cbf (Wed, 01 Feb 2017 21:01:03 GMT):
Hyperledger TSC discussion
cbf (Wed, 01 Feb 2017 21:01:06 GMT):
Hyperledger TSC discussion
tbenzies (Wed, 01 Feb 2017 22:26:11 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Thu, 02 Feb 2017 00:06:35 GMT):
tbenzies
rjones (Thu, 02 Feb 2017 08:35:40 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:22:43 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
C0rWin (Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:29:14 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
markparz (Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:33:39 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
nage (Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:42:20 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
MicBowman (Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:39:16 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 02 Feb 2017 23:51:54 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
grapebaba (Fri, 03 Feb 2017 06:32:48 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
danacr (Fri, 03 Feb 2017 14:57:39 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
fz (Fri, 03 Feb 2017 19:38:48 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
karkal (Fri, 03 Feb 2017 19:57:47 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rocket.chat (Fri, 03 Feb 2017 20:09:28 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
greg.haskins (Fri, 03 Feb 2017 20:34:23 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
GeorgLink (Fri, 03 Feb 2017 21:25:12 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
ericmvaughn (Fri, 03 Feb 2017 22:07:34 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
jiangyaoguo (Sat, 04 Feb 2017 01:33:40 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
sheehan (Sat, 04 Feb 2017 02:33:55 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Sun, 05 Feb 2017 09:03:26 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
ray (Mon, 06 Feb 2017 04:43:03 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
baohua (Mon, 06 Feb 2017 06:08:51 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
TakekiyoKubo (Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:20:30 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
david.peyronnin (Mon, 06 Feb 2017 09:53:23 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
weeds (Mon, 06 Feb 2017 20:28:50 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mgutala (Mon, 06 Feb 2017 21:39:26 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
hartm (Tue, 07 Feb 2017 01:05:13 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
bart.cant@gmail.com (Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:15:50 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Tue, 07 Feb 2017 18:01:07 GMT):
please migrate to https://chat.hyperledger.org
myu (Tue, 07 Feb 2017 20:14:57 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
beauson45 (Tue, 07 Feb 2017 21:01:53 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
jojocheung (Wed, 08 Feb 2017 07:45:43 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
jadhavajay (Wed, 08 Feb 2017 14:01:55 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Wed, 08 Feb 2017 19:50:34 GMT):
I request permission to create a read-only repo, named `slack-archive`, which will host the HTML extract of the former slack instance. It will contain about 80 megs of html/json. This will be mirrored to github.
rjones (Wed, 08 Feb 2017 19:50:34 GMT):
I request permission to create a read-only repo, named `slack-archive`, which will host the HTML extract of the former slack instance. It will contain about 80 megs of html/json.
rjones (Wed, 08 Feb 2017 21:43:56 GMT):
If you wish to see a copy of the output, it is available here: https://github.com/rjones-lf/hyperledger-slack-archive
crow15 (Thu, 09 Feb 2017 03:17:01 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Thu, 09 Feb 2017 15:24:50 GMT):
SGTM, @rjones
cbf (Thu, 09 Feb 2017 15:26:37 GMT):
@tbenzies @bbehlendorf it occurred to me, sitting in Heathrow, that using RocketChat instead of the gotomeeting chat would be a Good Thing(tm)
cbf (Thu, 09 Feb 2017 15:26:54 GMT):
esp now that we have searchable history
cbf (Thu, 09 Feb 2017 15:27:12 GMT):
thoughts?
bbehlendorf (Sat, 11 Feb 2017 09:05:18 GMT):
@cbf that makes a ton of sense, we'd just have to ask people not to use the gotomeeting chat
cbf (Sat, 11 Feb 2017 09:46:03 GMT):
agreed
cbf (Sat, 11 Feb 2017 09:49:40 GMT):
note that I think that this would (ideally) apply to all WGs that use GTM and have voice calls... maybe we can even wean off of voice calls since we now have archived chat history
ShaneCurcuru (Mon, 13 Feb 2017 21:34:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
ShaneCurcuru (Mon, 13 Feb 2017 21:35:50 GMT):
As a general comment: there are too many different places for newcomers to try to look for information. Any effort to centralizing engagement channels is helpful!
ShaneCurcuru (Mon, 13 Feb 2017 21:37:04 GMT):
For example, various groups seem to have calls, post a google doc with minutes, and then put technical pointers in the wiki...
ShaneCurcuru (Mon, 13 Feb 2017 21:45:54 GMT):
I hope no-one minds if I do a little cleanup on the wiki...
saifulislamsaaif (Tue, 14 Feb 2017 09:40:53 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
stanliberman (Tue, 14 Feb 2017 18:34:13 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
duncanjw (Tue, 14 Feb 2017 22:16:40 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
greg.haskins (Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:05:50 GMT):
@tbenzies conflict again this week for me
greg.haskins (Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:05:55 GMT):
hopefully free up moving forward
ssaddem (Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:17:35 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
caoyin (Sun, 19 Feb 2017 14:53:53 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
RistoAlas (Tue, 21 Feb 2017 10:05:42 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Tue, 21 Feb 2017 21:39:36 GMT):
User User_1 added by rjones.
v_thirugnanam (Tue, 21 Feb 2017 21:55:11 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
WilliamSparks (Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:09:59 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
WilliamSparks (Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:11:05 GMT):
Trying to catch up on a few TSC meetings. Are the recordings still available? If so, where? Thnx.
WilliamSparks (Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:13:43 GMT):
found them
rjones (Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:31:31 GMT):
is there a recording of last week's meeting?
WilliamSparks (Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:33:33 GMT):
most recent recording is February 9th
WilliamSparks (Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:34:42 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/technical-steering-committee
bartcant (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 02:17:38 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:00:19 GMT):
are we going to use this @channel for today's tsc call?
lehors (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:06:11 GMT):
ouch
hartm (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:06:38 GMT):
Haha, is someone going to restart the meeting?
greg.haskins (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:06:38 GMT):
i just got booted from gotomeeting
SeanBohan_Evernym (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:06:43 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:06:48 GMT):
same here
greg.haskins (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:06:52 GMT):
ok, its back
SeanBohan_Evernym (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:06:56 GMT):
think we all did
cbf (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:06:58 GMT):
GTM crashed but is back
greg.haskins (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:07:01 GMT):
ok, just checking
greg.haskins (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:07:20 GMT):
no soup for you
bbehlendorf (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:28:59 GMT):
did it crash again? might have been the wifi on my plane.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:29:13 GMT):
looks like there's no scrollback buffer on the chat interface there
bbehlendorf (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:30:26 GMT):
was someone asking if project proposals are private? They certainly can't be once submitted to the TSC, and probably should be made public even before then so people can discuss them (like the Sovrin / Plenum proposal I put on the proposals page on the wiki). I do talk with people about potential proposals privately at times.
rjones (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:39:21 GMT):
@bbehlendorf he was asking if the internship proposals were private, I think
tbenzies (Thu, 23 Feb 2017 20:28:17 GMT):
As discussed on the TSC call, we are looking to hold a Hackfest on the East Coast in April. As such, please indicate your preference on timing at http://doodle.com/poll/xwdefutqhpwsqszr.
ShaneCurcuru (Fri, 24 Feb 2017 16:43:39 GMT):
project proposals should definitely be posted and announced publicly beforehand. Having a little bit of discussion before the TSC works on the proposal can definitely help.
greg.haskins (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:47:18 GMT):
@cbf regarding the upcoming fabric incubation vote: are we voting for fabric-* projects or just fabric.git ?
greg.haskins (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:47:49 GMT):
e.g. we have baseimage, sdk-node, composer, chaintool, etc, in the mix
greg.haskins (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:48:53 GMT):
some are inseparable, like baseimage, while others could be debated
greg.haskins (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:49:21 GMT):
im just curious as to the proposed scope, mostly for planning purposes around chaintool, but just in general
cbf (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:31:09 GMT):
@ShaneCurcuru yes, we post them typically to the hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org and also on chat. Typically we would also allow comments in the proposal doc
ShaneCurcuru (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:32:05 GMT):
And are they put on a central wiki page as well, or at least all pointed to from one place?
ShaneCurcuru (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:32:14 GMT):
Just brainstorming ways to grow community around new project ideas
ShaneCurcuru (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:32:28 GMT):
thx
ShaneCurcuru (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:33:34 GMT):
bonus app idea would be RC plugin bot that tried to helpfully redirect questions to #fabric or other rooms from #general. :wink:
cbf (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:35:44 GMT):
speaking of which there is a proposal to have Fabric considered for exit from Incubation here https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UQwQdAfK9DwTpGFQmIF7HU4YBTpx0ZG1VbdtGW1hlIQ
ShaneCurcuru (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:38:28 GMT):
Nice percentages of both committers and work done there showing the diversity.
lehors (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 23:11:00 GMT):
@ShaneCurcuru Hi, I'm also of the opinion that we are under utilizing the wiki
lehors (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 23:11:20 GMT):
I've tried to add some info to it a while ago when we transitioned from github wiki
lehors (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 23:11:42 GMT):
but few people seem interested in using it much
lehors (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 23:12:27 GMT):
I'm guessing this is due to a lack of established policy as to what we put there vs in the doc and elsewhere
lehors (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 23:12:58 GMT):
I've tried to make that point a few times but I don't get much response
lehors (Tue, 28 Feb 2017 23:13:11 GMT):
it's nice to see someone else thinks that would be good :)
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:15:22 GMT):
The real question is: where is the informational and "check daily" homepage for each specific project?
