos records to Genbank, pubs, projects, etc., etc.) for the public user and to impress potential funding sources, with no regard for how my colleagues and I were supposed to get the records in efficiently. 'email Dusty' Joe would say. Then, 'put it on github' I'd be told. Gordon once stood in my office door, conceded that all of my complaints of data entry and record editing from a CM's perspective were valid, and told me we're all beta testers. There's some dark humor. Now Arctos is millions of records in and I'm more frustrated than I've ever been.

Last month, I had to get Mariel to finish the bulkload of the most recent thousand-plus MSB Bird records into Arctos. I've never had to do that before (get someone to finish the process for me), and the file I sent her was version 6. That means I'd already done six iterations of formatting the file, finding errors by getting it into the staging table, trying to bulkload it, and getting the error file back. It was close, I thought, but it still took her three weeks to get it done. There were loan requests to be filled that were dependent on getting these records into the database, so it was a priority for her. And it still took her three weeks. The data entry interface, revamped though it is, still is a mouse-intensive popup-clicking exercise that makes the process inefficient and frustrating to the point that bulkloading is still my best option.

That's great that there's a grant to work on attributes/traits related to repro data. I'd love to hear of a dedicated funding source to work on something so mundane but fundamental as data entry and editing.

It's my opinion that the developers of Arctos are too close to it. It's like a mural on the side of a sky scraper being painted one brick at a time and nobody is asking the critics viewing from across the parking lot to see if this masterpiece actually is looking like it's supposed to. Do the colors and values actually work together? In some places yes, but in others not at all. The public, viewing from afar, sees a slightly abstract representation that they're fairly pleased with, but they don't know that it's actually supposed to be a realistic representation of the subject matter.

Has there ever been an outside audit of the functionality of this database? Somebody from a computer science background who knows about database user friendliness? How to make it more efficient from the standpoint of the most important users, the CMs? Our data would be better and available more quickly if Arctos were more usable, and that's ultimately what this is all about: Serving data to the public.

That's where I'm at. I've resigned myself to doing the minimum in Arctos that my job requires: getting records into arctos and getting the tissue part barcodes entered so that they can be used in loans. Few media, and most projects and links to pubs were not entered by me. I work in it sparingly because I find it incredibly frustrating.

I filed login issue 5852 because Arctos login is a convoluted process that I've not experienced in any other login interface on the web. Only logins that require secondary authentication take more time, but at least I understand why the process works the way it does, so they are less annoying. I thought that surely this little nugget of functionality wouldn't be too hard implement! I tried to make specific critiques and suggestions to fix them. However, it has become another representative microcosm of what frustrates me about this program.

Thanks for your attention.

Andy

On 4/26/2023 12:24 PM, Michelle Koo wrote:

[EXTERNAL]

**

@catherpes https://github.com/catherpes Appreciate your thoughts. First I wanted to say generally the use of github issues is for a community input and action. A lot of the detailed work can be done in working groups or taken up by one of our monthly meetings. "Hot" topics does not mean it's a priority for development -- That said, the github forum is handy for weighing in on a lot of conversations and it can be overwhelming. We always recommend that people tweak their personal preference for what works for you (eg turn off all notifications but just receive specific ones, get a digest, use email filters). And pay attention to Labels and Milestones. Some issues are filed specifically for discussion!

As for development prioritization, we will be discussing and introducing at the next monthly Working Group meeting (4th Thursdays at 11 am PT) some new measures to make this hopefully more transparent.

OK, now to some specifics:Streamlining login https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/5852 Seems like there are some incremental things that Dusty is doing. Password managers definitely streamline and obfuscate the need to address for many users so this is a difficult one to suss out unless we see it in action. (for ex., I get logged in immediately after clicking log in, and just close the window (red X in the upper right) reflexively; BUT sometimes I do go straight to notifications because I have to fish out an error or IP address). AND I think we can work on the re-logging in after time-out issue IMO. Regardless, we wont close until we're good with all aspects. I also added to UI project so that the UI working group can consider.

As for right/left/ unknowngonad measurements https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/6189, yes now it affects few records but there is an active NSF grant to record traits so I imagine this is better to sort out now when it affects few before it becomes another "hot and urgent" topic and they are trying to load many. We do need a space for discussions and if the diverse viewpoints can be gathered before the Code Table committee convenes all the better (plus the legacy CT just needs cleaning up so these tend to be constantly brought up).

To anyone reading: Everything Teresa said BTW applies but I hope I added a little more detail. I personally am grateful when people get involved constructively on issues they are passionate about (for whatever work or research reasons) and speaking for the Arctos officers, we appreciate people understanding that we are similarly all working at our respective museums with only two fulltime Arctos staff, a handful of Arctos volunteer officers, and a committed collection community. Feel free to reach out to us directly too anytime: Arctos Working Group Officers @.***

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/6192#issuecomment-1523863771, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJJOJ6EUD64LQNI34EXXPFLXDFR7JANCNFSM6AAAAAAXMT4SLI. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

thanks again Andy. I will migrate this to discussions and close as needed. I feel this might more fruitful if this is in realtime. Let me know if we can chat

ArctosDB / arctos

prioritization of issues in Arctos #6192