...

Moving towards institutional developer commitments - In Fedora 3.x era commitment more personal, did not seem like this was written into job descriptions and responsibilities. Ppl worked on this after office hours. Contributing to single projects vs. a suite of OSS. Would be helpful if 'on the ground contributions' development/testing, also helpful to have some time allocated to Fedora and other OSS projects of value to the community. Andrew notes some institutions reserve Friday for "Open Source Day".  Majority of contributors are ad hoc. Need to operationalize this at your institutions. How can we increase time contributions at your institutions? Support voiced for "Open Source Day". Each institution needs to figure how they can contribute. Northwestern mandates that each developer has to participate in at least one sprint annually, ensures long-term sustainability of projects. What are the barriers to such approaches? Harder at institutions with fewer human resources. More organizations like this than not. Have to make this an institutional priority. Public universities may have the advantage making it part of the ethos. If you are a consumer but not a contributor, limits the reach of the project. Smaller institutions - how do we get orgs that don't have developers to contribute? Who is doing testing? How do we know it's working? How can these orgs help without contributing development? QA, testing?, can we have other ppl deploy in production. Support for this voiced. Hackdoc model, consortial approach getting help with testing, documentation. Need to articulate how orgs can contribute without coding - will lead to coding. Need to clarify non-developer roles: dev ops, testing, documenting, contextualize around how to engage. Open question around tactics of how to make these roles known, communicated. Maybe add to monthly newsletter. If such clarity exists, then might be easier to allocate time (weekly/monthly) to project support. Where is development time most relevant, useful? Maybe a manager component, a campaign to ppl who manage development group. Advise managers on how to coordinate and prioritize work at their institutions? Have been some obstacles that have discouraged some of the community. Have addressed these issues and hope that community is more welcoming. 

Agenda for OR2017 Fedora LG Meeting - Please have a look and provide feedback! 

Membership ideas from Task Force

• Merging Fedora, Islandora, and Samvera site information into a master list - use this to figure out who uses Fedora 'writ large', need to a more definitive list. Who can we in leadership reach out to? If you know where some of these lists are report to David, Rosy, and Chris.
• Allow individuals to declare their support (similar to DORA) - Our membership model is geared to institutions and soliciting financial contributions. How can we get institutions and/or individuals to highlight broader use of Fedora and to highlight the institutions that use Fedora. DORA initiative, research analytics. Anyone can sign up. Model for drumming up. understanding interest. Powered by Fedora, might be an option but you can use this badge without being affiliated
• Develop corporate sponsorship model (ideally based on the VIVO model) - Incorporate corporate memberships, Triple I bought VTLS, Vital is a Fedora based project. They could be/should be a corporate sponsorship. May be others. Also relates to the Registered Service Provider (RSP) program most used by DSpace (but also VIVO and some interest voiced in Fedora). 

Vote on Fedora/Islandora/Hydra proposals for DLF!

Actions

Andrew Woods - Add new ppl to Slack leaders, Ginny, Este, Rosaline, Joanna. 

Need to clearly define roles for contributors, new leaders should be able to see how to engage with a minimum amount of knowledge. Clarifies commitment for manager = understands and can align work with their institution's mission.