---
meeting: Enterprise Brain Scrum
date: 2026-03-31
participants:
  - Yeshwanth Reddy Yerraguntla
  - Rajashekar G
  - Vara Kumar Jagarapu
duration: ~20:00
transcript: 20260401.txt
---

# Enterprise Brain Scrum — March 31, 2026

A status update scrum addressing deployment of enterprisebrain.zoomi.com, design review dependencies, and the critical path to Wednesday's deadline. The meeting covered visualization package integration, the need for explicit communication with the design team about component delivery, and prioritization decisions around use case flows and data work.

## Act I - Deployment Status and Design Dependencies (~00:00:00 - ~00:04:11)

Rajashekar opened with deployment news: enterprisebrain.zoomi.com and gomi.com both went live yesterday. The system is running with basic visualizations from Ganesh's experience center package—bar charts, pie charts, donut charts, and line graphs—and testing with the data sheet is yielding working results.

Yeshwanth immediately identified the missing piece: drill-down functionality and dashboards aren't yet implemented. Rajashekar confirmed the current deployment is reactive-only—no dashboard-level interactivity.

> _"Dashboard is not there. Drill down part is not there. Right now we are going with the reactive only."_
> — Rajashekar G _(~00:07:41)_

The design complication: the design team is still working on revamping all designs, using Cursor or Claude to generate code. They haven't yet received PM review approval. Yesterday's discussion with Navin confirmed the team will proceed with basic visualizations from the experience center package while waiting for finalized designs.

Vara Kumar raised a critical coordination gap: there may be an assumption mismatch. While the team knows the design team's code isn't production-ready and needs restructuring, the design team might still expect to deliver visualization components to the engineering team.

> _"there might be an assumption apart from this whatever we are rendering right there might be expecting getting a few components from them as well."_
> — Vara Kumar Jagarapu _(~00:04:11)_

The solution: explicit communication. Once remaining work is complete, the engineering team will extract components, publish them to a library, and import them—but this needs to be clearly stated to avoid misaligned expectations.

## Act II - Use Case Flows and Data Prioritization (~00:04:11 - ~00:10:16)

Vara Kumar introduced another strategic concern: the team has five use cases, but they've only built tables and flows for one. To guide the design team's prioritization, the engineering team needs to define demonstration flows that identify which visualizations matter most for the demo.

> _"what are the visuals that we need that we are going to show in that part of demo"_
> — Vara Kumar Jagarapu _(~00:05:18)_

Rajashekar responded by showing the question set provided by Solv.it the previous night—five types of scenarios with specific questions and expected outputs. The questions target the NSC (Early Warning, Quotation, NC) data sheet. Each question should trigger an SQL query and generate a visualization.

Yeshwanth validated the approach: the SQL queries are generating correct responses. The only remaining gap is better visualizations.

On the data front, Rajashekar reported multiple pull requests in progress:

- User management and login (with database connectivity)
- Conversation history persistence
- Streaming implementation via SSE (Server-Sent Events)

Harshit's PR received feedback from Rajashekar. Abhilash implemented SSE-based streaming, which Ganesh suggested based on successful Optin implementation. Yeshwanth questioned the choice—websockets would be superior for bidirectional communication needed for interactive visualizations.

> _"you are aware that websockets is superior because when you do some visualizations all those things back and forth if it's happening it can only happen with the websockets."_
> — Yeshwanth Reddy Yerraguntla _(~00:08:34)_

He clarified his position: if SSE can handle the back-and-forth required for experience center features (like selecting a bar chart element and asking for breakdown details), it's acceptable. But bidirectional communication is non-negotiable for M3 delivery.

Yeshwanth also emphasized code quality: once merge requests complete, the team must refactor to ensure reusable components. Rajashekar confirmed they're already following this practice but flagged concerns about the frontend architecture being provided to Claude—he wanted to discuss those offline in office.

Vara Kumar mentioned work on creating a package from the internal chart library, which Yeshwanth confirmed should be frontend-focused.

## Todos

- [ ] Explicitly communicate to design team about component delivery expectations and library publishing workflow | author: Rajashekar G | deadline: 2026-04-01
- [ ] Define demonstration flows for remaining four use cases to guide design team visualization prioritization | author: Vara Kumar, Team | deadline: 2026-04-01
- [ ] Merge user management, login, and conversation history PRs after addressing feedback | author: Harshit, Abhilash | deadline: 2026-04-01
- [ ] Validate SSE streaming supports bidirectional communication required for interactive drill-down (or switch to websockets) | author: Abhilash, Ganesh | deadline: 2026-04-01
- [ ] Refactor merged code to ensure reusable component architecture | author: Team | deadline: 2026-04-01
- [ ] Discuss frontend architecture concerns for Claude integration offline | author: Rajashekar G, Vara Kumar | deadline: 2026-04-01