Zak Burke : Looked at first draft with Maccabee Levine . Caught between Orchid and Poppy, they fixed it for Poppy so compiles and runs now. Need a second look. Team needs to specify a new commit to evaluate.
PC approval? Seems like yes. → list app has been approved by the PC
Discussion about what gets included in what platforms. And can we not do some of the flexibility in composing platforms with the current module framework.
PC experimenting with shorter (60m) meeting and more subgroups, like TC.
A small group is looking at the implications of the proposal and preparing a document for the PC which is expected to cover some problem statements, implications of the ideas presented, and questions arising for the PC/product.
Jakub Skoczen not present. Mark Veksler : Group reviewed draft timeline for Q release, currently targeted 4/29. Additional work needed for scope, development capacity, and Easter holiday.
Zak Burke People actively involved in the project happy where it is. KnowledgeWare would like FOLIO to function in a multi-lingual manner, not just "not English". I.e. translations of lookup-table in UI and via API requests. Is there an architecture that doesn't require major backend work. Figure out the real-world requirements.
Maccabee Levine I brought this up, needs CC involvement if we are getting KW engaged, and PC to define functionality first. No point in technical solution without those.
Jeremy Huff Need requirements gathering, but we know some of the technical boundaries that we want any solution to live with. Could put together a problem statement, i.e. we know this is something people desire, any solutions would have to fit within these boundaries, maybe RFC for possible solutions that fit.
Marc Johnson Given "problem statement" discussion, TC is the wrong part of the community to be driving this. Product needs should drive it. Could express boundaries/constraints but whether those are a good idea or not depends on what people want to achieve.
Owen Stephens Feel opposite. From PC, the need was expressed. Single tenant should be able to provide different languages at different times. Requirement came from KWare to PC, PC accepted and supported need. Solution was rejected as not technically appropriate by TC. Can't loop again.
Craig McNally Need a volunteer to help wrangle this. Engage with PC on list of requirements? Having something in writing would be better. Then driving effort to look at options, maybe for RFC. Put something in PC and CC channels as well. I will post.
Marc Johnson If call for participation, ensure PC and CC folks represent what people want on a multi-lingual perspective. Not what happened last time.
Want to give people more lead time before the Poppy release
Today:
Marc Johnson We don't have a process for driving these decisions, we've been reactive after dev teams. Led to discussion about actively delegating to interested parties. Does TC own or is there a group to delegate to?
Craig McNally Was looking more specifically at Postgres, give dev team time to plan for it.
Craig McNally For typescript, teams already using it, should probably add to the list?
Craig McNally We do tend to forget about edge modules on this list. edge-common, edge-common-spring.
Tod Olson Re: Postgres, recommend 15? Would be a while before we need another bump.
Craig McNally Balance how much time to upgrade, three major revs may be tricky. But if we do now, not again for some time. See how much effort is required. Does Postgres have LTS versions?
Marc Johnson Implicit in Craig McNally 's comment that TC will drive this. So who figures that out? What person or group?
Jeremy Huff Find out if anyone out there is currently using a newer version of Postgres
Mark Veksler EBSCO experimented with Aurora serverless which required v13 of postgres. Was smooth upgrade. Someone from EBSCO can talk to TC about what that process was like. But upgrade to v15 would be different.
Florian Gleixner Used Postgres 13 for a long time now, didn't see requirement. Not a problem.
Craig McNally Maybe v13 is easiest path, look to 15 later. Volunteer to look at this, make a recommendation? Florian Gleixner volunteered.
Craig McNally typescript experience? Do we need that?
Zak Burke TC never had an official stance, but could help to explicitly include that. Also fine just saying v4.
Jeremy Huff Typescript not the path of least resistance in react. Willing to explore with Zak Burke .
Maccabee Levine Agree with deleting these decisions to groups like the one just defined rather than making ourselves.
Marc Johnson Already using typescript for ages, so this is really a documentation thing.
Craig McNally Yes, but what version for Quesnelia. Agree this is more reactive than others.
Mark Veksler Even for Quesnelia, scope freeze planned by early October.
Marc Johnson In release status meetings, not how FOLIO works right now. I.e. from last week's meeting, we added RMB and Spring, those tend to change at last minute. Things change right up to deadline of current release.
Craig McNally Don't want to get into process right now.
At the August 25, 2023 meeting of the Tri-Council at University of Chicago, it was agreed that we would repeat the “List of Things that Could Be Better About FOLIO” survey that was conducted after WOLFcon at Hamburg (Sept ’22).
