[
https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/DS-1175?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=24895#comment-24895
]
Richard Rodgers commented on DS-1175:
-------------------------------------
Hi Richard:
Sorry the behavior seems confusing, but it is operating as designed. Of the two
fields only one (terms) is assigned by the user. The other (lift) is
*calculated* from the terms.
So it is correct that an error should be thrown if there are no terms assigned.
*After* the lift has been calculated, it is used by the Lifter to actually lift
the embargo after the calculated date - so I'm not sure what you mean by
'minimal usage' (i.e. after lift has been assigned, the terms are no longer
used).
I think the confusion can stem from two aspects:
(1) The terms can be expressed as a 'rule' ("90 days"), *or* as an actual
literal lift date, or, for that matter, anything at all that the Setter code
can interpret - like "Elsevier standard". When the terms are a literal date,
they get mapped directly into the lift date (no calculation really, just a
pass-through).
(2) It is possible to configure both the terms and the lift fields to point at
the same field. This is useful if you don't want to keep a 'historical
reference' to the terms in metadata. In this case the lifecycle of the field is
(1) user assigns terms which become available to EmbargoSetter (2) upon
ItemInstall, Setter reads terms, translates them into a concrete lift date, and
writes that back into the field (obliterating the terms) (3) Lifter code checks
the field to determine when to lift the embargo.
I thought all this was adequately documented, but please suggest how it could
be improved...
> EmbargoManager looks for Embargo Lift Date in Embargo Terms
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DS-1175
> URL: https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/DS-1175
> Project: DSpace
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: DSpace API
> Affects Versions: 1.8.2
> Environment: All
> Reporter: Richard Jones
> Priority: Major
> Labels: embargo
>
> The DSpace configuration defines two fields for use in Embargo:
> embargo.field.terms - for user-supplied terms of embargo
> embargo.field.lift - for the lift date of the embargo
> The EmbargoManager attempts to load the lift date of the embargo from the
> embargo.field.terms field, and does not check the embargo.field.lift. This
> then throws an error if no date is available in the embargo.field.terms.
> Looking deeper into this, there appears to be minimal usage of the
> embargo.field.lift field, and the documentation is confusing. Probably the
> fix is a rationalisation of what each of these fields actually means, and a
> re-implementation of at least the EmbargoManager and DefaultEmbargoSetter for
> consistency.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://jira.duraspace.org/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Dspace-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-devel
