| :06 | | | - Dennis: Discussion last time left off that there are different types of topics added.
- Open: Topic is ready to be discussed, all the information is there that is needed for the group to discuss.
- Block: Waiting for more information to come back from somewhere before the topic can be discussed further by our group.
- In Progress; Actively discussing, maybe action items have been identified,
- Closed: Discussion resolved and required actions completed.
- Required action may not have implemented anything.
- There is still discussion to have. Not everything on the list will turn into a feature, some will. The purpose is to get the topic in front of the community. Prioritization isn't really up to us as a group on this page. We are getting the list together, discussing them, then moving forward as needed to the larger community.
- If purpose of the page is to discuss the topics, then starting the priority process. There are different types of topics. Sometimes it may be questions for the community. Ex how are others in the community doing x workflow... It can be about supporting each other on workflows and how we are doing things as a community.
- Not sure what to call this topic
- Enhancement request - we have hit a roadblock, or gap, and would like to request a feature. Has this topic been discussed about previously? Lets gather information.
- Customization : There could be topics around customization. Lets say we have a feature and I want to change it. Example: Allowing users control how instance matching is done. There are a lot of different ways users may want to do this. Customers may want more control over that.
- From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:17 PM
I can definitely vouch for many, many possible matching options - Sara: Those are good thoughts. I had mentioned the Show and Tell to get feedback option. There can be a lot of overlap there with enhancement requests. You can be demonstrating something and pointing out pain points that turn into enhancement or function requests.
- From Robert Heaton to Everyone 12:18 PM
I agree with the potential overlap of topics resulting from a show-and-tell: Is there a better way/Is there a workaround/Do we need to submit a feature request? - Dennis: The Types will have to evolve. What are we trying to convey here... making it easier for the convener to be prepared to make sure the right people are in the meeting.
- From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:20 PM
Should there maybe be a "required attendees" column? - From Heather to Everyone 12:22 PM
Can we put a link to the Jira page at the top of the Implementers page? - From Ann Crowley to Everyone 12:23 PM
+1 Heather - Dennis: It is possible
- Ann-Marie: Maybe a confluence page that has a list of app acquisitions epics and the list of acquisitions features, two sections to start from.
- From Kristin Martin to Everyone 12:25 PM
Searching in Jira is never easy... - From Scott Perry (UChicago) to Everyone 12:25 PM
+1 Kristin - Dennis: We can make the list of features a little easier to find and put a link on the Implementers page. You can also ask in slack. You can also ask if it's going to be doing something soon. Slack is a really good place to put forth questions, there are a lot of knowledgeable people able to answer questions.
- From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:26 PM
The more searching you do, the better you get - but it almost always takes refinement of your original search. And filters/dashboards are also tremendously helpful. Good point about Slack - the more libraries go live, the more that peer-to-peer Q&A can be helpful
- There is interest in having Dennis demo how to search in Jira.
- Kristin Martin: When Susan was a convener she would reach out to people to see if they could attend certain meetings to discuss the topic they submitted.
- From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone Would a priority column be helpful, or do we just work from top to bottom?
- From Dennis Bridges to Everyone 12:33 PM
I think priority might be tough to identify because people may disagree. top to bottom or “First come first serve" might not be the most efficient but it is relatively unbiased. - From Lisa Smith - Mich State to Everyone 12:33 PM
I would like to see a priority column; who would prioritize? - From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:33 PM
The person who adds it? Urgent/Regular/Low? - From Lisa Smith - Mich State to Everyone 12:34 PM
Could the group prioritize? - Dennis: The thing about working from top to bottom allows for any topic to be discussed, is seems to be the most unbiased way. The danger when you add priorities is that small thing important to few will get constantly overlooked.
- From Robert Heaton to Everyone 12:36 PM
Maybe a compromise where “date added” figures into the priority? If everyone wants to talk about some topics, we should get to those sooner. But if I’m in the minority, it would be nice to have my item surfaced if we haven’t addressed it after, say, 3 months. - From Julie Stauffer to Everyone 12:37 PM
Do we have the ability to vote/me too/plus one topics on the list? - Dennis: For us to assign priorities outside of JIRA can add complications. I would caution that adding priority here in the Acq implementers page may turn it into a boxing match.
- From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:39 PM
Or +1 and add name/institution in the "Provided by" column?
Great minds, Julie! - From Julie Stauffer to Everyone 12:39 PM
Writing the above at the same time! I was thinking of an informal way to indicate that more than one person would like to see discussed by this group -- don't call it priority. - From Julie Brannon (she/her) to Everyone 12:40 PM
+1 to Julie - it would help to amplify which topics are of interest to multiple institutions - From Lisa Smith - Mich State to Everyone 12:40 PM
+1 A-M, Julie - Dennis: I see value in having a column that allows people to express interest in the topic.
- From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:42 PM
Sort of combines the ideas of "me too" and "required attendees" and "priority"-ish - From Dung-Lan Chen to Everyone 12:43 PM
Yes to Ann Marie :) - From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:44 PM
Interested parties? - From Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) to Everyone 12:44 PM
Fellow sufferes - From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:44 PM
I like having institutions, in addition to names - especially if bugs/enhancements - to understand if more widespread or not - Sara: Discussed how helpful it is to see how other institutions are using it.
- Dennis: I think seeing demo's before discussing features would help engage members and help us all to better understand.
- From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:44 PM
I like having institutions, in addition to names - especially if bugs/enhancements - to understand if more widespread or not - There's a FOLIO workflows lab on Thurs afternoons, which evolved from an import/export exploring time. I don't attend on purpose - so that I don't dominate the convo, and so that folks learn amongst themselves, experiment, and then come back with questions, bugs, enhancements
- Group discussion on the best way to have group meetings to discuss workflows. Join the group Ann-Marie talked about, start a separate meeting that doesn't include Dennis, use the Friday morning meeting time slot....
- Dennis: There are different people that attend on Friday so lets continue this discussion on Friday. I think we have some good ideas. I think this list can't continue to grow the way it is.
- Last question: How to we archive topics as the list continues to grow.
- From Scott Perry (UChicago) to Everyone 12:59 PM
+1 to alternate day - From Ann-Marie Breaux to Everyone 12:59 PM
And meeting overload is always an issue. Really good conversation and food for thought
|