2025-08-18 Meeting notes

1 min

Scribe

@Ingolf Kuss is next, followed by @Maccabee Levine

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

@Christie Thomas

@Craig McNally

• CC:  @Maccabee Levine:

  • No meeting this week.

• PC: @Christie Thomas

  • Dennis Bridges presented the EBSCO Mosaic integration with the Orders App.

• RMS Group:

  •  

• Security Team:

  • @Kevin Day : Concern about Grails 7 Update. In August 2024 K-Int said that they want to migrate their modules from Grails to Micronaut within ~ 5 years. But there will be security issues in that time that we can not address. We might need up to speed up that timeframe. We need to find a solution to this problem. It touches a broader topic: How do we want to handle the shorter release cycles. Maccabee will follow up on that with Owen and Ian. Olamide will create a topic for that.

• Eureka Early Adopters:  @Craig McNally:

  • Latest status updates can be found here , spreadsheet there is up-to-date

  • Meeting every other week now.

  • PoC work related to the versioning in routes and Kong. Support multiple modules for different tenant.

  • OSS support for Kong. @Craig McNally No formal announcement from Kong. They won’t publish Docker images anymore. The source code will still be there. The community needs to build Kong from source. Another spike: Looking at alternatives to Kong (we looked into many different gateways before). Hopefully, we can stick with Kong. We have a bunch of options on the table. It was a surprise for us all last week. KONG-33 and KONG-34.

• Community Driven Development (@Jenn Colt / @Maccabee Levine):

  • No meeting last week.

• Wolfcon 2025: There will most likely be a shoulder meeting for the councils.

  • Tri-Council meeting in the morning on Friday

  •  

5-10 min

Upcoming Meetings

All

• Aug 18, 2025 - Regular TC meeting

• Aug 20, 2025 - Dedicated discussion: FOLIO Futures Proposal, OST discussion

  • Futures Proposal: most useful to leave comments at the documemt that Maccabee shared

• Aug 25, 2025 - Regular TC meeting

• Aug 27, 2025 - Dedicated discussion:

• Dedicated Discussion Topics:

  • Revisit issues around breaking changes: https://github.com/folio-org/ui-courses/pull/349

    • PR has been merged

  • New TC member orientation in Early July

    • What do new members need to do?

    • What does TC need to do around permissions in Wiki, GitHub; other administrative tasks?

    • Appoint another co-chair

  • 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

• https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/TCR-57

  • @Julian Ladisch Not ready for evaluation yet.

  • mod-mosaic has a lot of stuff under the licenses review.

  • We will apply the same level of stringentness for the licenses as for lib-linked-data-rdf4ld.

  • 2025/08/18 No updates today. We need the PC approval before we can proceed.

  • Exception for reference data: they declare reference data as optional.

• https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/TCR-58

  • ready for TC decision: https://github.com/folio-org/tech-council/pull/99/files

  • @Kevin Day : Some have a licence under EDL / it is acceptable . EPL is not acceptable. We need to document this in the README. junit is EPL but it is in the exception list. We can also ignore EPL in http2-* . Only in Jakarta, the use of EPL is questionable. There is a lot here to discover.

  • Marc J.: What does the TC do for future review with regards to these exceptions ? / Include Category B related licences . When will the subgroup meet again ?

  • Maccabee: Some criteria fail because of problems with the criteria theirselves.

  • Module approved by lazy consensus.

• Existing module evaluation process

  • @Maccabee Levine shared some suggested talking points in #tc-internal

3 min

Existing Module Evaluation

ALL

• @Maccabee Levine created a spreadsheet

  with some information like age of repository on existing modules which could be used to see which modules need review. Julian also had the idea in slack to use sonar metrics to decide which modules get picked.

• mod-search and ui-export-manager has been chosen to be first modules.

• Criteria is being drafted at https://github.com/folio-org/tech-council/pull/98/files

Need to be aware of problems with adding more and more languages to the project. A technical knowledge is required to do the evaluation. But evaluators can get help from people who have done this before.

0 min

Technical Council Sub-Groups Updates

All

1 min

GitHub RFCs

Wiki RFCs

All

Anything we need to discuss here?

1 min

Decision Log

All

• We need to discuss the distributed configuration timeline. Going from mod-configuration to mod-settings. RFC-0006. We extended the deprecation timeline to Umbrella Leaf. A Decision Record seems like the right place to do this. @Florian Gleixner : We can modify the Decision Record. I wanted to wait for the teams to give a timeline when they will be able to do the switch. But we can switch it if we decide to do it in Umbrella Leaf. → We will adapt the change in Umbrella Leaf.

25 min

Officially Supported Technologies (OST)

All

• https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/TC/pages/966852629/Umbrellaleaf

  • Docker. Whenever a new version is released, that version will be supported. We resolve this issue and do not specify a version.

  • Maven, Gradle, Make are development teams' decisions. Docker is a DevOps decision. It does not quite fit into this document.

  • Julian: We should treat Docker the same as Gradle and Make. There is a script that downloads the correct Gradle version. Olamide: We need to include the reasoning why we do not include versioning for Gradle and Make.

  • Maven vs. Maven extensions: They have different versions. We should leave extensions versions to the code owners.

  • Grails

  • Go: Julian: We should use Go 1.26 for Umbrellaleaf to cover the whole support period for Umbrellaleaf.

    • Wayne: Go. 1.26 is far in the Umbrellaleaf cycle. That might be a risk. Go skipped a release. If they skip again, Umbrellaleaf might not be covered.

    • 1.26 was set preliminarily. We will decide on Wednesday. We might be asking hosting providers if it is acceptable to take the risk.

• POs have scope deadline of Aug 22

NA

Zoom Chat

Heute

Maccabee Levine an Alle 17:02
I have to drop off at 11:45.

Jenn Colt an Alle 17:06
nope

Maccabee Levine an Alle 17:09
I missed who reported at RSMG that K-Int was switching from Grails?

Maccabee Levine 17:09
I mean at Security Team

Tod Olson 17:10 (Bearbeitet)
I think he said Owen.

Jenn Colt an Alle 17:14
Brb need power cord

Wayne Schneider an Alle 17:18
Can the link to the document be added to the agenda notes?

Jenn Colt an Alle 17:19
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11mxHR7BdI5ImYNIDKECxe5fVmvTyLMYzPbWQmtwJGPE/edit?usp=sharing

Tod Olson an Alle 17:29
I found both shadowing and having assistance on reviews to be incredibly helpful.

Maccabee Levine an Alle 17:46
Have to run to next meeting, was going to say please put in the OST doc WHY no versions need to be specified, as discussed today

Julian Ladisch an Alle 17:47
We don't need to specify a maven plugin version because the pom.xml specifies the maven plugin.

Tod Olson 17:54
I need to drop a little early. Thank you all.

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:

1. Schema linting does not occur if the schemas are in YAML format.

2. 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.

1. 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

2. 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.