Make productionPlace multiple, facetable, and enabled for Advanced Search #9253

[philippconzett]

What this PR does / why we need it:
Allows depositors to define multiple instances of the metadata field productionPlace in the Citation Metadata block, to refine searches based on the content in the field using the search facets, as well as using the field in the Advanced Search option.

Which issue(s) this PR closes:

Closes #9253

Special notes for your reviewer:
No.

Suggestions on how to test this:

1. Create a test dataset with multiple instances of the productionPlace metadata field.
2. Filter results using the field in the filter facets.
3. Conducting a search using the field in the Advanced Search option.

Does this PR introduce a user interface change? If mockups are available, please link/include them here:
No. There are already other metadata fields that are repeatable, facetable, and enabled for Advanced Search.

Is there a release notes update needed for this change?:
Should briefly mention that the field now is repeatable, facetable, and enabled for Advanced Search.

Additional documentation:
No.

[pdurbin]

@philippconzett and I update the Solr schema.xml in a2f5d12

We did this in docker-aio. I'm not sure why it says "Production Place" instead of "Production Location". (Maybe some cruft on my machine?) That update was made here:

• 8127 citation field improvements #8708

Anyway, Solr was happy to take the data once we made that change (making it allow multiples).

[pdurbin]

There's a test failing according to https://jenkins.dataverse.org/blue/organizations/jenkins/IQSS-Dataverse-Develop-PR/detail/PR-9254/3/tests

[mreekie]

Prio meeting with Stefano.

• Moved from Community Backlog to ordered backlog

[jggautier]

The changes in the citation.tsv file look good, and the changes in the schema.xml make sense to me, although I know less about that.

I think the release notes just need to say "Production Location", the field's new name, instead of "Production Place", the old name. @philippconzett I can change that if that's okay, unless you'd like to.

[pdurbin]

Heads up that we should also fix the failing test I mentioned above.

[jggautier]

Oooo, sorry. I saw that but it had been a while since you posted it so I thought it might've been resolved.

Is the failing test saying that the API endpoint for importing a dataset using DDI Codebook xml doesn't like that the Production Location field can have multiple values now? So that code has to be adjusted?

[pdurbin]

An xml file needs to be changed (and probably the surrounding tests?).

Here, I guess? https://github.com/IQSS/dataverse/blob/v5.12.1/doc/sphinx-guides/source/_static/api/ddi_dataset.xml#L37

Via https://github.com/IQSS/dataverse/blob/v5.12.1/src/test/java/edu/harvard/iq/dataverse/api/DataversesIT.java#L504

Hopefully this PR isn't a backward incompatible change. importDatasetDDIViaNativeApi is being called in that test.

[philippconzett]

@jggautier Thanks for spotting the naming issue in the release notes. I have replaced "Production Place" with "Production Location".

@pdurbin I earlier mentioned that I wanted the field to be included in Advanced search, but I never got the issue and the PR updated accordingly. If still possible, I could do it later today. If this would mess up your ongoing work with the PR, I could submit a new issue/PR about Advanced Search. Please let me know which option you prefer. Thanks!

[pdurbin]

@philippconzett I'm not assigned as a reviewer. Let's see what @scolapasta and @jggautier (who are) think.

[scolapasta]

@philippconzett I'm happy with you making those changes here. It'll make it more complete (and easier to review and test together).

[pdurbin]

Speaking of tests, please don't forget about the failing tests!

[philippconzett]

Thanks, @scolapasta. I've edited the files 9253-productionPlace.md and citation.tsv accordingly, but left the file schema.xml untouched. Please let me know I the changes make sense and if anything needs to be improved.

[jggautier]

I've reviewed the release notes and citation.tsv files and they look good to me.

I'm not sure if the schema.xml file needs to be changed anymore. And I'm probably not the best person to resolve the testing failures, so I'm going to remove myself as a reviewer now. Thanks all!

[sekmiller]

@philippconzett I will update the ImportDDIServiceBean so that it will know to expect multiple Production locations are possible. I'll also add the upgrade instructions that I mentioned above.

[coveralls]

Coverage: 20.009% (-0.0005%) from 20.01% when pulling 0978dbd on philippconzett:patch-2 into ac7aef7 on IQSS:develop.

[philippconzett]

Thanks for adding this, @sekmiller. (I don't how enough about schema.xml to add anything substantial to this.)

[scolapasta]

@sekmiller Looks good - can you make one more change and add a second Prod location to the ddi that is used for testing? That way we actually exercise this change.