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:16:07 GMT):
That is - there's code on github, some mailing lists (which have a horrible UI for archives), and a whole bunch of RC Channels for different areas. But where should newcomers go to see an overview? What ties everything together?
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:16:46 GMT):
If you compare to the ASF, there, each project has OurProject.apache.org as a homepage, with pointers to every aspect for *that* project. HL hasn't gotten to that point yet
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:17:15 GMT):
So for now, wiki information is the defacto "how can I learn more by myself easily" place until better web presence(s) are setup
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:18:07 GMT):
Part is HL staff (which I know aren't many) need to coordinate, and part is the various fabric, STL, etc. project communities need to be more organized about publicising their own projects as projects (i.e. not in their corporate homes, but under HL)
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:18:13 GMT):
Thanks @lehors for the comments!
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:51:44 GMT):
you're welcome, very happy to discuss this further
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:52:14 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=82BZM6YmipgunjQCK) @ShaneCurcuru I don't think that's really the case though
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:52:23 GMT):
at least it's not been recognized as such
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:52:41 GMT):
this is also what I think would make sense
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:52:44 GMT):
is there any place that is recognized? Or just each project for themselves?
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:53:24 GMT):
I would say that the documentation of the project is considered the primary point of entry
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:54:13 GMT):
unfortunately, it's not even exactly clear which version of the doc is
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:54:22 GMT):
we have two repos: gerrit and github
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:54:56 GMT):
you can get into the doc simply by browsing the repo
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:56:18 GMT):
for fabric we also build the doc and export it to readthedoc
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:56:28 GMT):
then there is the wiki
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:56:40 GMT):
a lot more effort is put into the doc than the wiki
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:56:45 GMT):
So that's the technical documentation about the code (which has two versions, yay!)
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:57:06 GMT):
where's the documentation about the *project*? I.e. the community of people working on this code that creates a product that provides useful functionality?
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:57:20 GMT):
I know... but that's not so bad because one is generated from the other
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:57:35 GMT):
like github is a mirror of gerrit
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:58:01 GMT):
well, there is definitely the wiki page
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:58:20 GMT):
but it's not clear what goes where
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:58:22 GMT):
where is the easily shareable URL that explains (briefly, to newcomers) what Fabric is, who is working on it, how someone new can get *involved* (not just submit a patch), and why the project is useful?
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:58:37 GMT):
you'll find project info in the doc as much as on the wiki
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:59:04 GMT):
I mean, HL is still pretty young as a foundation. But this is stuff that a good foundation provides for or at least works with projects to provide, to help the community draw in new contributors.
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:59:08 GMT):
http://hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
lehors (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:59:32 GMT):
I have a call I need to join but let's continue this discussion
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:59:33 GMT):
Although I suppose this is exactly why HL is looking to hire a few more people!
ShaneCurcuru (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 15:00:07 GMT):
k thx!
benjaminbollen (Wed, 01 Mar 2017 21:12:49 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
jamessheen (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 12:50:11 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
greg.haskins (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 13:56:28 GMT):
@tbenzies are there dial in numbers for the TSC calls? I will be driving today and probably cant easily join the gotomeeting
greg.haskins (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 13:57:54 GMT):
ah, i just found +1 (312)-757-3119
ShaneCurcuru (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 15:03:07 GMT):
@greg.haskins Details (should) always be on the wiki: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/calendar-public-meetings#hyperledger_project_-_fabric_technical_planning
ShaneCurcuru (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 15:04:52 GMT):
Agenda for today's TSC meeting (on email list last night): https://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/2017-March/000648.html
lehors (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 16:03:26 GMT):
it really felt like we got cut short on the discussion on GSL
lehors (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 16:03:59 GMT):
@cbf not sure you saw but several people requested we get more time to discuss it
cbf (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 16:04:31 GMT):
ok will tee up next week
lehors (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 16:04:34 GMT):
thanks
cbf (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 16:04:37 GMT):
thx
JonathanLevi (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 16:17:35 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
troyronda (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 16:38:10 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
troyronda (Thu, 02 Mar 2017 16:40:37 GMT):
Cross-posting from #fabric-maintainers - I posted the Fabric Go SDK proposal to the wiki
(https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/proposals | https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tYk3t8pF2mj4IGSzPvGopzKxSz8okTW749UyNqxTGZk)
yoshtec (Fri, 03 Mar 2017 18:49:25 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
uramoto (Mon, 06 Mar 2017 18:11:46 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
troyronda (Wed, 08 Mar 2017 15:08:43 GMT):
I am wondering about next steps for the above ^^^
Suma (Wed, 08 Mar 2017 15:45:30 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
greg.haskins (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 03:32:21 GMT):
@troyronda I am not sure of the exact procedure, but basically it would need to get on the TSC agenda and then we vote
greg.haskins (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 03:32:46 GMT):
in general, I am in favor of this, particularly if you plan to convert the fabric CLI to use it
ssaddem (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 14:55:49 GMT):
Have you seen the email of gohfc ?
rehmke (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:01:20 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
troyronda (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:11:27 GMT):
Hi TSC - can we please add this proposal to the agenda?
SeanBohan_Evernym (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:15:59 GMT):
Is the TSC call still happening?
lehors (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:25:12 GMT):
hi all
lehors (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:25:23 GMT):
today's TSC call is canceled
lehors (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:27:50 GMT):
@troyronda you've already done most of the work :-) All is left for you to do is to send an email to the TSC mailing list introducing your proposal and requesting for this to be put on the TSC agenda
lehors (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:28:23 GMT):
then join the call to present it and answer any questions
lehors (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:28:50 GMT):
that's all there is to it
SeanBohan_Evernym (Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:34:39 GMT):
Thanks Lehors!
sstone1 (Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:48:21 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
JatinderBali (Fri, 10 Mar 2017 15:53:06 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
dhuseby (Tue, 14 Mar 2017 22:54:07 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
timblankers (Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:13:24 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
vishwass (Thu, 16 Mar 2017 18:54:08 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
snowy13 (Fri, 17 Mar 2017 02:50:39 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
judypriest (Wed, 22 Mar 2017 12:39:17 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:18:47 GMT):
@here Identity WG meeting at 12 noon EDT
The Identity WG meets biweekly on Wednesdays noon EST / 17:00 UTC. (Next meeting: March 8th, alternates with Architecture WG meetings)
Join the webex here: https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/meetings/join?uuid=M13E85PQ13KWSMVJJLZ1FZ3XNX-9VIB
Or join by phone:
◾ +1-408-525-6800 Call-in toll number (US/Canada)
◾ +1-866-432-9903 Call-in toll-free number (US/Canada)
◾ Access code: 190 609 401
All doc links from wiki.hyperledger.org the Identity WG section
vishwass (Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:01:37 GMT):
Thanks for the invite @VipinB , was really interesting.
nage (Fri, 24 Mar 2017 20:35:13 GMT):
We received approval from the Sovrin Trustees and Technical Governance Board to submit the Sovrin code base as Hyperledger Indy: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YzXz0aM8w7kSp3_ao3ue9tOFwK9paofXbtBptR1Jucg/edit?usp=sharing
Please take a look.
smithbk (Fri, 24 Mar 2017 21:01:31 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
nhrishi (Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:07:43 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
baohua (Wed, 29 Mar 2017 01:57:52 GMT):
today's meeting agenda is at https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/twgc/meeting/2017-03-29
tbenzies (Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:10:35 GMT):
Registration is now open for the April Hackfest in the Washington DC area on April 24th & 25th.
Please register now https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestapril2017
Jwlehane (Sat, 01 Apr 2017 14:09:02 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Jwlehane (Sat, 01 Apr 2017 14:13:42 GMT):
is anyone working on usecases involving management of co-ops?
silasdavis (Tue, 04 Apr 2017 10:49:25 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Wed, 05 Apr 2017 14:19:11 GMT):
@here call today at 12 EDT. Details in wiki link https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/identity/identity-wg.Agenda:
VipinB (Wed, 05 Apr 2017 14:19:52 GMT):
1.Standards: Normative/Prescriptive vs Descriptive where do you draw the line? How does this relate to the Identity WG
2.Work on the Interface/Whitepaper Document for Identity- how to proceed? There have been suggestions made: start with Interfaces/Capabilities from Indy/Fabric/STL/Iroha- we need volunteers
3.How to Interoperate? Is this important in the first place?
