2022-02-10 Product Council Meeting notes/SIG Conveners Meeting



Discussion items

5 minAnnouncementsAll
  • Martina Schildt: There will be monthly SIG convener meetings
    • SIG Conveners have a Wiki space
    • Plan: standardize the information on the SIG's wiki pages → to make things easier for someone completely new to FOLIO
      • screen shots (by Darsi Rueda)
      • it would be great if SIG conveners can adjust the relevant wiki information accordingly; Darsi offered to take care as an option (starting this Friday)

Data Sync Working Group update (link to slides)Martina Schildt 

Questions being asked of subject matter experts in SIGs:

  • What is a tolerable delay for data to be in sync that is still workable?
  • Which use cases require instantaneous access to the updated data?
  • If data needs to be updated instantaneously, but is not, what are the impacts on your workflows?

Feedback is sought before next Friday before the working group ends data gathering and starts making decisions.

The working group has had extensive discussions about the conflicts between how much the modules should know about each other. This is particularly important for the "block-on-deletion" use case. When this kind of check is put in place, it has caused performance problems (as noted in circulation). There isn't a general solution in FOLIO right now for this use case. When this has to happen, two modules become more integrated than what might otherwise be intended or desired. (This is being hard-coded now, as in the Users app check.)

Are there examples of where instant updates are required? This is a big part of the information gathering process—what is the maximum tolerable time for some use cases. In some cases, modules are looking up information directly from other modules.

For the block-on-delete, the leading contender for a solution is a "soft delete"—the underlying data has not been removed from the system but it isn't visible to the user. It implies that it can be "un-soft-deleted"; there is a process that runs periodically that checks to make sure all of the dependencies have been fulfilled before actually deleting a record. An exceptions report is available.

SIG Updates

See reports below

Data Migration will have a new convener, Darsi Rueda. It may make a proposal to Product Council to become its own SIG.

Topics for future meetings
  • Review a proposal from Data Migration—now under the Sysops SIG—to become its own SIG.
  • Need for translation teams for docs.folio.org
  • Update on lodging and other logistics for WOLFcon.

SIG Updates

ERM (Martina Tumulla & Martina Schildt)

  • Annika presented on eUsage reports functionality in the Agreements App. 
  • The ERM SIG started to discuss acceptable delays for data to be in sync across apps after the presentation from the data sync working group.

User Management (Maura Byrne)

  • SIG has concentrated on two specific functions.
    • Preferred first name display in User records ( UXPROD-3467 - Getting issue details... STATUS )
    • Protecting user fields from being overwritten by a central feed. ( UXPROD-242 - Getting issue details... STATUS )

Resource Access (Jana Freytag)

  • fee/fines:
  • Dashboard: Presentation of the Dashboard functionality including finding new use cases
  • Reporting cross over Meeting (now monthly)
  • Data Sync Working Group: Discussion on the use cases and the acceptable delay in data sync

Reporting (Angela Zoss)

  • Did some new year planning toward the end of January. Goals for 2022 include:
    • Support transition from LDP to Metadb
    • Developing training/onboarding for new SIG members/report users
    • Develop a FOLIO Reporting Vision and Strategy
    • Improve communication between SIG and developers of apps so we hear about data model changes in advance
  • Development teams are working toward a new release of our query repository to align with Lotus. We are prioritizing updates of our LDP derived table queries so that they will work Metadb. 
  • In the SIG meeting, we are building/delivering training related to important reporting topics. In December and January we covered some intro to SQL topics. This month, we have switched over to talking about Git and GitHub.
  • Now that we have both European and West coast US members of our SIG, we will be reviewing our SIG meeting time to try to better accommodate all time zones. We will likely propose an alternating schedule week to week.
  • The LDP app has been approved by Technical Council for Lotus.
  • With the introduction of Metadb, there isn’t a plan to rename the app in FOLIO. No formal release for Metadb yet; it is live for ReShare customers. UChicago is starting to test it with its FOLIO implementation.

Metadata Management (Felix Hemme, Raegan Wiechert)

  • Presentation on new MARC Authorities App
  • Presentation on multiple graphical representations (i.e. non-Latin scripts) display in Inventory and current workarounds
  • Missouri State, Chicago, and Cornell shared about migration experiences, especially challenges and advice for those who have not migrated yet
  • Questions surrounding how prioritization is done now that the functionality common to almost all libraries is nearing completion

Consortia (Noah Brubaker)

  • The consortia SIG has met with Dennis Bridges and Dung-Lan Chen to discuss consortia functionality related to acquisitions.  We anticipate that there will be additional collaboration in the future.
  • The consortia SIG will continue to reach out to other SIGs going forward to create more dialogue between our SIGs
  • We are continuing to refine functionality we would like to see in a Consortium Admin Tool

Accessibility – dormant at this time

SysOps (Ingolf Kuss)

What we want to achieve this year:

  • Simplicity in Deployment
  • How to get SysOps concerns addressed that have been around for last 4 years :
    • make it easier to spin up "minimal" FOLIO
    • make it easier to build apps for FOLIO, easier to select what to deploy
  • Security needs to align, as well as privacy - look at as a whole, not an afterthought

Experiences with production environments :

  • Migration went well (one weekend)
  • No outages so far (fantastic!), but some performance issues
    • Issues with Elasticsearch
    • Checkin/out, circulation tasks were slow

Implementers (Ian Walls)

  • Looking at helping with onboarding documentation; working on wiki cleanup
  • Scheduled session (Feb 15) to discuss what’s new in Kiwi
  • After that session, plan to do testing together of workflows that may have changed from Juniper to Kiwi
  • Interested in getting into the testing process of Lotus earlier on, using some of the group’s synchronous time

Support (Anya Arnold and Debra Howell)

Folio implemented libraries are finding many bugs that result in hotfixes - so far Kiwi will have 2 hotfixes. Juniper currently has 6. 

