Difference between revisions of "Tech Committee Meeting Minutes 20 Aug 2013"

From PKP Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "August 20 1:30pm, Mexico City '''Present:''' Bozana Bokan, Brian Gregg, Rachael Hu, Barbara Hui, James MacGregor, Mark Newton (Columbia), Jason Nugent, Brian Owen, Alec Smech...")
(No difference)

Revision as of 14:04, 4 September 2013

August 20 1:30pm, Mexico City

Present: Bozana Bokan, Brian Gregg, Rachael Hu, Barbara Hui, James MacGregor, Mark Newton (Columbia), Jason Nugent, Brian Owen, Alec Smecher. (Marc Bria and Lisa Schiff were telepresent for the 1st 5 minutes of the meeting, then had to drop out because of technical difficulties.)

Minutes: Alec.


  • Mark Newton, Columbia University
  • Jayne Dickson (CDL) will be helping with the UI/UX review

PKP Development Priorities Discussion

  • https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cQeCL4eVvVQ4Sk3cWhAY5nN_pWXvCWPusd9XilPYzik/edit?pli=1
  • Came from PKP internal discussions over the last month or two
  • Attempt to identify potential dev targets for OJS 3.0
  • Many are already "baked in" (UI/UX; upgrade; back-porting)
  • Some dependent on grants/specific funding
  • Some depend on resource impact on team (some have external resources)
  • Also motivated by desire to better expose "mid-size" development priorities
  • May be possible to use UI/UX review to guinea-pig implementation decisions
    • Rachael: via Members committee, take findings out to community? Have members/advisory board/John validate/vet? Present as package deal with community feedback
    • Alec: Agree in principle, but concerned about potential for community feedback process being an unknown time cost. Feeling time pressure leading up to OJS 3.0.
    • Brian: Is members committee a sufficient proxy for the community?
    • Moving on many of the recommendations may be self-evident
  • James: [redacted] presented this AM; they want to contribute back
    • UI improvements; XML authoring; OAK integration; ORCID (by 2014). They want to get moving.
    • Barbara: Make sense to include them in at-large group? Still have one spot available.
    • They might be interested in push access.
    • Brian: Commercial vs. open source; lots of dynamics to consider.
    • Barbara: Community leadership summit had lots of examples.
  • Barbara: People want to commit but the process is not clear.
    • Alec: Have a fairly simple mix: most do pull requests; Bozana/Free University Berlin has commit access but checks with Alec informally before pushing code up.
    • Barbara: Need to actually document it clearly.
    • Alec: Ran tech session including Brian. Presented github workflow. Suspect that Google hangouts for tech sessions is not enough; need to follow up with persistent documentation (e.g. wiki).
  • Ideas on how to proceed:
    • Quantify availability of various team members
    • Deputize Tech Committee members to manage subprojects
    • Work specifically on:
      • on-ramping
      • refining UI/UX into more specific details as a prerequisite to defining decision-making process
    • James: use Asana task management system? (PKP already has this installed).