Attendees

Discussion items

Item	Who	Notes
WOLFcon Session Timebox	Mike Gorrell	Review the planned WOLFcon Timebox schedule and consider CC and other community meetings and whether there are any conflicts CC sees no conflicts and is fine with the timebox
Scope Criteria Group	Mike Gorrell	Review Flow on slides 7 and 8 - comments and/or concerns? Dracine: related to "contributor signs MoU" who is the contributor? Ian Ibbotson: initially it was software provider, who comes along and develops new software maybe this needs to be broadened up Harry: ownership goes to OLF does that make sense, if OLF cannot take care of code does it make sense to change that going into the future Marc Johnson: agrees to Harry; there is a relationship between owner and contributor needs to be granted that contributor stays around Harry: can this be granted by anyone? Ian Walls: transfering ownership is transfering responsibility expectations need to be clear business arrangements are needed to have FOLIO supported Simeon: code is given to OLF only in edge cases slide 10: functional criteria for FOLIO development is where expectations are given Mike: need to look at higher level when looking at ownerhsip of code → FOLIO is open source and should stay open source Harry: has issues with slide 7 "included in FOLIO build"; meanwhile there are multiple FOLIO builds example for China: acquisitions is not usable in China, they have to build a new acq in China we have to encourage multiple FOLIO builds (one for China, Germany etc.) core FOLIO with basic set of functionality Ian Ibbotson in chat: "Open Core" is a well trodden path for this kind of architecture Dracine in chat: I like that language. Marc Johnson: need advice from broader community on ownership; different sense of meaning when discussing in scope criteria group slides represent a proposal for today; not for future Dracine in chat: I can see a scenario where Duke might consider the Chinese FOLIO build for it's campus in China. Keven in chat: This is why we want to emphasize the role of regional communities, and it becomes necessary to maintain a "standard" regional version, otherwise compatibility is difficult to control and can cause difficulties in promotion FOLIO. Mike: this is the sticking point; what exactly is the MoU maybe need to find a better word do you have to turn over ownership and contribute under Apache 2 IanW in chat: so in this case, the kernel would Okapi + Postgres + Stripes, etc, and the builds would include the different functional modules Ian I in chat: @ianW - yes - that matches my understanding of core (possibly with users, permissions, auth also) Ian W in chat: Yes, Ian I., we'd need to auth/permissions, too. and Messaging (Kafka), storage (S3/Minio), and maybe some other cross-cutting utitilities clarification needed for: "Contributor signs MoU"; otherwise it is difficult to agree to the new process feedback: it should not be needed to have the PC approve at pre-build state Ian W: difficulty to use "FOLIO"; different meanings (Community, product) → we need qualifiers boundaries of power PC says what goes into flower releases everybody else can remix and bundle up there is a mechanism needed Harry disagrees partially: the PC should not make decisions on what is in a release in e.g. China Marc: that would be a very different understanding of what the group was trying to achieve Harry: this is because the slides are contracdicting each other Simeon: PC is charged with managing the product Feedback from CC: clarification needed for: "Contributor signs MoU"; it should not be needed to have the PC approve at pre-build state; due to inpracticality reasons (by Harry) how do we make sure that we have a process in place for builds in other countries (e.g. China) \| how do we endorse different builds of FOLIO throughout the world Marc asks for explanation; not in scope of this proposal Keven in chat: We need that
FOLIO Community Member status/questions	Mike Gorrell	New Members - all "Supporting Member" level - all in hebis network: University Library Kassel Darmstadt University and State Library University Library Johann Christian Senckenberg (Frankfurt / Main) MoU Status Question about paying multiple years Some institutions have inquired about prepaying their membership fees for the next few years. Keven in chat: Paying membership fees for multiple years at a time should generally be encouraged, which helps community maintain financial stability. Potential issues: Accounting? Paula will talk to new accountant to check whether this is doable Rate changes (supposed the level they choose becomes obsolete in future years) Other? CC agrees that prepaying their membership fees for the next few years should be made possible
Elections	Simeon Warner	Update voting closes this Friday Simeon will send a reminder to vote
Other Business

Chat

Von Simeon Warner (he/him) an alle 04:08 PM
50%
Von Harry an alle 04:08 PM
50%
Von Ian Ibbotson an alle 04:12 PM
via the CLA
Von Ian Ibbotson an alle 04:23 PM
"Open Core" is a well trodden path for this kind of architecture
Von Dracine Hodges an alle 04:23 PM
I like that language.
Von Ian Walls an alle 04:24 PM
so in this case, the kernel would Okapi + Postgres + Stripes, etc, and the builds would include the different functional modules
Von Dracine Hodges an alle 04:25 PM
I can see a scenario where Duke might consider the Chinese FOLIO build for it's campus in China.
Von Keven Liu an alle 04:28 PM
This is why we want to emphasize the role of regional communities, and it becomes necessary to maintain a "standard" regional version, otherwise compatibility is difficult to control and can cause difficulties in promotion FOLIO.
Von Ian Ibbotson an alle 04:30 PM
@ianW - yes - that matches my understanding of core (possibly with users, permissions, auth also)
Von Ian Walls an alle 04:32 PM
Yes, Ian I., we'd need to auth/permissions, too. and Messaging (Kafka), storage (S3/Minio), and maybe some other cross-cutting utitilities
Von Simeon Warner (he/him) an alle 04:33 PM
I second Dracine's comments. This is part of defining what our community mean
means
Von Keven Liu an alle 04:37 PM
We already have our own version name of Chinese FOLIO application 😊
Von Mike Gorrell an alle 04:37 PM
@keven
Von Dracine Hodges an alle 04:37 PM
Flower name?
Von Keven Liu an alle 04:37 PM
No
Von Mike Gorrell an alle 04:37 PM
where is the code for the Chinese FOLIO Application?
Von Keven Liu an alle 04:38 PM
Local gitlab site
Von Mike Gorrell an alle 04:38 PM
Is it publicly available?
Von Dracine Hodges an alle 04:38 PM
what naming convention are you using, Keven?
Von Keven Liu an alle 04:40 PM
We use YunHan 云瀚 which is named by vote
The code is not publicly available by now
Von Simeon Warner (he/him) an alle 04:40 PM
That is good, I think there should be just one meaning to a release name which implies different names for different mixes (even if aligned in some way)
Von Keven Liu an alle 04:40 PM
but by the members of Chinese FOLIO Community
Von Simeon Warner (he/him) an alle 04:40 PM
Would be better if public though
Von Mike Gorrell an alle 04:40 PM
To me, if the code isn't publicly available then we can't consider it a “part of FOLIO" or a “version of FOLIO” in a practical sense. It's a private fork.
Von Keven Liu an alle 04:45 PM
We plan to make it publicity when successfully implemented in Shanghai Library
We need that!!!
Von Harry an alle 04:48 PM
I agree with you Ian
Von Marc Johnson an alle 04:49 PM
The TC gave exactly the opposite feedback. They felt that the group overstepped it’s remit by defining terms like app and module
Von Keven Liu an alle 04:55 PM
Paying membership fees for multiple years at a time should
If rate changes, it can stipulate that the fees paid are non-refundable, and to choose the closest lever of membership, or recognize that it does not have to make up the difference if the payment rate changes in the future.

Browser not supported