4.Splitting the Identity space framework vs. Transactors
Sean_Bohan (Wed, 05 Apr 2017 15:22:19 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
atakada (Thu, 06 Apr 2017 14:14:21 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
david_boadita (Thu, 06 Apr 2017 17:39:36 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
ray (Sat, 08 Apr 2017 16:17:25 GMT):
Has left the channel.
tbenzies (Tue, 11 Apr 2017 17:23:37 GMT):
If you are planning to attend the April Hackfest in the Washington DC area on April 24th & 25th, please be sure to register ASAP https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestapril2017
Also, we have started a draft agenda (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rz1HsUwqIesSgj1fvKWTaNHuYKl7320iGpAX2l2NqBA/edit) doc so that there is a place to add suggested topics for the Hackfest.
Lin-YiTang (Tue, 11 Apr 2017 21:13:56 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
greg.haskins (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:03:12 GMT):
no call today?
jrosmith (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:08:56 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
jrosmith (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:09:27 GMT):
+1 for @greg.haskins question
nage (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:11:49 GMT):
From the mailing list: """We had a very light agenda for tomorrow, and I know we're all busy. Hence, a gift of an hour back on your calendars.
Just a reminder that we need to close out the discussion on sub-projects (see link below. Also, the up-coming hackfest. Please register if you have not already done so.
Here's the agenda we won't be sitting through;-) Enjoy and Happy Easter or Passover if those holidays are relevant to your faith."""
greg.haskins (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:12:08 GMT):
@nage ty
greg.haskins (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:12:11 GMT):
missed that
cbf (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 22:06:34 GMT):
@greg.haskins ah sorry next time I'll spam more channels;-)
greg.haskins (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 23:22:14 GMT):
@cbf not your fault...i need a better way to manage the deluge of email
greg.haskins (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 23:22:29 GMT):
its way to easy to miss important things
greg.haskins (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 23:22:29 GMT):
its way too easy to miss important things
cbf (Thu, 13 Apr 2017 23:22:31 GMT):
I know the feeling
tkuhrt (Sun, 16 Apr 2017 18:21:39 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Mon, 17 Apr 2017 00:08:47 GMT):
belated announcement: http://slack-archive.hyperledger.org/html/index.html is live (and indexed by Google)
Sean_Bohan (Mon, 17 Apr 2017 17:43:22 GMT):
thanks Ry!
VipinB (Tue, 18 Apr 2017 22:22:49 GMT):
Identity WG Call April 19, 2016 at 12 EDT. Details in wiki link https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/identity/identity-wg.
Proposed Agenda:
Welcome new comers into the group and get reasons for participation.
Work on short term goals, identify volunteers for the following items in the paper and a timeline (we will aim for a draft of some of these items by Monday the 24th to continue work at the hackfest)
a. Current Interfaces: Description of Indy, Fabric, Iroha, Monax, STL.
b. Extract the common elements from these interfaces to describe an “ideal” Identity Interface
c. Read the Requirements WG paper and map to Identity requirements
d. Description of CA vs DiD- i.e. Central Authority vs Distributed Identity and their interoperation and how Identity component will operate in the context of Legacy systems and heterogeneous DLTs.
e. Read and get data from Architecture Working Group on Identity to incorporate or link to in our paper
Tentative Volunteers from what I remember are: Jan Kamenisch, Nathan George, Drummond Reed, Sean Bohan, Daniela Merella
If there are any I am forgetting, please speak up if you are on the call.
I will cross post this on tsc chat and architecture wg chat as well as the technical-discuss and tsc mailing lists.
cbf (Wed, 19 Apr 2017 21:31:43 GMT):
canceling tomorrow's TSC call
cbf (Wed, 19 Apr 2017 21:31:46 GMT):
see email
cbf (Wed, 19 Apr 2017 21:32:09 GMT):
I pasted the links to the hackfest agenda and the thread on sub-projects
cbf (Wed, 19 Apr 2017 21:32:12 GMT):
please pile on
cbf (Wed, 19 Apr 2017 21:32:18 GMT):
see many of you next week!
Sean_Bohan (Thu, 20 Apr 2017 13:59:48 GMT):
no worries - looking forward to meeting next week!
hurf (Sat, 22 Apr 2017 08:40:09 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
zjb0807 (Wed, 26 Apr 2017 04:23:34 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Thu, 27 Apr 2017 00:00:27 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 27 Apr 2017 17:19:55 GMT):
@rjagadee and I were discussing turning next weeks Identity WG meeting into a combined session with Architecture WG, since both groups are discussing Identity at the moment. More details later. Any comments.
rjagadee (Thu, 27 Apr 2017 17:19:55 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
bpreston (Thu, 27 Apr 2017 21:01:17 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Wed, 03 May 2017 14:03:47 GMT):
@here Identity WG call today at 12 EDT. Details in wiki link https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/identity/identity-wg.
Paper link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ExFNRx-yYoS8FnDIUX1_0UBMha9TvQkfts2kVnDc4KE/edit?usp=sharing
Agenda:
Call for volunteers
Splitting up workload and discuss timelines:
a.Bridge to architecture WG paper – Nathan George (since he had already started on this)
b.TEEs & HSMs – Steven from Rivetz
c.Jan Camenisch (already provided some feedback)- ZK proofs and CL signatures- maybe something more concrete
d. Benjamin Bollen – Monax-Identity
e. Leonard Edwin maybe Iroha-Link is
f. Daniela Merella - She can look at the paper and contribute
g. Fabric CA team to provide some input on Fabric CA
h. STL EPR – (End Point Registry) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gWlbsKtgApOTm1E5XJsw2J3U6AvIRxujWiG-vm6ELOM/edit?usp=sharing EPID as identity repository.
i. Sovrin-Identity Model- Drummond
j. DiD->DDO model-Drummond
k. X.509 (Version 3.0), X.525 ****-need volunteer
l. Verifiable claims - Nathan/Sean/Drummond
m. Sketch out Identity Interface- Vipin
We have to recognize the fact that this conference season and people are very busy. In fact this can be a good thing, since the latest ideas garnered at conferences can be incorporated into our paper.
VipinB (Wed, 03 May 2017 14:03:47 GMT):
@here Identity WG call today at 12 EDT. Details in wiki link https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/identity/identity-wg.
Paper link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ExFNRx-yYoS8FnDIUX1_0UBMha9TvQkfts2kVnDc4KE/edit?usp=sharing
Agenda:
Call for volunteers
Splitting up workload and discuss timelines:
a.Bridge to architecture WG paper – Nathan George (since he had already started on this)
b.TEEs & HSMs – Steven from Rivetz
c.Jan Camenisch (already provided some feedback)- ZK proofs and CL signatures- maybe something more concrete
d. Benjamin Bollen – Monax-Identity
e. Leonard Edwin maybe Iroha-Link is
f. Daniela Merella - She can look at the paper and contribute
g. Fabric CA team to provide some input on Fabric CA
h. STL EPR – (End Point Registry) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gWlbsKtgApOTm1E5XJsw2J3U6AvIRxujWiG-vm6ELOM/edit?usp=sharing EPID as identity repository.
i. Sovrin-Identity Model- Drummond
j. DiD->DDO model-Drummond
k. X.509 (Version 3.0), X.525 ****-need volunteer
l. Verifiable claims - Nathan/Sean/Drummond
m. Sketch out Identity Interface- Vipin
We have to recognize the fact that this is conference season and people are very busy. In fact this can be a good thing, since the latest ideas garnered at conferences can be incorporated into our paper.
VipinB (Wed, 03 May 2017 15:03:46 GMT):
Interesting paper on fuzz testing in Communications of the ACM. It is very practical with tools to generate ASNs and use ASN to generate fuzz tests to probe weaknesses of MongoDB (in particular); but this can be generalized to test any platform or interface. The title is "MongoDB's JavaScript Fuzzer" In Communications Of the ACM 05-2017, maybe this will help with setting up test frameworks for Fabric/Iroha/STL. Maybe you guys already have such frameworks and would like to expand-iterate on those.
tbenzies (Wed, 03 May 2017 21:35:46 GMT):
Registration is now open for the June Hackfest in Beijing, China on June 19th & 20th. Please register now https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestjune2017
tbenzies (Wed, 03 May 2017 21:36:09 GMT):
Also, we have started a draft agenda (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LfTtwHvQfZAHUz8k35-s3hmE3S_0uXSuAAnhTB7U-Hg/edit) so that there is a place to add suggested topics for the Hackfest.
jrosmith (Thu, 04 May 2017 14:14:23 GMT):
no tsc call today?
robflowers212 (Thu, 04 May 2017 14:39:48 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
hurf (Fri, 05 May 2017 02:26:18 GMT):
No, Chris sent an email to the list and canceled the call.
rjones (Thu, 11 May 2017 16:40:41 GMT):
I propose archiving the fabric-api project. It hasn't had a meaningful commit since 30-AUG-2016 https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric-api/commits/master . Archiving it would mean removing the Jenkins rigging, marking the project read-only in Gerrit. The two maintainers for that project have not been active in any Hyperledger project I see since August. @hgabre @tamas @TamasBlummer .
