2024-05-22 Formalization Working Group Meeting notes

5min

Updates on RFCs, PoC, etc

Craig, others

• Folio Eureka Platform Overview

• A tri council meeting should be coming up. What do we need from that meeting?

• Craig:

  • working on finishing up RFC, at TC final review in the next couple weeks-ish

Next steps based on TC and PC Meetings

All

How could we help prepare the hosting community for Eureka?

• those outside EBSCO are not in a position to be able to just do Eureka right now

• need sample environment with documented deployment, it doesn't have to be a cookbook just a model you could adopt

Could there be Eureka hosting session at WC?

• Sessions have already been submitted and none are exactly like this but several will be of interest to sys ops:

  • session on manager component

• Harder to do a session on deployment because of difference in environments, EBSCO only has nuts and bolts details on what they use

What would a model look like?

• detailed diagram

• example implementation that can be adapted

• FOLIO devops team newly funded, how can they be involved?

• new reference environment with deployment scripts

• some practical model - how would I do this in ECS theoretically or in Kubernetes

• layout of a deployment strategy

Current work in Rancher envs:

• Kitfox updating to support Rancher envs using Eureka plus a hosting reference environment

• Some of this work should come online this summer and should help give examples. Craig will look at the timeline.

How does the transition actually happen?

• What is the roadmap for the transition?

• Do we want to support 2 platforms?

• How do we support the transition?

• How do we know who is hosting?

• How can we avoid leaving people in the lurch?

• Ask Kitfox to be in touch with the sysops sig to let them know what they are working on and schedule a demo when they are ready. Sys ops is well positioned to disseminate info

• Craig can touch base with Kitfox about what works/makes sense for them

• Should we have a project manager/product owner for the transition?

• What is our intention? Do we want everyone to get to Eureka? What is the plan for how to get there?

• If we really want every one to get there need to support those doing hosting

• What if there is pushback?

• If we make a community choice, it is expressing a community preference that others are not required to follow but will require them to potentially support their alternative themselves

• Should the RFCs be completed before asking the community/councils to endorse a path?

• Is there value to the RFC process if it isn't going to cause any change? What level of investment in the RFC process is worth?

• Pushback could surface in sysops but in the moment it is more like pockets of concern than outright rejection. Kirstin will talk to Ingolf about taking the temperature

• RFCs allow for consensus and potentially improvement to proposals

• RFCs could also illuminate what aspects of module reviews need to be updated

• Abstracts for RFCs already exist, going forward with them allows any disagreement to get worked out

• However RFCs aren't really designed to deal with large strategic upheaval

Upcoming tri-council meeting

• We could recommend councils endorse movement toward Eureka as well as given an update with reasons why, talk about alternatives, ask for vote

• Would we want RFCs squared away first?

• Are the councils representative enough of the people most affected?

• Do people understand enough of the implications to vote for an endorsement?

• If we do not move along with the Eureka team we could end up stuck in the transition period of supporting two "platforms" longer

Draft summary document

All

Draft summary document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rc4xgJQsNFlXoHW6lAI7MbF8MzaWDb9QW2eryiiyNTo/edit

Draft of answered questions still to come

All

Next steps