Page Comparison

No major changes from last time.

Will present a fuller update after I get the EOY report from the accountants.

Action item from 2023-07-10 Meeting notes was to "read and comment the proposal until next meeting! Approval in the next meeting!"

At CC's request a while, back the Technical Council created a subgroup to define some processes for Controlling AWS Costs.  The subgroup has drafted four deliverables, linked on that page.  I presented them to TC this morning; TC reviewed them and with one edit approved them as well.  We also need CC's edits and approval please since it was your request originally, this is all about budgets, and the deliverables propose a new group with CC's participation to perform that oversight.

• Peter Murray is presenting
• Kitfox team effort reduced costs
• AWS cost control group: feedback loop to CC would be good. Requests should be communicated (smaller / regualr ones). Big requests need agreement anyway.
• Volunteers: Christopher, Kathleen, Tom, Marko, Mike

Postponed due to lack of quorum

From Maccabee: "The folks behind the Developer Advocate proposal have incorporated all the feedback we received from community members and the questions from CC.  The most substantive change was to add two specific scenarios of who might fill the role, including time commitments and oversight"

• Scenario A was supported by the majority of the group developing the proposal
• Why is scenario B full-time and not scenario A? Ian could imagine a smaller fraction of time contract but imagined some signfiicant effort to ramp-up with the community. Contractors will include benefits in fees
• OLF would not be able to hire staff, could handle contractor or reimburse an institution. OLF can do 1099 agreements, or pay out to an institution.
• In scenario A, what happens if nobody is being onboarded? There is plenty else to do including documentation and dev environment issues. No shortage of work though Tom suggests building in additional outreach and coordination to make scenario A even stronger
• Should this role include recruiting? We think that institutions have staff the might be able to contribute but need help to do so. Perhaps documents sends more passive than intended – advertising this role might encourage contribution
• Kat notes onboarding sub-group could connect with the advocate

Decision postponed due to lack of quorum

At ad hoc discussions around ALA, Mike synthesized the following pithy FOLIO story based on various comments:

"FOLIO is a community-owned and governed, market-driven modern open source platform for libraries that provides choice and protection from vendor lock-in. Designed by librarians for librarians, its modular and flexible architecture helps solve current problems and is adaptable for future needs."

• What resonates and what doesn't?
• Would something like this be a useful device?

Not discussed