2025-02-19 Eureka decisions

1 min

Scribe

All

@Craig McNally is next, followed by @Tod Olson

Reminder:  Please copy/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.

10 min

TCR board

Deadline for new module acceptance into Sunflower is this Friday

TCR-52:  ui-claims - https://github.com/folio-org/tech-council/blob/4aa2bba1a65dbdbff2b832c6e2d0703959f299b0/module_evaluations/TCR-52_2025_02_04-ui-claims.MD

• The only thing @Joshua Greben has questions about are regarding license compatibility...  "How deep do I dig?"

  • Several layers down the dependency chain there are libraries which use MIT license and/or BSD, e.g. firebug-lite, backbone, etc.  Pulled in by lodash

  • It runs out that at least in some cases you can choose which license is applicable, so maybe not an issue for us.

• lodash for instance is used all over the place, it's not something specific to this module

• See the evaluation for additional details

• module produces different module descriptors from the github actions (complete) vs stripes mod descriptor --full   

  • Turns out this is related to the --strict parameter.  When using that locally the MD generated is the same as what was seen in GH Actions.

• It looks like the okapiInterfaces defined in the package.json are not making it into the module descriptor seen in the MDR.

  • See https://folio-registry.dev.folio.org/_/proxy/modules/folio_ui-claims-1.0.1099000000007

  • This appears that the process which generates MDs and publishes them to the MDR is probably not using the --strict parameter.  IOW this isn't a problem with this module but an operational problem.

  • We should look into this offline and discuss in a future TC meeting if needed.  Let's coordinate in #tc-internal.

• There are no failed criteria at this point.

• TCR-52 was approved via lazy consensus.

45 min

Eureka follow up decisions

Items to consider:

• Eureka RFC

  • There is a draft RFC, it's a WIP.  Is there value in continuing down this path?

  • There's probably value in some of the information if it's not present elsewhere.  Maybe move that to a more appropriate place and stop with the RFC.

  • The decision has already been made, making the RFC a little redundant.

  • Note on the draft RFC what the situation is, and why.

  • Suggestion:  Create a decision record to capture the formal decision, link out to meeting notes, the RFC, etc.

  • Action: @Craig McNally to create a decision record

    • Cross-link to the RFC

    • Provide an explanation of why the RFC was closed

    • What decisions have been made.

      • including waiving formal TCR evaluation of Eureka components

• FQM manager RFC

  • Still waiting on this.  An RFC does exist (in a private space?) 

  • It keeps coming up, we still want it.

  • Last time we discussed this we decided to ask Vince/Matt to update the RFC to reflect the current design, which is different from the initial design.

  • Let's discuss this more in a future meeting

    • Action: @Jenn Colt/ @Craig McNally to add this to the topic backlog

• Eureka-related TCR evaluations

  • The TC owes Oleksii Petrenko a list of new modules approved by the TC for inclusion into Sunflower. (By the deadline - EOW)

  • Should this list include the Eureka-related components?

    • Yes, let's be comprehensive

  • Action: @Craig McNally will create a parent page in the TC space and one for the Sunflower release under that.

• Maybe there are more things we need to discuss. 

  • Testrail test cases and permissions/roles mgmt.

  • Application evaluation / module evaluation - process/criteria/etc. adjustments.

  • Retrospective on the decision making process - related to the Eureka adoption decisions. (Part of the RFC process anyway)

  • Revisit the conditional aspect of Eureka adoption timeline approval... (see

    )

  • The plan as discussed is to continue to enumerate those out of band and get them into the Wednesday topic backlog

-

Zoom Chat

11:15:53 From Craig McNally to Everyone:
https://folio-registry.dev.folio.org/_/proxy/modules/folio_ui-claims-1.0.1099000000007

11:20:55 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
Jenn said she has computer problems, try to rejoin

11:21:57 From Jenn Colt to Everyone:
Sorry back!

11:42:46 From josh greben to Everyone:
https://dev.folio.org/guides/module-descriptor/#testing-the-modifications

11:50:10 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
I have a brief off-topic issue if we have time at the end

11:51:04 From Zak Burke to Everyone:
PR to update the “generate a UI MD” documentation: https://github.com/folio-org/folio-org.github.io/pull/1871

11:52:54 From Maccabee Levine to Everyone:
Replying to "I have a brief off-topic issue if we have time at ...":
Sorry Craig, I did say off topic 🙂

11:54:01 From Zak Burke to Everyone:
I don’t have privileges in this repo, so if you do, please merge this PR or ping somebody who does 🙂