| | |
|---|
11:01 | Smalltalk | Starting us off with some epistemology, Thomas asks: "Does anyone know anything? That's honestly how I feel half the time." We look at Peter's motherboards because they are cool
|
11:04 | Housekeeping | Last week's notes were approved Thomas asks that we continue to think of topics. If any arise, you may post to our slack channel, DM Thomas, or bring them up in a meeting.
|
11:04 | Application and Platform Formalization Working Group | |
11:06 | What is the working group? | |
11:07 | What is the problem being solved? | The flower releases for FOLIO have grown big and complicated. It is unwieldy for systems operators who, for example, have to activate 150 or so modules for every tenant that they upgrade. Application formalization takes the modules and sorts them into applications, significantly reducing the work of running FOLIO Formalizing applications also gives us the potential to make changes to the release process in order to make it more application-focused. While the technical changes proposed will enable these process changes, additional work by the community will be required in order to actually adopt and benefit from these processes
|
11:08 | What work is happening where? Where are things being discussed? | |
11:11 | What work is happening now? | Currently the group is working through a long list of questions that the Technical Council and Product Council created. Some questions are unknowns requiring decisions--there is no extant answer to be found. Some members of PC are specifically looking at the grouping of modules into applications. Additionally, they are looking into documentation of their decisions, so that it can be applied consistently moving forward. The group has also started thinking about what the release where this first gets adopted will be like, and what will need to be in place for that to happen. The group is also thinking about how the Library of Congress's adoption of some of this work will be re-integrated back into the main line of FOLIO. The group is also watching the Technical Council's Request for Comments (RFC) process.
|
11:15 | What is the Timeline? | |
11:19 | Questions | Stephanie Larrison asks: are there concerns from either the Technical Council or Tri-Council that were alleviated by answers received to their questions? Are there any outstanding questions about whether we should be doing this or not? Jenn says: There are many outstanding questions. Jenn says: Whether we should be doing this is not a question that is still on the table because it is in progress already for the Library of Congress. The best course of action for the community is to take advantage of that work. There will likely be smaller course-changes emerging as part of the RFC discussions, as the direction is solidified.
Stephanie asks if any other proposals were considered as a response to the problem of the releases getting too big. Marie has the same question as Stephanie. Thomas talks about the possibility combining specific apps: mod-circ and mod-circ-storage? Tara asks: what effect will this have on end-users? What do the interim stages look like for end users? Thomas notes that he's interested in which apps are being grouped together and which are being kept separate (inventory and circulation specifically). He asks if they will also be taking the opportunity to reorganize the API endpoints as well. Darsi notes that she's curious about dependencies and the order in which application are installed. We hope more details will be forthcoming. Kara notes that we're hoping for modules to be more connected, particularly Courses Thomas notes that as part of this process, they also have to look at how work and development is being split up, which may lead to positive changes as well.
|
11:34 | Closing | |