2023-02-22 - Product Committee

Date

Feb 22, 2023

Participants

@Wes Brown
@Sarah Farooqi
@Sainabou Jallow
@Taylor Downs
@Valeria Tafoya
@Nico Lueck
@Steve Conrad
@PSRAMKUMAR
@Margus Mägi
@Uwe Wahser
@Meelis Zujev (Deactivated)
@Kibuuka, Arnold
@Valentina Stadnic (Unlicensed)

Meeting Recording

Recording URL:

Discussion topics

Item	Presenter	Time	Notes
Review Action Items		5 min
GovStack 1.0 Publication	@Steve Conrad @Wes Brown @PSRAMKUMAR	35 min	TECH-206: Specifications Release v1.0In Review Questions What is the review and approval process? Ramkumar: Previously the architecture group reviewed on the technical-side, then TAC review, then publish Wes: What value in the TAC review? Ramkumar: Quite valuable, many changes were made as a result of that Taylor: Content was reviewed but consistency wasn’t a factor Wes: We we need the TAC review for the 1.0 publication? Ramkumar: TAC review is not needed for BBs that already had it, publish and then get further feedback Steve: Would be helpful to define a tight process for review Have a small review committee to review and approve(?) the spec Need to define the format for the specs “Format” = common sections and structure for content Nico: The the requirements be machine-readable This would be for the BB “Cross-Cutting Requirements” section which would only highlight differences from the Architecture Non-Functional requirements How opinionated should these requirements be? This is being worked on by the Architecture team and that perspective should flow down to the specific BBs Fit/Finish Work Validate terminology, consistent with global terms as well as other BBs Level of Key Decisions and other sections (this seems to be related to the spec format) Proposed Next Steps: Define content format (Steve to start) Align BB specs to format (Valeria) Internal tech edits/reviews as needed Small review team to approve (Wes)
Accelerated Use Case Process	@Wes Brown	5 min	Status Update Review EPR Use Case (PRD-112: ENV-1 (EPR): Stage 9.3 - Create Use Case document with logical stepsProposed ) Setup Online Construction Permit Tasks (PRD-115: Create Epics and Tasks for Online Construction Permit Use CaseAccepted ) Compile Online Construction Permit Documents Identify/Invite Country Representatives (PRD-117: Identify Country Representatives for Use Case FeedbackDone )
Template Sharing	@Taylor Downs		Need to define the content templates for BBs to be aligned to them
DPG / DPI and GovStack			White paper: https://digitalpublicgoods.net/DPI-DPG-BB-Definitions.pdf Uwe: A new version of this document is currently under review
Master Directory Document	@Wes Brown @Shukla, Ayush	10 min	Question Is a “live” document really needed as opposed to a high-level document detailing where content is located? The upkeep for a live document is significant and the page(s) will quickly grow to be difficult to consume. Can we instead rely on search?

Action items

@Rachel Lawson (Unlicensed) Train tech teams on where to document things once Google Drive goes awayPRD-51: Document Training for BB TeamsDone

Create task for this work (@Wes Brown) ->@Shukla, Ayush to create a live master directory document (on Confluence) with links to all relevant GovStack folders/files across the technical and non-technical workstreams. @PSRAMKUMAR to then circulate this master directory link to all team members.

@Martinez, Yolanda (Deactivated) to create proposal for where to host country content so that it can be linked in the Use Case on gitbook (Will present next week)

@Martinez, Yolanda (Deactivated) find out if/how to make Use Case source documents publicly available (readonly is fine)

@Martinez, Yolanda (Deactivated) to share documents pertaining to the online building permit user journey with Saina and Wes

@Jaume DUBOIS to translate GovStack slides into French - requested this item deadline be moved to March/April

@Wes Brown Create scheduled tasks for publication (based on list above)

Decisions

Agreement and alignment on sandbox purpose - Sandbox is intended for Reference Systems that are a staging-level prototype of a service, not anything approaching a production-level system
For accelerated work, UC do not have to have Example Implementation to proceed (though these will be worked on as a higher priority)