Connection Information - New for Friday
To join the Meeting:
To join via phone :
1) Dial: +1.408.740.7256 or +1.888.240.2560 or +1.408.317.9253
2) Enter Conference ID : 894689148
Note: please consider attending and separately registering for LDCX on the preceding Monday through Wednesday; also, a Hydra Developer Congress will be running in parallel to this Partner meeting.
Google Notes Doc for Meeting
- Thursday dinner & reception: Lathrop Library, 3rd floor courtyard at 5:30 PM
- Partner engagement in advancing the Hydra project on a variety of fronts.
This event will be organized and facilitated by volunteers among the Partners.
- Ben Armintor
- Karen Cariani
- Tom Cramer (Chair)
- Jeremy Friesen
- Mike Giarlo
- Richard Green
- Nabeela Jaffer
- Rick Johnson
- Margaret Mellinger
- Linda Newman
- Robin Ruggaber
- Evviva Weinraub
- eduroam if you have it
- Stanford Visitor if you don't -
hint if you can connect to wifi, but can't get to the internet, try connecting to
Earlier Notes from Planning Sessions (for Reference)
(Brainstorm list for now; to be prioritized and groomed prior to the meeting; add one or make an existing one better!)
Please also note that some of these topics were discussed at the November partner meeting, and we should review these notes so as not to retread the same ground.
Essential Project Hygiene
Additional Awesome Potential Topics
advancing a Hydra-Standard Training Curriculum
Vendor Engagement & Ties & Good Citizenship & RSPs
Prep for Hydra Virtual Connect
- Fun and exciting hands-on FIMO project
- IG/WG round up: how are we doing?
- The potential impact of Hyku take-up on the Community - are we prepared for it?
- Churn - cost and mitigations
- Points of collaboration and common priority between Hydra and Fedora
Rooms & Logistics
- All meetings will take place at the Bechtel Conference Center at Encina Hall (616 Serra Street) on Stanford campus
- We will have 1 large central room (Main Hall) that can be shared with the DevCon attendees; coffee and snacks available there
- Oksenberg Room: up to 60 people will be the primary room for the Partner meeting and its plenary sessions (has projector)
- Break Out Rooms
- Green Room will take ~10
- Encina 464 Classroom will take 28 (has projector)
- Encina West 202 will take 30 (has projector)
- Coffee will arrive at 8:30 AM and 12:30 PM
- Lunch will be on your own each day, to see and explore exciting pockets of campus
Planning Notes 20170316
- Skipping introductions owing to familiarity of attendees
- Agenda: Reviewing spaces available and logistics of the event in support of themes identified to date
- Space & Time Available to Hydra Partners
- Bechtel Conference Center is the venue - don't go to Lathrop!
- Multiple rooms available:
- A plenary/central room for reconnecting with Dev Congress
- Oxenburg (3rd floor) as primary room for Partner's plenary (~60 people)
- 3 Breakout rooms
- Green room (10 people)
- Encina 464 (28 people)
- Encina West 202 (30 people)
- Auxiliary Room set aside for food service
- Spillover space available in Lathrop if multi-tracking requires
- Social Calendar (Tom)
- Wednesday afternoon: Campus tours at break of LDCX
- Wednesday night: Hydra dinner?
- Thursday night: Something
- Evviva: Are we thinking about a large restaurant reservation
- Tom: Perhaps- could also have a reception, or an event at the library courtyard (which may be accompanied by working sessions)
- Evviva: Can the courtyard have beer? (Tom: Yes) Then maybe a low key courtyard event?
- Jeremy: +1
- Evviva's jokes about Tony's retirement are well-received
- Mike's jokes about Californian cold tolerance are well-received
- This might have constituted consensus?
- When will the meeting break Friday?
- Tom suggests scheduling an end time 3-4 hours later than you actually want people to stay; IE don't do wrap-up late in the afternoon
- Evviva suggests wrap-p by 3
- Mark notes space is reserved until 5 on all days
- Agenda setting: Should we have a strawman?
- Tom: This group could decide for an unconference arrangement, but seems like there are actual agenda that must be considered
- Evviva: Should we frontload the firm agenda, and leave the more flexible topic selection to Friday
- STRAW AGENDA drawn from topics id'd earlier
- Evviva suggests timeboxing this conversation, which will wander, and maybe moving off first day
- Karen worried that there are enough contingencies that will need to be dealt with earlier
- Richard observes that it will not be so open-ended, as some work will have been executed
- Tom suggests topic/session organizers in advance of meeting, which appears to reach consensus
- 2017 Spending Plan in context of upcoming development
- Hyku/Hyrax roadmap & resource commitment
- Partner admonition for lackadaisical contributions
- See also November Partner Meeting Notes
- ADDITIONAL TOPICS
- Vendor ecosystem
- WG and WG Process Review
- Hyku Success disaster planning: What do we need to do if it is taken up?
