Page Comparison

Jakub Skoczen is next, followed by Taras Spashchenko 

All

Maccabee Levine / Tod Olson / Jakub Skoczen / Craig McNally 

• Updates from CC:
  • CC discussed the two specific hiring scenarios added to the Developer Advocate proposal.  The major feedback to was to elaborate on the "recruitment" part of the role, which the proposal writers are now doing.
  • That and the AWS Costs proposal could not be voted on because CC lacked a quorum.
• Updates from PC: 
• Updates from Release Management Stakeholder Group: 
• Updates from the Security Team:

All

• Previous notes:
  • Check in on action items from the Kafka Tenant Collections RFC Retro
  • A retro board has been created for the Breaking Changes RFC:  https://easyretro.io/publicboard/dY8fCRqguiSDP3wtvSLhNzlULdM2/8b9f3f24-ca29-4122-bcfa-4387935e2e8e
    • The intent was to create the board now so cards can be added while this is fresh in our heads, but schedule the RFC sometime after WOLFcon.  We just had an RFC retro and are still working on the action items which came out of it.
• Todays notes:
  • Update on draft PRs

Maccabee Levine/ Craig McNally 

• Previous notes:
  • A schedule has been posted: https://wolfcon2023.sched.com/
  • Idea from Jenn Colt last week:  
    • Could we move the TC shoulder meeting to a time during conference when there's not much of interest to TC, use that for face-to-face meeting? Will need to look more closely at schedule.
  • Notes from today:
    • Craig McNally - not much window to carry on the shoulder meeting during WolfCon, till now 7 people will be attending WolfCon in person
    • Jenn Colt - also couldn't find a suitable time for a f2f meeting
    • Maccabee Levine - if shoulder meeting on the Friday of WolfCon week is happening needs to be known soon.
• Todays Notes
  • Any update on a Friday meeting?

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

Craig McNally 

• 31 Jul 2023 Application formalization continued (Vince)
• 07 Aug 2023 Application formalization continued (Vince)
• 14 Aug 2023 
• 21 Aug 2023 WOLFcon 2023

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.