Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
 ITEMMENTIONSTIMEFRAMECOMMENTS
AConsolidate platforms / Samvera decision / exit bepress / migrate legacy collections / sunset systems81, 3131, 3When broken down into A1=consolidate platforms/sunset systems, A2=Samvera decision, A3=exit bepress, A4= migrate legacy collections, tally become A1=5, A2=6, A3=1, A4=3 (wak)
B Service management / role clarity / appropriate staffing level791, 3See also I, below
C Complete and public-facing policies (including collection), contact information571, 3Some suggest consistency across repositories. One specific mention of consistent collection policies. See also I, below
DDevelop/define CUL-wide repository strategy; clear purpose for each repo; clarify place of repositories in CUL priorities451, 3Don't base on CU/CUL org structure
EEnsure preservation of repository content51, 3 
GImprove discovery (and interoperability to support it)41, 3Incl one comment that we should reduce multiple deposit
F Participate in selected open sources communities23Presumes some consolidation of platforms
Improve discovery (and interoperability to support it)23 
HEvaluate / explore existing and potential external partnerships and shared repos (e.g. BHL, Internet Archive, other)21, 3 
IAdopt / implement repository principles document across CUL21See also B, C above    

 

SINGLE MENTIONS

  • Should RepoExec should meet less frequently
  • Support for large (>3GB) datasets in eCommons (i.e. Globus)
  • Greater transparency on part of RepoExec, especially for liaisons
  • Complete documentation for all repositories
  • Define "metadata of record," in particular to support movement of content from one repo to another
  • Clarify repository landscape (support staff understanding of it)
  • Clarify whether collection and deposit of Cornell faculty papers is a priority (and if it is, staff appropriately)
  • Better communication among repository staff to share ideas, challenges, goals, etc.
  • PR / marketing support for repositories to improve visibility
  • Modernize Improve or modernize feature set in repositories; better support for customization
  • If supporting OJS, need to provision for service. Possible CUL-CUP partnership? Possible consolidation of existing pubs?
  • Update repository inventory

 

PRIORITIZING

  • Day to day work experience / pain points
  • Previous RepoExec discussions
  • Issues of technical debt, need to consolidate platforms
  • 1-year: things that can be done with current knowledge and resources
  • Funders' public access requirements (for data)
  • Lifecycle and longer-term thinking
  • Desire to break down siloes

...

  • RepoExec underutilized / out of the loop on discussions, decision-making. Bypassed and pther repository-related groups formed, or decisions about repos are made elsewhere. Instead this group could fulfill that role.
  • Convening service managers to establish more uniform practices could be useful
  • Lack of authority means RepoExec can't do much; demoralizing
  • Suggestion that membership skews too much towards "top level," should include more functional experts
  • Need to hear CUL/UL commitment regarding repositories

HOW RESPONSES WERE TABULATED

  • Repetition of the same idea within a single survey response was only counted once.
  • Where multiple/similar ideas were combined into a single item in the table above, if the response included two or more different elements of the consolidated item, each element was counted.
  • Responses tabulated: 14.