- Churn tolerance for projects
- Fedora/DSpace working relationship
- Linda asks whether we aren't committed to identifying the new brand by 3/31?
- some disagreement, as there is a legal review that will not be done
- The attendees begin to demonstrate the phenomenon that Karen worried about, rather than identifying the topics to be coordinated for the next call
- Tom reviews some possible models for discussion of non-name choice rebranding conversations
- What are the topics that should be coordinated for next call?
- call to nominate a SG member and a supplementary person with enthusiasm to prepare a more structured list of points about rebrand for next meeting
- new website: Richard hopes web presence WG will review work to date and HP will consider/review At the meeting
- Tom will frame spending plan, with recourse to a draft/blueprint from last year
- extraordinary expenses: rebrand. was there a cost associated with the slack archiving?
- Evviva: should this be the starting point the community contribution conversation broadly, especially the post-Hyku planning?
- Rick raises a point about identifying the places at which HP should reconvene with the Dev Congress
- Evviva: Revisiting partner contributions is a meaty topic, and should be on Thursday
- Hyku road-mapping
- Mike: Hyrax represents an unprecedented convergence at solution level for the H Community, and requires a clearer vision as a product than we have had for Sufia
- Linda: Is there a reason to delineate Hyku and Hyrax roadmaps? (Mike worries that the distinction will draw the conversation unhelpfully into the weeds of implementation)
- Tom: H Comm and products are big enough that hopeful organic approach to product development will not work, would like to talk about this
- many people agree
- Linda: developers may need to self-organize around this
- Mike: much of the work on the solution bundles has driven the stack maintenance as well- which makes Hyrax a consideration for non-adopters who use Hydra components
- Many people are supportive of the broad topic of product roadmapping
- People think this is a large topic, estimating 2-3 hours
- Partner Roles
- cf DLF talk
- Evviva will lead this discussion; reiterates connection to spending plan
- Richard will lead latter?
- Tom: topic - differentiate HP and SG responsibilities
- Karen: topic - id outstanding organizational and documentation needs as vectors for new contributions
- What "Additional" topics should be promoted to agenda?
- Richard nominates the churn tolerance topic
- Evviva characterizes vendor engagement as consonant with partner roles if viewed through lens of good citizenship
- Linda: roadmapping external integrations/composing a "big picture" of integration with services
- Richard: and the regional considerations (NA, Europe, etc)
- Mike mixes some metaphors in a caution that we might want this to be a WG, since there are participant requirements that may not align with attendees
- Jeremy advocates using HP to identify good WG participants (Nabeela: or subsequent call agenda)
- Tom: some "slack" time should be reserved for organizing topics to be taken up over 2017 (should this be a breakout)
- Mike from chat: "Points of collaboration and common priority between Hydra and Fedora" -- may be able to slot into the roadmapping/code contributions conversation depending on how far we get. The key question: how and how much does/should the Hydra community invest in Fedora enhancements to achieve our roadmap?
- Nabeela: How do we continue conversations from HP meetings between meetings?
- Karen: mission setting for the partner calls should be a topic we take up at the meeting (Tom +1 for this partner roles)
- Linda: We need to make sure we allocate time for report-backs
- Richard: groups addressing the "big" topics should have framing questions
- What do we need for next week?
- Tom: topic leaders should bring framing questions next week
- Rebranding: Evviva and (Tom/Mike)
- Website: Richard
- Overview of the need for a new website - functionality, audience (with the advent of Hyku)
- Description of work done by developer and Web Presence Working Group
- Ask audience to review current draft - not to "nit-pick" but to validate the approach and identify any omissions
- Work still to do on website before launch
- Work needed on wiki (WG of seasoned Hydranauts with executive powers?)
- Partner Roles: Evviva/Richard
- includes inter-meeting communication plans and the potential impact of Hyku
- Spending plan: (Chris/Robin)
- Hyku/Roadmapping: Tom/Mike/Karen/Jeremy
- Draft annual report (Tom/Richard)
- Overview of perceived need for annual report to attract/inform management of potential Hyku (and other) adopters
- Description of work done by working group
- Ask audience to review current draft and to suggest any significant possible improvements
- Other Topics to frame
- Roadmapping external integrations/composing a "big picture" of integration with services (Rick: I did not see this in the list but pulled this list of framing items together quickly)
- Potentially as smaller breakout
- Describe intended focus: both national and international concerns as these vary across our partners
- Form working group
- Draft initial group expectations such as:
- Explore critical types of services (to avoid bias to a particular geographic region) and which international communities/regions to consider initially
- Identify key tool alignments to pursue within each community
- Create process for initiating service/tool integration research, evaluation, implementation
- Identify members of working group
- Tom: next week we should talk about slotting the schedule
Registered Attendees (as of March 16, 2017)
steve van tuyl