2025-10-23 Product Council Agenda and Minutes

2025-10-23 Product Council Agenda and Minutes

Oct 23, 2025  Date

 Participants

  • PC Members: @Jennifer Eustis @Jana Freytag @Autumn Faulkner @Tod Olson @Thomas Trutt @Charlotte Whitt @Jeremy Huff @Martin Scholz @Lisa McColl @Alexis Manheim @Caitlin Stewart

  • Other Attendees:

  • Regrets: @Caitlin Stewart @Alexis Manheim

Highlights for Monthly Newsletter

The Product council formed three working groups to tackle their top three yearly priorities:
1. The Community Priorities Dashboard
2. Community Directed Development Framework
3. RMS/PC Roles, Relations and Communication

The PC will be discussing their approval of the the support period changes being proposed.


 Discussion topics

Allocated Time

Item

Presenter

Notes

Allocated Time

Item

Presenter

Notes

5 min

Welcome & Announcements

 

Note taker: @Autumn Faulkner or @Jana Freytag

MS: daylight saving time slot shift next week for European/UK attendees US follows one week after that

Housekeeping

3-5 min

Action Item Review

@Jeremy Huff

Status see below: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/PC/pages/1297940481/2025-10-23+Product+Council+Agenda+and+Minutes#%E2%98%91%EF%B8%8F--Action-Items

10 min

Newsletter

@Jeremy Huff

  • What should this process look like?

  • How frequently should this be sent out?

  • Chat: MS: https://folio.org/about/news/

  • See Action Items

    • Outreach to councils and past newsletters

Standing updates

5 min

Council updates

@Alexis Manheim

@Tod Olson

CC: No Updates

TC:

RMS: We talked about the recent decision on the recommendation on support periods. RMS talked about having PC weigh in on this. We talked about CSP 8.

In Chat:

Jenn Colt 16:28Also who votes on CSP inclusion

Charlotte Whitt 16:27
Mark Veksler
Harry Kaplanian
Jakub Skcozen

Jenn Colt 16:28
In slack it says: Approvers: D Howell (Support rep), J Eustis (PC rep), Y Kumar (QA), L Braginski (Dev), J Skoczen, M Veksler, M Gorrell (CC rep), H Kaplanian, K Gambrell. Need 5 approvals, including 2 technical approvers (Mark V, Lee, Mike G, Jakub)

 

Jeremy Huff: Asked for clarification on the decision records and whether the TC is open to changes after the PC’s review.

Jenn Colt: Confirmed that the TC is open to iteration on the proposal, though they hoped the concerns of the PC were already addressed by adding functional CSPs.

Explained that the TC would propose this decision, but it would be the PC’s responsibility to update the support policy document.

Discussed the risk of expiring dependencies and the importance of being transparent about their expiration.

Key Point: The TC’s proposal emphasizes that dependencies should have clear expiration dates, and the community should make informed choices about what to do once support ends.

Security and Support

Jenn Colt: Explained that the TC is proposing clear expiration dates for security support, allowing the community to manage risks after that point.

A risk matrix was developed to help visualize and manage potential security issues

Jeremy Huff: Raised a point about the governance document, which might have provisions for conflict resolution if multiple councils are involved in decision-making (e.g., the CC stepping in to resolve deadlocks).

Next Steps

Jeremy Huff: Suggested planning for further engagement with the proposal. Also mentioned the need to review the language and possibly make revisions to the support policy.

Jenn Colt: Assured that there would be further discussions to reach a consensus that works for everyone.

10 min

Sub Group Updates

All

  • Review Sub Groups Here

  • Ensure that

  • Checkin on the Subgroups and ensure the next checkin dates (the 6th Nov)

  • We established that the RMS Check-ins with PC should be incorporated into the subgrup check-ins

  • Autumn and Yogesh are going to give an update on the state of the sample date in the upcoming weeks

New Topics

10 min

PC Tri-Council Task: Create updated list of FOLIO modules with maintenance status (including orphaned apps) (PC).

All

this relates to the survey @Thomas Trutt introduced some meetings ago on the implementation of FOLIO Apps

In Chat:

Jenn Colt 16:35
Is this related to ‘core’ definition?

Martin Scholz 16:36
not directly

Charlotte Whitt 16:35 (Bearbeitet)
Maybe the survey could be ’star’ rating? Or happy Smileys

Autumn Faulkner (she/her) 16:38
possibly a tri council task force?

Charlotte Whitt 16:49
This wiki page has all module (+ POs and Tech leads) - https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/REL/pages/5210256

  1. Background:
    Jeremy Huff brought up the task assigned to the PC during the Tri-Council meetings to create an updated list of Folio modules with maintenance statuses, including orphaned apps. While the DIP proposal is already being addressed, this maintenance list needs further planning and action.

  2. Discussion Points:

    • Survey Proposal: Thomas Trutt proposed conducting a survey to assess which modules are in use across libraries and their maintenance status. Thomas explained that the survey would focus on app usage and the general institutional context, but it wouldn't directly capture maintenance details.

    • Potential Subgroup: Jeremy suggested that the PC could engage with this task via a subgroup, involving product owners (POs) from other SIGs to compile the information. However, the key question was whether the SIGs are aware of all the modules being used within their scope.

    • Concerns about Survey Fatigue: The group discussed avoiding survey fatigue by consolidating efforts and combining the needs of the PC and other groups like Implementers and RA into a single survey, to avoid asking the same people multiple times.

  3. Action Items:

    • Survey Scope: It was agreed that the survey might be complementary but would not directly address the maintenance statuses the PC needs. It may focus on app usage rather than detailed maintenance.

    • Direct Approach to Product Owners: Thomas suggested that reaching out directly to the Product Owners (POs) could be a better approach than using SIGs, as POs likely have more granular knowledge of the modules they oversee.

    • Compiling Maintenance Status: Jeremy proposed reaching out to SIGs or POs to collect data on module maintenance directly. If necessary, information could be gathered from GitHub, looking at module updates and activity.

  4. Conclusion:
    The group generally agreed to combine efforts with the Implementers and other groups, but the final plan hinges on contacting the POs directly to compile a comprehensive list of modules and their maintenance status. (see action items below)

15 min

PC Goal Working Group Expectation Setting

All

postponed

Updates on Active Initiatives

Planning

5 min

Newsletter topics

 

 

5 min

Define agendas for next 2 meetings

 

 

Action Items

(Jeremy) Add decision section, remove Meeting Minutes, add link to recording
Archive Roadmap Subgroup on Subgroup overview page and set status as concluded and maybe move group’s page @Jeremy Huff
Put new working groups on subgroups overview page @Jeremy Huff
@Jeremy Huff Bring up newsletter concept with the council chairs
@Jana Freytag to reach out to @Rachel Fadlon concerning legacy folio news letter
@Thomas Trutt reach out to implementors to determine if their survey can satisfy the PC’s goals for a list of modules with maintenance status

Decisions

 Related materials

Recording: