Page Comparison

Problem:

Given that the monolithic flower releases have grown to be a problem and that the deployment of FOLIO is becoming unsustainable for system operators, EBSCO has developed a proposal for the formalization of applications and platforms that they believe will help solve both of these issues.

Charter:

• Communicate to community in parallel to what is happening
• Dialog with the group implementing
• Communicating consequences
• Impact on existing FOLIO user and finding a path from the current process to the proposed process.
• General agreement with the proposal on the technical level, but there is a big gap between that and communicating the consequences
• Need to talk through the consequences and alternatives, not simply communicate them - what path do we want to take?
• When we find agreement for the path, understanding how we make things happen and how we minimize the risks or agree upon the acceptable level of risk
• Can describe what we want to have and what we want to avoid
• We need to understand the current state of work so we can focus our work
• E.g., if there is already work underway, we should be starting there
• Identify and share with stakeholders, e.g., DevOps and keep them involved
• Find answers to non-technical questions or come up with proposals to reduce risk and increase alignment
• Does this group help to determine what modules should come together for one app?
• The might be a technical question, but the implications are very non-technical
• Maybe think less “is this a technical question or not,” but what are the non-technical implications as the technical questions are answered

Current state

• Some work has been done; proof-of-concept
• A lot of non-technical aspects have not been addressed yet
• Technical aspects align closely with proposal

Questions:

• Will FOLIO as an Open Source project be easier to approach for new development team with this new change? That would be a long term goal, where especially libraries would benefit from, when asking for special development/customized development?
• What is the RFC process going to look like?
• Group will present overview and Scope, then take advice. Then write full RFC
• RCF us technically focused but okay to ask tech/nontech questions, this depends on the RFC

Potential process

• Identify risks
• Formalize problems and solutions
• Proof-of-concept and RFC are the appropriate vetting for this change
• Because the TC has a process for focusing on the technical aspects, this group does not need to focus on those

Concerns:

• Naming may be a problem - “app” is an overloaded name
• How do applications get defined? Bounded concept is going to be a RFC issue

What have we agreed upon

• We assume this is going forward to formalize apps/platforms
• We need to formalize our charter, find a way to allow for ambiguity yet feel clear about path forward
• Determine our first steps, risk analysis?
• We set up a weekly meeting at 1 PM ET Wednesday

Action Items:

• Jen: work on charter/refine and share with group by Friday
• All: consider what the first couple of ideas are to tackle
• First deliverables are reached in December
• Craig provides update on where things stand/timeline
• Communicate to broader community