TamasBlummer (Thu, 11 May 2017 16:40:41 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tamas (Thu, 11 May 2017 16:40:41 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
hgabre (Thu, 11 May 2017 16:40:41 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
hgabre (Thu, 11 May 2017 16:52:56 GMT):
I agree
rjones (Thu, 11 May 2017 16:55:19 GMT):
I ask the tsc for guidance for this - I don't think this rises to the need for a tsc vote. If it doesn't, based on @hgabre 's assent (and that he's the only maintainer that has committed any code, ever) I'd like to move forward
yury (Sat, 13 May 2017 20:11:15 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tongli (Mon, 15 May 2017 14:29:15 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
greg.haskins (Tue, 16 May 2017 15:01:35 GMT):
I have no problem with this, especially if Gabor and Tamas concur \
jrosmith (Tue, 16 May 2017 20:38:35 GMT):
Has left the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 25 May 2017 12:36:20 GMT):
@here Is the call going to be on uberconference today?
cbf (Thu, 25 May 2017 12:38:14 GMT):
think usual gotomeeting... no?
lehors (Thu, 25 May 2017 12:38:28 GMT):
I would expect gotomeeting
lehors (Thu, 25 May 2017 12:38:41 GMT):
it doesn't seem quite right to change without forewarning
lehors (Thu, 25 May 2017 12:39:26 GMT):
not that I'm against changing - it's not like I'm a big fan of gotomeeting...
naolduga (Mon, 29 May 2017 01:57:17 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
toddinpal (Wed, 31 May 2017 18:11:24 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
toddinpal (Wed, 31 May 2017 18:12:21 GMT):
Where can the plans for Fabric releases be found, as in what will be in the 1.0 GA release and so on?
rjones (Wed, 31 May 2017 18:14:25 GMT):
@toddinpal probably best asked in #fabric
toddinpal (Wed, 31 May 2017 18:15:01 GMT):
yeah, tried there and fabric-questions... no responses
rjones (Wed, 31 May 2017 18:16:34 GMT):
the tsc is the wrong abstraction level for release cadence questions, regardless.
weeds (Wed, 31 May 2017 19:28:47 GMT):
@toddinpal We have frozen feature capabilities. We are in process of test and defect fixing. Once we reach the exit criteria, we will cut the release. The maintainers (people like @cbf @JonathanLevi who are running the release this round) would be best to ask.
JonathanLevi (Wed, 31 May 2017 19:30:16 GMT):
Thanks. Also, #fabric-release and the "internal maintainers" #fabric-maintainers should provide you with a lot of related info.
toddinpal (Wed, 31 May 2017 20:00:11 GMT):
@weeds @cbf So if the features are frozen, is this frozen list documented somewhere?
cbf (Wed, 31 May 2017 21:30:25 GMT):
@toddinpal JIRA has the latest info on where we are
cbf (Wed, 31 May 2017 21:30:40 GMT):
https://jira.hyperledger.org/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=10104
Dan (Thu, 01 Jun 2017 13:57:38 GMT):
For those not on the TSC mail list, today's TSC call is cancelled.
itamar-m (Thu, 08 Jun 2017 13:04:40 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
baohua (Thu, 08 Jun 2017 13:55:49 GMT):
hi, anyone know whether we still use gotomeeting or the new uberconference system for the tsc meeting later? thanks!
trbs (Thu, 08 Jun 2017 16:11:50 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tkuhrt (Thu, 08 Jun 2017 16:24:28 GMT):
Hi, @baohua . I know this is late, but the TSC has not changed from gotomeeting.
tbenzies (Thu, 08 Jun 2017 22:02:29 GMT):
As discussed on the TSC call, we are looking to hold a Hackfest on the East Coast in the August/September timeframe. As such, please indicate your preference on timing at http://doodle.com/poll/e6qgduebztu3rvac.
baohua (Fri, 09 Jun 2017 01:15:22 GMT):
@tkuhrt yes, i open both, and see it's using gotomeeting. Do u know is there any migration plan to the uberconference? Or we will not change? :)
tkuhrt (Fri, 09 Jun 2017 16:01:53 GMT):
For now, it will remain on GoToMeeting, @baohua
tbenzies (Mon, 12 Jun 2017 16:07:09 GMT):
Quick reminder -- we are looking to hold a Hackfest on the East Coast in the August/September timeframe. As such, please indicate your preference on timing at http://doodle.com/poll/e6qgduebztu3rvac.
ChandraLekhaChavva (Mon, 12 Jun 2017 18:21:06 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
gpflanagan (Fri, 16 Jun 2017 15:05:10 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
amitkumarj441 (Sun, 18 Jun 2017 18:02:12 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
illya13 (Wed, 21 Jun 2017 10:18:06 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
LordGoodman (Thu, 22 Jun 2017 02:20:14 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cca88 (Tue, 27 Jun 2017 15:31:52 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:01:33 GMT):
oops, that did not seem intentional... even Todd was surprised that the gotomeeting ended
cbf (Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:01:40 GMT):
could have been coincidental
martin (Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:01:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:01:48 GMT):
a bit rough :)
cbf (Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:02:05 GMT):
anyway, to Stefan's point, I think that a demo would be a very relevant next step and certainly I would welcome it
martin (Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:02:24 GMT):
Haha ok we can prepare that
cbf (Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:02:38 GMT):
thanks and again, apologies for the glitch
martin (Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:02:48 GMT):
no worries
martin (Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:03:20 GMT):
thanks for hearing us out. very interesting conversation
tbenzies (Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:18:58 GMT):
As discussed on the TSC call, we are looking to hold a Hackfest in Europe during the October/November timeframe. As such, please indicate your preference on timing at http://doodle.com/poll/39za7hz3i98k8esb.
aaron.benningfield (Fri, 30 Jun 2017 20:45:25 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
aaron.benningfield (Fri, 30 Jun 2017 20:45:37 GMT):
I would like to start a Supply Chain Working Group. Any direction, advice etc. on doing so?
cbf (Fri, 30 Jun 2017 23:16:36 GMT):
just a reminder, I am on PTO 7/2-13 and will be off the grid, mostly in the glaciers and hinterlands of Iceland
cbf (Fri, 30 Jun 2017 23:16:49 GMT):
have a nice 4th for those in the US
ketan5452 (Mon, 10 Jul 2017 06:19:16 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
JonathanLevi (Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:07:24 GMT):
Take it easy.
JonathanLevi (Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:07:38 GMT):
I think it will most likely be just a slam-dunk on Greg's proposal
JonathanLevi (Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:07:39 GMT):
...
JonathanLevi (Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:07:52 GMT):
That anyway, will not get into master even if we go for RC2
VipinB (Tue, 11 Jul 2017 20:59:01 GMT):
First a shout-out to Fabric team for 1.0 release- first permissioned Blockchain production release!!!.
Identity working group call 12th July 12 noon EDT Join the call: https://www.uberconference.com/hyperledger-community
Optional dial in number: 401-283-2000,,,4807579435#
No PIN needed
Regional dial in numbers can be found here: https://www.uberconference.com/international
Agenda:
1.Discuss requirements laid out for key management especially recovery and delegation "after the fact". Review https://docs.google.com/document/d/1psJc9UWuteSzOqIG0VLIdzdlxFb9kq-Csw-dxcjPzEo
2.Expand on legal points (4th amendment) other identity related issues (read just the privacy and other special sections- hoping to get Dax Hansen to talk on the subject) https://www.virtualcurrencyreport.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/05/Perkins-Coie-Self-Sovereign-Identity-and-Distributed-Ledger-Technology_Framing-the-Legal-Issues-1.pdf
3.Continue working on the different sections of the paper.
4.AOB
guruprasath (Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:27:50 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cca88 (Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:14:34 GMT):
Hi all - is there already a venue proposal for the European Hackfest event in Oct/Nov? If not, we could look into setting up something in Zurich/Switzerland.
rjones (Tue, 18 Jul 2017 19:11:04 GMT):
@cca88 please talk to @tbenzies
C0rWin (Thu, 20 Jul 2017 20:54:16 GMT):
Has left the channel.
tmenner (Sun, 23 Jul 2017 20:14:15 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:35:54 GMT):
@here Tentative Agenda for our call today- noon EDT.
Join the call: https://www.uberconference.com/hyperledger-community
Optional dial in number: 401-283-2000,,,4807579435#
No PIN needed
Regional dial in numbers can be found here: https://www.uberconference.com/international
1. Eligibility for electors for tsc, identity working group participants.
2. An analysis of confidentiality & privacy topics as it relates to identity: We will use the base paper https://www.r3.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/survey_confidentiality_privacy_R3.pdf, this is a public paper from the R3 site.
3. Legal & regulatory underpinning for Identity- we will continue the discussion with reps from the Government sector (infrachain) and possibly a legal expert, may not happen until next meeting (August 9)
4. Verifiable claims (possibly with help from our friends from Indy/Sovrin)
5. Hope to have reworked material from our prior meetings as well as other contributions into the White paper. (mainly biometrics, Legal, use case around key management presented by Oskar DV)
6. Please take another look at the biometrics paper that Danny Bathen @berserkr produced. He presented four weeks ago. Please enter comments for https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YaQo5Yd2ooDurKhL_iGWkHO5KuNFA9L50GkXCs3LqeA/edit We need to aborb the salient points into our whitepaper.
