From dabcc607a5867558f61ce0819f77299825741ddf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kurtis Van Gent <31518063+kurtisvg@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 08:51:22 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] feat: add 2026-01-07 weekly meeting notes (#1) Adds a directory for storing meeting notes and includes the notes file for the 2026-01-07 meeting. Updates the main README to reflect this change. --- README.md | 11 +++--- meetings/2026-01-07_weekly.md | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) create mode 100644 meetings/2026-01-07_weekly.md diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index ae32df4..f22ae70 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -24,10 +24,10 @@ The Transports Working Group coordinates community stakeholders to: ## Meetings -**Cadence:** Weekly -**Day:** Wednesdays at 1:00pm PT -**Duration:** 60 minutes -**Format:** Virtual +**Cadence:** Weekly +**Day:** Wednesdays at 1:00pm PST +**Duration:** 60 minutes +**Format:** Virtual > **Note:** See [meet.modelcontextprotocol.io](https://meet.modelcontextprotocol.io) for meeting links and calendar. @@ -63,7 +63,8 @@ Our work focuses on: ├── GOVERNANCE.md # Governance model, roles, and members ├── CONTRIBUTING.md # Contribution guidelines ├── proposals/ # Transport proposals and specifications -└── docs/ # Guides and documentation +├── docs/ # Guides and documentation +└── meetings/ # Agendas and notes from working group meetings ``` ## Contributing diff --git a/meetings/2026-01-07_weekly.md b/meetings/2026-01-07_weekly.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..77dfc0e --- /dev/null +++ b/meetings/2026-01-07_weekly.md @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@ +# 2026-01-07 Transports WG (Weekly) + +## TL;DR +The Transport Working Group held a structured retrospective using a card-based +voting system to prioritize discussion topics. Key outcomes included a decision +to secure high-level directional agreement with core maintainers before detailed +implementation, a consensus to converge on single proposals within the working +group to minimize noise, and a move toward using a dedicated GitHub repository +combined with Google Docs for technical discussions. + +## Detailed Summary + +### Retrospective Process +Larry Maccherone facilitated a "Start/Stop/Continue" style retrospective, where +participants wrote cards, grouped them, and voted to prioritize the discussion +agenda. This process surfaced four primary topics for the group to address. + +### Core Maintainer Engagement & Feedback +The group discussed the need for earlier, lighter-weight feedback loops with +core maintainers rather than waiting to present fully fleshed-out proposals. +* **High-Level Alignment First:** Participants noted that the recent San + Francisco meeting successfully broke a "logjam" by allowing for alignment on + high-level direction before implementation details were solidified. +* **Avoid "Phone Books":** The group agreed that presenting massive "phone book + sized" proposals without prior alignment leads to excessive questioning and + wheel-spinning; "slicing" topics into high-level goals first is more + effective. + +### Minimizing Competing Proposals +* **Convergence:** There was a strong consensus that the working group should + strive to converge on a single, unified proposal before seeking endorsement + from core maintainers. +* **Unified Front:** While individual maintainers can technically sponsor + independent SCPs, the group agreed that achieving internal consensus first + ("blessing" a proposal) would increase the likelihood of acceptance and reduce + confusion. + +### Location for Technical Discussions +The group debated the best venue for technical discussions, noting that +fragmentation across Discord, Google Docs, and GitHub is currently inefficient. +* **Discord:** There was general consensus that Discord is not the preferred + place for deep technical discussions due to low adoption in corporate + contexts. +* **Hybrid Workflow:** A hybrid approach is preferred—using **Google Docs** for + rapid, early-stage iteration and **GitHub** (PRs/Issues) for the official + record, history, and discoverability. +* **Dedicated Repo:** There was strong interest in establishing a dedicated + repository for the Working Group to centralize these discussions. + +### Roadmap Structure & Visibility +* **Sequencing:** Participants discussed the need for better sequencing and + visibility of the overall MCP roadmap, specifically to understand how + transport changes interact with other simultaneous initiatives (like Tasks). +* **Transparency:** There was a request for more transparency regarding core + maintainer strategy and active work streams to prevent negative overlaps + between working groups. + +## Action Items +- [ ] **Kurtis Van Gent:** Consult with Basil Hosmer and Peter Alexander + regarding the creation of a dedicated GitHub repository for the Working Group. +- [ ] **Kurtis Van Gent:** Draft a proposal for the "rules of engagement" + regarding technical discussions (defining the workflow between Google Docs and + GitHub) based on the poll results for the next meeting. +- [ ] **Peter Alexander & Basil Hosmer:** Bring the request for greater + visibility into core maintainer strategy and outputs back to the core team. \ No newline at end of file