A tri council meeting should be coming up. What do we need from that meeting?
Ingolf
Will collect feedback from sysops
Feedback and also detailed estimations/opinions about the move from Okapi to Eureka
There is already initial feedback but we want to give more details now. Now sysops needs to create a kubernetes test environment. There is some documentation. In the course of that will see where there might be problems and what is not understood. (EBSCO uses ECS)
Will investigate how much time first to make a decision and then when, do they have the info they need for the decision
How much if any time needed for both types of FOLIO? Likely all want to switch but will gather details
Security upgrades are very appealing. Questions about sidecars
Will convene this Friday and see how it goes. Could give feeback one of the next couple wednesdays. Has 14 questions to ask the group.
(Is sidecar config particular to the orchestration platform?)
Sys ops will have to investigate all the components that are being replaced
GBV working to rebuild on Kubernetes cluster which will take weeks/months
They need more documentation and will produce documentation
They are in good spirits!
Next steps based on TC and PC Meetings
All
Sequencing:
RFC and community endorsement
Is this group willing to give a Eureka endorsement?
Deliverables:
What can we bring forward from what we've done?
Cleaned up questions answered
Rubric for organizing applications
Other recommendations from the draft document?
Continued communication
Recommendation to TC about RFCs
Recommendation about transition? (coordinator?)
Notes:
Conversation has gotten very technical may be appropriate to let technical conversation take center stage for now
What does this group want to focus on?
Wanting to make sure FOLIO works in wider variety of deployments than just the EBSCO context
Want to feel confident of technical side
Asking how we want to do Eureka instead of whether we want to, how to make smooth transition, gather experience from sysops and others
How do we transition makes the most sense if we make the call to move to Eureka.
Getting information we need will take time and potentially extend transition time
We can only get info from EBSCO as they have the time to give it.
Not sure transition time has a lot of impact on EBSCO
For how - not just how to do it but also find obstacles on the way that still need to be solved, to make Eureka better for everyone, not just simple how but enable community to say yes
Not only EBSCO will provide documentation, others could as well
How realistic is it that both platforms will be supported? How is Index Data thinking about this?
ID is having yearly meeting and will be discussing, don't have an answer yet, working on thinking it through
Two different platforms might also connect with how easy it is to implement in the new Eureka, how hard is the transition? If easy to move then less demand for both. There could be reasons one would want to stick with Okapi. How big the change is vs the resources of the institutions.
EBSCO has suggested they would support both for a period of time but probably not over the long term
Okapi lives with core platform and maintained by multiple organizations, not just ID responsibility, others can participate too
How much do folks need to learn to be comfortable?
EBSCO will certainly get to Eureka first, at that point 2 platforms
What is the purpose of endorsement if this is what is going to happen? EBSCO will be doing this.Community doesn't have options for other infrastucture
RFCs allow for technical tweaks
Maybe endorsement isn't explicit enough or the right word. EBSCO doesn't need endorsement. Endorsement was meant to indicate collective decision of the community to go to Eureka or not. If the thought is maybe not then that is a bigger thing.
All of the downstream decisions about what we publish about flower releases is connected to current flower releases. Part of the move to Eureka could change these. This where community can start to pick up work around the transition. What investment is the community going to make?
Either way not just what we recommend/support but the work that comes after and the support that is offered
Sequencing of events
Whether Eureka is where we want to go
Application manager could be separable but would need to talk to Okapi rather than Kong, could be carved off with effort
Keycloak is much. more entwined with the architecture/side cars
What is the transition time for hosting organizations, how long does Okapi stay around in whatever form
Getting away from flower releases can only happen after community comfortably in Eureka
Adopting Eureka doesn't mean we have to get rid of flower releases right away
Fact of applications doesn't force us to immediately change the practice of Flower releases
Someone needs more experience with this before we say community is ready to move forward with this
The decision of whether we intend to go toward Eureka or not. There will be an overlap of support. Community can't do everything they need to before there is overlap.
Two things - community decision about go to eureka or both long term and in doing so must decide how much information is needed before making that decision with confidence
Until make decision plans are speculative
So does that mean with EBSCO going to prod with Eureka is that part of getting experience with Eureka? Yes even if not perfect visibility.
German libraries also committed to getting experience
next
summer meeting frequency
revisit charge to see where we are vs original intent