Migrate Legacy Digital Content Project

Project Team

• Project Sponsor: Mark Dehmlow
• Project Manager: Tracey Morton
• Migration Lead: TBD
• Metadata Services: Alex Papson
• IT - WSE: Rob Fox
• IT - ESU: Steve Mattison
• Specialized Collection Services: Sara Weber

Key Project Stakeholders

• Curators, archivists and other librarians with existing legacy digital content
• ESU
• WSE
• University Records Archivist

Objective

Over the past few decades, the Hesburgh Libraries have built websites, digital exhibits and collections, and other digital content on a variety of platforms, in different spaces, and with different underlying technologies. The Libraries need to migrate or retire this legacy content in order to provide technical sustainability and reliability, and in order to move forward strategically with new digital projects. This phase of the Strategic Initiative involves identifying legacy content, planning migrations or retirements, and prioritizing the work.

Project Milestones

• January 29, 2021 - Define Legacy Digital Content Complete
• February 26, 2021 - Complete List of Legacy Digital Content and Assign Migration Lead
• April 30, 2021 - Migrate Legacy Digital Content Information Gathering Complete
• May 28, 2021 - Formal Migration Plans Complete
• June 18, 2021 - Migration Prioritization Complete
• October 4, 2023 - Team reconstituted with new members

Assumptions

MARBLE and Site Builder will be ready for content at the time of migration implementation.

Constraints

Certain legacy sites and services, including the Seaside Research Portal and the RBSC and Archives websites, are out of scope due to their complexity, and need to be addressed separately.

Project Risks

• Risk Mitigation Plan: Migration plans’ timelines slip due to final content location not being ready, and the transition is not time sensitive. Consider all downstream impacts of extending the migration timeline. If there are no or minimal significant impacts the timeline will be adjusted accordingly. Where migrations are time sensitive, interim migration plans may be required. Identify all time sensitive migrations and prioritize accordingly. Additionally, all time sensitive migrations should have a secondary solution identified in the migration plan.
• Stakeholders do not have capacity to assist with migration.
• Work with stakeholders to schedule migrations around their workloads when possible.
• If migrations are time sensitive, work with stakeholders to share or delegate content migration ownership with someone who do has capacity to support. Secondary content owners should be identified in the migration plan.
• Content may predate google analytics; may not have the measures to assess if something should be retired v. migrated.