Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Friday, February 15 at 1:00 pm EST


SG members

Paul Albert,   Mike Conlon, Anna Guillaumet Violeta IlikDong Joon (DJ) Lee, Julia Trimmer , Alex Viggio(star)


Andrew Woods 


Mark Newton , Erin Tripp

(star) = note taker

Connection Information

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

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:


  1. Topics for the LG (all, 30 minutes)
    1. Development: moving forward after the architecture meeting
    2. Requesting resources for sprints throughout the year (esp March)
    3. Action planning final reports
  2. Charter revisions: looking for volunteers (Julia, 5 minutes)
    1. The charter needs to reflect the changes we have made to membership and governance. Julia to lead and ask for helpers.
  3. Voting again on the proposal to address the budget imbalance (Julia, 5 minutes)
    1. Discuss voting again and see if objections. At some point we should revise voting processes to indicate that votes can include abstaining (no preference). We’ll vote after the meeting.
  4. Ideas for providing technical training (Julia and Anna, 15 minutes)
    1. How can we give in-depth technical instructions to new developers who can’t come to Camp?


Item 1c: Julia asking for final updates/reports from action planning groups for LG meeting

  1. What goals?
  2. Goals or deliverables accomplished?
  3. How the process went?
  4. Next steps? Continue group?

Mike: round table vs open discussion format? Open discussion draw 1-2 comments from the same people each time. Round table takes 15-20 minutes. How to improve?

Andrew: Four groups

Paul: 10min OK for PE update

Julia: round table option for when we really need to hear from everyone?

Paul: usually policy questions people like to chime in on. Also found communal editing of doc is helpful -- everyone can put some notes under the item being discussed and moderator can call on people? (Mike: some leaders aren’t accustomed to typing vs giving direction)

Paul: better to present actionable questions vs open ended questions?

Julia: looking for ways to improve the meeting format re: getting feedback from LG members?

Andrew: will groups be asked to prepare? (Julia: yes asked for 4 bullet points)

Julia: How to move forward from the architectural fly-in. Resource planning.

Andrew: fundamentally meeting focus was aligned with statement of product direction. Feedback was positive for having this statement in advance of architecture meeting. Summary linked of agenda 1a.

In terms of moving ideas forward, useful things:
Inform the broader community of meeting and outcomes
Ideally (after this or LG call) have a clear sense of the upcoming 2019 sprints and having those based on outcomes of meeting. This providing framework for getting developer engagement.

Linked of agenda 1b a rough draft of 2019 sprint schedule

Having it connected with the supporting institutions

Violeta: content at links look great. Excited to see this! (Andrew: me too) Will be beneficial to present to LG -- warrants discussion.

Violeta: question about having a triple store and decoupling?

Andrew: question about triple store came up a few times in discussion, but no plans to change this for the foreseeable future. Decoupling: opportunity to split out components. Alex: also an opportunity to investigate containerization, and allowing collaborators to use other technologies for specific components.

Violeta: Addressing issue with TPF in sprint? (Mike: current issue -- VIVO impl doesn’t respect data permission config of local VIVO -- all data is available in TPF in v1.10; not an issue for sites that consider all VIVO published.)

DJ: Some people working on Elastic? Some on Solr?

Alex: Solr did not have nextsed docs. Now does, so VIVO is updating its Solr support to the current version. Other sites have invested in ElasticSearch and we expect that ElasticSearch can be a supported, selectable alternative.

Paul and Mike: PE and Ontology groups should be able to focus on performant front end and ontology respectively -- decoupled from fine grained data concerns or specific data tech, as well as programming language preferences. Decoupling separates concerns and provides technology interfaces.

DJ: TAMU project started from institutional needs, e.g., having faceted search. Solr decision based on use in other library groups in other platforms. (Alex: great to have room for both)

Julia: maybe continue discussion in PE?

Agenda Item 2

Julia: We need to update our Charter to reflect recent changed. For membership TF. Would love to have some help if only to help keep things on track.

Agenda Item 3
Voting again on the proposal to address the budget imbalance (Julia, 5 minutes)
Discuss voting again and see if objections. No objections from the SG.

Agenda Item 4

Anna: what do you think about how to avoid issue?

Julia: great to have something reusable

Mike: TIB has a good VIVO team and might be interested -- has put on several VIVO events

Also Michele Mennielli from DuraSpace could help organize something in Europe

Another possibility is to create some online training? For devs? What examples outside VIVO show success?

Andrew: tech folks become more familiar by working on it vs talking about it -- needs to be a certain foundation. Learning by doing.

Meeting ending -- Julia take this offline, emails

  • No labels