- steve van tuyl
- Lynette Rayle (Cornell)
- Chris Colvard (Indiana University)
- Brian McBride (University of Utah)
- Collin Brittle (Emory)
- and me (Ryan Steans )
|10 min||Valkyrie/ Hyrax work state|
Valkyrie Hyrax work by Tom:
end of second of 4 planned for Valkyrie sprint plan. Time to evalutae, proritize and decde what needs to happen. Need to schedule remaining 2 sprints. Update - WINGS plan, moving along. Current codebase embedded in Hyrax: on Wings.
Anticipate needing time between sprints to evaluate. Work progressing - more concrete commitments from folks. Some eager to see work finished, Folks getting motivated to get it done.
|10 min||Roadmap Council Check In|
Roadmap Council - White Paper out - state of technical aspects of the community. Working toward coordinating roadmaps across Core Components and Solution Bundles. Reporting to partners at end of month at f2f, what's next for Council.
Rob - self-appointed inviters of contribution has value. Partners - get mandate.
|15 min||Partner Meeting - document and second resourcing ask|
We'd been asked to give a single resourcing ask at end of Partners in october. What you see is a second round ask for remainder or Roadmap things.
Paired with a document - asking Partners to make a decision/ facilitate the deciding of: what are we trying to do with Hyrax? Build something for Samvera Community internally or to draw people into the community. Fundamental problem we're facing - planning Hyrax as an outward looking, feature rich, competes with DSPace and FigShare. Resourcing as an inward-focused, what people with resources want out of Hyrax.
We need direction from Partners to properly roadmap in the future.
Clearly lays out how community has been getting things done - help partners understand - they have to commit time of devs to make these things happen.
community support - do we want it to be something you need a bunch of developers to support or do we want it more of a turn-key solution. For users who don't have developers on who use Hyrax, how do they influence the direction?
Hyrax - it should be a place where community at large is benefitting from work toward stability and work towards "ready to ship" solution bundles and common features. On the other side - some of the work in the community at large on leading edge finds it's way into a stable, state-of-the art repo.
Effort and tension into a substantial shift year - working on Valkyrie. Slow down velocity on features.
Is it a false choice - for the partners or for the community?
Choice is - what do we want people to see when we look in the door? As a PO for Hyrax - reliably roadmap and resource roadmap work. Cognitive dissonance between what we say we want and what we do.
Hyrax - Explicit about framework versus full repo project.
Historically community working on gems, or solutions like Sufia - consolidated work apart from Avalon. Curation Concerns got wrapped into Sufia, part of that decision making in the community, rather than work on things generally close to being an app, but not an app like Sufia - that merger represented a desire to stop working on a middle layer in a community way - looking at working at the top layer.
Where do we want to focus our fragmented efforts? One stack that is usable for many purposes but is also ready to go and can be used to make a repo app? Or are we focusing our efforts toward the middle and more utility services. Original decision was to move closer to application layer.
Giarlo will be there
|10 min||Product Owner Update|
Steve's time at 20% - there will come a time when Steve will not be able to commit. What it looks like to transition to a new PO.
This body needs to think about what a transition looks like when or if someone moves on.
Elect people to partners - identify and recruit and serve in roles.