Date

02 Nov 2023

Attendees

Kristin Martin Jennifer Eustis, Owen Stephens, Charlotte Whitt, Paul Moeller, Gang Zhou, Martina Tumulla, Jesse Koennecke, Martina Schildt, Corrie Hutchinson, Tod Olson, Kristin Olofsson, Ian Walls, Cornelia Awenius, Maura Byrne, Thomas Trutt, Harry Kaplanian, Peter Murray, Kathleen Moore,

Note taker: ~~Charlotte Whitt, Jennifer Eustis, Martina Schildt,~~ Owen Stephens

Discussion items

Time	Item	Who	Notes	Decisions and Actions
5 min	Announcements	all	Convener: Kristin Martin Minute-taker: Owen Stephens Re-architecting FOLIO Tri-Council Subgroup: Jen to initially convene to get things moving; looking for a meeting time. Application and Platform Formalisation Working Group: Application and Platform Formalization Proposals WG wiki page Initial meeting w/c 8th November Bulk Edit and Lists application are going to have a single group and Slack channel. Name TBA Bugfest ongoing and still tests to complete, so any time that people can give to testing would be very welcome Swedish Folio Days in Linköping, with 60 participating libraries. Day 1: Information sharing Day 2: Discussing forming a regional Folio community (inspired/similar to the German community)
45 min	User Acceptance Testing	Kristin Martin all	At the 10/19/23 PC meeting, we got an overview from Yogesh Kumar and Oleksii Petrenko on the current state of QA testing. There is some pre-bugfest UAT being done by SMEs, such as MM and Acquisitions, but could other SIGs do this as well? What dev environments are being used to do the UAT? Current UAT Testing FAQs You can add comments here too: Ongoing Discussion: Current state of FOLIO Quality Assurance testing Jennifer Eustis: Involved in Bulk Edit UAT (PO = Magda Zacharska). UAT takes the form of a Google form to work through and answer questions, and usually also go through the UAT together as a group. UAT testing usually done before release. Also done UAT for Lists app. Worked in a similar way UAT with data import (Ann-Marie Breaux) using a Rancher environment UAT of data import "slicing technique" (splitting large files into smaller files to make large imports work more effectively) on 5 Colleges sandbox environment UAT for the Purchase Order "History" feature (PO = Dennis Bridges) Worked in a dedicated test environment Worked through a Google form Significant time commitment Posted results in Google form Then reviewed in SIG Martina Schildt UAT for Financial Year Roll Over (FYRO) (PO = Dennis Bridges) Similar experience to Kristin In both cases the need to setup realistic data was time consuming Lots of note taking during testing But worth it as allows for the influencing of development Worked locally as teams to do the testing and then were able to share experiences with the SIG Is there anything that the PC can do to help with UAT Owen Stephens: Could we help coordinate announcement of testing - e.g. a dedicated slack channel (as well as the usual SIG channels etc.)? A dedicated channel (suggested by Owen Stephens, supported by Martina Schildt as better than the existing channels. Ian Walls commented "encourage looking at REDUCING the number of channels in FOLIO Slack") folio-general (suggested by several) folio-implementers (suggested by Charlotte Whitt) Also a wiki page to collate together? (suggested by Maura Byrne) Would there be a way of getting data set up in advance of the UAT commencing so that volunteers don't have the overhead of setting up data for testing Maura Byrne: Does UAT happen at particular interval? Owen response: Not really, as they tend to be at the point when the feature is in development/developed enough to put in front of users Charlotte: UAT done at the point where the developers are able to respond immediately to feedback Thomas Trutt: Can we use Slack Groups? Kristin Martin: Does it matter to the POs? Is it easier for one channel? Bad / Cons to UAT Jennifer Eustis UAT is time consuming Should be clear about the purpose of UAT Is it for a purpose or just bug testing Are there other approaches that could be used instead (e.g. designs presented up front) Thomas Trutt (in chat): I feel for new apps, and large changes UAT makes sense. For smaller changes it doesn’t. Martina Schildt UAT important where there is very varied practice and data across institutions - where more testing and more involvement from across the community is important Ian Walls: how I think it should work: PC identifies functionality FOLIO should have, and delegates to a SIG SIG defines features, and hands to PO + their dev team Devs dev PO presents code produced to SIG for UAT repeat steps 3-4 as necessary SIG signs off on features Features undergo Quality Assurance (currently bugfest) if passing, then PC approves release (later suggested this could be dropped) Clarifications from Ian: The PC should have control over the definition of what features go into the product - isn't that the point? Need to close the loop - so where ever decision made of a new feature, PC should sign off that it's been delivered and can be released Kristin Martin PC haven't been involved in this level of detail previously	DECISION: PC could help devise a process for UAT to support POs including some standard steps such as a list of Slack Channels where UATs should be announced Draft a support process for UAT to support POs, to then be presented to/discussed with the POs (responsibility for this action to be discussed at PC Planning 7th November) (responsibility for this action to be discussed at PC Planning 7th November)
5 min	Future topics	all	SIG Group has met and has some actions to complete before the next PC Planning meeting, especially in relation existing Working Groups vs SIGs and whether some WGs should be transitioned to SIGs and if so what support would be needed. Expect to see some future PC topics around these issues	Bring question of documenting/understanding the process for features being added to Folio and how development gets prioritisedKristin Martin Owen Stephens

