Stream: IPA
Topic: IPA Jan ballot
Isaac Vetter (Nov 24 2021 at 20:08):
Hey @Floyd Eisenberg , @Jean Duteau - I created an agenda page for CGP for next week, to add an agenda item of reviewing the IPA PSS, so that it can ballot this cycle. Any concerns?
Isaac Vetter (Nov 24 2021 at 20:13):
Hey PE Co-chairs! (@Debi Willis , @Dave deBronkart , @Virginia Lorenzi, @Abbie Watson) - I created an agenda page for PE for next week, to add an agenda item of reviewing the IPA PSS, so that it can ballot this cycle. Any concerns?
Floyd Eisenberg (Nov 24 2021 at 20:19):
@Isaac Vetter I had created an agenda page for the next meeting we had agreed to have - December 9. We generally meet the 2nd and 4th Thursday of every month and only increased to weekly until the US Core ballot content was finished (last week). We don't have a call next week. We expected to have content to review before the approval deadline during one of our scheduled calls and, as a co-sponsor, we expected regular updates.
Brett Marquard (Nov 24 2021 at 20:22):
@Floyd Eisenberg - the IPA team has been working hard to pull this together the past several weeks, I am happy to meet next week out of cycle or host an electronic vote?
Isaac Vetter (Nov 24 2021 at 20:33):
And Floyd, here's the last IPA update to CGP: https://confluence.hl7.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=79496456. What does regular mean?
Isaac Vetter (Nov 24 2021 at 20:40):
Hey @Michelle (Moseman) Miller, I created an agenda page for PC for next Thurs, to add an agenda item of submitting a PBS matric remediation plan to permit the IPA PSS to be approved and therefore ballot in January. Any concerns?
Jean Duteau (Nov 24 2021 at 20:53):
The last update was September 9th and it was from Brett. No one from the IPA project team came forward to provide any other updates. As Floyd said, our regular calls are the 2nd and 4th Thursday of the month. We've been having weekly calls for the past six weeks and the project team SHOULD have attended one of those or one of the regular ones to inform us that they were getting ready for ballot. I don't appreciate having to scramble to approve a project when we haven't heard anything since September 9th. I am leaving on a vacation this evening, so I leave it up to Floyd on how he wants to handle this.
As an aside, I don't think it is appropriate for a non-co-chair to create agenda pages for WG calls. That should be left to the co-chairs and you should have simply forwarded your request to the co-chairs.
Jean Duteau (Nov 24 2021 at 21:02):
Brett Marquard said:
Floyd Eisenberg - the IPA team has been working hard to pull this together the past several weeks, I am happy to meet next week out of cycle or host an electronic vote?
The problem @Brett Marquard is that there is an expectation that the WG have time to review the material before approving it. We would need to send out an email to the WG informing them that a) here is some content to review and b) we will be having a meeting on Dec 2nd.
Isaac Vetter (Nov 24 2021 at 21:10):
Hey Floyd,
My apologies for creating the agenda page. I tried to understand the committee's published calendar and thought your next call was next week. Agenda page is deleted.
The current deadline is 12/5. The PSS subtask was first assigned to CGP on 11/4, with a due date of 11/18.
If CGP is unable to review, I understand. Does CPG have to be a co-sponsor?
Jean Duteau (Nov 24 2021 at 21:21):
apologies but I misunderstood what you were asking for based on the title of this thread (IPA Jan Ballot). If you are asking for an approval of the PSS then we can simply schedule an e-vote for that. We can start that process via the CGP mailing list.
Floyd Eisenberg (Nov 24 2021 at 21:35):
@Isaac Vetter I have a concern about your comment the PSS being assigned to CGP on 11/4 with a due date. You indicated the WG but did not assign the ticket to anyone so Jira did not notify anyone in CGP to look at it and NO ONE in all of our meetings indicated there was such a task. So if you didn't specifically email a co-chair or assign the ticket to one of us and no one indicated a task during any of our calls, how were we to know about the task? We have a significant failure of process here and I am concerned you indicate a failure of action on CGP's part. I do not accept that assumption. I agree with Jean that we can send an email and request and e-vote - we do need to give the WG time to review. So are we just approving the PSS? @Brett Marquard I don't doubt the team has been working but we had no information about it.
Abbie Watson (Nov 24 2021 at 21:54):
@Isaac Vetter your pro-activeness and working the ballot system is awesome, and much appreciated. We’ll make sure it gets into the Agenda.
Isaac Vetter (Nov 24 2021 at 22:06):
Hey Floyd, I think that the PSS subtasks are automatically created (or manually created by HL7 HQ) once a sponsoring WG co-chair changes the status of a jira PSS from Approved to Consensus-Review. I believe that without co-chair or greater permissions in jira, the mere project team isn't enabled to do any of this.
We're talking about step #5, here: https://confluence.hl7.org/display/FHIR/A+-+Project+Proposal+and+Project++Scope+Statement. image.png
Here's my live journaling of how step #4 happens: https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/184932-JIRA.2FConfluence/topic/How.20to.20submit.20PSS.20to.20PMO.20.3F
Floyd Eisenberg (Nov 24 2021 at 22:09):
@Isaac Vetter That process failed and neither Jean nor I received the notification. So a fail safe would be very helpful by emailing or assigning the ticket (or both). Systems don't alway work the way the are designed (as can be seen here).
Isaac Vetter (Nov 24 2021 at 22:10):
you're right, Floyd. Thank you to Jean and you for working with me! Happy Thanksgiving!
Dave deBronkart (Nov 25 2021 at 00:41):
LOL thanks for being proactive - this weekend I'll move it to our own agenda format.
Do you have pre-reading or other supporting documents we can distribute? Or is it just the PSS?
Isaac Vetter (Nov 26 2021 at 18:14):
Hi @Dave deBronkart! - the PSS Project Need and Description capture the goals and intent of the project fairly well. The IG is pretty close to having completed content for ballot -- and so, the first page of the IG provides an additional, high-level but more technical overview.
Virginia Lorenzi (Nov 30 2021 at 19:29):
Of course Isaac!
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
