Generate list of sitenow v1 standard sites that didn't meet the deadline

[briand44]

Story

As a web team, we would like to generate a list of SiteNow v1 standard sites that missed the Aug. 1 deadline so that we can share this list with leadership to see if they want to weigh in on how we move forward with these sites.

### Tasks
- [x] Generate list of sites that missed deadline
- [x] Include any relevant metadata (extension granted, etc.)?
- [ ] Share list with leadership

[briand44]

Grooming conversation... Cohort is people who requested a v3 site but haven't launched or still have a active v1 site. If we do say "Do something by x date", lets not penalize these folks because there may be a valid reason they didn't reach out or meet the deadline. Do we need to be communicating with the site requestors again or should we be generating the unit leaders population and sharing with leadership at this point. Could send a message saying "We noticed you missed the deadline, did something come up? Do you know longer need the site? Are you still transitioning?"

Decided to push this back a bit after the deadline to account for any folks trickling in at the last minute. Also decided this slice would be generating the list of sites that missed the deadline and sharing and getting feedback from leadership on if they want to weigh in on next steps.

[briand44]

Grooming conversation.. Alan adding an extension column to the spreadsheet so we can track that info consistently between sites. Sean mentioned some of these aren't specific dates and that we will be checking in with them in a certain amount of time.

Should we wait to do this until all extensions have passed?

Do we include all sites to leadership even if we have granted extension or do we just include sites that we haven't heard from that missed the deadline?

Michael shared the following as a potential future communication after we have the list for leadership:

“We notice that you have not completed your migration to SiteNow v3. At this point, your D7 site is at risk of failing/not supporting. We’d like to do what we can to keep it running until your complete your migration, but we need to know how quickly you can finish your migration…”

Audience is people who haven’t finished, and we have not heard from/made plans with?

[joewhitsitt]

Here are my initial findings based on the spreadsheet:

No request and previously identified and represented in Michael's spreadsheet

~apo.org.uiowa.edu~ globalwealth.law.uiowa.edu ~hackiowa.org.uiowa.edu~ ~hawkeyeoptimistchapter.org.uiowa.edu~ m-ashley-spies.lab.uiowa.edu ~maps.org.uiowa.edu~ ~rugby.org.uiowa.edu~ shepherdgroup.lab.uiowa.edu ~sigmaalphaiota.org.uiowa.edu~ ~sits.org.uiowa.edu~ ~uiowaclubglax.org.uiowa.edu~ ~yaf.org.uiowa.edu~

Seemingly launched but not deprovisioned

~ncbc.medicine.uiowa.edu~ deprovisioned ~strack.lab.uiowa.edu~ deprovisioned

Redirected but not deprovisioned

~drivingassessment.uiowa.edu~ deprovisioned

Extension notes

hultman.lab.uiowa.edu - 8/16 michaelson.lab.uiowa.edu - 8/16 ~ncbc.medicine.uiowa.edu (see launched above) - 8/15~ launched/deprovisioned parekh.lab.uiowa.edu - 8/30 victorianfboos.studio.uiowa.edu - 9/18

Requested but remaining

accessibility101.course.uiowa.edu anthony.lab.uiowa.edu atasoy.lab.uiowa.edu blsa.org.uiowa.edu brogden.lab.uiowa.edu campbell.lab.uiowa.edu celp.org.uiowa.edu chen.lab.uiowa.edu clp.law.uiowa.edu cssa.org.uiowa.edu cui.lab.uiowa.edu econsent.lab.uiowa.edu english-society.org.uiowa.edu fab.law.uiowa.edu fisher.lab.uiowa.edu geerling.lab.uiowa.edu hultman.lab.uiowa.edu ieee.org.uiowa.edu lira.lab.uiowa.edu masongroup.lab.uiowa.edu matthew-arndt.sites.uiowa.edu michaelson.lab.uiowa.edu mil.lab.uiowa.edu nasa.org.uiowa.edu nhlp.law.uiowa.edu niciu.lab.uiowa.edu orsc-colloquium.sites.uiowa.edu parekh.lab.uiowa.edu pcit.lab.uiowa.edu perception.lab.uiowa.edu quelle.lab.uiowa.edu radley.lab.uiowa.edu rahmouni.lab.uiowa.edu richerson.lab.uiowa.edu rohlman.lab.uiowa.edu roman.lab.uiowa.edu sebag.lab.uiowa.edu tedabel.lab.uiowa.edu ~tlcp.law.uiowa.edu (email about launching in its-web)~ launched 8/20/24 turkish.org.uiowa.edu uisrmsymposium.sites.uiowa.edu uitransalliance.org.uiowa.edu usachev.lab.uiowa.edu victorianfboos.studio.uiowa.edu

I am going to dig through some emails, check a few other sites in the spreadsheet to see if things are misclassified, etc.

[joewhitsitt]

Updated the spreadsheet related to ncbc.medicine.uiowa.edu as it looks to have launched on 8/14 (domain added to uiowa06) but left the extension note on there.

[briand44]

I removed drivingassessment.uiowa.edu D7 site and updated the spreadsheet. Waiting to hear back on ncbc and then will remove it and strack.lab

[briand44]

Added dates to https://github.com/uiowa/uiowa/issues/7886#issuecomment-2296783668 in the extension notes

[joewhitsitt]

Waiting to understand what format these results should be in and where to send it to.

[briand44]

deprovisioned strack, ncbc.medicine and tlcp.law

[briand44]

i discussed this with @mjoneill . We don't need to make this visible to leadership as part of this slice but would like to audit more to understand how far along they are in the process. Did they request a site but never create any content or are they actively creating new content and close to launch? I discussed this with @joewhitsitt and he thought he could tackle that piece of this work as part of this slice and would add that info to the spreadsheet in some manner. We don't need to worry about the sites that never requested or those that we already provided an extension for.

I will create another slice to identify unit leaders so we have that information for future communications.

[joewhitsitt]

I was thinking I could tackle the "more to understand how far along they are," but it would be nice to identify a scale of sorts because in the first handful of sites there is variation about where they are at.

• Someone log in since it has been created
• Addition/modification of content
• Recent activity (logins or content updates) since email campaign
• Some progress within the site but homepage still has demo content
• Basic info of who/what the site is furnished so it could launch even if incomplete
• Looks potentially launch worthy and comparable to their v1 site
• Etc..

At EoD it sounded like whatever the groupings would be that it would be good to get this into a separate column for easier filtering/counting.

So @mjoneill I was curious if you had more specifics about what you want to do with the data and how granular we should go so that we can classify things appropriately.

[joewhitsitt]

Talked with Michael and Brian this morning and I am going to capture a couple of criteria and then an overall score based on those. I'll see how far I get today, but the PO thought that this could spill over to #8006 and this issue could close at the end of the sprint.

[joewhitsitt]

Established new columns (Noticable progress, Login since June 2024, Potentially launch-ready) on the D7 spreadsheet to help generate an overall score for the site's transition off v1. Also added an internal-domain url column for easy referencing and have some generalized notes for sites.

Still have about 17 sites to check.

[joewhitsitt]

Finished going through the sites. Just need to fix the remaining d7 dynamic sheet

[joewhitsitt]

I was able to fix and include more columns in the Remaining D7 sheets.

To clarify, this slice addressed standard/active sites of the remaining d7 sheet that had requested a site, so initial filtering should happen there.