Hello Robert,
This is welcome feedback- I think we have some wordsmithing to do to
address this concern as we would not want yourselves or others in a
similar position to be isolated from the aims of the PSP. Today's date was
fairly arbitrary- I'm going to ask for some more feedback from Artefactual
colleagues and we'll have some revisions ready early next week.
Cheers,
Sarah
Sarah Romkey, MAS,MLIS
Archivematica Program Manager
She/her
Artefactual Systems <http://artefactual.com>
604-527-2056
@archivematica <http://www.twitter.com/archivematica> / @accesstomemory
<http://www.twitter.com/accesstomemory>
On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 11:27 AM Robert Gillesse <robert.gillesse@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi Sarah and others,
Thanks for the document! We have not so much specific comments on (parts
of) the document as more a general observation that has been troubling us
for a little while longer and which concern the activities and goals of the
PSP group. The thing is, that we are part of this group not so much because
we want to contribute code (at least not at this moment - our development
work has been done mainly *around* Archivematica, pre- and -post ingest)
but because we want to help out with the roadmap (especially with the
discussion what is core and what is not) and by doing so help shape the
long term vision on Archivematica. This and other documents do acknowledge
this up to a certain point but it is clear that the main focus is on
developing code and make code contribution more efficient and easy. While
this is of great importance we wonder if this other goal of keeping the
Archivematica ship on course is not of equal importance. We could imagine
that these two goals as guiding principles behind the activities of the PSP
group. We could also imagine in this case membership could be interesting
to a wider group of institutions – as some institutes are serious
Archivematica users, and might want to think along, but not necessary want
to contribute code.
We do realize we should have brought up this point earlier and certainly
is not convenient if you want to publish the document tomorrow (sorry about
that), but reading the document made it very clear to us what we are
slightly uneasy about. If you decide to publish this anyway we are ok with
that. We can always discuss this at a later point.
But regardless of the inconvenience of the late moment for bringing this
up, we were wondering if we are alone in this or if our idea of the group
is shared by any of the others. Curious to know what you think.
Kind regards,
Robert and Eric
Robèrt Gillesse
Digital Archivist
*international institute of social history*
Email: robert.gillesse@xxxxxxx
Skype: robert.gillesse
Postbus (PO Box) 2169
NL – 1000 CD Amsterdam
Cruquiusweg 31
NL – 1019 CD Amsterdam
T + 31(0)20 6685866
iisg.amsterdam
*From: *<archivematica-psp-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Sarah
Romkey <sromkey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Reply-To: *"archivematica-psp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <
archivematica-psp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Date: *Monday, August 17, 2020 at 4:40 PM
*To: *"archivematica-psp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <archivematica-psp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject: *[archivematica-psp] Last call for feedback on the Terms of
Reference
Hello all,
Doing one final call for any feedback on the PSP Terms of Reference:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1deRkgDIIWHJjpEBFSMd28cD0G_pr5OlQIm56ubtSIEw/edit#
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1deRkgDIIWHJjpEBFSMd28cD0G_pr5OlQIm56ubtSIEw/edit>
I've incorporated some feedback from Tom- if anyone else has
comments/suggestions, could you please make them by the end of day on
Thursday this week, as I plan to publish on Friday. Of course we can always
make light edits and additions in the future, but we want to make sure we
all largely agree in principle.
Thanks so much,
Sarah
Sarah Romkey, MAS,MLIS
Archivematica Program Manager
She/her
Artefactual Systems <http://artefactual.com>
604-527-2056
@archivematica <http://www.twitter.com/archivematica> / @accesstomemory
<http://www.twitter.com/accesstomemory>
