- Add all action items from WOLFcon to this list Jesse Koennecke
- set up a small team to update the MVP paper
- recommend and approve changes to MVP paper
- On-boarding - Put together clear criteria for participation, e.g. at least a 0.5 FTE, work yourself through github developer starting process, etc ... described transparent and accessible. Post Guidelines for developers and institutions (who want to send resources)
- Review community testing process - identify if more testers/test writers needed
- Identify key areas to work in small groups with all parties and bring back the issues to PC?
- Define a process to address certain questions, that occur and let that be done in a small group to deal with it and bring back
- Change our approach to PC meetings first raise the areas of development need (for example: core platform testing) and what can PC do to make sure our institutional resources are directed to this need
- Have different Types of PC meetings - Tactical and strategic
- Clarify the roles of PC Exec group
- Define schedule to Invite the right people at the right time, e.g. Anton (testing), Mike G. (TC), SIG’s (revisit model of liaisons), PO’s, Capacity planning group, more ?
- SIG reports need to the PC be more strategic; Action oriented reports and follow up, e.g. questions about data security (guidelines)
- Decision about how many versions of the software needs to be / will be supported
- Make suggestions regarding platform support/end of life matrix
- Set community standards, how long SIGs continue, etc...
- Convener group will propose a SIG leadership/membership model. Consider: leadership succession/terms, job descriptions for leaders/members, taking into account what works and what doesn’t, keep flexibility for SIGs to govern themselves, define relationship with POs if possible.
...
- Security Audit results - Jakub
- Cross-App - Kirstin
- Go live planning for Q2 - Harry/Mike
- Q2 Capacity Planning update -
- Introduce Technical Editor
...
How is PC meeting the objectives laid out in our charter: https://wikifolio-org.folioatlassian.orgnet/wiki/display/PC/FOLIO+Product+Council+Charge? Are we getting the input we need to make effective decisions and recommendations? Should we change the format of any of our meeting or invite any other relevant individuals or groups on a regular bases, like with monthly the SIG Conveners updates and Technical Council updates?
Zoom link: https://zoom.us/j/158762227
Review PC charge: https://wikifolio-org.folioatlassian.orgnet/wiki/display/PC/FOLIO+Product+Council+Charge
- Which groups shall the PC listen too?
- Do we get the input to make the necessary decisions?
- Quality improved in the last year regarding developer assignment, release notes, etc.
- Which decisions could profit from more information? Difficult decisions?
- Know more about how much time is spent on support, which is taken away from development?
- Views of the capacity planning team
- PC needs to put more emphasis on development (Mark Veksler) - more understanding about quality, dependencies and technical question additional to requirements, more understanding of definition of “done” and migration scripts have to be part of requirements
- Role of PO’s: estimates from developers,
- Capacity planning group with the POs: weekly report to PC
- How does the PC make responsible and informed decisions- decisions in one development of feature over another and what are the technical dependencies
- PC need to get reports and background information to make informed decisions - “closing the loop”
- Defining “action items” for the PC
- How can the PC help in situations that need clarification? How to be involved?
- Recommendations from technical council to the PC and how does the technical council report to PC on open questions; decisions are made in technical council and then this has to be reported out and their process and versions get communicated
- But: developers are not reporting to TC, e.g. Anton's report about quality dashboard is waiting …
- Regular report from Anton to PC
- Return these testing problem areas and the quality of code to action items for the PC
- How can we make sure all loose ends / participating parties are united in the PC? Developers, PO’s, Testing team, SIG’s
- Positive example: Antons call for testers
- Suggestion to start each PC meeting with pain points (for example Anton's QA dashboard, what's the critical issue this week?
- Activating the community to provide necessary resources
...