Date
...
Functional Area | Product Owner | Planned Release (if known) | Decision Reached | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| e.g. loans, fees/fines | Name | e.g. Q4 2018, Q1 2019 | ||
| Loans | Emma Boettcher | Check out messages : displaying a non-circulating policy message last is suboptimal, as previously agreed, but is acceptable in short term as the team works on other things. | ||
| Loans | Emma Boettcher | On-demand anonymization : Excluding loans with fees/fines from any manual anonymization, and only anonymizing them according to automated settings (if at all), is acceptable |
Notes
Notes by David Bottorff
No Meeting Monday, We should have a quorum on Thursday
Holly
overview of capacity planning assignment
At current capacity, not all go features will be delivered by institutions' go live dates
adding developer capacity seems a bit late
will institutions need to alter their go live date or revise what they need at go live?
PO will review features needed for go-live, ask for SIG feedback, changes will be captured in Jira
Not only priority but also order in which features are being approached
deep dive for go live or first quarter after go live
may need to split features so that some elements are higher priority than others
cost of feature
show local team your recommendations to update local ranking
Assignment is due July 31, but stakeholders meet July 23, should higher priority epics be tackled first?
This will happen during SIG meetings after Washington DC meeting
Emma
ordering of checkout messages (non-circ policy, checkout notes, then multipiece) could have performance issues, would effect all items at checkout consensus is that short term reorderign is acceptable for the sake of performance to non-circ policy being last
anonymization - manual anonymization at patron request should all closed loans with fines/fees be excluded from manual anonymization okay? yes this seems ok