| Elections [Reminder / Results] | @Vanessa French | Elections will close on June 30. Vote now!
Two councils will have vacancies. Each council with empty seats is responsible for filling their vacancies. Suggestions for filling vacancies include canvassing former Council members who are eligible to run again, and encouraging PC candidates who are not successful to run for one the empty seats on TC or CC. |
| Membership | @Mike Gorrell | Members Meeting on June 5 notes. Looking forward to Members meeting at WOLFcon; some suggestions for topics in that meeting doc.
Community-driven development a topic of interest; how can an institution with its own dev team get their work incorporated into a module’s code base by its “home team”? Recognize this is an ongoing need and challenge.
Funding for community driven development is another area; need to keep developing this capacity.
Suggestion to implement community profiles to increase visibility of member interests, capacity.
Desire expressed for more predictability and stability in releases, e.g., Trilium and Umbrellaleaf schedule adjustments have downstream complications.
Member Committee is putting together an agenda for meeting in Prague. This will include a “state of FOLIO report” (membership, live users, budget). Will be supplied to CC et al in advance. |
| AI in FOLIO (SIG & Policy questions) | @Shawn Nicholson @jpnelson | Jeremy Nelson: AI SIG recently formed. Will have three subgroups. 1.) Policy and ethics of using AI in FOLIO.
2.) Technology focused: using AI in FOLIO and FOLIO-adjacent projects (like Blue Core)
3.) Education on AI topics related to FOLIO.
These groups are just forming. Data privacy is/will be a concern. If AI is used with FOLIO, can we ensure patron info (e.g.) won’t be exposed via RAG or MCP?
Shawn Nicholson: FOLIO has to factor in AI/ML. Is AI-generated code a concern for FOLIO? Is it of sufficient quality? VuFind is developing a community statement policy on AI.
Three proposals for TriCouncil:
1.) Consider adopting a statement or position similar to Koha’s on AI. Transparency, reproducibility, etc. are also values that we have.
2.) Is there interest in OLF community on creating shared AI guidance? Or is this a FOLIO-only topic?
3.) If we have a FOLIO-centric approach, should Tri-Council consider developing a statement?
Discussion:
- AI expense is an approved line item in the budget, but we still need to establish scope, users, benefits and control around cost before we can begin using it.
- AI issues may mirror some of the other issues we are familiar with: e.g. Testing. We’ve struggled with testing as a distributed community. Can AI help?
- long-term maintenance of FOLIO code is important concern.
- there are different types of AI and different concerns. Agentic AI access to FOLIO may be a different concern than using AI to code.
- Aren’t dev teams responsible for their own code? And so AI use for coding is up to them? If we have a policy about AI-generated code, do we also have a policy around quality of human-generated code? Yes, we do. [Some considerable back and forth on this.]
- Security concerns. AI will uncover more potential exploits.
Outcome:
- Tri-Council request that AI SIG subgroup on Ethics and Policy incorporate AI-in-FOLIO
- Also explore arranging a convo at WOLFcon that could be OLF-wide: Jennifer Eustis, Thomas Trutt, Tod Olson are on the WOLFcon planning comittee. Jennifer suggests that people look at conference schedule to find existing AI topic and go there. there are also two open slots (one 25 min, one 50 min) where a person could propose a topic and gather like-minded folk. Jeremey is also leading a precon workshop on AI, but is more focused on innovation not
|