Product Council Action Items
- Add all action items from WOLFcon to this list Jesse Koennecke
- set up a small team to update the MVP paper
- recommend and approve changes to MVP paper
- On-boarding - Put together clear criteria for participation, e.g. at least a 0.5 FTE, work yourself through github developer starting process, etc ... described transparent and accessible. Post Guidelines for developers and institutions (who want to send resources)
- Review community testing process - identify if more testers/test writers needed
- Identify key areas to work in small groups with all parties and bring back the issues to PC?
- Define a process to address certain questions, that occur and let that be done in a small group to deal with it and bring back
- Change our approach to PC meetings first raise the areas of development need (for example: core platform testing) and what can PC do to make sure our institutional resources are directed to this need
- Have different Types of PC meetings - Tactical and strategic
- Clarify the roles of PC Exec group
- Define schedule to Invite the right people at the right time, e.g. Anton (testing), Mike G. (TC), SIG’s (revisit model of liaisons), PO’s, Capacity planning group, more ?
- SIG reports need to the PC be more strategic; Action oriented reports and follow up, e.g. questions about data security (guidelines)
- Decision about how many versions of the software needs to be / will be supported
- Make suggestions regarding platform support/end of life matrix
- Set community standards, how long SIGs continue, etc...
- Convener group will propose a SIG leadership/membership model. Consider: leadership succession/terms, job descriptions for leaders/members, taking into account what works and what doesn’t, keep flexibility for SIGs to govern themselves, define relationship with POs if possible.
Clarification for many of these items can be found in our notes from WOLFcon: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zI1Pbzc0jefrUNK1_nB8YLgYNKxoQYi3TkCYauU4IBA/edit
Copied notes from PC meetings at WOLFcon - these will be deleted as the get converted to list
Future PC Agenda items
- Security Audit results - Jakub
- Cross-App - Kirstin
- Go live planning for Q2 - Harry/Mike
- Q2 Capacity Planning update -
- Introduce Technical Editor
- Type your task here, using "@" to assign to a user and "//" to select a due date
--------- end of session one ----------------------
- Onboarding process
- Determine next steps to revise plans and / or address objectives
- Discuss more agenda items while meeting F2F
_____________________________
Wednesday, January 22 - 10:30 AM
FOLIO Product Council – FOLIO Project input and engagement -
How is PC meeting the objectives laid out in our charter: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/display/PC/FOLIO+Product+Council+Charge? Are we getting the input we need to make effective decisions and recommendations? Should we change the format of any of our meeting or invite any other relevant individuals or groups on a regular bases, like with monthly the SIG Conveners updates and Technical Council updates?
Zoom link: https://zoom.us/j/158762227
Review PC charge: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/display/PC/FOLIO+Product+Council+Charge
- Which groups shall the PC listen too?
- Do we get the input to make the necessary decisions?
- Quality improved in the last year regarding developer assignment, release notes, etc.
- Which decisions could profit from more information? Difficult decisions?
- Know more about how much time is spent on support, which is taken away from development?
- Views of the capacity planning team
- PC needs to put more emphasis on development (Mark Veksler) - more understanding about quality, dependencies and technical question additional to requirements, more understanding of definition of “done” and migration scripts have to be part of requirements
- Role of PO’s: estimates from developers,
- Capacity planning group with the POs: weekly report to PC
- How does the PC make responsible and informed decisions- decisions in one development of feature over another and what are the technical dependencies
- PC need to get reports and background information to make informed decisions - “closing the loop”
- Defining “action items” for the PC
- How can the PC help in situations that need clarification? How to be involved?
- Recommendations from technical council to the PC and how does the technical council report to PC on open questions; decisions are made in technical council and then this has to be reported out and their process and versions get communicated
- But: developers are not reporting to TC, e.g. Anton's report about quality dashboard is waiting …
- Regular report from Anton to PC
- Return these testing problem areas and the quality of code to action items for the PC
- How can we make sure all loose ends / participating parties are united in the PC? Developers, PO’s, Testing team, SIG’s
- Positive example: Antons call for testers
- Suggestion to start each PC meeting with pain points (for example Anton's QA dashboard, what's the critical issue this week?
