2025-06-16 Meeting notes

Date

Jun 16, 2025

Attendees

@Jenn Colt
@Craig McNally
@Kevin Day
@Ingolf Kuss
@Joshua Greben
@Julian Ladisch
@Marc Johnson
@Maccabee Levine
@Matt Weaver

excused: @Jason Root , @Jakub Skoczen

Time	Item	Who	Notes

Time	Item	Who	Notes
1 min	Scribe		@Tod Olson is next, followed by @Kevin Day Reminder: Please copy/paste the Zoom chat into the notes. If you miss it, this is saved along with the meeting recording, but having it here has benefits.
5-15 min	Liaison Updates	@Maccabee Levine @Tod Olson @Jakub Skoczen @Craig McNally	CC: @Maccabee Levine: PC: @Tod Olson / @Marc Johnson Talked about the future of FOLIO . RMS Group: Security Team: @Craig McNally: Eureka Early Adopters: @Craig McNally: Latest status updates can be found here , spreadsheet there is up-to-date Meeting every other week now. @Jason Root got platform-minimal working. GBV is working on getting Sunflower up. Community Driven Development: Working on a definition of CDD, along with scope of group. See https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/CC/pages/1022492711 Opened up a slack channel.
5-10 min	Upcoming Meetings	All	Jun 16, 2025 - Regular TC Meeting Jun 18, 2025 - Dedicated Discussion - TBD Jun 23, 2025 - Regular TC Meeting Jun 25, 2025 - Dedicated Discussion - Evaluating existing modules Jun 30, 2025 - Regular TC Meeting Jul 2, 2025 - Dedicated discussion - TBD Dedicated Discussion Topics: FOLIO contribution network proposal: @Craig McNally Is this in discussion or for approval? @Jenn Colt Still in discussion Topic for next Wednesday’s meeting. What would TC’s perspective be on how a contribution network would operate? There are two related proposals that need to be considered and should be discussed more broadly. Developer Advocate Evaluating existing modules Communication plan to promote updates to OST pages Need to update OST pages with communication plan changes Need a retro on changes to OST(?) TC Roles and Responsibilities Has this been influenced by CC adopting a vision statement that the community should direct FOLIO development? OST discussion around the Grails 7 and Java 17 issues; get to talk to the stakeholders There might be a security issue to it. This is separate from the OST topic above. We might not be able to upgrade to Grails 7 for the Sunflower and we may not be able to get to this on Trillium. Is this in scope of Trillium, or do we need to put this on Umbrellaleaf? We need to schedule a meeting on this with the appropriate parties to plan this out. Issue about the Eureka release schedule - do we want to come back to it ? Continued third-party support during release periods Prompted by Kong/Keycloak and Spring Boot, plus extra-long Trillium cycle Should probably talk about this more generally, beyond these specific examples mod-mosaic and the Gobi group.
0 min	TCR Board Review	All	Nothing on the board
0 min	Technical Council Sub-Groups Updates	All	Presently there are no active TC subgroups
1 min	GitHub RFCs Wiki RFCs	All	Anything we need to discuss here?
5 min	Decision Log	All	No new decisions. Related to mod-configuration: Deprecation of mod-configuration DR-000039 - Distributed vs. centralized configuration @Craig McNally some teams still use it. Developers are aware of the deprecation. Do we need to follow the timing plan with a readonly transition step or or can we just remove mod-configuration in Trillium or Umbrellaleaf? Probably developers need some time? @Jenn Colt Is managing this via RFC unusual? @Craig McNally We did it for some other things too: Postgres / Eureka… @Craig McNally will talk to developers, if they can make the transition, then stick to the plan, dropping the readonly phase, when not needed. If developers need more time, extend the plan to Umbrellaleaf. @Florian Gleixner if the plan can not be fulfilled, a formal decision to extend the plan should be made. Oleksii P. doesn’t have an answer for the scope of remaining work yet. Waiting to hear back from individual teams. Stay tuned; we should have an answer soon.