7. AOB
berserkr (Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:35:54 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:05:31 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:06:46 GMT):
Proposed charter for the PSWG can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OtGmVvHa_LDhIm5t1HEI7XwCQt1Lpr4gRmWixoJWQzg/edit?usp=sharing
n-horiguchi (Thu, 27 Jul 2017 09:46:35 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
MaggieLi (Tue, 01 Aug 2017 06:48:48 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
drasko.draskovic (Mon, 07 Aug 2017 11:55:30 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 13:58:46 GMT):
@here Tentative Agenda for our call today.
Join the call: https://www.uberconference.com/hyperledger-community
Optional dial in number: 401-283-2000,,,4807579435#
No PIN needed
Regional dial in numbers can be found here: https://www.uberconference.com/international
1. Eligibility for electors for tsc: we have sent out an email, please check the list at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hm1_Kz7i5AbYQoslLXTp6yk380OaSRMJ51f7bMY9n_M/edit#gid=31088272
2. Following discussion of confidentiality and privacy in our WG, the arch WG will host a committee chaired by Mic Bowman to discuss this topic in a more general (architectural) context. Please contact him for inclusion in committee.
3.Marco Houwen of Infrachain will present on Infrachain and Identity.
4.Drummond Reed will present on further developments in DiF
5. Please take another look at the biometrics paper that Danny Bathen @berserkr produced. He presented four weeks ago. Please enter comments for https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YaQo5Yd2ooDurKhL_iGWkHO5KuNFA9L50GkXCs3LqeA/edit We need to aborb the salient points into our whitepaper.
6. AOB
berserkr (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 14:29:58 GMT):
;
greg.haskins (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 15:10:25 GMT):
@VipinB isnt today Wednesday?
greg.haskins (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 15:10:56 GMT):
Or is this the Arch WG?
greg.haskins (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 15:11:09 GMT):
(I thought you were referring to the TSC call)
VipinB (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 15:27:16 GMT):
No
VipinB (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 15:27:24 GMT):
Identity WG
greg.haskins (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 15:27:55 GMT):
ah, sorry...when you posted above, I thought it was in reference to the TSC call, and I feared I missed a note that it moved to Wed
greg.haskins (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 15:28:03 GMT):
false alarm, thanks @VipinB
VipinB (Wed, 09 Aug 2017 15:29:02 GMT):
Should have made this clearer Thanks @greg.haskins
tbenzies (Thu, 10 Aug 2017 21:29:07 GMT):
Registration is now open for the September Hackfest in Chicago on September 21-22.
Please register now https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestseptember2017
akuma921 (Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:49:13 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
genggjh (Wed, 16 Aug 2017 00:15:14 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
akuma921 (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 13:55:46 GMT):
hi ..can anybody help me with the mailing group for tsc members only
akuma921 (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 14:01:35 GMT):
in case I want to take approval for any dependant project
cbf (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 14:54:18 GMT):
hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org is the email address
cbf (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 14:54:40 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo
cbf (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 14:54:46 GMT):
@akuma921 ^^
akuma921 (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:25:41 GMT):
thanks @cbf
akuma921 (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:28:26 GMT):
@cbf so is this the mailing group only for TSC members, or anybody can join it ...
cbf (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:29:12 GMT):
anyone may subscribe
akuma921 (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:29:38 GMT):
but is there any mailing group only for TSC members
cbf (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:29:38 GMT):
anyone may post, but the primary purpose is to deal with issues before the TSC (such as proposing new projects)
cbf (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:29:53 GMT):
no, there is no private list in hyperledger
cbf (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:29:57 GMT):
all open to all
cbf (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:30:18 GMT):
well, except the board which is closed because confidential material may be shared
akuma921 (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:44:49 GMT):
thanks @cbf
Suedonym (Thu, 17 Aug 2017 17:14:06 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Vasco 2 (Fri, 18 Aug 2017 08:59:12 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tbenzies (Wed, 23 Aug 2017 00:39:47 GMT):
If you are planning to attend the September Hackfest in Chicago on September 21-22, please register now https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestseptember2017
Also, we have started a draft agenda (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gmSkA1Y0YkUAHfEfJNMuDf4uhwjpr32r2ykMvYKKnqo/edit) so that there is a place to add suggested topics for the Hackfest. We'd like to focus on finding ways to further enable the various projects to collaborate with one another, as well as more time on hacking.
lehors (Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:04:12 GMT):
@here hello everyone :-)
nage (Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:04:22 GMT):
hello!
hartm (Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:04:41 GMT):
https://www.forbes.com/sites/amycastor/2017/08/23/at-crypto-2017-blockchain-presentations-focus-on-proofs-not-concepts/#f6b3f2c7b702
hartm (Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:04:58 GMT):
Reading for the dead time.
Haojun (Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:05:01 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:10:43 GMT):
thanks to all for trusting me in continuing on the TSC :-)
hurf (Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:15:13 GMT):
Caliper proposal here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cwScsNgYUj72vP2fqZ6vihYiuQcy45Ml2C_yLRI7EoQ/edit?ts=599dce69#
nage (Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:30:44 GMT):
+1 to focusing on developing the tool rather than trying to publish results
jtclark (Thu, 24 Aug 2017 18:10:03 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
baohua (Fri, 25 Aug 2017 01:15:41 GMT):
Congrats @lehors. Believe the community will become better and better~
tbenzies (Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:30:41 GMT):
*REMINDER*: If you are planning to attend the September Hackfest in Chicago on September 21-22, please register now https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestseptember2017
Also, we have started a draft agenda (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gmSkA1Y0YkUAHfEfJNMuDf4uhwjpr32r2ykMvYKKnqo/edit) so that there is a place to add suggested topics for the Hackfest. We'd like to focus on finding ways to further enable the various projects to collaborate with one another, as well as more time on hacking.
baohua (Thu, 31 Aug 2017 10:59:12 GMT):
@tbenzies hi, todd, just to confirm we cancel this week's meeting? Saw brian had an email replied that info.
tbenzies (Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:29:40 GMT):
yes, sorry for just responding now
tbenzies (Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:29:43 GMT):
--
tbenzies (Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:29:45 GMT):
We have a solid lead on a good location in Lisbon, Portugal, with two date options: October 26th-27th or December 5th-6th. We had guidance from the TSC that late October could work for everyone, but given a number of other conferences going on in October and November, and it being only a month after the US Hackfest, we'd like to know your availability and preference for both dates. Please go here to let us know: http://doodle.com/poll/vfsnabcykec62wr6.
lmrln (Fri, 01 Sep 2017 10:11:31 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Sep 2017 02:33:07 GMT):
@cbf Congratulations!
cbf (Thu, 07 Sep 2017 13:12:45 GMT):
thanks!
Colonel_HLE (Wed, 20 Sep 2017 09:38:36 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cre8bidio (Thu, 05 Oct 2017 01:53:55 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
jchenibm (Mon, 09 Oct 2017 07:28:50 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Wed, 11 Oct 2017 16:31:39 GMT):
Reminder: there is an emergency chat server outage in about four hours for about one hour: https://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/2017-October/001179.html
neewy (Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:32:52 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
neewy (Wed, 18 Oct 2017 11:22:28 GMT):
Hi! Can you please help me with DCO check in iroha-api repo? It seems that signed commits are still rejected:
neewy (Wed, 18 Oct 2017 11:22:36 GMT):
Screen Shot 2017-10-18 at 14.05.23.png
Dan (Wed, 18 Oct 2017 20:08:06 GMT):
In the sawtooth repo I think we got false positives from the DCO check when someone signed a commit using a different email address than they had associated with github. Could be something like that. You might compare the sign-off to the user details.
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 06:58:10 GMT):
Okay, I will do that. We cannot update the docs until this is resolved :(
rjones (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:42:11 GMT):
@neewy could you create a pull request instead of pushing directly to master? I think we get better errors that way
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:55:35 GMT):
No
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:55:40 GMT):
I cannot push code :(
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:56:17 GMT):
Maybe I will update it manually in GitHub, but this is a huge pain
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:56:31 GMT):
When do you have a meeting today btw? How can I join?
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:56:58 GMT):
```
remote: error: GH006: Protected branch update failed for refs/heads/gh-pages.
remote: error: Required status check "DCO" is expected.
To https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha-api.git
! [remote rejected] gh-pages -> gh-pages (protected branch hook declined)
error: failed to push some refs to 'https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha-api.git'
```
rjones (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:04:27 GMT):
@neewy the meeting was earlier today. I'm not asking you to update anything manually on github. I'm asking you to fork iroha-api into your personal github account, add a remote to your existing clone, and push there. the manual step would be creating a pull request in the GitHub UI - which is one button click
rjones (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:04:27 GMT):
@neewy the meeting was earlier today. I'm not asking you to update anything manually on github. I'm asking you to fork iroha-api into your personal repo, add a remote to your existing clone, and push there. the manual step would be creating a pull request in the GitHub UI - which is one button click
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:04:52 GMT):
okay
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:05:09 GMT):
but it is very strange that my signed commits are rejected anyway
rjones (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:05:10 GMT):
then we should get a verbose error
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:05:15 GMT):
щлфн
neewy (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:05:15 GMT):
okay
rjones (Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:05:25 GMT):
I suspect the email you're signing with is not registered to your github account.
gut (Wed, 25 Oct 2017 09:43:53 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tbenzies (Wed, 25 Oct 2017 22:44:49 GMT):
Registration is now open for the December Hackfest in Lisbon on December 5-6.
