Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Attendees

LG and SG members:

Paul Albert (star), Ann Beynon, Tom Cramer, Mike Conlon, Anna Guillaumet, Doug Hahn, Christian Hauschke, Violeta Ilik, Muhammed Javed, Mark Newton, Julia Trimmer, Terrie Wheeler, Joe Zucca

Duraspace:

Erin Tripp, Andrew Woods

Regrets:

 DJ Lee, Ginny Pannabecker, Jean Rainwater, Hannah Sommers, Robert Cartolano, Federico Ferrario, Alex Viggio

(star) = notetaker

Connection Information

Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: 

https://duraspace.zoom.us/my/vivo1

(New call-in numbers were corrected on 5/10/2018)

Or iPhone one-tap :

    US: +16468769923,,9358074182#  or +16699006833,,9358074182# 

Or Telephone:

    Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): 

        US: +1 646 876 9923  or +1 669 900 6833  or +1 408 638 0968  or +1 408 638 0986  or +1 646 558 8665 

    Meeting ID: 935 807 4182

    International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/cex8G1kjQ

Agenda

  1. Review agenda:  Julia, 5 minutes
  2. Steering Committee nominations (procedure outlined here) Julia/round-table discussion, 30 minutes.
    1. Background on the purpose of Steering vs. Leadership (see the Leadership Group Processes page for more info).
    2. If necessary, would this structure work with a smaller Steering Group (8 people)?
    3. If not, how do we proceed?
  3.  Update on technical initiatives/roadmap process. Mike, 5 minutes.
  4. Survey from the Governance action planning group. Julia, 2 minutes.
  5. Future agenda items: we need to hear your most burning questions for the LG. Julia/Mike/short round-table discussion, 20 minutes
    1. Others?

Notes

  1. Steering Committee nominations
    1. Steering group is a subset of the Leadership group.
    2. Thus far, we've only gotten one nomination for the Steering Group
    3. Should we go with a smaller Steering group?
    4. Paul: maybe we could ask additional people to participate. Some people whose terms expired are no longer on the Steering group. I think we should recruit people.
    5. Ann: I'm okay with a smaller group.
    6. Mike: I like the idea of reaching out to people individually and don't kill ourselves trying getting to 10.
    7. Anna: maybe it's better having fewer people than more people.
    8. Violeta: I'm in favor of a smaller group. My understanding is Steering group is really operational.
    9. Christian: 8 would be a good size depending on if they can work together. Maybe it would to ask again in a couple months. For example, right now, I have no time. But maybe in 2-3 months.
    10. Javed: I like the idea of having a larger group. We should contact the do-ers in our community.
    11. Andrew: I don't think we should hold things up over the number of people.
  2. Technical initiatives and roadmap process
    1. We agreed to have a group score the initiatives on impact and effort.
    2. We have 6 groups that have agreed to score: Andrew, Mike, Weill, Columbia, Clarivate, Sigma.
    3. We will review discrepant scoring.
    4. Christian: I sent an email asking for feedback on certain initiatives? Mike: I have included those in my ratings.
    5. Mike: One of the points of this exercise is to try to generate commitment.... There will be some effort to lump together similar efforts.
    6. Ana: I think how VIVO looks is very important.
  3. Action planning groups
    1. Goal: survey to inform the work of the action planning group.
    2. Julia: We will send a survey to the community. This should be coming up in the next several weeks.
  4. Future agenda items
    1. Andrew: I see different initiatives: VIVO core, Product Evolution, and Research Intelligence. We could start better using Slack to facilitate communication.
    2. Erin: we have a report on the ResearchGraph pilot. We should include this as an agenda item.
    3. Javed: I see the groups as being VIVO Core and Product Evolution. We still don't know how we bring back individual institutions into Core. There's not a lot of interest in moving code commits back into VIVO core. That's my concern.
    4. Violeta: I was thinking the Leadership group could have an open call with community members, so that we can synchronize parallel efforts.... Also, is the Leadership group deciding about the Conference? Julia: I think we'll have an update about that soon. Mike: the Conference Team decides. We'll follow up. We will follow up.
    5. Christian: I agree with Javed. There are a lot of solutions from single institutions, and we never hear about their code. I have no idea how to do this. We need to figure out what everyone is working on. We need to communicate our development projects in a transparent way. I would also like to talk about funding opportunities. 
    6. Doug: I agree with what I've heard.
    7. Ana: I like the idea of having specialized groups. This way we can invite more people to collaborate.
    8. Mike: I second the idea of a community forum. I'm comfortable seeing a lot of people doing a lot of things. People will choose to participate in efforts they see as most valuable. We will have parallel effort but I hope they will be aligned.... Finally, there will be memoranda updates starting in September. Our goal is to have a revised MOU. Our goal is to have something in place by end of 2018. I'm grateful to Duraspace for putting us in a place where we can discuss this. If you're interested in this work, let me know.
    9. Tom: we have done a lot of good foundational work. I would like to see us get some resolution and convergence on those. 
    10. Ann: I like the idea of having a wider forum. A colleague of mine wanted to be a guest speaker. We have a new leader of the Converis business; we're immersing her in the VIVO world. Violeta: I like that idea.
    11. Paul: I like the idea of treating VIVO more as a set of components rather than a single monolith. Mike: I agree. Positioning the conversation as an ecosystem type discussion might allow us to better see alignment.
    12. Tom: Stanford is interested in research intelligence. We're opting to go to cloud-based solution (AWS) - Neptune. We're doing a VIVO pattern but we're not using much of the existing VIVO codebase. We haven't found an obvious place to report out our progress. How should we share? Violeta: what about another Slack channel? mike: for most of us a periodic update would be helpful. 
    13. Andrew: I've heard about an interest in re-envision VIVO's role. It would be a shame if Stanford does good work and Stanford doesn't collaborate with this group.
  • No labels