Date

09 Feb 2022

Attendees

Discussion items

Time	Item	Who	Notes
1 min	Scribe	All	Marc Johnson
5 min	Review outstanding action items	All	Craig McNally asked for a volunteer to document the decisions that the TC has made recently (July 2021) Radhakrishnan Gopalakrishnan volunteered to do take this action
10-15 min	TCR Board Review	All Zak Burke	Zak Burke informed us that the bulk edit modules have been removed from the module acceptance process. The issues will be cancelled. Jeremy Huff and Zak Burke explained the confusion around TCR-13, as it is not an evaluation request, rather it was a task to add a self evaluation to TCR-12 caused by some confusing advice given. Zak Burke will clean these issues up. Technical Designs Jeremy Huff suggested that there might be a place for asking the TC for thoughts on what folks are intending to build e.g. whether it is the right thing to build Zak Burke agreed with the need with that. The reason for these modules being withdrawn was due to them not being ready e.g. missing self evaluation Tod Olson concurred that there is a need to talk about what we are building and expressed that it would be unfortunate if we ended up throwing away significant amounts of work e.g. the reference record translations Zak Burke explained that there is history around folks doing independent development prior to involving folks from the central governance in decisions
10-15 min	Technical Council Sub Groups Updates	All	New Module Technical Evaluation Craig McNally informed us that he and Jeremy Huff met this week and have defined a list of what they are going to address. Technical Evaluation Process Chulin Meng asked if the working group he is involved in is around confusion around the module evaluation process? Craig McNally advised that this another working group that he and Jeremy Huff are in, whereas the group Chulin Meng is facilitating is about how the project / TC makes technical decisions e.g. including Kafka in the infrastructure, fundamental API designs or where translations should happen. Zak Burke is working on defining what those technical decisions may be. Chulin Meng advised that the first meeting will be next Tuesday.
10-15 min	Quarterly Community Update	Jeremy Huff / Craig McNally	Jeremy Huff advised that Craig McNally and he met to discuss this and have started putting together a presentation around this. All Council members are asked to give feedback on this. The event is on Friday, so limited time to do this
10-15 min	Council Goals/Objectives	All	Tod Olson advised that a new document has been created for this Craig McNally stated that the goal of this is for the TC to form it's own objectives Tod Olson asked if folks could provide feedback on this document Marc Johnson stated that he would not be providing feedback on this document, as he recognises that his previous feedback was not helpful
	Personal Data Disclosure Form	Craig McNally	Craig McNally described that the Privacy SIG has submitted changes to the Personal Data Disclosure Form and has asked him for feedback Radhakrishnan Gopalakrishnan asked if there are legal implications to this? Craig McNally advised that this is in the early stages and has not got to that stage yet Marc Johnson asked who owns this work? Jeremy Huff stated that he thinks every repository should have an owner and the TC should be the backstop for reviews on any unowned repositories Zak Burke echoed that Mike Gorrell asked "if not you, whom?" when the TC suggested it isn't responsible for something. He suggested that we need to find a way to get things done and maybe we can have a quick review and complete it. Craig McNally suggested that we go back to the Privacy SIG and suggest they own it? Radhakrishnan Gopalakrishnan suggested he does not understand the technical aspect and leave this to the Privacy SIG (who are the experts) Craig McNally described how the history is that VBar and he created this prior to the Privacy SIG's existence Jeremy Huff suggested that the new Technical Council is trying to establish a culture and legacy of policy and processes for technical governance Zak Burke agrees that we should propose the Privacy SIG own this

Deferred Agenda Items

Time

Item

Who

Notes

Deferred until Jakub Skoczen is back (16 Feb 2022 ?)

Hosted AWS environments

Jakub Skoczen

No update, to be discussed in the future.

2022-01-26 discussion

Jeremy Huff open question is to whether this is really under TC's purview? TC Charter explicitly says "resourcing" is not our thing, so this feels like a bit of a gray area. Mike Gorrell but ... if not TC then who? By process of elimination, feels like TC is best suited to offer advice here. Jakub Skoczen we have also been asked to review requests for new envs. Feels like this could/should be handled by a dedicated group from devops/sysops. Maybe Peter Murray and OLF sysops group is in a place to offer good info here? Folks on TC don't look at the bills, so not the best-placed group to make decisions. Jeremy Huff we can describe usefulness of different envs, but leave decision to a group that actually deals with bills/funding. But we probably need a somewhat systematic way to keep these evals fresh so is not laborious every time we are asked for input. Tod Olson soliciting input from outside TC is likely crucial here. Jakub Skoczen to ask Peter Murray to help organize such a group.

Deferred this week since Jakub Skoczen is out.

Action items

Radhakrishnan Gopalakrishnan will document the decisions that the TC has made since July 2021
Zak Burke to clean up TCR-12 and TCR-13 following the confusion about how to provide self evaluation
All Council members are asked to provide feedback on the Quarterly Community Update presentation before Friday
All Council members are asked to provide feedback on the Council Objectives

Browser not supported