Wendy Kozlowski, Deborah Cooper, Steve Folsom, Michelle Paolillo, Simeon Warner, Tre Berney, Jean Pajerek, Peter Hook, Dean Krafft, Gail Steinhart (notes), Sandy Payette, Jenn Colt, Jason Kovari, Erin Faulder

Background - RepoExec members survey fall 2018

• Purpose: identify high level priorities with respect to CUL's repositories
• Survey intended to prompt thinking in advance and seed discussion, and not the final word
• Focus on the ideas and not the details of implementation

Discussion:

• Some items require major investment of resources, others don't- do we treat them the same way? Do we entertain a notion of ROI for addressing this? Especially with respect to A, B, D (related: A is the problems at hand, B and D are some possible approaches).
• Sandy and Anne's analysis is also looking at most urgent issues, some overlap. Note multiple views: IT, access function, RepoExec.
• Several issues further down the list follow from A. 
• Is there anything people would like to add?
  • Research data responsibilities at Cornell.
  • Infrastructure agnostic metadata management that doesn't rely on consolidating platforms. Example: ORCID. Also serves item G.
  • Digital humanities absent.
  • Lack of definition of the CUL service that we mean to provide with repositories.
• Question re: A and consolidation - is that about reducing number of platforms or reducing number of services? We suspect both.
• B,C, D may be candidates for RepoExec work.
• Work in A has to be planned and executed strategically.
• If we start with D, determine a CUL repo strategy and policy, who is it for? Who has agency in making decisions?
• Consider where we are now, issues with, where we should be going.
• Consider perspective - individual/collection of repositories ("repository first approach"), or the services that they individually and collectively provide.
• Can we agree on priorities, take those and suggest some possible ways forward?
• Note that B, C, E, I are all related (could be as big a bucket as A)
• Perhaps D is uber issue, with three sub-groups (A, C/E/I, B)
• RepoExec role in the short term is summarizing and providing this feedback
• Next steps:
  • Rewrite / reorganize ideas - volunteers: Wendy, ...
  • Plan to meet in November
• Tre: 
  • Trying to provision for some RMC assets - prompted larger examination of question of roles with respect to ArtStor, Kaltura, and Samvera digital collections
  • Dianne did a series of interviews, surfaced some policy needs for ArtStor
  • Tre will move forward on Kaltura
  • Then can start to fill specific roles (currently no ownership in those areas)