Minutes Status: Pending Review and Approval
Date/Time
Friday, June 28, 2019 at 10:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Attendees
| Name | Organisation | Github ID | Attended? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nicholas Kolba | OpenFin | nkolba | y |
| Johan Sandersson | FactSet | donbasuno | y |
| Jonathan Teper | JPM | n | |
| Neil Slinger | JPM | ||
| Riko Eksteen | Adaptive | rikoe | y |
| Tim Kolecke | Citadel | tkolecke | |
| Frank Tarsillo (Deactivated) | IHS Markit | ||
| Former user (Deleted) | Refinitv | y | |
| Rob Underwood (Deactivated) | FINOS | brooklynrob | y |
| Tosha Ellison | FINOS | toshaellison | y |
| Aitana Myohl | FINOS | aitana16 | y |
Open action items
| Description | Due date | Assignee | Task appears on |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tosha Ellison | 2019-08-23 Meeting |
Discussion items
| 5 min | roll call | group | |
| 5 min | Review of open actions | group | |
| 10 min | WG cadence | group | An idea was floated of moving all WG meetings to a single cadence and having a dedicated slot (e.g. Tuesday at 10am EST). Ideally have fewer meetings and more work being done via PRs and Github threads & issues. Will socialize this idea on an e-mail thread. |
| 10 min | Standardizing on Github – i.e., moving to Github for collaboration infrastructure use cases like meeting minutes | group | FINOS proposed moving to GitHub for all collaboration, minutes, etc (totally ditch confluence). What do we think? We need to plan accordingly and make sure that we have equivalent workflow tooling on Github to the one we use on confluence. Check out Github wikis We need to have someone show how what we do currently in Confluence – we should have someone show that it can be used Could we do a screen share/demo of Github wiki for how Educating people on how people around how the pages are structured – a problem is that FDC3 uses it a different way than FO. We should use it in a consistent way. Could one of the working groups prototype on Github Wiki, and share feedback? Would we migrate? Is there a good project that has used Github wiki well?
|
| 5 min | Website design | group | Aaron from FINOS has raised a PR: https://github.com/FDC3/FDC3/pull/96 (See https://grizzwolf.github.io/FDC3/ to see what it looks like) |
| 5 min | Help Wanted (& Good First Issues) | group | Help wanted for "this week in FINOS” . Do we have anything we can put in there? |
| 5 min | Housekeeping & Hygiene (see "Tasks and Asks" at the bottom of the page) | group |
(See FINOS "Tasks and Asks" Google Sheet for more context, as ) |
| 20 min | OKRs | group | set OKRs for 2019 roadmap. See FDC3 Use Cases WG OKRs. objective is to increase the desktop interop API user base Could we adopt the use cases OKRs as FDC3 use cases, as a skeleton to get us started? |
| 5 min | AOB | group |
Action items
- Follow-up on pull requests to introduce standard CCLA language into CONTRIBUTING.md files of FDC3 repos, especially the the FDC3/FDC3 mono repo
- Ask Jamie for examples of Github wiki use to compare and contrast use cases like doing meeting minutes Aitana Myohl Jamie Jones Rob Underwood (Deactivated)
"Tasks and Asks" List
- Someone from the program has provided input on the FAQ
- PMC provided direction on what their confluence entitlements and security should be ("Please prioritize getting infra@finos.org guidance on your wiki permissions per slide 22 of the pan-PMC presentation")
- Demonstrated evidence of publishing agenda ahead of meetings
- Demonstrated evidence of becoming self-sufficient in doing meeting minutes
- PMC has provided guidance on if/when they want/need a Github Microsite
- PMC has provided guidance on if/when they want to use Github (either Github Wiki or GH Pages) to replace collaboration use cases currently done on Confluence
- PMC has provided direction on if/when they would like to move their repos into the FINOS github ORG
- Evidence that those in program (at member) are getting Github IDs
- Programs Repos have been updated with README.md and CONTRIBUTING.md that reflects CCLA language [INT-643]
- Have provided at least one help wanted to "This Week at FINOS" or done a "Good First Issue" in a github repo
- Have built and socialized their 2019 roadmap
- Have contextualized their 2019 roadmap in OKR terms ("Review and reaffirm objectives on which your program roadmap has been built; review progress towards those objectives")
- Have produced (Are working on) their board report for July 17th board meeting
- Demonstrated evidence of staying on top of google groups moderation (both join requests and messages posted by those not in the respective google group already)
- As applicable, project/working group with eligibility criteria have 1) had them approved by the PMC, 2) published them on the site, and 3) are using them to review join requests to the mailing list