2024-03-20 - WOLFCon Proposals and Static Code Analysis

• Individual council meetings after WOLFcon in addition to the Tri-council meeting?
  • If so, let's nail down details sooner than last time so those attending can make the necessary travel plans.
  • WOLFcon planning has apparently already allocated time for these council meetings.  Tod Olson will find out details.
  • Some members term limits will mean they will not be TC members at WOLFcon (including Jeremy).
  • Do we want to make this an open or closed meeting? 
• How exactly do we see Roll-on/off of TC members working in general?
  • What about chairs?  Do we select someone to take Jeremy's spot before the election?
  • We need to be careful about who we select so that we don't have both chairs term limits running up at the same time.
  • Maybe this is a good topic for a dedicated discussion next Wednesday?
• Potential topics for WOLFcon...
  • Applying the TCR process to existing modules
    • Give the community an update on where things stand, plans, etc.
    • While we don't typically have many devs at WOLFcon, we do have POs.
    • The expectation is there there will be many opinions on this
    • Even if Jeremy's assumption that we will be further along on what this mechanism might look like by WOLFcon isn't false, the feeling is that there are still aspects of this which are worth discussing at WOLFcon, e.g. possibly a workshop?
      • Potentially look closer at the criteria... the criteria we think are directly applicable, and gaps where the criteria is insufficient, or unnecessary.
    • Who is interested in participating?
      • Jeremy Huff
        • The feeling is that official TC membership is not a requirement for being involved in planning/running this discussion/workshop.  It's more important to be familiar with the current process, criteria, etc.
      • Maccabee Levine
    • How sure is the TC that they want to evaluate existing modules?
      • Yes for fairness, to address technical debt, etc.
    • Discussion delved into the specifics/details of this.  It's clear there's plenty to discuss and there's sufficient interested to warrant a WOLFcon session
  • Managing Technical Debt?
  • Recent RFCs?
    • golang → e.g. Folio as a polyglot
    • application formalization / bounded contexts / architectural PoC 
      • It's very likely that EBSCO will have sessions on these topics, but details are still TBD.
  • TC relationship with dev teams.  How can we improve how these two entities interact?
    • Will likely need to touch on things like what power does the TC actually have
    • Maybe the developer advocate plays a role here?
    • Revive tech leads group?
    • Is it worthwhile to have more developer participation at WOLFcon?  Even if virtually?
• Likelihood of the March 31 deadline being pushed out?  Tod Olson has heard that it will be, but nothing is official yet.

The FOLIO Security Team runs Snyk's Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Tool on all https://github.com/folio-org/ repositories, see Snyk.

Not discussed - we ran out of time.

11:09:27 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
I’m up for re-election also (but not required roll off)
11:09:31 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/TC/pages/5052393/Technical+Council+Membership+History
11:09:56 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
Looks to me like Jeremy is actually the only one ending his second term this summer
11:10:04 From Craig McNally to Everyone:
Reacted to "Looks to me like Jer..." with 👍
11:10:11 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
(Lots of people next summer)
11:10:40 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
And make sure there are virtual options
11:10:48 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
Someone elected in summer might not be able to get funding
11:11:46 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
It’s an election though...
11:25:26 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
I'd be willing to be involved in that
11:25:40 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
Pending discussion of other proposals :)
11:28:05 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
Does the TC really want to do this?
11:32:12 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/TC/pages/59637761/2024-02-28+-+Criteria+for+evaluating+existing+modules
11:32:56 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
Reacted to "https://folio-org.at..." with 👍🏻
11:33:47 From Ingolf Kuss to Everyone:
How often would exsiting modules be (re-)evaluated ? It is not practical to evaluate all (100 ?) modules of a release each release.
11:35:49 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
Introducing yet another evaluation that will be overridden frequently in favor of practicalities is not super enticing
11:36:01 From Ingolf Kuss to Everyone:
Reacted to "Introducing yet anot..." with 👍
11:36:12 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
"Existing FOLIO modules ideally conform to the same Values and Criteria. It is understood that not all existing modules currently do so, especially modules created before the Values & Criteria were initially defined. The Technical Council will work with development teams to align the current reality of the code with the Values and Criteria over time, as practicable. Such processes will need to be developed and documented." https://github.com/folio-org/tech-council/blob/master/MODULE_ACCEPTANCE_CRITERIA.MD
11:36:22 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
How does fairness fit with what Jenn said about advice / guidance?
11:38:11 From Tod Olson to Everyone:
Replying to "Introducing yet anot..."

