Every year around this time, ebsco gets together with the PC and the Stakeholders and review status of EBSCO resources.
Two years ago, EBSCO increased resources - let PC/Stakeholders know
EBSCO is extending work on teams for another year - minor difference - EBSCO reserves the right to have full-staffed EBSCO teams to diverge in prioritiy settings
Community staffed/EBSCO embedded teams will continue to operate
Should not affect Round IV adopters.
EBSCO adopters want what others want
What EBSCO builds gets contributed back to the community.
Priority of features hasn't changed. EBSCO tries to build according to those priorities.
When POs/development teams look at priorities, there are pre-requisites that come into play and they will adjust to meet the needs.
Healthy for the community
FOLIO has to be a commercial success as well. The success garners more interest/funding.
Seeing FOLIO as an open source project beginning to mature.
EBSCO is committed to MVP features. Kelly - Additional 42 features that all round IV libraries say they need EBSCO is committed to as well? Harry - For majority of features, it's likely that EBSCO's customer wants them too. If there's features in the 42 that only one library wants, and it's not an EBSCO customer, it may not be done by EBSCO.
Capacity planning for Q3 is starting. EBSCO and EBSCO teams will continue. Maybe need to work to enhance transparency to general community.
Steven Bischoff - people like the POs are going to continue with their groups, and aren't being redirected to prioritize EBSCO customers. Harry - fair to say. May be a case where a team has to be redirected, but it would be something the community needs. Maybe the order might be done differenty.
Jacquie Samples - concerns about switching back and forth when community isn't ready to switch because we're partly through issue A when EBSCO client needs issue C. Harry - not going to happen. As matter of programming practice, that's a bad thing. Teams will continue to work on issues to completion. As libraries go live, we have feedback loop (bugs/defects). Some developers may have to turn attention to that to get a hot fix out, then return to what they were working on. Many teams are shared teams with members from all organizations and they'll continue to work on community prioritization.
Tod - How do we see this playing out on capacity planning process? Harry - probably doesn't change that much. Already during the process, we have spreadsheet of features and teams, POs have option to adjust the priorities. Previously it was more of an algorithm/automatic assigning of tasks. May be more hands-on. For example - Index Data delivered Course Reserves (which was part of MVP - everyone requires it).
Course Reserves and QuickMARC are both a really good example of market forces working on the product.