Page History

Discussion Points: 

• How is your group using LexEVS today?
  • No new additional uses.
• Are there any concerns or issues with the current API?
  
• What are your future plans with LexEVS?Are there additional requirements?
  
  • No new additional requirements.

• Currently, the client jar is needed for the remote API even though changes may not apply. Would like propose removal of the remote API and utilize the EVS REST API. This would remove the client jar requirement. The EVS team could even re-write the code used by caDSR (to remove remote API dependency and use the REST service).
  • caDSR code effort could be minimal, but need to determine the full impact (enhancements to EVS REST API, etc).
  • Evaluate what calls into LexEVS (remote service) and determine a LOE.
• A new caDSR solution is being considered, but that will still be a ways out (Q1/2020)
• EVS REST API is being developed and the results (API response) are still being defined.
• There is discussion about having a single service that will serve content from EVS REST API and LexEVS.
• Future caDSR requirements need to be documented so that EVS Services can satisfy what is needed.

Decision Points:

• caDSR team to provide calls to Tracy so team can provide an LOE.
• Future caDSR (new tooling) requirements to be documented so that EVS Services can satisfy what is needed.
• Provide dates if known regarding RMI. (Tech stack or security issues could impact usage).
• Investigate/create JIRA item for current bug (related to retired flag) caDSRAdmin-329/LexEVS-3468