2023-04-19 Meeting notes



Discussion items

1 minScribeAll

Ingolf Kuss is next, followed by  Maccabee Levine 

1 minTCR Board Review


Two newly submitted issues:

  • ui-consortia-settings
  • mod-consortia

N.B. Deadline for Poppy is .  TCRs submitted after  (prior to the TC meeting) may not be completed in time.


2 new issues: TCR-25, TCR-26

volunteers: ui-consortia-settings: Zak Burke, Maccabee

we first need to evaluate mod-consortia   Ingolf, Jeremy, Tod (if schedule permits). Target date: May 10th. 

5 minCC / PC Updates

Any updates from the PC and/or CC?

  • CC: No CC meeting this week.
  • PC: No update, last week PC was cancelled and time used for Tri-Council meeting.
1 minElectionsAll
  • Nomination window has been extended to
  • So far we have 4 nominations for 5 open spots.
5-10 min

Technical Council Sub Groups Updates


  • AWS Costs subgroup.  Reviewed a draft process for new environments.  Documenting current budget & alert practices.
  • TCR Improvements subgroup - Jeremy Huff  please raise awareness of decision made on Monday wrt scope (ui plugins / shared libraries) - see New Module Technical Evaluations
  • Breaking Changes: the next stage is the public review
  • Improve the TCR Process : the subgroup has produced a presentation which it hopes to deliver. 
    • ui-plugins and shared libraries are currently out of scope, but they will or may become in scope in later flower releases
  • Distributed vs Centralized Configuration. Will probably start next week. Hard to find a time slot.
  • Architecture Review Subgroup. On hold, probably until after the elections.
5 minUpcoming meetings
  • TC dedicated discussion:   11:00 AM ET
    • Topic: RFC "java 17" review process

N.B.  Check your profile settings to ensure the timezone is configured appropriately.  Events in the TC calendar will have incorrect times if your not configured correctly.

5 minRFCsAll
  • java17.
    • That is a substantial change to the FOLIO platform because dropping Java 11 is: 
      • the removal of a feature that is already part of a FOLIO release,
      • a change that requires the coordination between multiple FOLIO components or services,
      • and Java 17 has been a new feature which might be considered redundant to existing feature Java 11.
    • Julian: make java17 mandatory from Quesnelia on. 
    • "java 17" is now in the internal review stage ("draft review") for RFCs. The TC is now expected to create a subgroup about this.
  • Tenant Collection Kafka Topics. We are out of schedule for this RFC. It was publicized directly to sys ops. Only Julian provided comments.

5-10 minOnboarding Documentation

Review and gather feedback on survey for new developers.  Thread here with screenshots of the whole survey.

  • do we need to question professional experience so granularily ?
5-10 minTerminology DocumentAll

From Jenn Colt in slack:

@cmcnally for the TC agenda next week, this is what I think we need: a vote on whether to accept the document as it is now (with our deletions) but with a statement adding that there are other definitions of platform in use. I believe Simeon/Kristin/me will get that statement in before the meeting. I think that vote is what we need to give CC. After that we should discuss whether people want to participate in a new group to talk more about the definition of platform. I think people may also indicate that there are other definitions they would also like to revise. After this vote, I think it will be the end of my involvement with the doc on this level and someone else should consider coordinating TC proposing some definitions. Right now it seems like we are not happy with existing definitions but don't have alternatives to propose, but that is just my assessment of where things are.

Notes: We get a lazy consensus to accept the document as it is. 

Maybe the best thing we can do is to form a TC subgroup which is open to other members of the community.

10-15 minOfficially Supported Technologies - UpkeepAll

A process was proposed for how to keep these pages up-to-date, we need to revisit and put some processes into place.  As it stands right now, we have members of the community making changes w/o consulting the TC.

Previous Notes:

  • Florian Gleixner advised that he added a header including page properties for some of the release pages for folks to review
  • Craig McNally asked what states do we want for these pages e.g. Draft, Final? 
    • Jeremy Huff suggested Active (for actively being defined by the TC), Supported (for after initial version is finalised, yet may still change) and No longer supported (for after the support period for the release has ended)
    • Marc Johnson wondered how we would come up with the list of statuses, without figuring out the process for maintaining these policy documents
    • Jeremy Huff asked how we determine during the module evaluation process, which release's supported technologies they should be judged against? Marc Johnson and Craig McNally advised that this would be the release currently ongoing at the time of submission
    • Jeremy Huff suggested that we could use Confluence's page restrictions functionality for limiting who can change these documents and add some clarifying text to advise folks contact the TC to submit changes. Craig McNally volunteered to investigate this
    • Craig McNally asked for volunteers for defining a list of statuses and adding a description of the process to the top level page. Jeremy Huff volunteered to take these on


Topic Backlog

Action Items

  • Craig McNally to investigate using Confluence's page restrictions to limit editing of the officially supported technologies lists
  • Jeremy Huff will propose a list of statuses for the officially supported technologies documents
  • Jeremy Huff will add a description of the process for changes to the officially supported technology processes to the top level page