Time

Item

Who

Notes

Decisions and Actions

5 min

Announcements

all

Convener: Kristin Martin
Minute-taker: Owen Stephens
Re-architecting FOLIO Tri-Council Subgroup: Jen to initially convene to get things moving; looking for a meeting time. Application and Platform Formalisation Working Group:
- Application and Platform Formalization Proposals WG wiki page
- Initial meeting w/c 8th November
Bulk Edit and Lists application are going to have a single group and Slack channel. Name TBA
Bugfest ongoing and still tests to complete, so any time that people can give to testing would be very welcome
Swedish Folio Days in Linköping, with 60 participating libraries.
- Day 1: Information sharing
- Day 2: Discussing forming a regional Folio community (inspired/similar to the German community)

45 min

User Acceptance Testing

Kristin Martin
all

At the 10/19/23 PC meeting, we got an overview from Yogesh Kumar and Oleksii Petrenko on the current state of QA testing. There is some pre-bugfest UAT being done by SMEs, such as MM and Acquisitions, but could other SIGs do this as well? What dev environments are being used to do the UAT?

Current UAT Testing FAQs

You can add comments here too: Ongoing Discussion: Current state of FOLIO Quality Assurance testing

Jennifer Eustis:

Involved in Bulk Edit UAT (PO = Magda Zacharska). UAT takes the form of a Google form to work through and answer questions, and usually also go through the UAT together as a group. UAT testing usually done before release.
Also done UAT for Lists app. Worked in a similar way
UAT with data import (Ann-Marie Breaux) using a Rancher environment
UAT of data import "slicing technique" (splitting large files into smaller files to make large imports work more effectively) on 5 Colleges sandbox environment

UAT for the Purchase Order "History" feature (PO = Dennis Bridges)
- Worked in a dedicated test environment
- Worked through a Google form
- Significant time commitment
- Posted results in Google form
- Then reviewed in SIG

Martina Schildt

UAT for Financial Year Roll Over (FYRO) (PO = Dennis Bridges)
- Similar experience to Kristin
- In both cases the need to setup realistic data was time consuming
- Lots of note taking during testing
- But worth it as allows for the influencing of development
- Worked locally as teams to do the testing and then were able to share experiences with the SIG

Is there anything that the PC can do to help with UAT

Owen Stephens:

Could we help coordinate announcement of testing - e.g. a dedicated slack channel (as well as the usual SIG channels etc.)?
- A dedicated channel (suggested by Owen Stephens, supported by Martina Schildt as better than the existing channels. Ian Walls commented "encourage looking at REDUCING the number of channels in FOLIO Slack")
- folio-general (suggested by several)
- folio-implementers (suggested by Charlotte Whitt)
- Also a wiki page to collate together? (suggested by Maura Byrne)
Would there be a way of getting data set up in advance of the UAT commencing so that volunteers don't have the overhead of setting up data for testing

Maura Byrne:

Does UAT happen at particular interval?
- Owen response: Not really, as they tend to be at the point when the feature is in development/developed enough to put in front of users
- Charlotte: UAT done at the point where the developers are able to respond immediately to feedback

Thomas Trutt:

Can we use Slack Groups?

Kristin Martin:

Does it matter to the POs? Is it easier for one channel?

Bad / Cons to UAT

Jennifer Eustis

UAT is time consuming
Should be clear about the purpose of UAT
Is it for a purpose or just bug testing
Are there other approaches that could be used instead (e.g. designs presented up front)

Thomas Trutt (in chat):

I feel for new apps, and large changes UAT makes sense. For smaller changes it doesn’t.

Martina Schildt

UAT important where there is very varied practice and data across institutions - where more testing and more involvement from across the community is important

Ian Walls:

how I think it should work:

PC identifies functionality FOLIO should have, and delegates to a SIG
SIG defines features, and hands to PO + their dev team
Devs dev
PO presents code produced to SIG for UAT
repeat steps 3-4 as necessary
SIG signs off on features
Features undergo Quality Assurance (currently bugfest)
if passing, then PC approves release (later suggested this could be dropped)

Clarifications from Ian:
- The PC should have control over the definition of what features go into the product - isn't that the point?
- Need to close the loop - so where ever decision made of a new feature, PC should sign off that it's been delivered and can be released

Kristin Martin

PC haven't been involved in this level of detail previously

DECISION: PC could help devise a process for UAT to support POs including some standard steps such as a list of Slack Channels where UATs should be announced

Draft a support process for UAT to support POs, to then be presented to/discussed with the POs (responsibility for this action to be discussed at PC Planning 7th November) (responsibility for this action to be discussed at PC Planning 7th November)

5 min

Future topics

all

SIG Group has met and has some actions to complete before the next PC Planning meeting, especially in relation existing Working Groups vs SIGs and whether some WGs should be transitioned to SIGs and if so what support would be needed. Expect to see some future PC topics around these issues

Bring question of documenting/understanding the process for features being added to Folio and how development gets prioritisedKristin Martin Owen Stephens

Notes:

Browser not supported