2023-02-20 Meeting notes - Regular Meeting

15 min

General info questions and remarks

@Nico Lueck

• Next Retrospective after sprint?

  • @Meelis Zujev (Deactivated) proposed the retrospectives workshop will be conducted once a month(in 2 sprints) with everyone. The retrospective workshop will be conducted after each sprint with the internal team.

• Continue discussion on Spec design vs Sandbox design https://govstack.slack.com/archives/C02UUB9SD97/p1676459013710879

  •  

• BB Provider Meeting: Is an action item for Satya and Nico, but postpone until contracts with BB provider are signed to keep a momentum (learn meanwhile with OpenIMIS and UNCTAD)

5 min

Catalog API: What are your ideas? Relating to the slack post https://govstack.slack.com/archives/C0483JHTYG0/p1676631893835319

@Nico Lueck

• @jarkkohyoty Sandbox is planned to build to be self contained. Some of the approaches on the discussion (ref. Slack link) is similar with Sandbox. But we are trying to use multiple BBs which creates much complexity and creates differentiate with approaches that are shared in the discussion. One question is need to answer if the technical commute will use sandbox for testing? We are not fully convinced that testing would be the same thing in sandbox due to the differences in approaches. This is recommended to take these approaches in parallel. It might work as risk management too. (In addition Sandbox needs testing withinself separate from the others fow working efficiently).

10 min

Any Blockers or Dependencies in the near future (next 2 sprints)?

@Nico Lueck

@Jonas Bergmeier concern: There are couple of parallel activities regarding BBs integration. But it is not sure that all the BBs providers are aligned for the common goals/milestones. Which we should consider in near future. This concern is for both tech commutie and BBs providers. For example If the Happy path that Heidi created is something we should focus and all of the stakeholders should be on the same page to have a common direction.

@Heidi Kuum (Deactivated) To run this MVP we need an input regarding the requirement of the BBs in minimum from BBs working group leads. We need more specific BBs API requirements(Input and Output).

@Jonas Bergmeier What is goal and benefit of each group work towards to the MVP? This needs to be clarify. Understanding this is important in order to have POC.

@Satyajit Suri We need to be very clear from what we need from BBs. explains complexity of the APIs. From the sandbox perspective if we go through current documentation there are already enough input. What we need to do is we need to define from the MVP which BBs we need to call and what purpose?

10 min

Discover and meet the value proposition country partners see in prototyping their use case

@Nico Lueck

Communication draft: Country Functional Prototypearchived

10 min

Update regarding BB involvment int Sandbox

@Heidi Kuum (Deactivated)

@Satyajit Suri Raised the questions, regarding how we are going identify Prerequisites?

@Heidi Kuum (Deactivated) Explain that It will be done with the cooperation with everyone.

@Nico Lueck Shared: Compliance Evaluation: openIMIS which might be helpful.

10 min

Review of Action items from previous meetings

@Meelis Zujev (Deactivated)

Project Meeting Notes Meelis will review the previous meetings action items and Ping the responsible actors to close the item or make the feasable date to return to this topic.