2023-08-14 Meeting notes

FY24 Membership fees: $405,000 , $275,000 received so far.

Everything looks good so far.  Won't have a FY23 annual report until I receive the auditor's statement.

• no more update

Action item from 2023-07-10 Meeting notes was to "read and comment the proposal until next meeting! Approval in the next meeting!", was postponed from 2023-07-24 Meeting notes due to lack of quorum

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.
• CC is supporting the proposal!
• Again question for volunteers:  Tom is it! 

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"

Notes from brief 2023-07-24 Meeting notes discussion where there was a lack of quorum:

• 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

• Alexis is presenting the new version of the scenarios
• Questions:
  • Tom: Are we now at that point to make a decision?
  • Boaz: Let's go ahead - make sure that 40% for  are the rigth scope. As well the time of 3 month might be too short.
    • Alexis: All asked developers said: 40% is fine
    • Kirstin: 40% for better 6 month than 3 month in scenario A might be the most helpful and realstic scenario - Edwin supports this - try A first - use B as backup
    • Mike: What needs to be decided? Between Scenario A and B? Yes
    • Tom: @Alexis Manheim does the proposal describe who will “manage” the person’s community time?
      • Answer: We did suggest that the person would still report to their current manager and do regular check ins with the TC.
    • Harry: For what person do we look out? A developer or a manager? And how do we recruit? Do we need a marketing/recruiting effort? And who could be a good match for the job - a certain person? 
      • Alexis: Search through Slack and most meetings  - no heavy recruiting effort 
      • You know - hang out where the Devs hang out and convince them to join FOIO effort… :-)
    • Marc: Asking again about the certain person and its skill sets - it is a task that asks for a lot of knowledge and insight
      • Mike: Fokus on "get startet" and see the asked tasks as aspirational
    • What about the budget? 
      • No question - Boaz: strong vote for "go ahead" 
      • Marc: yes - but we need to know, if this is working out
        • Alexis: There would be TC oversight  - Marc: What kind of TC oversight are folks talking about?
          The TC doesn’t have regular hands on involvement in development on the project
      • Harry: job description needed
      • Tom: go for 6 month 
• Decision: Is CC supporting the proposal as whole?  YES  
• Action items: volunteers from CC to work the next steps out (scenario A or B and find a person): Mike G., Boaz

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?

• Feedback:
  • Boaz: useful approach
  • Harry: Assuming this is a draft and we need to make some changes?
    • First: what is the audience? 
      • Mike: Ensure that FOLIO has an aligned message 
    • Marc: Marketing and a short statement  - but did it reflect the reality?
  • Harry: document, that this statement is for internal purpose 
  •  Kirstin: no difference between internal / external usage - needs to be lived by community and be a good explanation for external use - and a short understandable message
    • needs to reflect what we want to live and try hard to realize - some difference are ok

  • Boaz: I hear this is for internal purposes

  • Marc Johnson: I like the “lived by the community” idea, it embodies that the community is both in agreement with it and moving in line with it

  • Kristin / Alexis: it migth be aspirational but its a good way to explain why are we doing this - it helps explaining