Page History

De Coronado, Sherri    

Safran, Tracy

Kuntipuram, Kumar

Sprint Status

Current Sprint -  Sprint 33 (June 23, 2016 – July 6, 2016)

LexEVS

S13-500 Agile Development - Sprint

Status#SprintStatus-Sprint33

We finished sprint 33.

The HL7 loader issue for namespace is complete

There were three OWL2 loader issues that were resolved

Lucene code has been merged into the master branch

We are also planning for sprint 34 and for the next LexEVS release.

Dev - RC.1

• Status of Deployment and Verification

This deployment will be done through the PTE and Anthill Pro process.

TODO: Mayo team needs to set up an ARC meeting for LexEVS 6.4.

• There are questions about the new lucene indexes and running LexEVS 6.3 in parallel with LexEVS 6.4. We will also need separate URLs for LexEVS 6.3 and LexEVS 6.4.
• The Mayo team will need to verify/update the LexEVS 6.4 ARC document.
• The Mayo team will then ask Sarah Elkins on the process to request an ARC meeting.

NCI team will run user acceptance tests (from Tin) against the LexEVS API. NCI doesn't need any additional resources from the Mayo team at this time.

After LexEVS is deployed, Tin will update the URLs from his test suite to hit the DEV deployment and test his scripts.

NCI will test LexEVS 6.3 and LexEVS 6.4 side by side to make sure they both work together.

Planning for QA deployment and beyond

Deployment to DEV:

• Toky deployed using the Jenkins server
• Once LexEVS is installed via AHP, Tin will test.

ARC Process

• Updates

Deployment to DEV:

• Sara is using our original PTE request to have LexEVS installed on DEV. This ticket has been assigned to Jacob.
• The Systems team will do the install on DEV using AHP.
  • Remote API - This will be a new container (there will be 6.3 and 6.4 instance available)
  • CTS2 - 6.4 This will be used in place of 6.3. CTS2 6.4 will reuse the 6.3 container.
  • URI resolver will not change. We will point to the existing one.
• We don't want to require clients to have to update their client builds for 6.4

OWL2 Loaders discussion

• Feedback regarding cardinality

Quantified Object Of Restrictions -

• Cardinality restriction is covered in this fix.
• What do we do with the other cardinality restrictions?
• Should these be traversable?
  • relationships
  • qualifiers (if they are at the end).

Larry suggested the following:

• Base semantics could be used in the LexEVS
• Full semantics should be in another tool besides LexEVS (possibly a triple store). The LexEVS model doesn't support this.

Scott suggested that we think about the restrictions issue and we will continue our discussion at the meeting set up for this Friday

OWL2 Loaders - planned time with Gilberto

We have time set up for the next several Fridays (Gilberto, Rob, Tracy, Scott, Deepak, and Cory) to review OWL2 loader changes.

There are several other cardinality use cases that are not in scope for this issue. They will need to be addressed.

These issues will be discussed at the meeting set up during the next several Fridays.

We will also need to discuss how OWL fits into LexEVS in the future.

HL7 Loader issue - create issue for the flipped internal code and entity code.

• Jira
  server NCI Tracker columns key,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution serverId 7954a81f-12da-3366-a0ef-97c806660e7c key LEXEVS-2016

• Gilberto's feedback

Current fix is to call everything an "HL7" namespace object.

Do we need to expand this to multiple namespaces?

Gilberto mentioned the following:

• In the case of the OBI vocabulary, we are using coding scheme to denote the vocabulary, which is in turn composed of several namespaces, GO, ChEBI, IAO, as well as the OBI namespace itself.  
• In the case of HL7, we'd be using "namespace" for the container, while each individual HL7 vocabulary is a "coding scheme" (per the HL7 nomenclature).  

Gilberto asked if this fixes Kim's issue? Yes, there is now a namespace called "HL7".

We agreed to go with this approach for now and have it tested by Kim

.

LexEVS External Users

getIsPreffered() - Prioritize JIRA Issue

• Jira
  server NCI Tracker columns key,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution serverId 7954a81f-12da-3366-a0ef-97c806660e7c key LEXEVS-

  2015

The javadocs are working as designed.

When the javadocs are created, the filename convention is to be lowercase. Any camel case filenames will therefore break.

One possible solution is to create a specialized doclet to create camel case file names/paths.

A couple other possible work arounds may be to do the following:

• Place a note that this doesn't work on Linux. This note would be placed where we post the javadocs.
• Host them on the wiki

The return type is a Boolean type, which can return a null.

If the property name is the preferred name, Rob thought it would use that property.

Tracy suggested that the Thesaurus should have a preferred name.

Rob will create a JIRA issue for this.

• 2020

This can wait until LexEVS 6.5 (if it wasn't fixed in 6.4)

TODO: verify if this was fixed in 6.4.

HTTPs as a requirement for CTS2, Remote API and URI resolver

• Discuss the timeline for this requirement

Larry mentioned that there is an HHS mandate that all services need to move to HTTPS by the end of the year.

Any new services created after this year will need to be HTTPS.

Question: When do existing services need to be updated?

TODO: Create a JIRA issue for this and place it into 6.5 for now.

6.5 Review and Planning

• Planning activities:
  • Prioritization of 6.5 issues from face to face. (30)
    • https://tracker.nci.nih.gov/issues/?jql=(affectedVersion%20%20%3D%206.5%20OR%20fixVersion%20%3D%206.5)%20AND%20labels%3D%202015.12.Face2Face%20and%20project%20%3D%20LEXEVS
  • Prioritization of 6.5 tagged backlog issues (not 2F2). (25)
    • https://tracker.nci.nih.gov/issues/?jql=(affectedVersion%20%20%3D%206.5%20OR%20fixVersion%20%3D%206.5)%20%20and%20labels%20is%20EMPTY%20and%20project%20%3D%20LEXEVS
  • Deliverables by end of Sept?
  • Other timeline?

This will not be in LexEVS 6.4.

Larry would like us to come up with a plan and try to fit it into the LexEVS 6.5 schedule.

• Refer to issue Kim created this TreeServer issue:

  Jira
  server NCI Tracker columns key,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution serverId 7954a81f-12da-3366-a0ef-97c806660e7c key LEXEVS-

  1999

• 1460

Mayo Team

• Scott - July 4thDeepak - July 4th15th - 20th