Versions Compared

Key

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

...

Attendees

Goals

  • SIG's MVP response
  • FOLIO LSP Reverse RFP Response

Discussion items

LSP RFP Response
TimeItemWhoNotes
5WelcomeIngolf
  • Introductions
  • Note Taker
30Our Questions about MVP Responsesall

This SIG's questions about columns F and G of the MVP Responses to Review   . Also, questions about "Additional Changes to MVP" spreadsheet tab in the same spreadsheet.

    • Today is deadline for comments on the non-MVP features
    • Final version will be released Sept 25
    • Institutions will make their go/ no go decisions October 2


MVP = Market viable product

Background information: Institutions were asked to produce MVP worksheet (based on their rankings). Capacity Planning Team responed with comments. And now, SIG's are asked to review/respond to Capacity Planning Team response.

Very likely, SysOps related items concerning hosting have been taken care of and have not been dropped in the MVP. But let's be sure and double-check that.


Notes:

SysOps related issues have been taken out of institutions prioritization. They have to be done. The developers have alreday solved some of these things. The items don't appear in the Capacity Planning Spreadsheet anymore. Q: Should we be prioritzing ?

Jason: Database schema upgrades is the most important thing.

Harry: Let's invite Jakub for an update on database schemas upgrade .

There is a group in Brazil. Migration of bibliographic and item data from ALEPH. There is a subgroup Voyager to FOLIO

. They would make those tools available to the project. The migration tools have been excluded from the Capacity Plan.

We all need some Batch Loading APIs, and we can't do that. The FOLIO project has to do this.

Jakub is coming to the Data Migration Subgroup meeting on Monday.

The most well definded items might be pulled into Q4, if resources are available.


Notes25FOLIO LSP Reverse Request for Proposal

Ingolf, Hkaplanian

Need assistant writers for RFP Response

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1v2bAQz7DJyZvBXlO1XJoAw1jhesNpFhswIBw-4DXx-U/edit

For following topics:

  1. "A description of the platform, microservices and advantages.  Should include where the different data sets are stored in FOLIO as well as how data flows through the system.  " → core dev team ?

10. Import records → Data Migration Group ? Ann-Marie's group ?

11. Export Records

14. Reporting → Reporting SIG

15.Standards & Interoperability

15. E  NCIP 

Jira Legacy
serverSystem JiraJIRA
serverId01505d01-b853-3c2e-90f1-ee9b165564fc
keyUXPROD-991
Michelle Suranofsky

15. G Z39-50

16. Settings - Additional General FOLIO Settings → also a SysOps Topic ?

Maybe we can embed links to the technical doumentation.

-------

Notes:

A reverse RFP is a feature listing. We should keep the RFP up to date. It will be useful for the community. This document could answer the question : Can we really go live with FOLIO ?

The document is not done.

Phil reviewed the document. Its detailed, maybe too detailed. But it is what librarians want to see.

Acquisition, orders, financing are essentially done.

Inventory is up to date until 3.2

Agreement, licence managament is at ca. 95% . Product Owners should clarify a vew things.

E-Holdings broke down into three areas. 6 a) 6 b) and 6 c)

User Managment is there.

Resource Access

8 c) odr 8 d) need help

Importing Records will get help from Ann-Marie Breaux

Discovery Integration - what do people like to see ?

Björn from Leipzig will add e-usage harvester documentation

LDP Reporting - Harry hasn't seen it yet

SIP2

What do SysOps want to see in here ?


We should add recommandation on system RAM, CPU etc. ; things which are not container based. How many docker hosts are recommended ?

Updating is a big point which would be interesting for a documentation.


Action items

  •