5 min	Officially Supported Technologies (OST)	All	Anything we need to discuss here, e.g. related to folio-kong/folio-keycloak? Is basically done. From last meeting: Action item: update OST to include the new section and the policy that hosts are encouraged to stay on the latest version. Keep text regarding support policies and release predictions - first draft done @Jenn Colt did the editing, but no communication done yet. She will post in the appropriate channels. - done Action item: Release management needs to be made aware @Jakub Skoczen
1 min	Elections	All	We are one person short of our open-seats. We may end up having a smaller TC. Does this situation require some sort of approval? Anything we do at this point is going to be unusual. Other councils, like Community Council, reduced their size when they had similar situations. We may have problems due to having an even number of members. Last year, we had special elections to replace members who left. Is there a way to have a special election if interest rises up at a later date? Or should we just accept the current situation of having a smaller TC? We can leave the vacant seat and decide at any point to fill a vacant seat. We are not required to have a special election and we can appoint someone to the empty seat. What is the outlook if there is not enough interest in joining the TC? The community has difficulties with these kinds of problems. The community could be asked about whether or not they were interested and why. The TC should be setting the standards, but this can be very intimidating. FOLIO is, in many ways, not a tech-first product. The TC is very reactive because it has to guide technology given the limited authority in conjunction with individuals who can enact technological decisions. The TC is possibly being excessivly FOLIO focused when it comes to bringing in individuals with technical experience. We may want to have tehnically experience individuals who may not have as much FOLIO specific technical experience. This could bring in fresh mind with fresh ideas but also has the cost of having to re-introduce and re-hash existing topics. New ideas may be more difficult to bring into the TC than it is for other councils. The TC has a smaller scope than the PC and so individuals may end up wanting to join the PC instead due to the broader scope. What are the difficulties for new TC members? We should inquire on TC members who recently joined on topics such as what are pain points? Action Item: We should ask the CC to do a survey.
	Notes		Sunflower Release Situation: It was decided to not delay Sunflower. Texas A&M is still going to support their environment longer. Circulation BFF (backend-for-frontend) https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DD/pages/651001889/Circulation+BFF+backend-for-frontend We need more information on this.
NA	Zoom Chat		Craig McNally 10:04 AM @Jenn Colt I too use the order of members on the main TC page for determining who is next to scribe. Maccabee Levine 10:05 AM Ok I volunteered last time because I thought I was next by alphabet...no worries. Craig McNally 10:32 AM brb b Marc Johnson 10:39 AM The point about external transferable knowledge is really interesting Ingolf Kuss 10:48 AM https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/REL/overview Maccabee Levine 10:54 AM A related question is whether PC has reviewed that new module ('s functionality) yet. Jenn Colt 10:55 AM It’s mod only, I believe they did the UI Part of the app/mod misalignment