Please register now https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestseptember2017
Also, we have started a draft agenda (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DZKPwb0ztJ0D1jpZF4gXIGp6ZHAL_v-3bRVDGVHJsYY/edit) so that there is a place to add suggested topics for the Hackfest.
tbenzies (Wed, 25 Oct 2017 22:44:49 GMT):
Registration is now open for the December Hackfest in Lisbon on December 5-6.
Please register now https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestdecember2017
Also, we have started a draft agenda (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DZKPwb0ztJ0D1jpZF4gXIGp6ZHAL_v-3bRVDGVHJsYY/edit) so that there is a place to add suggested topics for the Hackfest.
tbenzies (Wed, 25 Oct 2017 22:46:26 GMT):
Apologies -- please use the following URL https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestdecember2017
gut (Thu, 26 Oct 2017 09:00:12 GMT):
Dear all,
Previously this week in a meeting a client has proposed us an specific scenario where some code snippets would be sent through a Tx payload. This code would be useful for the SDK to read it later and perform an action.
I know that is a closed scenario, but how does it sound as a future development branch? Would it be feasible and useful an scenario like that?
Dan (Fri, 27 Oct 2017 02:07:06 GMT):
That sounds like a smart contract. Burrow supports that.
gut (Fri, 27 Oct 2017 06:57:54 GMT):
Thanks @Dan. Certainly it'd be like a small smart contract persistent for some reason. But with the difference that it'd be accessible/executable from an outer system. I'll check Burrow implementation
tjack (Fri, 27 Oct 2017 07:45:24 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Fri, 27 Oct 2017 12:28:52 GMT):
F00tBa!!
tbenzies (Tue, 31 Oct 2017 18:27:56 GMT):
Please register now if you are planning on participating in the December Hackfest in Lisbon on December 5-6: https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestdecember2017
gut (Thu, 02 Nov 2017 12:23:13 GMT):
Hello again. We've been recently working on [blockchain-explorer](https://gerrit.hyperledger.org/r/#/admin/projects/blockchain-explorer) deployment. I think I can make a contribution, but I don't know if it's intended for the project design. Who can I contact to know if it is a valid contribution? I think that is better to discus it prior to a simple pull request.
baohua (Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:44:23 GMT):
@gut feel free to contact the project maintainers, besides, you can create a jira issue to discuss, too
gut (Thu, 02 Nov 2017 15:45:30 GMT):
Thanks @baohua
bennettneale (Fri, 03 Nov 2017 16:19:08 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tbenzies (Wed, 08 Nov 2017 06:48:45 GMT):
[REMINDER] Please register now if you are planning on participating in the December Hackfest in Lisbon on December 5-6: https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestdecember2017
greg.haskins (Thu, 09 Nov 2017 15:02:16 GMT):
tsc call on today?
baohua (Thu, 09 Nov 2017 15:40:47 GMT):
no it's canceled due to the summit
greg.haskins (Thu, 09 Nov 2017 16:15:05 GMT):
thanks @baohua
Tianjian (Sat, 11 Nov 2017 08:54:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
PeteCallaghan (Thu, 16 Nov 2017 13:46:49 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Sean_Bohan (Thu, 16 Nov 2017 14:44:30 GMT):
Indy team has posted it's status here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/indy-2017-nov
I screwed up and missed the instruction that this needed to be shared in advance with the TSC BEFORE the call. Apologies.
tbenzies (Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:51:55 GMT):
[REMINDER] Please register now if you are planning on participating in the December Hackfest in Lisbon on December 5-6: https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestdecember2017. Also, add to the draft agenda here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DZKPwb0ztJ0D1jpZF4gXIGp6ZHAL_v-3bRVDGVHJsYY/edit)
cbf (Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:58:30 GMT):
[REMINDER] no TSC call this week (US Thanksgiving) - happy thanksgiving to all who celebrate the day
baohua (Wed, 22 Nov 2017 04:26:24 GMT):
Happy thanksgiving!
heath (Wed, 29 Nov 2017 19:22:30 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
neewy (Fri, 01 Dec 2017 06:24:19 GMT):
Hart, if you need help with whitepaper regarding Iroha -- please contact me here (or preferably in telegram @neewy) so that I can give you updated information @hartm
neewy (Fri, 01 Dec 2017 06:25:04 GMT):
I am not sure if that is his nickname though :)
heath (Sat, 02 Dec 2017 01:40:21 GMT):
how difficult would it be to move the hyperledger project in this general direction while still retaining the existing openness to experimentation?
```
fabric:
- identity management
- pluggable ledgers (iroha, sawtooth, etc.)
ledgers:
- interledger configuration
- pluggable:
- transport
- transaction
- computation
- consensus
- permission
```
heath (Sat, 02 Dec 2017 01:40:21 GMT):
how difficult would it be to move the hyperledger project in this general direction while still retaining the existing openness to experimentation?
```
fabric:
- identity management
- pluggable ledgers (iroha, sawtooth, etc.)
ledgers:
- interledger configuration
- pluggable:
- transport
- transaction
- computation
- consensus
- permission
```
heath (Sat, 02 Dec 2017 01:40:21 GMT):
how difficult would it be to move the hyperledger project in this general direction while still retaining the existing openness to experimentation?
```txt
fabric:
- identity management
- pluggable ledgers (iroha, sawtooth, etc.)
ledgers:
- interledger configuration
- pluggable:
- transport
- transaction
- computation
- consensus
- permission
```
heath (Sat, 02 Dec 2017 01:40:21 GMT):
how difficult would it be to move the hyperledger project in this general direction while still retaining the existing openness to experimentation?
```
fabric:
- identity management
- pluggable ledgers (iroha, sawtooth, etc.)
ledgers:
- interledger configuration
- pluggable:
- transport
- transaction
- computation
- consensus
- permission
```
heath (Sat, 02 Dec 2017 01:40:21 GMT):
i would love to get some feedback on the idea of moving the hyperledger project in this general direction (while still retaining the existing openness to experimentation):
```
fabric:
- identity management
- pluggable ledgers (iroha, sawtooth, etc.)
ledgers:
- interledger configuration
- pluggable:
- transport
- transaction
- computation
- consensus
- permission
```
heath (Sat, 02 Dec 2017 01:40:21 GMT):
i would love to get some feedback on the idea of moving the fabric project in this general direction (while still retaining the existing openness to experimentation):
```
fabric:
- identity management
- pluggable ledgers (iroha, sawtooth, etc.)
ledgers:
- interledger configuration
- pluggable:
- transport
- transaction
- computation
- consensus
- permission
```
heath (Sat, 02 Dec 2017 01:42:13 GMT):
does anyone even like this idea besides me? :)
neewy (Sat, 02 Dec 2017 04:11:40 GMT):
By the way, what is the target audience of the whitepaper proposed? Are you going to publish it somewhere?
cbf (Mon, 04 Dec 2017 21:20:17 GMT):
It will be published yes, probably linked from the https://hyperledger.org/ somewhere
cbf (Tue, 05 Dec 2017 09:34:17 GMT):
Hackfest agenda https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DZKPwb0ztJ0D1jpZF4gXIGp6ZHAL_v-3bRVDGVHJsYY/edit
neewy (Thu, 14 Dec 2017 14:08:15 GMT):
Can I have a link for TSC call? I seem to have an outdated one
baohua (Thu, 14 Dec 2017 14:24:57 GMT):
@neewy
baohua (Thu, 14 Dec 2017 14:24:58 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/technical-steering-committee
TSC Call - Weekly on Thursday, 10:00am - 11:00am ET
Please join the meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone at: https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/613310429
You can also dial in using your phone. United States (toll-free): 1 877 309 2070 United States: +1 (312) 757-3119 Access Code: 613-310-429
neewy (Fri, 15 Dec 2017 06:16:12 GMT):
Thanks!
b9lab-damien (Sat, 16 Dec 2017 22:52:11 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
SuzanneSSB (Mon, 18 Dec 2017 21:53:04 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tbenzies (Thu, 21 Dec 2017 22:46:12 GMT):
quick heads up that next hackfest will _likely_ be in los angeles, february 20-22 (includes a "day 0" to help devs new to hyperledger come up the learning curve). more details coming in early january once confirmed, but please tentatively block your cals
smcnamara (Thu, 04 Jan 2018 19:16:47 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
caroline-church (Mon, 08 Jan 2018 10:24:05 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
toddinpal (Mon, 08 Jan 2018 19:22:19 GMT):
Anyone care to comment on Chris Ferris' comment about permissionless blockchains?
baohua (Tue, 09 Jan 2018 03:05:03 GMT):
@toddinpal would u mind post the link here?
