Date
Attendees
Discussion items
| Time | Item | Who | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 min | Scribe | All | Tod Olson is next, followed by Ankita Sen Reminder: Please copy/paste the Zoom chat into the notes. If you miss it, this is saved along with the meeting recording, but having it here has benefits. |
| 5-10 min | Liaison Updates |
| |
| 10min | TCR Board Review | All | |
| 5 min | Upcoming Meetings | All |
|
| 5-10 min | Technical Council Sub Groups Updates | All | Quick updates only. If we can't find volunteers for groups, we'll need to add the topic to our backlog and address it during dedicated discussion sessions Sub-group Suggestions? |
| 10 min | RFCs | All |
|
| 1 min | Decision Log | All | Standing agenda item... is there anything in the decision log requiring attention? |
| 5-10 min | WOLFCon Topics | All | A quick discussion to solidify WOLFCon proposals and participation. |
| 15-20 | Static Code Analysis | All | Are our evaluation criteria concerning static code analysis too centered on SonarQube? Should we adopt a more platform-agnostic approach to evaluating static code analysis? If so, how should we develop this approach? |
| Time Permitting | All | Standing agenda item to review/discuss any requested or required changes to officially supported technology lists | |
| Time Permitting | Topic Backlog Grooming | All | Review the topics on our Topic Backlog to remove those that are no longer relevant, modify those that require change, and add topics that might be missing. |
| NA | Zoom Chat |
Topic Backlog | ||
| Decision Log Review | All | Review decisions which are in progress. Can any of them be accepted? rejected? |
| Translation Subgroup | All | Since we're having trouble finding volunteers for a subgroup, maybe we can make progress during a dedicated discussion session? |
| Communicating Breaking Changes | All | Since we're having trouble finding volunteers for a subgroup, maybe we can make progress during a dedicated discussion session? |
| Officially Supported Technologies - Upkeep | All | Previous Notes:
Stripes architecture group has some questions about the Poppy release. Zak: A handshake between developers, dev ops and the TC. Who makes that decision and how do we pass along that knowledge ? E.g. changes in Nodes and in the UI boxes. How to communicate this ? We have a large number of teams, all have to be aware of it. TC should be alerted that changes are happening. We have a couple of dedicated channels for that. Most dev ops have subscribed to these channels. How can dev ops folk raise issues to the next level of community awareness ? There hasn't been a specific piece of TC to move that along. Craig: There is a fourth group, "Capacity Planning" or "Release Planning". Slack is the de facto communication channel. There are no objections to using Slack. An example is the Java 17 RFC. Craig: The TC gets it on the agenda and we will discuss it. The TC gets the final say. Marc Johnson: We shouldn’t use the DevOps Channel. The dev ops folks have made it clear that it should only be used for support requests made to them. Jakub: Our responsibility is to avoid piling up technical debt. Marc: Some set of people have to actually make the call. Who lowers the chequered flag ? Craig: It needs to ultimately come to the TC at least for awareness. There is a missing piece. Capacity Planning needs to provide input here. Marc: Stakeholders / Capacity Planning could make that decision. Who makes the decision ? Is it the government or is it some parts of the body ? Marc: the developers community, the dev ops community and sys ops are involved. For example the Spring Framework discussion or the Java 17 discussion. But it was completely separate to the TC decision. It is a coordination and communication effort. Marc: Maybe the TC needs to let go that they are the decision makers so that they be a moderating group. Jakub: I agree with Marc. But we are not a system operating group. Dependency management should be in the responsibility of Release management. There are structures in the project for that. Jason Root: I agree with Jakub and with Marc also. Policies should drive operational/release/support aspects of Folio. Jason Root: If the idea of “support” is that frameworks are supported, then of course the project should meet that. Marc Johnson Craig: This is a topic for the next Monday session. Craig to see if Oleksii Petrenko could join us to discuss the process for updating the officially supported technologies lists. |
| Dev Documentation Visibility | All | Possible topic/activity for a Wednesday session: Discuss/brainstorm:
|
Action Items
TC members to review policy guidance in Ramsons OST page and provide feedback