Custom nodes will start off by first registering in Sandbox. Nodes using an existing MN software will register in Stage.
- Node contact subject approved by D1 admin in DataONE LDAP.
- Node software configuration - synchronization enabled if applicable.
- Node registration document generated and submitted to Sandbox or Stage CN.
- D1 Admin approves node registration on the Sandbox or Stage CN server.
- Monitor and verify synchronization, indexing, search behavior.
- MN approves display of information in test search interface (https://search-sandbox.test.dataone.org/#data or https://search-stage.test.dataone.org/#data)
A note for custom implemented DataONE services: It's expected that development and testing will be more iterative. When satisfied with results in sandbox, repeat the process by changing target to cn-stage.
#1 Updated by Amy Forrester over 3 years ago
- % Done changed from 0 to 30
- Assignee set to Rob Nahf
- Status changed from New to In Progress
3/19/18: from Rob to Sarah Roberts
we'll only need to test the MNCore and MNRead apis. We do have a web site that runs basic api and connectivity tests. Once enough of those pass, we'll register you into a testing environment to iron out any potential issues with data display in our indexes before moving to production
* The testing site is http://mncheck.test.dataone.org:8080/MNWebTester_v2.3-SNAPSHOT_r18433/.
#6 Updated by Amy Forrester about 3 years ago
from Rob: Cyverse is doing some storage refactoring in anticipation of integrating with DataONE. This will impact their timeline (+1 month?). Prior to that we didn’t have a great sense that they were handling updates properly, so we will need to reassess once they get back in touch with me. Additionally, they will need to register their genomics data formats. I haven’t heard back from them on that either. My assumption is that we are not as high of a priority for them as other things they have going on
#7 Updated by Amy Forrester about 3 years ago
9/14/18: from Sarah Roberts firstname.lastname@example.org
I’ve got two pull requests waiting for review. Some of the code changes were a little complicated, so I requested several reviews in order to make sure that there aren’t any bugs and that the code will be maintainable in the future. I think that these are the last of the changes we’ll have to make, at least initially.
I’ll run through the automated tests again as soon as the changes have been merged in.
#8 Updated by Amy Forrester over 2 years ago
4/12/19: from Sarah Roberts
I spent a little time looking this over today. The change that I was making was related to the placement of the metadata files. The files are now going to be placed into a different directory than the data set, which will prevent us from having to explicitly update the data set for metadata changes if I remember correctly. These changes have been merged into the master branch of their respective repositories.
The migration to nested metadata attributes is now complete as well, although we currently only support DataCite 4.1. If you could add support for that, it would be very helpful to us. If not, adding a DataCite 3.1 generator on our end wouldn’t require an inordinate amount of work.
I think that the last things that we have to do are to compile the list of file formats and decide what to do about data set updates. Once we have that done, I think we can revisit the approval process. I could easily be missing something, though.