SjirNijssen (Tue, 09 Jan 2018 13:39:43 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
SjirNijssen (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:23:30 GMT):
If Chris Ferri' comment means:
SjirNijssen (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:23:49 GMT):
11/20/2017
Several panelists support the view that permissionless blockchain technology will win out eventually, but in the meantime companies will continue to cling to permissioned or private blockchains as the safer option. For example, Chris Ferris, Governing Board Member & Chair, Technical Steering Committee, Hyperledger, said that his group focuses on private blockchains because if something goes wrong it’s possible to identify the other parties involved and use the legal system if necessary.
SjirNijssen (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:26:18 GMT):
My opinion is that the permissionless blockchain will eventually disappear or play a minimal role. Why? When more people start to understand the negative aspects of permissionsless blockchains, particularly to the society at large, they may well become an outcast.
SjirNijssen (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:27:02 GMT):
If another quote of Chris was mentioned please identify.
toddinpal (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:04:17 GMT):
The quote is here: https://blog.sweetbridge.com/when-blockchain-and-wall-street-meet-9a86e3804237
"In this context, it was very interesting to hear Chris Ferris, Chair of the Hyperledger Technical Steering Committee and IBM CTO Open Technology, who said that it is very possible that in the future Hyperledger will switch its focus to public permissionless infrastructure for its use cases."
baohua (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:05:54 GMT):
would like to hear more comments from @cbf himself :grinning:
cbf (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:17:24 GMT):
so, I cannot recall exactly what I said, but I have been fairly consistent in making the case that the path that blockchain takes will be somewhat similar to the path that cloud has taken. Initially public cloud was shunned by enterprise, because of concerns over security, thinking that they could do a better job of securing their data, etc. and hence the trend (at that time) towards private cloud.
cbf (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:17:51 GMT):
over time, enterprise became more comfortable with public cloud and now it seems that that is the predominant trend
cbf (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:18:15 GMT):
with blockchain, same thing... concerns over running on public/permissionless networks for obvious reasons
cbf (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:20:54 GMT):
over time, I think that there will be some applications that work fine without complete permissioned access and that eventually there will be permissioning and privacy/confidentiality supported on public networks (alongside permissionless and anonymous)
cbf (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:21:01 GMT):
that's what I meant
cbf (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:21:20 GMT):
I think that there will always be a case for permission
cbf (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:21:31 GMT):
(e.g. known identity)
toddinpal (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:43:10 GMT):
@cbf Thanks for the clarification... Regarding Public cloud, for many applications public cloud is just fine, but for many others, data residency issues make them difficult to leverage. As for the analogy, a significant difference is public cloud issue was around security, which one could argue who can do a better job, on premise or public cloud. Identity is another beast altogether with AML/KYC regulations.
baohua (Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:02:34 GMT):
for privacy on public networks, we may need to take advantage of technique like zero-knowledge, but seems there's no practical enough solution yet.
ynamiki (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 00:11:17 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
satoshima (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:26:55 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 13:12:13 GMT):
@toddinpal yes, of course... I am not speaking of absolutes, just trends. Over time, CIOs have relaxed their stance on what could be run in the public cloud. They are of course bound to abide by regulations etc
albrandt (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 14:54:03 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:00:35 GMT):
hola
baohua (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:00:38 GMT):
ping
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:00:46 GMT):
bonjour! :)
baohua (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:01:22 GMT):
the correct response to `ping` should be `pong` :slight_smile:
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:01:45 GMT):
my bad ;-)
hartm (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:01:53 GMT):
Hey everyone--guess we're here today.
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:02:03 GMT):
at least for now!
baohua (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:02:26 GMT):
thanks for lehors's suggestion, let's use rktchat for tsc meeting too
kelly_ (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:03:05 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
hartm (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:03:24 GMT):
This will probably be a very interesting read out of context.
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:05:15 GMT):
true, let's give some context then
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:05:15 GMT):
true, let's give some context then: TSC call starts now
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:05:15 GMT):
true, let's give some context then: *TSC call starts now*
hartm (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:05:21 GMT):
Who is supposed to attend day 1 (out of the veterans)?
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:05:27 GMT):
* TSC call starts now *
tbenzies (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:09:32 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/explorer-2017-dec
cbf (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:10:46 GMT):
if we use this, maybe we should just paste in the agenda as well
binhn (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:11:11 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:13:01 GMT):
will be on shortly. wrestling gotomeeting
Dan (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:14:28 GMT):
on
cbf (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:15:05 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/fabric-2018-jan
thomasknoll (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:18:26 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
baohua (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:22:23 GMT):
nice progress on explorer and fabric!
baohua (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:22:46 GMT):
besides code, would encourage more improvement on documentation, too
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:24:09 GMT):
in other words: the ongoing poaching of IBM devs has a silver lining: it increases diversity ;-)
tbenzies (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:24:21 GMT):
Labs: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VbgmlIqDnUnvjxSJ5QTUBV-Qn3eA7Gduw0edjYgDXIY/edit
Dan (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:24:45 GMT):
Nice update, Chris.
baohua (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:25:00 GMT):
LOL @lehors
hartm (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:30:31 GMT):
Question: the text says that we don't require stewards to do a technical review. While I don't want the stewards to have to do a conference review, should we suggest that they at least do some kind of sanity check to make sure the project at least has a chance of working? We might want some kind of minimum bar.
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:31:46 GMT):
@hartm can that responsibility be taken by the sponsor?
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:31:58 GMT):
otherwise the sponsor is really just a "name"
hartm (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:32:15 GMT):
@MicBowman Sure, but we should state that in the document.
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:32:23 GMT):
agreed
hartm (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:33:19 GMT):
Yeah, I like the fact that the sponsor should be a maintainer.
hartm (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:33:55 GMT):
(Bots can be committers too ;))
rjagadee (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:34:09 GMT):
Perhaps it can be either 4) or 5).
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:36:38 GMT):
is there any incentive for a sponsor to "do a good job" to vet the project?
hartm (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:36:52 GMT):
I'm not sold on requiring commits if we already have sponsorship. We might have people who are clearly outside experts on blockchain who want to participate (i.e., a well-known bitcoiner wants to try out some new technology)--we don't necessarily need to make this people go through the ropes of committing.
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:38:03 GMT):
i'm comfortable with the assumption that individuals in the list of potential sponsors are incentivized by the overall success of HL
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:39:02 GMT):
good suggestion @cbf
rjagadee (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:39:21 GMT):
+1 on inclusion - We should word this openly enough so that the labs encourage new participants to join the HPL community
tkuhrt (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:41:05 GMT):
https://hyperledger.org/about/charter Section 4.a.ii defines who will have a vote
hartm (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:50:03 GMT):
Sign in blood! Now we're talking.
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:52:18 GMT):
great work @lehors
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:52:29 GMT):
thanks
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:53:37 GMT):
@lehors I see the advantage of RC
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:53:54 GMT):
Since I was absent for most of the call
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:54:05 GMT):
ah! very good
lehors (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:54:26 GMT):
*Call has now ended*
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:54:32 GMT):
I know
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:54:53 GMT):
I was on for the last 10 minutes
baohua (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 17:16:46 GMT):
looks very efficient using rktchat for the meeting chat today.
baohua (Thu, 11 Jan 2018 17:16:54 GMT):
let's keep on
eccheung4 (Wed, 17 Jan 2018 04:31:57 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:54:13 GMT):
hi there
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:54:42 GMT):
I don't mind but looking at the agenda makes me wonder whether it really justifies having a call
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:54:47 GMT):
it seems pretty light
tbenzies (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:57:30 GMT):
i think too late to cancel at this point -- so, we can just move really swiftly through and give folks some time back
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:57:46 GMT):
swift silent and blocky
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:57:54 GMT):
maybe not silent
tbenzies (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:57:55 GMT):
:joy:
tbenzies (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:59:17 GMT):
LA Hackfest (registration): http://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestfebruary2018
tbenzies (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:59:42 GMT):
LA Hackfest (draft agenda): https://docs.google.com/document/d/14yNuJsFEWnVsAclKb1QjPluRKgz3rIpaApRSppJj6to/edit
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:00:00 GMT):
nobody ever complains about shortening a call :-)
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:01:39 GMT):
We'll have some discussion about Working Group reports, but perhaps that will be brief.
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:02:46 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180118 ~~~~~~~~~
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:02:54 GMT):
As you know any of these topics can take off
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:03:12 GMT):
and consume the full 1 hr
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:03:50 GMT):
indeed
hartm (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:04:32 GMT):
Who is supposed to show up for the first day of the hackfest?
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:04:40 GMT):
You
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:04:55 GMT):
there were talks about trying to have at least one rep for each project
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:04:57 GMT):
noobs like us
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:05:18 GMT):
it would be good to try and get that sorted out
tbenzies (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:05:25 GMT):
LA Hackfest (draft agenda): https://docs.google.com/document/d/14yNuJsFEWnVsAclKb1QjPluRKgz3rIpaApRSppJj6to/edit
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:06:24 GMT):
LGTM but we need names of people committed to cover those topics
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:07:06 GMT):
cant we have parallel tracks according to interest
cbf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:07:28 GMT):
hmmm
cbf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:07:50 GMT):
I think that you really don't need to do both getting started and dev env
MicBowman (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:07:59 GMT):
@hartm should we add an agenda item for the crypto library?
hartm (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:08:12 GMT):
Yeah, we need people committed to presenting each of these. And I'm also curious about parallel tracks--not sure that people are going to want to set up three environments...
hartm (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:08:23 GMT):
@MicBowman Yes!
