Determine Use of CKAN Upstream Tagging Feature

thejuliekramer commented 4 years ago

User Story

As a developer, I want to use CKAN's upstream implementation of the tagging feature so that we can use the OKF version of CKAN instead of GSA's fork. If we can't replicate this behavior we will not move this code upstream at this time.

Acceptance Criteria

[ ] Documentation where custom tagging is being used in GSA Fork
[ ] Documentation where CKAN OKF tagging can be used as a replacement using an extension
[ ] PR with code changes as an extension or a configuration file to move this functionality

Details / tasks

[ ] Documentation where custom tagging is being used in GSA Fork
[ ] Documentation where CKAN OKF tagging can be used as a replacement using an extension
[ ] Current custom tagging behavior can be recreated using CKAN OKF and an extension or a configuration file

kimwdavidson commented 3 years ago

@thejuliekramer to determine what this ticket is for. We'll the decide whether to icebox or prioritize.

thejuliekramer commented 3 years ago

This ticket original came from an analysis of data.gov commits to the 2.3 CKAN fork https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nFJyKfGobIEi1v-UEGmdvKSVNIe1QFW61L7HwzJLDTY/edit#gid=0

thejuliekramer commented 3 years ago

After reviewing this with @avdata99 we think we should not continue to roll up extras in CKAN 2.9. In the past we were using extras for tagging. We need to determine what we want out of tagging in CKAN 2.9 and use the topics or other built in categories given by CKAN. If we require additional custom categorization or custom tagging we will need to build this feature.

GSA / datagov-ckan-multi