Versions Compared

Old Version 2

changes.mady.by.user Craig McNally

Saved on

compared with

New Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Maccabee Levine

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: CC meeting

Date

...

TimeItemWhoNotes
1 minScribeAll

Maccabee Levine  is next, followed by Tod Olson 

1 minElectionsAll

As of July 1, member-elect Taras Spashchenko is now officially a TC member, replacing Raman Auramau.  Welcome Taras, and thank you for your service Raman!

Wiki pages have been updated to reflect this change.

5-10 minTCR Board Review

All

  • Jira Legacy
    serverSystem Jira
    serverId01505d01-b853-3c2e-90f1-ee9b165564fc
    keyTCR-27
    draft PR
5 minLiaison Updates

Maccabee Levine / Tod Olson / Jakub Skoczen 

5-10 min

Technical Council Sub Groups Updates

All


1 minDecision LogAll

< 5 minRFCsAll
  • Previous notes:
    • Cleanup effort required:
      • filename prefix - all RFCs currently use 0000- defeating the purpose
      • conflicting process documentation between the wiki and github...
      • renaming can be done by RFC submitters, leave comments on the RFCs that still need it
      • Jenn will take on the documentation clean up, Work has started, some discussion in tc-internal slack.
    • From Craig McNally via #tech-council slack: 

Here's the retro board for the RFC retrospective scheduled for July 10.  Please add your cards prior to the meeting.
https://easyretro.io/publicboard/dY8fCRqguiSDP3wtvSLhNzlULdM2/61b6d545-2d94-4007-93fa-d6263efb49a1

Today:

< 5 minWOLFcon Planning

Maccabee Levine/ Craig McNally 

Previous notes:

  • The deadline for submission ideas has past.
  • No updates on shoulder sessions (TC or tri-council)
  • Some agenda planning for the in-person meeting
  • Expected in-person attendance of TC: 4 definitely, 2 maybe
  • A Workflow SIG is being formed. Related to the work going on at TAMU on mod-workflow and mod-camunda. A kind of SIG-level guidance.

Craig McNally Has heard that there are more sessions proposed then there are slots for presentations

Tod Olson and Maccabee Levine confirmed this

Mark Veksler How will decisions be made, which sessions will be accepted

Tod Olson This has not been determined yet

Marc Johnson Cautions against combining sessions, as the widening of scope may inhibit the ability of the session to come to a useful conclusion

Today:

  • ...
< 5 minOfficially Supported TechnologiesAll

(New) Standing agenda item to review/discuss any requested or required changes to officially supported technology lists

5 minUpcoming Meetings

Craig McNally 

  • RFC Retrospective
  • Officially Supported Technologies - Upkeep Process
  • Application formalization (TBD)
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • WOLFcon 2023
10-20 minAWS Hosting costs

Maccabee Levine 

See Controlling AWS Hosting Costs subgroup

Topic Backlog

Discuss during a Monday sessionOfficially Supported Technologies - UpkeepAll

Previous Notes:

  • A workflow for these pages. When do they transition from one state to another. Do we even need statuses at all ?
  • Stripes architecture group has some questions for the Poppy release.
  • Zak: A handshake between developers, dev ops and the TC. Who makes that decision and how to we pass along that knowledge ? E.g. changes in Nodes and in the UI boxes. How to communicate this ? We have a large number of teams, all have to be aware of it.  TC should be alerted that changes are happening. We have a couple of dedicated channels for that. Most dev ops have subscribed to these channels. How can dev ops folk raise issues to the next level of community awareness ? There hasn't been a specific piece of TC to move that along.
  • Craig: There is a fourth group, "Capacity Planning" or "Release Planning". Slack is the de facto communication channel.  There are no objections to using Slack. An example is the Java 17 RFC. 
  • Craig: The TC gets it on the agenda and we will discuss it. The TC gets the final say.
  • Marc Johnson: We shouldn’t use the DevOps Channel. The dev ops folks have made it clear that it should only be used for support requests made to them.
  • Jakub: Our responsibility is to avoid piling up technical debt.
  • Marc: Some set of people have to actually make the call. Who lowers the chequered flag ?
  • Craig: It needs to ultimately come to the TC at least for awareness. There is a missing piece. Capacity Planning needs to provide input here. 
  • Marc: Stakeholders / Capacity Planning could make that decision. Who makes the decision ? Is it the government or is it some parts of the body ?
  • Marc: the developers community, the dev ops community and sys ops are involved. For example the Spring Framework discussion or the Java 17 discussion. But it was completely separate to the TC decision. It is a coordination and communication effort.
  • Marc: Maybe the TC needs to let go that they are the decision makers so that they be a moderating group.
  • Jakub: I agree with Marc. But we are not a system operating group. Dependency management should be in the responsibility of Release management. There are structures in the project for that.
  • Jason Root: I agree with Jakub and with Marc also. Policies should drive operational/release/support aspects of Folio.
  • Jason Root: If the idea of “support” is that frameworks are supported, then of course the project should meet that.
  • Marc Johnson
    Some group needs to inform OleksAii when a relevant policy event occurs.
    These documents effectively ARE the manifestation of the policy.
  • Craig: This is a topic for the next Monday session.

  • Craig to see if Oleksii Petrenko could join us to discuss the process for updating the officially supported technologies lists.





...