Time | Item | Who | Notes |
---|
1 min | Scribe | All | Raman Auramau is next, followed by Jenn Colt |
- | TCR Board Review | | |
- | RFCs | All | |
10-15 min | Technical Council Sub Groups Updates | | A lot of overlap with WolfCon on big picture topics. "How to create a FOLIO module" of particular interest to onboarding group. No group needed for Elastic Search, outcome seems to be we only support Open Search due to licensing (needs confirming, see slack comments in the channel). |
Open discussion | WOLFcon Debriefing | | Hot topics - These came up several times in various sessions: - Platform minimal - WIP. Conversations happening in slack (#platform-minimal)
- Applications/Bounded Contexts & App Store/Marketplace - Team Firefly shared some of their work/thoughts. VBar / Tod Olson shared some thoughts as well. FOLIO China is also working towards realizing the app store vision. Also came up during the cross-council scope criteria session and others.
- Blue/Green Deployments - While it wasn't discussed much, it was raised several times.
- Kafka/Messaging improvements - Cost reduction, standardized message formats, security, etc. Parts of this are WIP.
Tech Debt - Jakub Skoczen - Broad / Shallow overview of topics.
- Main question: What do we do about this? How do we make progress on these?
Architectural Blueprint - Tod Olson & VBar - Touched on many of the hot topics above.
- Presented in a logical sequence... Bounded context → Applications → Platform minimal → Cross-app data sync
There were many other sessions & discussions covering important and interesting topics. Session recordings should be available: https://recordings.openlibraryfoundation.org/olf More detailed overview: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1deqICFxlOvMHDftxPRifDMfPdgYMYgY3CLJlOnt_WVo/edit
Slides have been made available in some cases as well. NOTE: The FOLIO Community Quarterly Update was postponed. Unsure when it will take place. Details below Other topics (discussion): - Platform minimal and concentric circles of significance did come up over and over, almost an assumption we need to be heading in a "core module" direction for flower releases with room for interacting with other modules outside the core. Probably need to be involved in the technical aspects of these decisions.
- Scope, alignment, discussions among councils about authority, decisions. Good opportunity to get these things moving.
- Understanding interactions between councils and who decides what. How the PC understands their role impacts TC's. Interest in more interactions between the councils, just liaisons may not be enough.
- Allocating resources is a big question mark. Not clear how the project will deal with it yet. "Somebody" who can allocate should decide priorities, no one feels like they have that power. How to "make it so"?
- But don't necessarily have to have resources to make a decision, yes, implementation could ignore it. But worry if/when that happens, hope that it would work better than that.
- Valuable to be able to compare implementers priorities with what is being developed, so community can see what needs to be worked on. Can highlight where implementers might place resources.
- Being able to provide technical priorities to the community is important, even if it isn't followed exactly.
- PC could help provide direction for bringing good ideas into implementation. How does the good idea get to implementation, get resources, etc? Making funding opportunities easier to take advantage of when they arise. Could be productive to assume there is money and make the request, and see where it goes. TC can make direct line between goals and the funding for these technical PoCs.
- Quarterly cross council meeting could be useful
- Onboarding process on to the technical council would be beneficial. Revisiting the charter on some regular basis could also be useful. Consider re-reading so we can review charter in upcoming meeting. Want to be able to continue making decisions and not get too mired in process.
|
5 min | FOLIO Community Quarterly Update | Craig McNally | What have we been working on? - Making a few decisions official
- Brought back an improved RFC process
- Various working groups:
- New developer onboarding and documentation
- Improved processes for tracking AWS hosting costs
- Technical goals and Objectives
- What constitutes a breaking change?
- How to handle backend translations
Goals for Next Quarter: - Wrap up these working groups and start new ones as needed
- Start working towards alleviating technical pain points and addressing technical debt
- Continue to revisit and improve our processes so that they’re:
- More closely aligned with the other council’s processes
- Well understood and adopted across the community
|
Time Permitting |
5-10 min | Tools/Dependencies Versions | | |
??? | Technology Changes & Releases | | Previous: - How/when to make significant technology changes in coordination with the release schedules of other tools, e.g. keeping in sync with Node LTS releases, or Java 17 or Postgres 14, etc.
- May be overlapping with the Tools/dependency versions (see above)
- Marc Johnson - It would be useful to relate the changes to match the release schedules
- See also: messages in TC channel
Today: |
10 min | Retrospective on the ADR Process | | - Discuss if we want to try and do this during a TC meeting or schedule a dedicated meeting.
- What's working well for us? What needs to be clarified?
- Scope / level of detail,
- Clarify what information belongs in which section
- Is it mandatory for accompanying materials (details designs/proposals/etc.) to be on the wiki, or can they live in google docs, etc.?
- We agreed to do this sort of exercise after each RFC, but think it's worth doing this for ADRs - maybe not after each one, but periodically.
- Retro board: https://easyretro.io/publicboard/bk8DxfBbCeZIYL1pnsBPUN2xgYb2/a07d2c6b-754b-4446-8743-7f32f2911928
|
Topic Backlog |
| How can/should the TC weigh in on the architectural impact of new modules? | | Introduce the topic - What do we want to get out of this conversation?
- Does this require a subgroup or individual to generate a proposal?
|
| Optimistic Locking interfering with batch update in inventory | | Conversation started in slack: The Data Migration subgroup of SysOps has been struggling with how optimistic locking has interfered with batch update in Inventory. They've asked me to bring it to TC to see if there's a way to push this forward. The current open ticket is MODINVSTOR-924 Batch update with optimistic locking disabled. (This was split off from MODINVSTOR-910.)
|
| Ease of Installing FOLIO | | From last week: - Ease of installing/deploying FOLIO - Ian Walls , Marc Johnson , Jeremy Huff
- Primary task the Tc would take on by making FOLIO easier to get up and running. Would also reduce AWS costs so that the money coming from Membership groups can be flowed to other aspects of FOLIO. Tc is the best equipped group to decide on how to make installing and deploying Folio easier and cheaper.
- Craig McNally - Brainstorming open ended session with Ian Walls and then discuss further before or after WOLFcon depending on the brainstorming session. Ian Walls and Tod Olson to frame the topics of discussion for the brainstorming.
Today: - Probably defer, but keep on the agenda so we don't lose track of this...
|
| Revisiting FOLIO Governance | | Slack discussion: Revisiting FOLIO Governance - Ian Walls - should be best discussed in cross council meeting possibly at WOLFcon. Idea to was bring this up at a high community level not necessarily the Pc or TC. Doesn't need to be on TC agenda next week. Aspects to be discussed at WOLFcon.
- See also: messages to PC and CC council channels
|