...
| Item | Who | Notes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meeting times, communication protocols | Based on this document - discuss recommendations and questions Would Discuss be a good tool for us?
Meeting times: stagger to accommodate time zones Limit calls to once a month - Probably too early to consider this now Have recordings As FOLIO expands geographically more asynchronous communication would be better This is becoming an issue for the SIGs also - discussion about whether to talk to the SIGs about this, encouraging them to use Discuss - or does this belong to PC? We will use this topic as a pilot on Discuss | |||||
| Review updated list of CC inherited Objectives/Initiatives | Team | Based on our review, we decided that CC will own or take part in driving these initiatives and Objectives Spreadsheet version: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KZ-n6KgSLbv3a4GHN19VDuM83DfD2vSOqwFfAME4gtk/edit#gid=0 | ||||
| Potential review/qualification of Organizations that are interested in Joining FOLIO | The FOLIO Officers (Manager/Secretary/Treasurer) are working through the MoU process and tracking mechanisms and a question has come up: If an organization expresses an interest in joining FOLIO - is there a "vetting" or approval process? Or, can any organization that wants to join (and commit resources) just join? Q - Why would we say no to any organization? Boaz - need to be sure goals and strategic interests are addressed Ian Walls - it's open source, why would there be any vetting? Harry - the project is interested in expanding both members and functionality Marko - instead of vetting why don't new members just get introduced to CC? Tom - does the process include onboarding steps? Or just signing and filing? - Right now it's just filing | |||||
| Updates | Team | Communications: New PC & TC started last week. Both elected co-chairs PC - Kristin Martin & Jesse Koenneke; TC - Jeremy Huff & Onboarding: .
Treasurer: No update Grants:
Events: New Member Campaign: Harry - a new institution interested in FOLIO is asking what membership would do for them? There also seems to be different interests depending on how much IT support the institution has In Germany networks have a strong say and the membership model doesn't reflect networks or consortia well. Are our tiers effective? Should we do away with the lower tiers? How can we show the actual benefit to prospective members? Free seats at WOLFCon isn't very persuasive. Technology aspects of FOLIO can be a barrier to local IT units. It's supposed to be language-agnostic but it is Java-based now. If it were broader could that attract more developers? Where should this discussion take place? TC? Notes:
| ||||
| Other |
...