2026-02-09 Meeting Notes

Attendees

@Ingolf Kuss
@Christie Thomas
@Matt Weaver
@Jeff Gerhard
@Olamide Kolawole
@Julian Ladisch
@Charlotte Whitt
@Kevin Day
@Jenn Colt
@Jason Root
@Maccabee Levine
@VBar
@Shelley Doljack
@Tod Olson
@Florian Gleixner

Time	Item	Who	Notes

Time	Item	Who	Notes
1 min	Scribe		@Wayne Schneider is followed by @Florian Gleixner Reminder: Please take attendance. Please 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 Budget report from Kat Berry. Currently projecting $42k deficit this year, better than original projection of ~$100k. 25k more income. AWS costs less than expected, AWS group keeping costs <$30k/month. Overage will come from carryover funds. FOLIO Members (standing) Committee draft charge. . Also planning an onboarding / outreach committee. Feedback requested by next CC meeting (two weeks). Annual deliverables: Annual Membership Experience and Expectations Survey Assist in provisioning an annual “State of FOLIO” Report, supplied by the Community Council Plan and facilitate and WOLFcon Members Meeting Program and Virtual Members Meeting Updated Members Area on Confluence Biannual Summary Reports to the Community Council Recommendations on governance, sustainability, or membership issues as needed PC: @Christie Thomas Feedback on the Developer conference SME/developer relations - is there space for engagement in this area? How and why us this different from WolfCon? Would a summit for tackling decision-making around core issues complement this? New functionality presentation for endorsement: Inventory Import Data Import for the Linked Data Editor functionality presentation scheduled for February 19th. Will discuss the PC endorsement process on Feb. 19th. RMS Group: No meeting this week Security Team: business as usual, nothing important to report Eureka Early Adopters: @Craig McNally: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/FOLIJET/pages/1278476307
5 min	Upcoming Meetings	All	Feb 11, 2026 - TBD Feb 16, 2026 - Regular TC meeting Feb 18, 2026 - TBD Feb 23, 2026 - Regular TC meeting Feb 25, 2026 - TBD Dedicated Discussion Topics: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/x/VQBTR FOLIO API Standardization & Documentation Surface current issues with API documentation and discoverability. API versioning ability and access by release/module? Validation standards API usage for bulk operations Breaking changes notifications Dedicated channel for breaking changes announcements (forwarded from #folio-development) Tag breaking changes in Jira; auto-populate wiki page for external monitoring Define FOLIO Core: Establish clear definition of what constitutes “core” FOLIO vs others. what should integrate vs what needs to be in FOLIO Simplification opportunities Cost Reduction & Resource Optimizations Sidecar proliferation Kafka usage visibility and optimization AWS cost analysis wOLFcon Technical Track Planning: Proposal for technical conference track alongside general wolfcon. Ensure non-developer access Format options: virtual conference, two-day technical overlay, hybrid Employer outreach for developer/operations engineer participation FOLIO contribution vehicle Technology Visibility & Scanning: Automated scanning and reporting on FOLIO technology stack leverage existing work by David Crossley Language and framework scanning Topics from Wolfcon sessions that could get into dedicated discussion Folio “Core” definition Estimating support costs Getting People to contribute to Folio Working costs of supporting modules Costs of development environment (AWS) Security team DR for support periods- Sep 17, 2025
10 min	TCR Board Review	All	mod-linked-data-import https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/TCR-59 under TC review since 2026-02-04 today: TC approves it by lazy consensus mod-ebsconet https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/TCR-60 findings reported and maybe merging PR is all that is left to do Olamide will take a look at the PR and determine the next step of the pilot to see what changes we want going forward.
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. mod-ebsconet and ui-export-manager has been chosen to be first modules. Existing Module Criteria has been merged:Create WIP criteria doc for existing module evals by maccabeelevine · Pull Request #98 · folio-org/tech-council Selection of module reviewers for mod-ebsconet @Florian Gleixner +. @Ingolf Kuss Select of module reviewer for ui-export-manager: @Shelley Doljack shadowed by @Maccabee Levine @Shelley Doljack will start on the ui-export-manager evaluation this week Perform evaluation Pilot feedback Overhead for dev teams to answer questions that come up during a review Outcomes should be prioritized so the most important issues can be addressed first. Not realistic to review all existing modules during a release cycle. @Olamide Kolawole met with @Maccabee Levine to discuss next steps for moving forward on the evaluations. Question: Are we doing this as a pilot, so we have not committed resources to performing evaluations for all modules? Yes, this is a pilot, but the TC has not issued a directive that all modules will be reviewed with expectations that issues will be addressed within a release cycle. @Shelley Doljack started the review process for a UI module and tagged the PO and lead dev, which caused some confusion about the pilot and process, as well as the expectations for response to the outcomes. Noted that there may be some modules that could benefit from review more than others. Direct community questions about the pilot to Olamide. Update: Shelly has done review - can proceed to next steps for the pilot.
10 min	Technical Council Sub-Groups Updates	All	Zero active subgroups
1 min	GitHub RFCs Wiki RFCs	All
0 min	Decision Log	All
10 min	Evaluation Criteria Update: Eureka permissions	All	https://github.com/folio-org/tech-council/pull/116 “Add link to permissions naming convention to module acceptance criteria“ Olamide will review the PR and determine next steps - does this just need approval or do we need further discussion? Update: Olamide has consolidated documentation to a single TC space. Julian will update PR to link to guide in TC space.
10 min	Officially Supported Technologies (OST)	Alls	Moved the Trillium page to Active last week. Next up - work on Umbrellaleaf. Nothing to be added right now. Olamide will investigate GA date for Umbrellaleaf. Update: No GA date for Umbrellaleaf
NA	Zoom Chat		None for this meeting

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.