We would like to confirm if our journals are being correctly preserved in the PKP Preservation Network.
We still use an older version of OJS (2.4.8), but we have made some improvements on the code and we can see that all the issues from our 4 Journals are being deposited and appear on the PKP PLN list of journals updated nightly on:
I can also see they are updated in the Keepers Registry:
The Schedule Task (plugins.generic.pln.classes.tasks.Depositor) and respective logs seem to be running fine.
The PKP PLN Plugin Status page only shows the Issues as “Packaged” and “Transferred” (Yes), but the other columns (Received, Syncing, Synced, Updated, Local Failure, Remote Failure) are marked as “No”.
I would really need confirmation if our 4 Journals are being preserved or not and if there is anything to worry about and fix?
Showing up on the PKP PLN list of journals updated nightly (https://pkp.sfu.ca/files/pkppn/onix.csv) is sufficient?
If our journals are being preserved on the PKP PN, they don’t need to be available on other networks (Global LOCKSS Network or CLOCKSS Archive)?
I would really much appreciate a response.
Thank you in advance.
Looking at the journals you listed:
This journal has 68 deposits in the PKP|PN. Of these, all show agreement about the content archived in the LOCKSS network except for some early issues that appear to be related to a training copy of your journal that has since been taken down. (Please be careful not to accidentally send content into the PKP|PN from training/testing copies of the software – if making one of these, please be sure to disable plugins that might interact with 3rd party services like PKP|PN, CrossRef, etc.)
This journal has 68 deposits in the PKP|PN. Of these, all show agreement about the content archived in the LOCKSS network except for Volume 9 Issue 4 (harvested, will be ingested into LOCKSS soon) and Volume 10 Issue 1 (this appears to have been reset a few times on your end – maybe it’s been updated and republished? – but it’s been preserved twice and should be preserved again shortly.)
This journal has 83 deposits in the PKP|PN. All look fine except for some unpreserved content related to the testing installation mentioned above.
This journal has 47 deposits in the PKP|PN. All content looks fine.
It looks like everything is being archived successfully, but I do strongly recommend coming up with a plan for an upgrade to OJS 3.x. OJS 2.x is past its end-of-life and will be increasingly hard for users to maintain.
Public Knowledge Project Team
Thank you Alec, for taking a look and confirming the deposit status on your end.
And yes, we are planning to upgrade do OJS 3.x in the future.
I’ve taken over the sysadmin of this journals and a lot of features were added in the past by changing the core files, making the upgrade a challenge. But it has to be done.
That’s unfortunately not an uncommon situation! I’m hoping you’ll find that OJS 3.x already has a lot of features that were often requested in 2.x, but if you do find additional gaps, don’t hesitate to discuss them here before embarking on new modifications. Hopefully this community will be able to identify a low-impact way to accommodate the feature that can be integrated into the software, undertaken as a plugin, or accommodated using an existing feature; modification is of course an option, but leads to technical debt.
Public Knowledge Project Team
Yes, I am well aware that you cannot make changes on the core files, rendering updates impossible. Plugins and Themes should be the way to do it. I work a lot with WordPress and that’s also how you add and change features. The architecture is different, but the principle is the same.
Thank you again and kind regards.