Atlassian uses cookies to improve your browsing experience, perform analytics and research, and conduct advertising. Accept all cookies to indicate that you agree to our use of cookies on your device.
Atlassian uses cookies to improve your browsing experience, perform analytics and research, and conduct advertising. Accept all cookies to indicate that you agree to our use of cookies on your device. Atlassian cookies and tracking notice, (opens new window)
Attendees: Simeon Warner; Peter-Paul Kloppenborg; Tom Cramer; Vanessa French; Petra Schneider; Martina Schildt; Peter Murray; Kirstin Kemner-Heek; Maike Osters; Stephen Pampell; Joseph Grobelny; Kristin Martin; Boaz Nadav; Maccabee Levine; Johanna Radding; Karen Jara Maricic; Chris Spalding
Guests:
Regrets: @Shawn Nicholson ; Mike Gorrell;
Note Taker: @Rachael Kotarski
Discussion items
Item
Who
@Notes
Item
Who
@Notes
Welcome new CC members and selection of chair(s)
@Christopher Spalding@Simeon Warner (final duty as outgoing chairs?)
Round-the-room intros of all CC members, officers, alumni and visitors
Election of CC co-chairs
@Simeon Warner and @Christopher Spalding are no longer CC members and thus two new co-chairs need to be selected. Then update contact details on https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/CC wiki
Tom Cramer, Stephen Pampell and Shawn Nicholson all volunteer for co-chairs. Suggest we vote on chairs on Slack before the next meeting. All volunteers to send Joe their blurb by July 18. Vote will be on Slack by July 21, and vote concluded by July 25.
Suggestion that one co-chair takes a 2-year term and another 1-year so that both chairs don’t cycle off in the same year.
Selection of PC and TC liaisons. Kristin was previous PC rep, and Mike was previous TC liaison. Peter Murray is the new PC liaison; Joe is the new TC liaison.
Should be Slack and Google tidy to remove former members. Co-chairs will manage this once in place.
Calendar invite: We’ll continue with members managing their own calendars.
Note taker
…
Note taker for July 28: Stephen P.
Updates / Checkins
…
Elections results and reflections @Joseph Grobelny@Boaz Nadav Manes
Election turn out was 12% compared to 20% in previous years. Need to raise the profile of the election.
Need to raise the profile of Technical Council to have more nominations in future.
Joe recommends having a couple more people support the election effort to help spread the word, and start the process a little earlier.
Request for CC to discuss the elections to ensure it’s more inclusive in future.
Percentage of turnout may be different this year as the list was generated differently.
TC had discussed the low nomination numbers and the opportunity to send out a questions to members to find out the roadblocks, and this could be done for the elections on the whole.
Question as to whether, with some big community members not currently on councils, the make up on councils currently represents reality. There are ways to democratically ensure representation.
The Membership sub-committee would consider this question, and there was some support for that suggestion.
Letter requests an end of fiscal year contribution, so some light editing is needed.
Joe and Tom will continue to work with Shawn to refine, and new co-chairs will send.
Shawn has a spreadsheet with contact information for the target institutions and is ready to share.
Incoming co-chair(s) should send the letter.
Need to consider the work of the sub-committee on line-item charges. Boaz will also support review of the letter to members to ensure it reflects the line-item work, or at least doesn't contradict it.
FOLIO Futures: 1) Contribution Network, 2) TC Community Driven Development, and 3) FOLIO Blueprint idea
@Christopher Spalding@Mike Gorrell@Tom Cramer
K-Int have withdrawn their proposal regarding use of the FSL license based on community feedback.
Would it be good to discuss some or all of these ideas in an August tri-council meeting in order to set the scene for more in-depth discussions around WOLFcon?
The discussions around these papers is important and necessary, but much more discussion across the community is needed, possibly more than CC can currently provide.
We’re not currently needing to make a decision, rather discuss all the issues and find some plans.
Commonalities: keeping it open source; resourcing the work based on a common understanding of development effort and its costs. There are likely more, even if not expressed the same way.
Disagreements: how are the relationships managed to reduce bureaucracy?
There are more parties that need to be brought together to discuss.
Do we need a new group to examine the current documents to elaborate the different paths?
Proposal for 1-2 members to review the differences between the papers and bring the summary to the next meeting: Paul, Joe and Stephen P.
CC Thanks its departing members, and especially it’s departing co-chairs.