2025-11-12 PredictiveConnectivityData Minutes
Community Attendees:
@Eric Murray @Violeta González @Alberto Ramos Monaga
Community Attendees:
LF Staff:
Agenda
The project's Antitrust Policy is linked from the LF and project websites. The policy is important when multiple companies, including potential industry competitors, are participating in meetings. Please review it, and if you have any questions, please contact your company’s legal counsel. Members of the LF may contact Andrew Updegrove at the firm Gesmer Updegrove LLP, which provides legal counsel to the LF.
Approval of previous meeting minutes and meeting agenda.
Open issues and PRs
Discussion Summary
AoB
Approval of previous meeting minutes
2025-10-28 PredictiveConnectivityData Minutes: OK
Closed Issues
# | Summary | Action |
|---|---|---|
N/A |
|
|
Open Issues & PRs
# | Summary | Action |
|---|---|---|
Add User Stories for Predictive Connectivity Data API - The Predictive Connectivity Data API currently does not have documented User Stories, which are mandatory for stable public releases. The current status of the API is initial and not a priority, but it is a task that would be good to move forward with. |
| |
Issue from Release Management: | Context: proceed with Fall’25 RC as is, create issues, document the exception in the API Readiness Checklist, and fix in v0.2.0 (post-Fall’25, dual-phase). Status: An issue (#533) has been created in the commonalities group to address this issue. Once a decision has been made, it will be applied to this issue.
| |
Scope for Fall26 release
| To be discussed the targets for the scope. The scope for the PredictiveConnectivityData API should be defined until M1, leaving two month to create the release candidate | |
Add “Best Effort” Service Level - Introduce a BEST_EFFORT service level providing qualitative coverage predictions without guaranteeing specific service levels. |
|
Discussion Summary
Agenda 1: Clarifications for asynchronous response in callback #533
Problem description
Some APIs such as Population Density and Predictive Connectivity Data support asynchronous responses for large or time-consuming requests by allowing a sink (callback URL).
Current CAMARA guidelines define two subscription types — instance-based (implicit) and resource-based (explicit) — and specify that event notifications use CloudEvents.
The open question is whether asynchronous responses (triggered once per request) should also adopt the CloudEvents structure, or remain simple JSON payloads.
Discussion summary
Patrice Conil and Pedro Diez both argued that an asynchronous response is not an event but rather a deferred response, which happens once and whose value lies in the payload, not in the occurrence of the event itself. Therefore, using CloudEvents adds unnecessary overhead and does not conceptually fit this case.
The group agreed that the key question is whether CAMARA should mandate CloudEvents as the default envelope for asynchronous responses, or allow plain JSON responses for simplicity.
Next step
→ The group will discuss and reach a consensus on this topic in an upcoming meeting before applying any decision or documentation update.
Agenda 2: Fall26 meta-release scope #39
API release tracker created for v0.2.0.
Note: APIs are recommended to target the Fall26 Meta-release, but some exceptions can be discussed.
For these exception, the concerned APIs should be aware that the Spring26 schedule is very tight.
Recommended to skip Spring26, but exception may exist e.g. for APIs that dropped from the Fall25 meta-release.
Requests for Spring26 participation are to be done through a GitHub issue in Release Management
AoB
N/A
Action Points
Template