App Interaction (Martina Schildt)

  • The AI SIG continued to discuss the change log in orders, requirements and steps forward 
  • Members of the Privacy SIG presented a form, where information that will be collected by an app needs to be declared (declaration form)
  • The SIG walked through creating a request on items on order
  • Next meeting: Looking at newly collected Dashboard use cases

Acquisitions (Martina Schildt)

  • Due to schedule conflicts the Friday meetings will be shifted from currently 2/18, 3/4, …, 2/25, 3/11, …
  • Edifact Order export UAT took place
    • Part II of the testing will be about flagging orders for export and creating the Edifact files
  • ACQ SIG discussed/reviewed
    • MODINVOICE-328 - Getting issue details... STATUS  - Allow editing of subscription dates after an invoice is paid 
    • Order/invoice export to csv requirements
    • Display "Rush" in receiving and on invoice -  UXPROD-3179 - Getting issue details... STATUS (Morning Glory)

Data sync questions re: the acceptable delay for data to be in sync across apps - answer will be provided via this form by February 18th

Meeting Chat log

09:39:00 From  Charlotte Whitt  to  Everyone:
    Yes, TCR-10 (mod-lip) and TCR-11 (ui-ldp) is approved by the Technical Council
09:39:11 From  Charlotte Whitt  to  Everyone:
09:44:22 From  Anya  to  Everyone:
    Have to step away for a second
09:46:49 From  Brooks Travis (he/him)  to  Everyone:
    Not to be confused with mod-pubsub
09:46:56 From  Anya  to  Everyone:
09:49:57 From  Charlotte Whitt  to  Everyone:
    Yes, Block on deletion - is one area
09:50:18 From  Jana Freytag  to  Everyone:
    Very important for circ!
09:50:34 From  Charlotte Whitt  to  Everyone:
    And similar Block on ’move of holdings/item’ - is another area, also not addressed
09:50:52 From  Charlotte Whitt  to  Everyone:
    This gets more and more critical for the implementing libraries
09:51:06 From  Ian Walls  to  Everyone:
    attempting to replace an integrated library system with a disintegrated one is certainly tricky
09:51:47 From  Brooks Travis (he/him)  to  Everyone:
    I would call it a different model of integration
09:53:15 From  Tod Olson  to  Everyone:
    Can the link to the slides be shared?
09:53:35 From  Martina Schildt  to  Everyone:
09:54:28 From  Owen Stephens  to  Everyone:
    Yes - hardcoding the check is always possible where it’s necessary - which essentially ends up with a much tighter integration between the modules in question
09:55:02 From  Owen Stephens  to  Everyone:
    And that’s where questions like “have we got the right boundary between modules” comes up
09:55:30 From  Owen Stephens  to  Everyone:
    We have a similar hardcoded check between Agreements and Licenses - so it’s not just users etc.
09:58:19 From  Raegan Wiechert  to  Everyone:
10:00:29 From  Owen Stephens  to  Everyone:
    That’s exactly what we’re trying to get to with the questions we’re currently asking the SIGS
10:01:46 From  Maura Byrne  to  Everyone:
10:01:56 From  Raegan Wiechert  to  Everyone:
10:03:25 From  Maura Byrne  to  Everyone:
10:04:54 From  Charlotte Whitt  to  Everyone:
    Sorry - my laptop just died in the middle of a sentence
10:06:29 From  Charlotte Whitt  to  Everyone:
    Good question Peter
10:07:13 From  Charlotte Whitt  to  Everyone:
    In Inventory we have a feature for ’Marked for deletion'
10:07:51 From  Brooks Travis (he/him)  to  Everyone:
    Do we do garbage collection or automated reference counting, to borrow from the coding world
10:08:42 From  Tod Olson  to  Everyone:
    What Owen, Harry, and Brooks are saying about soft delete is what I had in mind: mark a record as "deleted" but it is still there and does not leave dangling references and the system can do various things to come to consistency.
10:09:44 From  Harry  to  Everyone:
    +1 Tod
10:11:28 From  Brooks Travis (he/him)  to  Everyone:
    I think we’ll come to that when we circle back to the block on delete question
10:32:35 From  Owen Stephens  to  Everyone:
    Thanks for that update Tod
10:36:18 From  Owen Stephens  to  Everyone:
    Thank you all
10:42:27 From  Brooks Travis (he/him)  to  Everyone:
    I think it’s been there, but now it’s required
10:42:40 From  Steph Buck  to  Everyone:
    +1 Brooks - called RCA
10:44:35 From  Brooks Travis (he/him)  to  Everyone:
    I think the RCA requirement is a QA initiative, but my recollection could be off slightly.
10:44:58 From  Peter Murray  to  Everyone:
    Thanks, Brooks!
10:49:13 From  Tod Olson  to  Everyone:
    Darsi Rueda will convene Data Migration.
10:49:26 From  Tod Olson  to  Everyone:
    Darsi from Stanford.