March 2017 Hydra Partner Meeting Agenda

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
  • Rebranding
    • 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
    
    • new website
  • 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)

• Benjamin Armintor

• Karen Cariani

• Aaron Collier

• Stefano Cossu

• Esmé Cowles

• Tom Cramer

• Jon Dunn

• Karen Estlund

• Hannah Frost

• Michael Giarlo

• Richard Green

• James Griffin

• Nabeela Jaffer

• Rick Johnson

• Braydon Justice

• Mark Matienzo

• Margaret Mellinger

• Linda Newman

• Andrew Rouner

• Robin Ruggaber

• Bess Sadler

• Jon Stroop

• steve van tuyl

• Simeon Warner

• Evviva Weinraub

• Andrew Woods

• Maurice York