2020-05-12 Meeting Notes

12 May 2020 

Attendees

Rob Kaufman

Previous Action Items

• Connect with Component Maintenance Group and find out a) if they are active, b) if someone else is willing to join (in Mark's place) Mark Bussey
  
• Reschedule Hyrax Interest Group meeting and take the Hyrax PO role forwards Rob Kaufman

Agenda

Action Items

Notes

• Call for additional items
  • Julie
    • Resourcing and survey results
    • Presenting the survey results at a Partners call
  • Nabeela
    • Perhaps we can discuss the Partner call
    • Marketing Working Group
      • Mention of some help from the Roadmap Council in updating the pages
      • Julie: Assigned certain pages from the last meeting
• Agenda
  • Hyrax WG meeting rescheduled
  • There is potentially a new Hyrax Product Owner identified, but there are scheduling concerned
    • Julie Hardesty is looking to start this in July, hitting 20% stride by Connect 2020
      • Serve in this role for two years, with the second year involving the preparation for nominating the successor PO 
    • This will be discussed with the community during Virtual Connect
      • There needs to be some clarification addressing that Julie cannot begin to ramp up focus until at least July
  • Component Maintenance WG
    • James is going to serve as the representative for the WG
    • Mark could continue to be a Product Owner representative for the WG, with James serving as the developer representative
      • Prefer to keep Mark
    • James provided a history of the Core Component WG
      • (This will be drafted)
    • Roadmap Council is there to facilitate with community coordination from the WG
  • Parter Meeting Recap
    • Three goals were shared with Partners
      • Survey
      • Asks put to Partners
      • Code reclamation
      • Some discussions regarding the reinterpretation of 
        • For the ask, assumed that we were discussing the contribution model
        • Tom Cramer: Raised questions regarding the overall goals and objectives vs. the vision of the community
      • Roadmap
        • Are we actually working towards a roadmap?
          • Are we building a roadmap?
    • We might need a massive change to the charter
      • Rename to the "Roadmaps Council"
      • There is this constant problem of assuming that this council is chartered to create a single roadmap for the entire community
        • This is not the chartered purpose of this group
      • This needs to be clearly stated
        • The community does not empower us to establish a single roadmap
        • There also isn't interest from the community in empowering us to do so
      • We are more of a clearing house, "air traffic control"
      • If Partners do not understand this, then the rest of the community likely does not understand any of this either
      • Renaming
        • "Samvera Roadmaps Coordination Committee"
        • "Roadmap Clearing House"
        • If we continue to keep the "roadmap" term in the name, we still are left with the assumption that we have a roadmap
      • If there is a contingency of partners who do want to define a roadmap, this will need to be clearly identified and this will need to be addressed
      • We need to start this process by reviewing the charter
        • Changing the name by itself may not solve the problem
        • If we routinely provide an artifact to the community, then this might prove to be more effective
        • However, it might also be the case that not many will read the revised charter; renaming, then, should be given a higher priority
          • "Community Coordination Council"
            
      • For the next meeting, conduct a brainstorming exercise for renaming the group
        • Rob will lead this
      • The core anxiety which drove all of this is, what if I have my team invest my effort into Samvera solutions, but then the community takes an entirely unanticipated turn with new architecture
        • Can everyone feel secure that there is a stable framework that their institution has invested in
        • If we were more clear about the purpose of this group, community members would know where to check in
        • Do I adopt Hyrax 2? Wait for Hyrax 3? Use Valkyrie alone?
  • Roadmaps Survey
    • Offer a matrix to identify where institutions are directing resources for customizations
      • This could be use to derive features which could be scoped for community sprints instead of being left to internal customizations
    • Found there to be a lack of energy and activity within the community at the moment
      • Rather than put out a document summarizing this survey, during Partners call, propose a resourcing discussion with members of this council
        • How can Hyrax and Samvera better serve community and institutional needs during trying economic times?
        • Resourcing the community requires time from other institutions, more than anything else
    • During the last Partners Meeting, the resourcing questions were not completely addressed
    • From the survey, we could try and make the point that there is more which could coordinated centrally
    • However, there are limitations when it comes to community coordination
      • Unfunded mandates are difficult to define and then enforce
      • Explicitly requesting FTE time for a set duration of time is much more helpful
    • The size of the meeting itself can be discouraging
      • Trying to reduce meeting sizes in order to try and find those who can readily contribute resources to a community sprint
    • We still need to present the survey results to Partners
    • There is something to the idea of hosting a meeting with the implicit directive "if you want to do this, please attend; if you do not, please do not"
      • Otherwise there is more time invested in discussions and resource planning for those without FTE resources to contribute
  • Hyrax Development
    • Tom Johnson and Matt Critchlow have been investigating taking more time to addressing Wings support for Hyrax 3
    • There are concerns regarding the ActiveFedora dependencies in the stack
      • If this can be completed, Component Maintenance can serve to assist with deprecating ActiveFedora dependent components
    • Concern is that there might need to more involved in integration testing
      • Upgrading to Hyrax 3 is a process in itself to test
    • There need to be steps towards integrating community development efforts
      • Provide Partners with the survey results
      • More focus gathering which draws in community members with the resources to do it
      • Present "here are the next 3-4 objectives, how can I prioritize this?"
      • Rob and Jon will assist Julie with preparing for this
  • Analytics
    • There may be some effort organized focused upon this
    • Remains to be determined
  • Scheduling the Next Meeting
    • We will meet in two weeks
• Meeting adjourned at 09:55 PDT/12:55 EDT