Page History

...

• Pascal-Nicolas Becker (The Library Code)*

• Allan Bell (University of British Columbia Library)

• John Butler (University of Minnesota)*

• Suzanne Chase (Georgetown University)

• Lieven Droogmans (Atmire)*

• Federico Ferrario / Roberto Suardi (Cineca)

• Scott Hanrath (University of Kansas) 

• Barbara Hirschmann (ETH Zurich)

• Jyrki Ilva (National Library of Finland)*

• Jayan Kurian (University of Sunshine Coast)
  

• Pierre Lasou (Université Laval)

• Mariya Maistrovskaya (University of Toronto)
• Lautaro Julián Matas (LA Referencia / RedCLARA)

• Agustina Martinez-Garcia (University of Cambridge)

• João Mendes Moreira (Foundation of Science and Technology Portugal)*

• Susanna Mornati (4Science)*

• César Olivares (CONCYTEC)*

• Jere Odell (Indiana University Purdue University Indiana)

• Kristi Park (Texas Digital Library) - Chair

• Beate Rajski (Hamburg University of Technology)
• Gail Steinhart (Cornell University)
• Peter Sutton-Long (University of Cambridge, interim)*

• Maureen Walsh (The Ohio State University Libraries)*

...

Notes: 

TOP 1 DSpace 7 development update

Heather reports about the state of DSpace 7: In August development slowed down as many developers were on vacations. The Working Group is working on a timeline for beta 4, trying to keep a two-month schedule. Beta 4 might be delayed in cause of the vacations, but it is too early to say, we will have to wait for that timeline. There will be a beta 5, that we’ll need it for critical bugs. A community testathon going on for two weeks is also planned before a 7.0 will be published. The timeline between beta 5 and 7.0 might be very short, depending on what’s found in the testathon. Depending on the timeline of beta 4 and length of beta 5, we can schedule 7.0 release in the next LG Group meeting.

Beta 4 will contain work on GDPR and SEO. Google Scholar wants to test DSpace 7. Some bug fixes are already planned for beta 5, but we will need to anticipate that more things will come into it (slipped from beta 4 or found by the community). Beta 4 might come out end of September, but that is not sure until the timeline is fixed (see above). 

TOP 2 It Takes a Village program assessment

Lyrasis undertook the ITAV assessment for all their community supported programs, including DSpace. The summarized report was discussed in last Steering Group meeting and provided to the Leadership Group. SG decided that it would be useful to take some of the recommendations from the report and to extend them, to make it more concrete how they could be picked up. Laurie and Kristi drafted an action plan based on the recommendations. In the next SG meeting in early September SG will discuss this plan. SG will probably propose to form a bunch of working groups that work within the next year on these actions, e.g. to look on our governance structure and the MoU.

TOP 3 Year-end financial report

Laurie Arp reports: A budget is a plan, at the end of the year you get a snapshot compared to the plan. In the year before (2018/2019) DSpace was slightly in the red ~$2,500. This year (2019/2020) we kept a net assets of approx. $24,000. We had extra fundraising for DSpace 7, we had less travel costs, we had additional contract labor for DSpace 7. The fundraising contains only the straight-out contribution, not the enhanced membership fees and the money that comes in in the new fiscal year.

We are currently discussing the IDC rate (42.3%) for the extra contract labor work. Lyrasis will take a look on this. For the normal work it seems reasonable to cover office space, social insurances, HR administration, … Some of these costs are covered by the labor work rate. Nevertheless, of course Lyrasis has an effort with the administration of the labor work. Lyrasis will look into this and see if the IDC can be lowered on the contract labor that is done for DSpace externally. Lyrasis will probably have a proposal until next meeting.

TOP 4 Elections and transition to new Leadership Group

We currently have 3 seats for Bronze members, and 2 seats for silver members in the Leadership Group. In addition seats are used by 7 Gold, 3 Platinum members, 3 certified DSpace partners, 2 community at large seats, and the seat for Lyrasis.

We haven’t heard back from some silver members, if they are going to renew their membership or not. From the number of silver members we currently do have two seats for them. The silver members did a better job to find nominees than the bronze once. This can be a topic, when we take a look on Governance structure of DSpace, to not give anyone the impression to have a better chance to become a LG member by getting a bronze membership instead of a silver one.

We had 18 total nominations for Leadership, including 5 organizations that have not worked on Leadership before. We had 3 nominations from Bronze members. As we have three seats for them, we will not need to run an election. We have 4 silver members and we have two seats available. Some of the silver members gave additional money as part of our DSpace 7 campaign. At least one of them would have ended up with a gold membership, if they would have raised their membership fees instead. We need to run the votes now to not delay the next meetings of the Leadership Group. At the same time the LG asks Michele Mennilli to take a look on this. How many silver members would become gold members for this year, if we would account the money given as part of the DSpace 7 campaign as membership fees? By how many seats would the Leadership Group grow then? If the group becomes not to huge by that, we would like to offer these members to be dealt like gold members for this year, independently if they paid their campaign contribution in the last or the current fiscal year. It would be also helpful for these members to be then listed as gold members on DSpace’s website.

The next Leadership Group Meeting is scheduled for September on 23^rd same time as this meeting.

The first thing for the new LG will be to elect new steerers. Steerers are nominated for three years, not for one. Three current steerers will rotate out. Also chairs for both groups will have to be selected. One of the first topics of the new LG should be the action plan that SG is working on (ITAV, see above).

As the SG discussed the governance structure a bit in the last meeting, the question came up, how members of the LG, that are not in SG do think about the governance structure? How efficient are the LG meetings?

One suggestion for the governance structures were to make less frequent LG meetings, with more time for each meeting, while keeping the SG meetings at the same frequency as currently. For example, LG could meet once per quarter for two hours, while SG meets every month for one hour. The benefit would be, that more task forces and working groups could be build and would have time in between those meetings. Fedora changed there governance model like this.

Another suggestion would be to work with a consent agenda (https://www.boardeffect.com/blog/what-is-a-consent-agenda-for-a-board-meeting/) in LG.

Kristi invited everyone to send direct emails to Kristi, Jyrki, or Pascal if they want to share ideas or impressions about DSpace’s governance structure privately.

TOP 5 AOB 

Kristi thanks everyone for the work they have done this year in the LG, and especially to the folks from Lyrasis that served the leadership group.