Notes from Participation Tools Worksteam Weekly Sync Call
- ITK name is perhaps OK, but we should define its content/constituent parts and capabilities. Specifically it’s not just the mojaloop-connector.
- MCM: vNext has some possible feature overlap with MCM, how do we resolve this?
- vNext should not interfere with the infra layer, as this would break layer separation. Therefore, it is safe to assume that MCM will still be applicable once vNext becomes RC.
- PM: MCM server and client should go through the adoption process asap as its features are very important for the Mojaloop product. This is fully in line with MLF mission: making it easier for people to use Mojaloop and participate in Mojaloop schemes. Possibly ask Paul Baker to take MCM through the adoption process?
Please find all meeting notes in this doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FCwkin-2JE4OwjVk9wb3xAjs6aDywgxTdGbg4tJJYsQ/edit?usp=sharing
Top comments (0)