Indeed. Want existing modules adhere to project best practices and standards, but how to take practical steps in that direction?
11:38:25 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
Reacted to "Introducing yet anot…" with 💯
11:38:31 From Tod Olson to Everyone:
Replying to "Introducing yet anot..."

I find myself thinking of gaps at technical debt.
11:40:10 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
We should be really careful about evaluating qualitative or subjective motivations WRT to code coverage
11:40:51 From Ingolf Kuss to Everyone:
Reacted to "We should be really ..." with 👍
11:40:57 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
I think the topic of whether TC or PC own accessibility privacy in ongoing functionality is worth talking about
11:41:05 From Tod Olson to Everyone:
Re QA, in his last year or two, Anton had added QA metrics to the build processes and treated gaps in coverage or code smells as technical debt and would report on changes.
11:41:24 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
Reacted to "Re QA, in his last y..." with 👍🏻
11:41:28 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
It’s increasingly acknowledged that underneath our community processes is a lack of alignment across the community
11:41:35 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
Reacted to "I think the topic of…" with 👍
11:41:37 From Craig McNally to Everyone:
I would expect that most concerns about this wouldn't be about the evaluation of existing modules, but rather the remediation of issues found...
11:41:51 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
Replying to "I think the topic of…"
Yeah, I consider that a product concern
11:42:04 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
Replying to "I think the topic of..."

same
11:42:08 From Tod Olson to Everyone:
Reacted to "I think the topic of..." with 👍
11:42:42 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
It might be worth folks checking out the specifics of that progress before we make strong statements about that progress
11:43:29 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
Reacted to "I would expect that …" with 👍
11:43:47 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
Replying to "I would expect that …"
The value of evaluation is limited if it does not inform action
11:44:44 From Ingolf Kuss to Everyone:
Reacted to "The value of evaluat..." with 👍
11:46:42 From Craig McNally to Everyone:
Not to step on toes here, but it feels like we're getting into the detail so this topic. Are there other WOLFcon session ideas we want to get to today?
11:46:50 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
Reacted to "Not to step on toes …" with 👍
11:46:51 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
Working to the metric
11:46:53 From Tod Olson to Everyone:
Reacted to "Not to step on toes ..." with 👍
11:47:17 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
Replying to "Not to step on toes …"
Yeah, my hand was up to suggest we move on (even though it was me that bogged us down)
11:49:20 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
Replying to "Working to the metri…"
“what gets measured gets managed” - Peter Drucker
11:52:20 From Tod Olson to Everyone:
Are there working meetings that would benefit from face time?
11:53:32 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
I would support a “how polyglot do we want to be?” session
11:53:41 From Matt Weaver to Everyone:
Reacted to "I would support a “h..." with 👍
11:53:58 From Marc Johnson to Everyone:
I would really like FOLIO to accept that the architecture it has is significantly different from a microservices architecture
11:54:29 From Tod Olson to Everyone:
Replying to "I would really like ..."

"Distributed ball of mud", to quote a former TC member.
11:55:20 From Matt Weaver to Everyone:
Reacted to "I would support a “h..." with ➕
11:55:21 From Matt Weaver to Everyone:
Removed a 👍 reaction from "I would support a “h..."
11:57:18 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
Isn’t that like what Craig said ebsco is doing?
11:57:30 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
Should we reach out to index data, etc?
11:57:50 From Tod Olson to Everyone:
Reacted to "Should we reach out ..." with 👍
11:57:58 From Ingolf Kuss to Everyone:
Reacted to "Should we reach out ..." with 👍