...
Action items
For the document
- Update the term components council to roadmap council
- Update the overview section to talk about the documentation we've generated being available to future working groups
- Add a qualifier to say July or end of summer at the latest
- Remove the requirement for in person once per year
- “Will elect a Chair and Chair-Elect from among their membership”? And membership” And let Steering sort it out how in the bylaws.
- Rosalyn Metz: Roadmap Council is core components and other components as identified by the Steering Group (Avalon, Hyrax, metadata, etc.)
- Rosalyn Metz: Make sure all voting models are consistent throughout
- Rosalyn Metz: Get rid of any reference to standing working groups
- Rosalyn Metz: Update the glossary of terms
- Rosalyn Metz: Add a title
- Rosalyn Metz: Update the overview section to talk about the documentation we've generated being available to future working groups
Other action items
- Carolyn Caizzi: Draft an email to send to the community.
Meeting Notes
Housekeeping: Mark, Ryan, CC, Rosy, Richard Green - talk about what we're actually voting on -
...
Partners will have input to decide on order of which position will be hired first - Technical or Community Manager position. Yay or nay? Do we say Tech Manager first?
DuraSpace could take on some features and roles. Have transitional staff take care of it. that might lead us to want to hire one or the other first. Constraining that process when we don't know the funding - what parts of those jobs does Steering want done? What are the pieces we need filled?
A person would do tech coordination if he knew that there was a place to fall back.
Job would likely fall under DuraSpace - DuraSpace would handle the funds.
We are in agreement - needs of Community will drive the hiring
Principles for contribution model added - Partners will develop a contribution model which will get voted on, based on 4 Principles - Do we need to include all the verbage and brainstorming in this document?
In case of verbage - keep as appendix - Remove verbiage but keep the principles in place
Contribution Model–new WG or this one?
We will charter a new WG. Will be approved by majority 2/3rds
Resolved what happens when a PO steps away
When a PO steps away, Partners will acknowledge and we'll find a replacement PO
Support Simeon’s comments about Components Council making language stronger?
Goes back to re-naming of Components to Roadmap Council
Left avalon and SIGAHR separate - Components Council and COmmunity Roadmapping Group
Practically be Sr. folks who will be on the roadmap council. Technical coordinator will oversee the coordination of
Things from the Core Components as decided by CCMWG and Solution Bundles as Designated by Steering
- Roadmap Council is name
- Solution Bundles and Community Owned Components and other Components Identified by the Steering Group
Will be responsible for roadmaps
Standing Working Groups? Do we need this?
New framework allows for rechartering - so we don't need "Standing" Working groups in new format
Other COmments:
We could erase the first paragraph - Agreed
Could put a title on it - This is a new version of Rec's - use that title
4th paragraph in overview section - we could put 4th paragraph into an email to the community
Clarify that we're talking about new WG's and IG's tied to work related to Governance
What groups do we need to list:
Voting
Contributions
To be worked out by new working groups and...
What's Next:
Between Rosy, Ryan and CC we'll clean up doc
Write email to introduce the doc
Pass out to Community Next week
Ryan and Mark will get contacts for votes
Select technology for vote
Don't know that we'll need a larger group meeting -