- Chris Creswell
- Robbie Douglas
- Anton Emelianov
- Jackie Gottlieb
- Harry Kaplanian
- Aaron Neslin
- Jason Root
- Florian Ruckelshausen
- Catherine Smith
- Brandon Tharp
- Patty Wanninger
We have a new deliverable:
Community support model
Perhaps a formal model during the initial period of implementations and less formal after that.
Community Support model (the new deliverable). A formal model during initial implementation period.
Based on a Wolfcon panel. Trying to form a SIG to provide this support. Jason is working with Holly to create the charge. Includes Kelly Drake, Anya, Lisa (Chalmers), Elizabeth Germain.
Is this a SIG or a working group? Patty suggested a name change.
Asking the SysOps SIG for input as to what this should look like. Anton already setup a project for this in JIRA. Will go to the PC with recommendations. This will try to formalize the current informal support model.
Wayne: Was Staffing discussed?
Defects are already managed, so this is really about support?
Would a Forum support this? Discuss? It might not yet be useful since FOLIO is changing so often. We could archive previous versions, and restart with each new version along with general topics.
There is a difference between open source support and vendor support and what each should provide.
FOLIO open source is responsible for prioritizing defects and providing status. Based on the priority, you can expect in some cases a fix (for high priority items). FOLIO cannot do anything else.
All else is between customer & provider.
If you adopt FOLIO by yourself, you really on your own. No guaranteed support.
SysOps might need something such as "stack overflow".
Proposed Support “SIG” charge: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qA-Yxc7vK29rmv03JX809_GfRi7UpHqMKy784hwBGC0/edit?pli=1
TAMU testing the in-place upgrade and looking at performance metrics. It's very performance hungry.
Can this group define the needed performance testing and how this group can automate this.
We currently have Jenkins jobs running straight API tests, but this isn't something we want to use going forward.
EBSCO outsourced the building of open source tools to build the framework for FOLIO testing. JMeter is the core of this test. A report went to TC to define tests and reqs for tests beyond check in and check out. We need these built and they need to run on a regular basis with automatic reporting. We should be able to run every other week. We can provide the framework to anyone that wants to test in their environment. It's all collected in Grafana.
TAMU does something similar, but it's not automated.
This should be contributed to the common framework to take advantage of any contribution. It's being presented to the TC and core team to add to the community GIT for reuse by the community.
Should check with Mark Veksler on this.
The data model has changed enough where this could be a problem. We need to invest in the automated schema upgrade.
|Database upgrade testing|
|Other topics you would like to discuss here|