Difference between revisions of "Tech Committee Meeting Minutes 28 November 2017"

From PKP Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(In Attendance)
Line 1: Line 1:
== In Attendance ==
== In Attendance ==
* Clinton, Chris, Dulip, James, Kenton, Kevin, Marc, Svantje, Alec
== Quick Updates ==
== Quick Updates ==

Revision as of 10:03, 28 November 2017

In Attendance

  • Clinton, Chris, Dulip, James, Kenton, Kevin, Marc, Svantje, Alec

Quick Updates

  • Question of the Month
    • What comes to your mind first when you think about PKP's strengths? What do you see as potential obstacles to PKP?
      • Alex (via email): The first thing that crosses my mind is the fact that is a project towards Open Access. Much like SciELO, I think that is PKP's biggest strength. Regarding potentioal obstacles, I believe that PKP has to have a bigger presence in Latin America. Not talking about numbers, because we know how big OJS is here. But even though OJS is huge in Latin America, not everyone knows about PKP, its principles and why things are done the way they are done. For example, if the next PKP Conferences were to be held in southern countries, it's likely that more people would attend and thus PKP's message would get accross even more efficiently. Latin America was the birth of Open Access and I believe that PKP should target their efforts here in order to have a bigger presence here.
      • Marc: About strengths: PKP is playing in a global universe and during the last decade earned an important position in the international scene. OJS is the facto standard for scientific journals and PKP is a reference in the open access movement. It's also relevant the strong commitment of the PKP people. They work very well together and new incorporations make the team even more solid. About the obstacles: Open Access movement is questioning the business that big publishers are making around knowledge. PKP is an essential tool to keep journal's open, so those publishers will fight hard to avoid the project's grow. Apart from this, in a society build upon individualism, we all know it's difficult to build community and make people understand they need to contribute to the project in someway, because products are for free, but are not cost-less


Release Progress

  • OJS/OMP 3.1.1 will probably come out next year (a few too many issues for this month, and December is December)
  • OJS 3.1.0-1 scheduled for *this week*!


  • Recently spoke with Kassim (PKP) about investigating Pootle and (probably) XLIFF. (Alec)


  • List of needed tasks for the Technical Reference documentation (from Alec) and solicitation of volunteers (from the group)


  • James: Software as a Service options
    • CLI additions (possibly using API)
    • Enhancements to OJS as a shared hosting environment

Other topics

  • Clinton: Report out from PKP Advisory Meeting
  • Kenton: Is there a master priority list for plug-in redevelopment for OJS 3.1? If a site wanted to take a lead with reworking a plug-in to work with 3.1, what is the best way to approach this to avoid duplication of effort?
  • Svantje: What data is transmitted via the beacon?

Public files management (Svantje)

  • we want to add an overview of all public files (with the option to upload more that just images)
  • and add the option of a moderation (like the new user mediation developed at the last sprint)
  • what are PKP's plans? see also https://github.com/pkp/pkp-lib/issues/298

Next Meeting