2025.08.26

[atambay37]

Generated by AI. Be sure to check for accuracy.

Meeting notes:

• Repository Setup and Collaboration Workflow: Anshul, Tyler, and Peter Smith discussed options for setting up the project repository, ultimately agreeing to use an existing repo in Anshul's organization and add collaborators, with code contributions and milestones to be tracked there.
  • Repository Ownership Options: Anshul outlined two approaches for repository management: either forking an existing repo from the client organization or creating a new repo in their own organization and transferring ownership at project completion. Tyler and Peter Smith confirmed that the current repo is mainly for ETL and not application code, so starting fresh in Anshul's org is preferred.
  • Collaborator Access: Anshul confirmed that Tyler and others have already been added as collaborators to the repo, and the same repository will be used for application development, with discussions and code contributions centralized there.
  • Milestone Tracking: Anshul will fill out project milestones at the bottom of the PRD, which will be accessible in the shared SharePoint folder and reflected as milestones in the repository for tracking progress.
• User Story Prioritization and MVP Scope: Anshul led the team, including Tyler, Peter Smith, and Andrea, through a detailed review and prioritization of user stories for the MVP, identifying must-have (P1) and nice-to-have (P2) features based on data availability and technical feasibility.
  • Prioritization Process: The team agreed to label user stories as P1 (must-have) or P2 (nice-to-have) for the MVP, considering the six-month delivery timeline and dependencies on available data and technical complexity.
  • Data Availability Constraints: Several user stories, such as those involving market value, environmental impacts, and conversion potential, were deprioritized to P2 due to lack of available data or the need for offline scientific analysis.
  • Inclusion of Temporal Data: After discussion, the team decided to include seasonal availability at the month scale as in-scope, given new data availability, despite initial concerns about technical complexity.
  • Infrastructure Data Integration: The team determined that infrastructure data (e.g., digesters, pipelines) from the national tool should be included in the California tool, with new API endpoints to be developed for higher resolution queries.
  • Buffer Analysis and Export Features: Spatial buffer queries and multimodal export (GeoJSON, CSV, Shapefile) were confirmed as critical P1 features, with more advanced modeling left to users via data export.
• Data Import, Standardization, and Utility Package Discussion: Anshul, Tyler, and Peter Smith discussed the need for a standardized internal utility package to streamline the import of new data layers, with agreement on the value of establishing data format standards for future extensibility.
  • Current Data Import Practices: Tyler explained that currently, new data is often integrated via one-off pipelines, with core requirements being geospatial annotations and attributes, but no strict schema standard.
  • Proposal for Utility Package: Anshul proposed developing an internal utility package that would allow maintainers to easily import new data layers, provided they meet certain format and attribute requirements, reducing the need for custom pipelines.
  • Discussion of Data Standards: The team discussed the benefits of establishing a clear data standard, including required attributes and coordinate systems, to facilitate future application development and community contributions.
  • Action Item and Scope: It was agreed to keep the utility package as a potential deliverable if time permits, with the immediate focus on documenting and possibly formalizing data standards as part of the project.
• Technical Stack, Database Hosting, and Licensing Decisions: Peter Smith, Anshul, and Tyler reviewed technical stack requirements, confirming the use of Google Cloud's managed Postgres service for database hosting and agreeing to use the BSD 3-Clause open source license for the project.
  • Database Hosting Options: Peter Smith raised the question of whether to use Supabase or Google Cloud for database hosting; the team agreed that Google Cloud's managed Postgres service is preferred for proximity to data and ease of maintenance.
  • Technical Stack Review: Don was tasked with reviewing and updating the tech stack section of the PRD, with the team confirming that the stack is straightforward and open for further detail as needed.
  • Open Source Licensing: Anshul and Tyler agreed to use the BSD 3-Clause license, which has been used in previous projects, and to include the license link in the project specification.
• Project Timeline, Meetings, and Next Steps: Anshul outlined the upcoming project schedule, including milestone deadlines, planned meetings, and opportunities for asynchronous work, with the PRD to be finalized and shared for feedback.
  • Meeting Schedule: The team will meet on September 2nd and 9th, then pause for two weeks due to travel, resuming meetings on September 30th, with asynchronous work and PRD feedback to continue in the interim.
  • PRD Finalization: Anshul will complete the PRD, share it in the shared folder, and solicit asynchronous feedback, with the possibility of pushing the sign-off deadline to the end of September to avoid rushing.

Follow-up tasks:

• PRD Milestone Completion: Review and complete the remaining sections of the PRD, especially Section 6 (tech stack), and add any necessary details or questions. (Don)
• Infrastructure Data Integration: Add infrastructure data (e.g., rail, CO2 pipelines, digesters) from the national tool to the California tool MVP dataset and create new API endpoints for querying this data. (Tyler)
• Data Standardization Utility: Explore the creation of an internal utility package or establish a data standard for importing new geospatial datasets into the tool, including minimum attribute requirements and schema. (Anshul, Tyler, Peter Smith)
• Open Source Licensing: Add the BSD 3-Clause open source license file to the project repository and include the license link in the PRD specification. (Niki)
• PRD Document Feedback: Share the updated PRD document in the shared folder and request asynchronous feedback from the team before sign-off. (Anshul)
• Database Hosting Decision: Discuss database hosting options (Google Cloud Postgres vs. Superbase) with Corinne and confirm the preferred choice for the project backend. (Peter Smith)