...
- Discussion of small groups document. The context and synthesis can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IfOeTUr37f99pzS0TSCnO26RX6Qb9zFCBPazFiWoX3c/edit?ts=5a5cf556
- From Rosalyn: Is there a way that we can clearly delineate between these two needs within the document. Similar to what we did above. Can we describe them as "concerns around software development and resourcing" and "concerns around decision-making for the community". I know we touched on this in our previous discussion, but is there a way to capture that or is this good enough?
- From Various: How do we distinguish between core components and solution bundles? Rosalyn's solution: go with one example that we can all safely agree is a core component or a solution bundle.
- Next steps. Identifying next steps for the group.
- Communicating to the community. We've received a lot of requests to provide input, how do we field these requests? How do we better communicate with the community about our work?
- Developing a recommendation for a governance model. What process do we want to follow to move forward with developing this document?
Action Items:
- Type your task here, using "@" to assign to a user and "//" to select a due dateMark will bring the document to the Steering Committee on Monday
- Mark will alert us to the feedback
- We are targeting 1/29 or before to release the document
- Rosy will check the various doc schedules, reconcile and make sure is on Wiki page
Possibly Useful Items:
Charter and document request
...
Set roadmap for technical components - note the component community - what is the list of things we say we're managing? Reference the Component Maintenance working group and how they fit in for technical work taking place in parallel with this WG. No solutions for things that group is working on.
NEXT STEPS:
Ryan, Carolyn an dRosy have gotten a lot of questions about how to contribute
Late entries, etc...
Giarlo comments on agendas - dropping his info and walking off. Rosy asks people to look at those, feel free to add comments, etc... We're being transparent but we don't need to open door to let people on. Rosy is the Bad Guy. Make sure we're properly communicating with the community.
Rosy - question I had - not clear in this charter document - is this going out to the community?
Yes.
One thing that will help with communicating. Make sure people know we're meeting weekly to work on the issues. Note - here's our working group page, agendas, etc... we're doing work. Alleviate curiosity.
mark: yeah, maybe we update our timeline and link to that so people know when to expect to see certain items delivered.
Rosy: Maybe a final sentence - published timeline can be found on the Samvera Wiki.
Next thing - we can push off to next meeeting - what is the process for creating the recommendations themselves.
The doc goes to Steering for Review on Monday
Contemplate models
Contemplate the timeline. Timeline is in three places. Rosy will make sure they don't repeat each other. Make sure they're all the same.
Anything to ask Steering?
Inconceivable to go over licensing and MOU stuff. - Asking 30+ institutions to go back to their council is pretty burdensome - may actually lose some institutions. If there's a good reason - but if we can avoid that - the happier path. If Steering says "don't think on it", useful.