Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Translator

...

TimeItemWhoNotes
1 minScribeAll
Jakub Skoczen  is next, followed by Jenn Colt
Florian Gleixner took notes

Reminder:  Please copy/paste the Zoom chat into the notes.  If you miss it, this is saved along with the meeting recording, but having it here has benefits.

5-10 minLiaison Updates
  • CC: Maccabee Levine
  • PC: Tod Olson
    • Kristin Martin rotating off as co-chair, need a new co-chair
    • Jeremy Huff will act as liaison from PC to TC (taking over from Owen Stevens)
    • Developer Advocate updates, largely reviewing developer documentation and working on developer mentorship program. Planning to interview Library of Australia to learn about their issues during onboarding
    • Acquisitions SIG is piloting a program for prioritizing issues, using JIRA voting (though concerned that "voting" may be interpreted as making development decisions as opposed to helping dev teams prioritize.
  • RMS Group: Jakub Skoczen 
  • Security Team: Craig McNally 
  • Tri-council Application Formalization: Jenn Colt  
    • No meeting last week
5 minRFC RetroAll

We had a productive retrospective last week, Several discussion topics were identified, which we need to allocate some time for...

Retro Board:

https://easyretro.io/publicboard/dY8fCRqguiSDP3wtvSLhNzlULdM2/1cf104bb-6aa4-4eb3-a878-0f9f1e235436

It's probably worth reviewing if you weren't present.

Continue RFC discussion again this Wednesday

Check in on action items:

  • ??? - Taras Spashchenko to incorporate the notion of review windows into the RFC Process documentation
  • DONE - Craig McNally to remove the Draft Refinement stage from the RFC Process documentation, make minor adjustments to language of RFC Prep and Public Review stages
  • DONECraig McNally to remove Draft Review PR metadata field from the RFC template
  • DONE - Craig McNallyJenn Colt to add the "adapt the RFC process to use the wiki" topic to an upcoming Wed. session
    • planned for  along with a couple other RFC-related topics.
  • DONE - Craig McNally to update the RFC Process documentation to highlight the importance of logging an official decision in the decision log upon the conclusion of the RFC. 
1 minUpcoming MeetingsAll
  •  - Dedication Discussion: RFC follow up continued
  •  - Regular TC Meeting
  •  - Dedicated Discussion: Topic TBD
  •  - Regular TC Meeting
  •  - Dedicated Discussion: Topic TBD
5-10 minTCR Board ReviewAll
5 min

Technical Council Sub-Groups Updates

All


1 minRFCs

All

Reminder(s)

  • Go RFC still open - admin action required, only a PoC - nothing formal required other than closing the pull request.
  • Still Need Decision Log record for application formalization, Go, configuration RFCs
1 minDeveloper Advocate UpdatePatrick Pace


1 minDecision LogAll

Need to log decisions for the following:  (see above)

  • Decentralized configuration - Florian is working on this, will come back around next week. Write-up in draft
  • Go programming language
  • Application formalization - Craig will update next week


Time Permitting

Officially Supported Technologies (OST)

All

Check Recurring Calendar

Orchid has not been moved from Active to Archived - Fixed
Jenn Colt will look at the table, it appears to be broken. No Q, or R Folio releases on the table. - Fixed

5 minReference Data Upgrade

In the Sys Ops SIG meeting the topic of Reference Data Upgrades came up. The SIG thinks that the solution of this problem for mod-inventory-storage is not enough, but that this problem needs to be solved in a general way, for all modules.

There has been a long discussion 3-4 years ago about how FOLIO should handle reference data upon upgrades. See these links for background:



Notes:

Marc Johnson points out he remembers a difference set of formal processes for this from the previous subgroup

Jason R. asks if the issue is that you cannot specify per-module what type of data to load, or that no matter what is specified the upgrade process overrides it

Marc mentions that the proposal to correct this by Vince is a very involved and complex workflow. There has been no developer resources allocated to correct this issue and address the proposal

No easy solution to this problem because the original default data is lost to time and change

Will reach out to Julian Ladisch when he returns


15minDeveloper Advocate ProposalsPatrick Pace
NAZoom Chat





...