2026-02-23 Meeting Notes

Feb 23, 2026

Attendees

@Jenn Colt
@Maccabee Levine
@Shelley Doljack
@Christie Thomas
@Olamide Kolawole
@Jeff Gerhard
@Julian Ladisch
@Craig McNally
@Tod Olson
@Wayne Schneider
@Charlotte Whitt
@Kevin Day
@VBar
@Florian Gleixner

Time	Item	Who	Notes

Time	Item	Who	Notes
1 min	Scribe		@Ingolf Kuss is followed by @Maccabee Levine . @Maccabee Levine filled in since @Ingolf Kuss was absent. 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 Trainings as a member benefit. Early considerations, not making recommendations yet. WOLFcon planning update PC: @Christie Thomas mod-linked-data-import presentation for endorsement. (Endorsement pending) Larger discussion of data import functionality across FOLIO, how to appropriately scope modules, and resource development. Data import didn’t evolve as originally envisioned. Progress still needed, difficulties for new modules. It’s not just MARC now, one solution may be to scale back to that. Touched on discussion of endorsement process, but will need to return to the discussion at a later meeting. RMS Group: No meeting this week. Security Team: Business as usual, nothing to report. Eureka Early Adopters: @Craig McNally: Status of Eureka Adoption
5 min	Upcoming Meetings	All	Feb 23, 2026 - Regular TC meeting Feb 25, 2026 - No meeting Mar 2, 2026 - Regular TC meeting Mar 4, 2026 - TBD @Wayne Schneider Are we considering the “meting calming proposal”? @Jenn Colt Cancel when we need to. @Wayne Schneider Our meeting load is pretty high. Maybe just meet 3 Wednesdays / month. @Christie Thomas agrees it’s a high meeting load. Maybe add the final meeting just if we need it. @Olamide Kolawole Not opposed to calming week. Harder to have topics for some Wednesday meetings because of prep worked involved. @Christie Thomas Are we really not productive when not meeting? Is work not getting done? Not enough people doing the prep work to make it productive, so more meetings doesn’t solve it. @Maccabee Levine Agree that metings help us move forward and we do have a backlog listed on the wiki. But no problem to have fewer Wednesday meetings. If we have fewer Mondays, have to consider deadlines like 3 week TCR goal. @Jenn Colt We might just be in a less busy time right now. @Wayne Schneider Dedicated discussions are useful. But can we achieve the level we want with fewer meetings, i.e. last Wed of the month. @Olamide Kolawole Suggest we implement the calming week and see how it goes. During busy times with Eureka it seems we need more meetings to move forward, but overall we should implement the calming week. @Wayne Schneider Just Wednesdays, or also Monday? @Olamide Kolawole Can do both, Mondays optional for that week. @Jenn Colt So won’t meet this Wednesday, then follow community calming calendar. FOLIO Community Calendar Calming Planning 2026 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-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. ui-data-export-manager https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/TCR-63 Some feedback about the TCR process from @Shelley Doljack ui-inventory-import is in Draft. @Charlotte Whitt - do we need 80% test coverage for submitting? @Julian Ladisch Not necessary. It would fail, but can be improved then. Moved to submitted. https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/TCR-64 @Shelley Doljack will do the module review. @Shelley Doljack I did a review but was told it was premature. Fine doing again when ready. Meeting this Friday. @Charlotte Whitt TC accidentally moved it from Draft to Submitted. @Olamide Kolawole It was communicated that we can start evaluation while unit test coverage is being raised. Learning moment. @Shelley Doljack Was not a problem to start early. @Olamide Kolawole mod-ebsconet failed as part of pilot. Export Manager passed. There’s a page on TC wiki space with feedback from the process. TC members should add feedback. @Wayne Schneider For people managing development, how is this feedback prioritized? What remediation could happen for mod-ebsconet and how? Sure there is overhead for the dev teams in answering questions; if this is only academic exercise then that would be annoying. So how do we prioritize? @Christie Thomas What kind of pace do we set for ourselves? And what selection criteria for modules? For the community, knowing when their modules might come up would also be important communication. @Shelley Doljack Purely academic? Document where they fail. Prioritize core modules. @Maccabee Levine I think dev teams are generally responsible in prioritizing fixes appropriately based on their seriousness – we don’t need to prioritize that for them. Re: pace, I think slow is fine as we learn how the process will work, but in the end maybe on existing module per TC member per year is not a huge workload. @Olamide Kolawole We’ll have future discussion on the topic. @Wayne Schneider For that future discussion: What do we do about architectural issues? I.e. mod-oai-pmh antipattern how it accesses other data? @Olamide Kolawole That’s the kind of problem to tackle, why it’s not an academic exercise.
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:https://github.com/folio-org/tech-council/pull/98/files 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
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	Officially Supported Technologies (OST)	Alls	Umbrellaleaf @Julian Ladisch added draft changes to this page @Julian Ladisch we should remove outdated versions from First Party Libraries / Frameworks and replace it with a note: “Pick the minor version released for the flower release.” @Kevin Day Do frontend versions have to match? @Jason Root Having versions here helps us @Julian Ladisch for frontend only the stripes version there, but this is not really helpful. For backend we have to use compatible versions for the spring version we selected. react version: difficult to predict Java 25: possibility to use docker hardened images, but we can still use regular. Check of all details will be done offline. We should ask developers and other stakeholders about the changes. Olamide will investigate GA date for Umbrellaleaf. Multiple updates/changes suggested, see “changes” in summary box at top. @Jenn Colt Expecting an Umbrellaleaf release date update at next RSMG meeting. @Olamide Kolawole Julian made some page updates. @Julian Ladisch Might start with removing the Backend First Party Libraries section. @Jenn Colt Just the version numbers? @Julian Ladisch Remove entirely @Wayne Schneider If a development team is not in S3 develpoment but want to use it, how do they know what version to target? Given this list may be inaccurate. @Julian Ladisch Listed in the flower release repository’s release notes? @Wayne Schneider Is that standard process? @Kevin Day Like Wayne, agree we need a source of truth. It’s not a complete list, but at least X version or greater. Or link to the package.json as point of truth? Repository codebase is more fluid. Maybe put major technologies in here, not all, so why we have a short list? @Olamide Kolawole We can start by removing the versions. Most of the libraries listed here, the teams are not going to this doc to see what to use, they’re going to the repos. Point to the tool’s repo to get the latest information. @Jenn Colt It’s useful to know i.e. that a folio S3 client already exists, don’t need to replicate. Consensus to remove version numbers? Or hold to a dedicated discussion? @Wayne Schneider Encourage us to act if we’ve made a decision. If people feel we’ve made a decision. May not meet Julian’s needs. @Julian Ladisch Happy with removing the versions. @Maccabee Levine We are waiting on RSMG for the Umbrellaleaf schedule not just for GA date. Also for the intermediate tasks like release scope deadlines that trigger other OST changes. And also to sure that the task to run the TC Module Evaluation tool has been added.
NA	Zoom Chat

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.