We ask all Council members to each survey three community members for a list of three things that could be better about FOLIO.Please enter the results into this documentby September 29, 2023.
In October, we will report back both on this year’s responses as well as an analysis on progress made against the 2022 goals.
Jeremy Huff The subgroup is happy with the list. Some items productive for TC to talk about at future meetings. But wanted TC agreement before we sent to CC and PC.
Maccabee Levine Reminded context that tri-council asked for this, and other councils are working through these issues now.
There was no objection. Jeremy Huff will announce.
Looking ahead to the late fall, I see thatRefresh Token Rotationis coming in Poppy, that's a big change and the new API token management API is still in progress. In any case, it appears this will require changes to any scripts or integrations that hit the (non-edge) APIs. Does TC have a role in publicizing and making recommendations for how to prepare for this change? Or am I misunderstanding the impact?
Continue discussion from Monday and try to make a decision on how to proceed.
have conversations about architectural discussions
Would like to have this discussion in the context of an RFC.
Do we want to weaken the constraints arcoss the board ?
Concerns that it gets out of hand
RFC could propose some privileged access
The decision to keep data boundaries up is being challenged by implementations. An RFC would be a great format to have those discussions.
Consider risk of suggested approach vs. the alternatives
We won't get the RFC done by Poppy. If we grant an exception, it will be part of Poppy. Otherwise not. We could make mod-fqm-manager a special being. Anyway, we have to address the immediate question.
Tasking fqm with being responsible for cross-domain queries. That would be a reasonable way to frame it as an RFC. Instead of an exception, it could be framed that way.
TCR review and architectural implications should be separated. The discussion whether we want to make an exception or not is independent of the TCR/RFC.
Release schedule for Poppy is less significant than the bigger question.
mod-fqm-manager is a component, a sub-system, that has the sole responsibility for making cross-module queries. An RFC should be taking that one position.
Marc Johnson : But that is the same as making an exception. Then this one module has a very significant amount of power in the system. We have to move that topic forward in the next week.
Jeremy Huff : I have 3 weeks to do the evaluation. I will follow the process. The Poppy deadline is irrelevant.
Marc Johnson : That will be effectively a fail for the module getting into Poppy. We have to represent the politics that goes with it to the rest of the community.
Jeremy Huff : I am aiming to keep the deadline. The module was probably in a state that tickets could have been created two weeks earlier.
Maccabee Levine : It already missed the 3-week-deadline. The reviews take the time they take. The TC had many cycles to improve the TCR process.
Craig McNally : This deserves more communication. Let us do that in Slack.
Mark Veksler : Can we have an additional meeting on this ? Can we decide on Monday's meeting (Sept 18) ?
Jeremy Huff : We should adhere to and preserve the TCR process.
- Dedicated Discussion - Topic?Tod Olson : Steve Ellis is writing recommendations based on testing. Does the TC need to help get the word out? If not, then who?
Craig McNally External scripts by hosting providers & libraries may not be updated yet. Avoid situation where all those integrations break on upgrade.
Marc Johnson Given the work that was done didn't involve the TC, the onus to communicate should be on those who did the work, planning and deciding it should be in a single release. TC can "signal boost" what they put together.
Craig McNally Core platform team make announcement then?
Marc Johnson Start with Steve Ellis and Alexi, with delivery plan. TC could announce whatever they want us to announce, but they could do it just as well, have access to all the same places.
Tod Olson Either way, TC should push for message getting out, regardless who it comes from.
Jenn Colt Holiday season release is hard, and some other code controlled by outside vendors.
Maccabee Levine Involve those people so they can respond to questions.
Marc Johnson But if we don't discuss TCRs on Wednesday, and no time scheduled Friday, then effectively saying they will not get in for Poppy.
Craig McNally Could try to find time on Friday. Or just accept they will not be in Poppy.
Marc Johnson The four downstream modules of mod-fqm-manager can't pass until it does, since they are dependent. So effectively all lists modules are blocked until Friday. So the only one would could talk about is edge-courses which won't be ready by Wednesday either.
Jeremy Huff Opposed to voting on modules pre-eval. Not opposed to any discussion. Voting before eval would subvert our process.
Marc Johnson Threads from slack implies there's nothing productive we can do until eval, i.e. Friday.
Jeremy Huff Probably true. Could call it failed as soon as any criteria fails.
Marc Johnson No time for that either; if we discuss each failure (multiple things), even if we gave one a bye, we still have to finish the evaluation.
Craig McNally Plan on continuing this conversation in Slack.
NA
Zoom Chat
Placeholder. Scribe should copy/paste the zoom chat here.