Topic Backlog
Decision Log Review	All	Review decisions that are in progress. Can any of them be accepted? rejected?
Translation Subgroup	All	Since we're having trouble finding volunteers for a subgroup, maybe we can make progress during a dedicated discussion session?
Communicating Breaking Changes	All	Currently there is a PoC, developed by @Maccabee Levine, of a utility to catalog Github PRs that have been labeled with the "breaking change" label. We would like to get developer feedback on the feasibility of this label being used more often, and the usefulness of this utility.
Officially Supported Technologies - Upkeep	All	Previous Notes: A workflow for these pages. When do they transition from one state to another. Do we even need statuses at all ? Stripes architecture group has some questions about the Poppy release. Zak: A handshake between developers, dev ops and the TC. Who makes that decision and how do we pass along that knowledge ? E.g. changes in Nodes and in the UI boxes. How to communicate this ? We have a large number of teams, all have to be aware of it. TC should be alerted that changes are happening. We have a couple of dedicated channels for that. Most dev ops have subscribed to these channels. How can dev ops folk raise issues to the next level of community awareness ? There hasn't been a specific piece of TC to move that along. Craig: There is a fourth group, "Capacity Planning" or "Release Planning". Slack is the de facto communication channel. There are no objections to using Slack. An example is the Java 17 RFC. Craig: The TC gets it on the agenda and we will discuss it. The TC gets the final say. Marc Johnson: We shouldn’t use the DevOps Channel. The dev ops folks have made it clear that it should only be used for support requests made to them. Jakub: Our responsibility is to avoid piling up technical debt. Marc: Some set of people have to actually make the call. Who lowers the chequered flag ? Craig: It needs to ultimately come to the TC at least for awareness. There is a missing piece. Capacity Planning needs to provide input here. Marc: Stakeholders / Capacity Planning could make that decision. Who makes the decision ? Is it the government or is it some parts of the body ? Marc: the developers community, the dev ops community and sys ops are involved. For example the Spring Framework discussion or the Java 17 discussion. But it was completely separate to the TC decision. It is a coordination and communication effort. Marc: Maybe the TC needs to let go that they are the decision makers so that they be a moderating group. Jakub: I agree with Marc. But we are not a system operating group. Dependency management should be in the responsibility of Release management. There are structures in the project for that. Jason Root: I agree with Jakub and with Marc also. Policies should drive operational/release/support aspects of Folio. Jason Root: If the idea of “support” is that frameworks are supported, then of course the project should meet that. Marc Johnson Some group needs to inform OleksAii when a relevant policy event occurs. These documents effectively ARE the manifestation of the policy. Craig: This is a topic for the next Monday session. Craig to see if Oleksii Petrenko could join us to discuss the process for updating the officially supported technologies lists.
Dev Documentation Visibility	All	Possible topic/activity for a Wednesday session: Discuss/brainstorm: Ideas for the type of developer-facing documentation we think would be most helpful for new developers How we might bring existing documentation up to date and ensure it's consistent etc.
API linting within our backend modules	All	https://folio-project.slack.com/archives/CAQ7L02PP/p1713343461518409 Hello team, I would like to discuss API linting within our backend modules. Some time ago, we transitioned our linting process from Jenkins to GitHub Actions as outlined in https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/FOLIO-3678. I am assuming that this move was done via some technical council decision. Please correct me if I'm wrong. In my observations, I've found two problems: Schema linting does not occur if the schemas are in YAML format. There are issues with resolving some deeper references during API linting. Although I'm unsure about how to improve the existing linting implementations within Folio, I propose to consider an open-source solution that handles OpenAPI linting effectively and allows us to define custom rules. For your reference: https://stoplight.io/open-source/spectral A test of this solution can be found in this PR: https://github.com/folio-org/mod-search/pull/567. The same PR also provides an example of custom rule definition: https://github.com/folio-org/mod-search/pull/567/files#diff-d5da7cb43c444434994b76f3b04aa6e702c09e938de09dbc09d72569d611d9ab.Also, by employing 'Spectral', I discovered AsyncAPI (https://www.asyncapi.com/en), an API design tool similar to OpenAPI but for asynchronous interactions. I suggest that we consider using AsyncAPI in FOLIO to generate documentation for Kafka interactions.
PR Templates	All	https://folio-project.slack.com/archives/CAQ7L02PP/p1713445649504769 Hello team, Small request to consider. Regarding pr templates. From my perspective, pr template is not good idea. Even the biggest open source projects that are contributed by many people don't have any pr template. Currently what we have for acq modules https://github.com/folio-org/mod-orders-storage/blob/master/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md These pr template is inconsistent in different teams. What I suggest is that, pr template shouldn't be any instructions, because most developer who are creating pr have already understand the rules. If we put just two section into template, it will encourage developers to write more about their work and that lead to knowledge sharing among developers.
Proposed Mod Kafka	All	https://folio-project.slack.com/archives/CAQ7L02PP/p1714471592534689 Mike Taylor Proposal. If and only if a FOLIO instance is running Kafka, it should insert and enable a module called mod-kafka, which consists entirely of a module descriptor that says it provides the interface kafka. The purpose is so that other modules can use the standard <IfInterface> and similar tools to determine whether they should attempt Kafka operations. Rationale: the FOLIO ILS depends absolutely on Kafka, but other uses of the platform will not. One such example: a dev platform that includes only mod-users, used as a source of change events for Metadb.