- Activating the community to provide necessary resources
______________________
Friday - 1/24 - 9:30-10:30
TC Tech Debt Discussion - w/PC
Walk through top Tech Debt Items discussing current actions and next steps. Brainstorming on how to best mitigate the issues
Real load test scenarios - EBSCO modelled with Carrier.io for check out / check-in
Most help needed- test cases - people who can write tests,
become proficient with testing framework - back-end skills needed (Java preferred) - someone 50% time for X months to build initial, then less time to maintain.
Add performance testing to definition of done.
Action item: Job description?
No automatic Schema/data migration - Edelweiss requirement to provide scripts for this. Not all tested, dependencies/orchestration factors, TAMU offered to do testing - unsuccessful - upgraded system wasn’t usable, also a significant load on their system. Fix requests submitted, some already fixed. Tech Council working on next steps . This testing should be done before bug fests. \
Action item: Possible need: 2-3 person dev ops team - to build and maintain environments, run these tests, etc… job descriptions.
Still no optimistic locking of records - scheduled for Q3-2020
- Marko (Leibnitz) - did a survey of frequency of occurrence.
Security audit remediation - Awaiting audit. This will result in more tech debt items to fix.
Architectural blueprint - some may be identified as high/urgent priority.
For many of these, balance between reliability and performance vs. Feature development - factor for decisions.
Zoom link: https://zoom.us/j/158762227
______________________
Friday - 1/24 - 11:00-12:00
Bjorn Muschall Leipzig
Kirstin Kemner-Heek GBV
Maike Osters HBZ
Jesse Koennecke Cornell
Tom Wilson Alabama
Marko Knepper HeBIS
Kristin Martin Chicago
Paul Moeller Colorado Boulder
Sharon Wiles-Young Lehigh
Harry Kaplanian EBSCO
Tod Olson Chicago
Aaron Trehub Auburn
Karen Newbery Duke
Lisa Sjogren Chalmers
Steve Bischoff 5 Colleges
Holly Mistlebauer Cornell
Christie Thomas Duke
Claire Hernandez Biblibre
Theodor Tolstoy EBSCO
Ian Walls Bywater
Patty Waninger EBSCO
Leander Seige
Kelly Drake FLO
Terence Ingram National Library of Australia
Leslie Reynolds Colorado-Boulder
Product Council - Beyond the MVP
Change this? - PC members prepare approximately 2 minute summary of their own WOLFCon experience and add ideas about necessary PC actions.
- Issue with tenant settings for operations in multiple sites
- Cross tenant functionality for multi-tenants
- Chinese partners cannot use zoom, google
- Open access issues and next steps
- Issues of performance and response times
- Security audit will add more technical debt or overlap with current technical debt items
- Complexity of apps - apps split for choice?
- Need discussions on apps and architecture later in project now we need to develop features and work on performance
- PC needs to say no to some ideas to keep the project going
- Texas A&M and architecture blueprint discussions about automation engines for workflow
What does PC do next:
- PC responsibility to go forward with features beyond MVP and how to handle the technical debt
- Focus on MVP development now
MVP Strategy Statement Update - https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1mixIc4Msd2YumGOlVxd8uyG4Wq1aAlygkzPNyox-v-c/edit?usp=sharing
- change implementations-summer of 2020 to 2020
- change bullet point: has to cover all bases functionality of an ILS and ERM for “most” edit out 90%
Early implementer priorities
- Roadmap update split implementers by priorities of needs and functionality for round 2 libraries-- finding bugs and fixing code
- Hear from the libraries about their feature needs for implementation in 2020 so these can be measured against capacity plan and MVP
- reported gaps prevents testing of end to end processing/workflow -- what is preventing you from testing a feature? what is a blocker for a library process?
