2023-09-18 Meeting notes

Date

Attendees 

Discussion items

TimeItemWhoNotes
1 minScribeAll

 Maccabee Levine is next, followed by Tod Olson 

5 minTCR Board Review

All


  • PC approval?  Seems like yes. → list app has been approved by the PC (tick)
5 minLiaison Updates
  • CC: Maccabee Levine no CC meeting this week
  • PC: Tod Olson 
    • Presentation on Application Formalization by VBar and Craig McNally 
    • See 2023-09-14 Product Council Agenda and Meeting Notes for details.
    • Discussion about what gets included in what platforms.  And can we not do some of the flexibility in composing platforms with the current module framework.
    • PC experimenting with shorter (60m) meeting and more subgroups, like TC.
    • A small group is looking at the implications of the proposal and preparing a document for the PC which is expected to cover some problem statements, implications of the ideas presented, and questions arising for the PC/product.
  • RMS Group: Jakub Skoczen 
    • Jakub Skoczen not present.  Mark Veksler : Group reviewed draft timeline for Q release, currently targeted 4/29.  Additional work needed for scope, development capacity, and Easter holiday.
  • Security Team: Craig McNally 
    • Logging vulnerability found last week, some sensitive info logged.  Patched and releases made, announced in #sysops channel.
5 min

Technical Council Sub Groups Updates

All

Quick updates... 1 minute each

Distributed / Centralized PR

Breaking Changes

Translation

  • Zak Burke no organizer yet.
  • Craig McNally Look for CC or PC to drive.
  • Zak Burke People actively involved in the project happy where it is.  KnowledgeWare would like FOLIO to function in a multi-lingual manner, not just "not English".  I.e. translations of lookup-table in UI and via API requests.  Is there an architecture that doesn't require major backend work.  Figure out the real-world requirements.
  • Maccabee Levine I brought this up, needs CC involvement if we are getting KW engaged, and PC to define functionality first.  No point in technical solution without those.
  • Jeremy Huff Need requirements gathering, but we know some of the technical boundaries that we want any solution to live with.  Could put together a problem statement, i.e. we know this is something people desire, any solutions would have to fit within these boundaries, maybe RFC for possible solutions that fit.
  • Marc Johnson Given "problem statement" discussion, TC is the wrong part of the community to be driving this.  Product needs should drive it.  Could express boundaries/constraints but whether those are a good idea or not depends on what people want to achieve.
  • Owen Stephens Feel opposite.  From PC, the need was expressed.  Single tenant should be able to provide different languages at different times.  Requirement came from KWare to PC, PC accepted and supported need.  Solution was rejected as not technically appropriate by TC.  Can't loop again.
  • Craig McNally Need a volunteer to help wrangle this.  Engage with PC on list of requirements?  Having something in writing would be better.  Then driving effort to look at options, maybe for RFC.  Put something in PC and CC channels as well.  I will post.
  • Marc Johnson If call for participation, ensure PC and CC folks represent what people want on a multi-lingual perspective.  Not what happened last time.
1 minDecision LogAll
  • Nothing new
1 minRFCs

All

  • Nothing new
5 min

Officially Supported Technologies

All

Standing agenda item to review/discuss any requested or required changes to officially supported technology lists

  • Postgres 12 EOL Fall 2024...  
  • Handle in Quesnelia page Quesnelia - Technical Council - FOLIO Wiki
  • Typescript needs to be addressed
  • Open question: Timelines
  • Want to give people more lead time before the Poppy release

Today:

  • Marc Johnson We don't have a process for driving these decisions, we've been reactive after dev teams.  Led to discussion about actively delegating to interested parties.  Does TC own or is there a group to delegate to?
    • Craig McNally Was looking more specifically at Postgres, give dev team time to plan for it.
  • Craig McNally For typescript, teams already using it, should probably add to the list?
  • Jeremy Huff What about edge modules?
    • Craig McNally We do tend to forget about edge modules on this list. edge-common, edge-common-spring.
  • Tod Olson Re: Postgres, recommend 15?  Would be a while before we need another bump.
    • Craig McNally Balance how much time to upgrade, three major revs may be tricky.  But if we do now, not again for some time.  See how much effort is required.  Does Postgres have LTS versions?
    • Tod Olson Just a fixed window for each release.
    • Marc Johnson Implicit in Craig McNally 's comment that TC will drive this.  So who figures that out?  What person or group?
    • Jeremy Huff Find out if anyone out there is currently using a newer version of Postgres
    • Mark Veksler EBSCO experimented with Aurora serverless which required v13 of postgres.  Was smooth upgrade.  Someone from EBSCO can talk to TC about what that process was like.  But upgrade to v15 would be different.
    • Florian Gleixner Used Postgres 13 for a long time now, didn't see requirement.  Not a problem.
    • Craig McNally Maybe v13 is easiest path, look to 15 later.  Volunteer to look at this, make a recommendation?  Florian Gleixner volunteered.
  • Craig McNally typescript exp