2022-02-24 Meeting notes

Announcements

• Updates on Ukraine
• Data Migration to remain subgroup under SysOps

We believe from everything we've heard, the EPAM developers in Ukraine are okay.  We likely shouldn't expect much communication as the EPAM staff focus on their own personal safety.  For the personal safety of those impacted, please refrain from contacting and seeking information from those colleagues; the FOLIO Slack is wide open and we don't know who is listening and watching.

Due to the cross-over of people and the overlap of discussions, the data migration group will remain a subgroup under Sysops rather than becoming their own SIG.

 Documentation Working Group update

• status of documentation
• updating the documentation past Honeysuckle

Updates: 
Community Council

Technical Council

Product Owners

Capacity Planning

Community Council

• Last update to PC was Jan 27, 2022 - this update summarizes the CC meeting Feb. 14, 2022
• CC worked on a letter to the FOLIO members to reflect on the recent situation on resources and FOLIO's state of the art
• Update of FOLIO webside is work in progress. Volunteers are welcome.
• Continuation of CC retrospective discussion
  • Sustainability and resourcing
    • Develop maintenance framework
    • Review of the MoUs – first draft
    • Intense discussion around resourcing and contribution strategies – still ongoing
• Community Council Meetings are in general open to participants!  Next will be on Feb. 28, 2022

Technical Council

Review process: LDP app received final approval, Authority control module still in process, new plug-in for finding fund information. Review process is currently set up to happen after a module is complete, but there is a sense that it would be useful to review the technical design before a lot of effort is expended in implementation to ensure the design fits with the rest of FOLIO. Not certain how this would work. We would not want to create an undue burden, but we have already encountered issues of architectural fit and implementation strategy.

New Technical Module Evaluation: small subgroup is working to update/clarify the module technical evaluation process based on experiences so far.

Code Library evaluation:A code library was submitted for evaluation. It had been split out from an existing module and intended for reuse in other modules. Decided that separate review of library code was not needed, and would happen in context of a module review.

Technical Decisions: another subgroup has formed to review TC process for making technical decisions; have had some questions of scope and mission, still organizing.  Some kind of RFC-like process may happen.

Personal Data Disclosure Form: The Privacy SIG made some changes to the form where developers disclose what personal data is stored by a module, asked TC for approval. While this form was originally created by TC member, that was before the Privacy SIG existed. TC position is that the Privacy SIG are the experts in this area and should own that form.

Council Goals/Initiatives: Have some good insights and questions, but unclear where to go next. Spinning up small subgroup to focus on this.

Hosted AWS environment: Peter Murray is looking at new environments that have increased expenses, driven by specific development needs, such as performance testing. Expect further conversation about how we approve environments and making AWS costs explicit for certain development efforts, and things we can do to contain expenses.

Onboarding Developers: PC noted challenge of onboarding new development teams, asked whether TC has a role in addressing this. This would need to be a cross-council effort. Creating onboarding materials is a project that requires resources. TC might be able to identify persons who could help create materials, but TC cannot assign that work or give it a priority relative to other efforts, but allocating resources and setting priorities is more under CC/PC.

Our current process is focused on getting code ready for release. We need processes to get feedback on code that is in development: some sort of opportunity to get reviewed earlier. Could this be related to the RFC process described earlier?  Sometimes with design documents on the wiki, it isn't clear whether feedback is desired just from the specific team or whether broad feedback from the community is required.  As development teams work on "local" issues, they need to often consider the global project-wide issues.

Product Owners

• Teams are wrapping up features, NFRs, and defects for Lotus release.
• New Product Owner : Steven Turner (Bama team) 
• Met with Data Sync Working Group to review current proposal. Product Owners were asked to complete survey to gather additional requirements. 
• Future meetings
  • Integrate performance tests throughout development lifecycle
  • Test automation 
  • POs Tips and Tricks

Capacity Planning

Capacity Planning has not met weekly since the beginning of the year. Focus has been on the community-oriented team, Prokopovych.  Holly is moving to part-time; Charlotte will be talking on some of the role from Holly, particularly in the area of search.  This team has a very limited number of developers (effectively 3 FTE with no one full time) and "a mountain of work" to do. Capacity Planning has been talked about whether it is possible to move some of this work to other teams.

Hotfix 2 for Kiwi is planned for March 6.

If there is capacity from China or other sources, how can these be put together?  Sources of capacity can go to Capacity Planning, which will review the skills being brought and place people on teams where they can be paired with an experienced project member. Technical Skills in Demand

We have more than just a developer onboarding problem, but onboarding is something that we can address.  We can address this by gathering the resources and making sure they are available for the teams.