- Libraries/SIGS testing workflows and features sets; concern is this what is needed by the early implementers
- Implementers testing (use testrails) and need to identify gaps or missing features -- implementers group talking about findings of testing
PC action item - is there a role for PC in tapping into dev resources to help with slippage, etc..
PC action item - “What happens after MVP?” -
- Post MVP Priorities
- modular and what apps are being used in implementations and tested
How do we continue a roadmap?
Zoom link: https://zoom.us/j/314122275
_____________________
Friday 1/24 - 1:00-2:00
Product Council F2F - Setting our 2020 Agenda
Zoom link: https://zoom.us/j/493167934
- Report outs from SIGs and groups: Accomplishments and plans from WOLFcon - These will be short and time-limited.
App Interaction - Martina Schildt
Met with various people throughout the conference
Talked about centralizing notifications
Pubsub seems that it could solve many problems
App interaction has no dev team - where can they record their needs?
Metadata Management - Laura Wright
[See slides ]
Reporting - Sharon Beltaine
4 sessions- LDP 101 Standing room only for overview of reporting in FOLIO
All sessions were recorded - check slack
LDP 102 - MM - report clusters - one query can be a basis for multiple reports, so Reporting SIG clustering them.
Reviewed Jiras
Next steps - meet with MM SIG
LDP 103 - RM
Discussions on integrating with the institution’s financial system
Data sources for ERM usage (cost per use, licenses, agreements, etc)
2/12 - Folio Forum on LDP - please attend!
User Management - Maura Byrne
More complete than some other modules - focusing more in implementation - permissions, permission sets, assigning permissions
Custom fields are brought up frequently. Bulk loader too.
Big push will be to make sure permissions do what they say they will do.
Discussing deleting users - German libraries are very interested in being able to delete users.
Sys Ops - Stephen Pampell
Discussed Product releases, System architecture, tech debt
others
- Wrap up and define next steps / agenda items - review the action items we identified at WOLFcon.
Action items copied from above
- Action item: Work in small groups with all parties and bring back the issues to PC?
- Want to make sure we’re hearing from groups, SIGs, POs, Testing,
- Action item: define a process to address certain questions, that occur and let that be done in a small group to deal with it and bring back
- Action item: Change our approach to PC meetings first raise the areas of development need (for example: core platform testing) and what can PC do to make sure our institutional resources are directed to this need
- Want to hear from other teams, TC, make sure we’re pointing resources to the right place
- Action item: Have different Types of PC meetings - Tactical and strategic
- Role / task of PC Exec group
- 6 members currently, should they be responsible for more decisions?
- Action item - next PC meeting: come back to the topics above and work through
- Action item: Invite the right people at the right time, e.g. Anton (testing), Mike G. (TC), SIG’s (revisit model of liaisons), PO’s, Capacity planning group, more ?
- SIG reports need to the PC be more strategic; Action oriented reports and follow up, e.g. questions about data security (guidelines)
- Action item: decision about how many versions of the software needs to be / will be supported
- Action item: make suggestions regarding platform support/end of life matrix
- Action item - Setting community standards, how long SIGs continue, etc…
- Plan for SIG conveners to rotate off, have others trained
- Action item: Job descriptions for any requests for contributed staff.
- Including what SIG members’ responsibilities are
- PC action item - is there a role for PC in tapping into dev resources to help with slippage, etc..
- Is there a way we can inject some help
- Work with CAP team
- PC action item - “What happens after MVP?” -
- Post MVP Priorities
- modular and what apps are being used in implementations and tested
- Con
Action item: Who to write user documentation, who to see that it gets done,
-Prioritization process - how to organize around next priorities.
- Conveners' session earlier today talked about post-MVP. How long will the community we've built up last? Other groups incl. FOLIO Stakeholders talking about future governance models
- How can we support the “definition of done”?