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:09:11 GMT):
maybe something in between would be best
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:09:19 GMT):
a series of intro
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:09:33 GMT):
and then in parallel some deeper dive sessions
hartm (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:09:47 GMT):
What if we introduce the projects in the morning and then have parallel tracks for setting up dev environments/applications/etc. in the afternoon?
hartm (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:10:01 GMT):
@lehors +1!
lehors (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:10:10 GMT):
yeah, I think we're converging :)
nage (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:10:22 GMT):
If people want to peel off to work, the experts won’t get a chance to onboard with the other projects (for example it would be good for me to set up Fabric and Sawtooth environments)
bbehlendorf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:10:43 GMT):
landing your first commit may also be part of the intro morning talks, since that will be same for each project (in theory)
bbehlendorf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:10:59 GMT):
morning is common and broad, afternoon is parallel and project-specific?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:11:18 GMT):
or slightly in parallel - maybe one track with three, a second track with another three, a third track with the three remaining
cbf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:11:23 GMT):
but each project uses different approaches to submitting patches
cbf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:11:46 GMT):
fabric and cello use gerrit, others github some use jira others not
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:12:00 GMT):
Yes, Chris pointed out some PR differences when we were in Lisbon. I
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:12:16 GMT):
I'd actually like to understand those better so we can cross pollinate best practices
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:12:25 GMT):
Maybe we can sort that out before LA though.
cbf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:12:38 GMT):
+1
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:13:34 GMT):
good stabbing @tkuhrt
hartm (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:15:05 GMT):
I don't know that we need to split application devs from regular devs--we'll probably have some people that aren't interested in coding period, and we should have something to accomodate them (maybe a presentation on techniques and applications?).
hartm (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:19:47 GMT):
Working group updates make total sense.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:20:10 GMT):
sorry about the noise in my background, I'm at a big conference
cbf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:20:40 GMT):
no worries
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:26:08 GMT):
good :vibration_mode:
cbf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:26:24 GMT):
lol
rjagadee (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:27:10 GMT):
+1 on WG reporting
JonathanLevi (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:27:16 GMT):
I really think that it's still the *New Year Resolutions* season...
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:27:16 GMT):
tracy with the :shield:
hartm (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:27:25 GMT):
"Tracy, can you deliver a dozen blocks of solid gold to my house?"
JonathanLevi (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:27:31 GMT):
So everybody comes up with all the things they planned for 2018...
JonathanLevi (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:27:47 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=JfxnnnvGTbg2A4QZ4) Make it 2 dozens, pls.
Dan (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:28:21 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180118 ~~~~~~~~~
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:28:40 GMT):
You will have to wait around for the next holiday season for your gifts
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:29:16 GMT):
I’ll take bitcoins in the mean time.
cbf (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:29:20 GMT):
thanks all
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:29:29 GMT):
Thanks
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:29:31 GMT):
before tomorrow for the bitcoins
greg.haskins (Fri, 19 Jan 2018 18:16:04 GMT):
hi all: anyone know the official dates of the LA hackfest?
greg.haskins (Fri, 19 Jan 2018 18:16:10 GMT):
trying to block my calendar
greg.haskins (Fri, 19 Jan 2018 18:16:53 GMT):
nm, i found it
greg.haskins (Fri, 19 Jan 2018 18:16:55 GMT):
https://www.hyperledger.org/event/hyperledger-hackfest-february-2018
hanlsin (Sun, 21 Jan 2018 21:45:07 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:03:57 GMT):
@here Second call of the Identity WG for 2018 today at noon EDT Join the call: https://www.uberconference.com/hyperledger-community
Optional dial in number: 401-283-2000,,,4807579435#
No PIN needed
Regional dial in numbers can be found here: https://www.uberconference.com/international
Agenda:
Re-Examine our raison d’etre
What are our goals as a group: The paper? An implementation?
Hyperledger joined ID2020, what are the concrete implications for the identity WG
Impact of PSD II, GDPR, MiFID
tbenzies (Wed, 24 Jan 2018 22:23:44 GMT):
Registration is open for the February Hackfest in Los Angeles on February 20-22. Please register now www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestfebruary2018
Please note that we are adding a "Day 0" to the Hackfest that will be focused on helping developers that are new to Hyperledger come up the learning curve.
February 20th -- Hyperledger Technical Intro
February 21st & 22nd -- Hackfest
We have started a draft agenda at https://docs.google.com/document/d/14yNuJsFEWnVsAclKb1QjPluRKgz3rIpaApRSppJj6to/edit.
lebdron (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:34:15 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:01:59 GMT):
hola
hartm (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:02:04 GMT):
Good morning!
baohua (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:02:26 GMT):
my gotomeeting apps stops working...
baohua (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:02:26 GMT):
my gotomeeting app stops working...
Dan (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:02:51 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180125 ~~~~~~~~~
jrosmith (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:03:22 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:05:24 GMT):
Hyperledger Global Forum, December 12-15, Basel Switzerland: https://www.hyperledger.org/announcements/2018/01/23/2018-hyperledger-global-forum-announced
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:06:12 GMT):
reg: http://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestfebruary2018
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:06:24 GMT):
agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14yNuJsFEWnVsAclKb1QjPluRKgz3rIpaApRSppJj6to/edit
hartm (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:08:19 GMT):
+1 Chris--seems like a good idea.
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:08:37 GMT):
hi all- what is the number and diversity of current registrants
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:08:51 GMT):
for LA
Dan (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:09:29 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/sawtooth-2018-jan
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:10:04 GMT):
Hope to be there from Identity WG...looking forward to get approval from the poohbahs
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:10:18 GMT):
Pulled an allnighter @Dan
baohua (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:10:20 GMT):
when is the planed date for sawtooth 1.0? look forward to seeing that
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:13:08 GMT):
@tbenzies what is the number and diversity of current registrants
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:13:58 GMT):
for Hackfest? 33 registered -- which is great for 1 month out. diversity on what metrics?
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:14:16 GMT):
company/geography etc.
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:14:23 GMT):
let me have a look when call wraps up
hartm (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:14:24 GMT):
LOL.
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:16:15 GMT):
@Dan who developed the Edx material?
hartm (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:18:39 GMT):
As far as hackfest diversity, I'd be more interested in what sort of skill set/experience/interests the people that are coming have. This will help us plan the agenda better.
binhn (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:22:02 GMT):
@hartm do we still need any more work on the crypto project to get a proposal out? i haven't heard since Lisbon, but i've been missing architecture meetings
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:22:36 GMT):
i think i added an agenda item for that @binhn
binhn (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:23:09 GMT):
thanks
hartm (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:23:49 GMT):
@binhn Check your PMs.
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:24:13 GMT):
@lehors do we have anything like a "template" for HL labs projects?
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:24:27 GMT):
nope
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:24:56 GMT):
@MicBowman @lehors we should make a variant of HIP
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:25:05 GMT):
template
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:25:16 GMT):
I'm wondering what the best approach is
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:25:32 GMT):
the idea was to use github and have requests submitted via a PR
baohua (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:25:35 GMT):
@Dan great progress in sawtooth!
Dan (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:25:45 GMT):
thanks!
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:25:49 GMT):
but we should still have a form of template for the PRs I guess
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:25:56 GMT):
Iroha: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/iroha-2018-jan
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:26:01 GMT):
i can play guinea pig for you... we have a project we want to add
cbf (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:26:25 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/iroha-2018-jan
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:26:31 GMT):
cool
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:27:31 GMT):
as a starter I would suggest a PR with a README.md file explaining what the lab is about
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:27:48 GMT):
Lift from Hyperledger labs material
Dan (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:28:01 GMT):
I thought each lab got its own repo?
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:28:05 GMT):
already presented by Tracy- I was thinking about this as well
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:28:23 GMT):
yes, you're right Dan
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:28:39 GMT):
so, we still need to figure out the exact mechanism to use
baohua (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:29:37 GMT):
README.md is a good idea and habit
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:30:00 GMT):
labs projects don't have a lot of requirements... but we should capture the "sponsor"
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:30:13 GMT):
errr... "capture" --> "document" :-)
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:32:49 GMT):
FYI -- Composer update due for next week
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:33:29 GMT):
process: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:33:40 GMT):
template: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/template.txt
tbenzies (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:33:51 GMT):
cadence: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-update-schedule
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:40:19 GMT):
lgtm with the suggested changes
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:40:34 GMT):
totally agree on the scope bit
Dan (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:41:07 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180125 ~~~~~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:41:07 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180128 ~~~~~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:41:07 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180201 ~~~~~~~~~
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:41:21 GMT):
see, I like not to be kicked out of the chat when the call ends
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:41:25 GMT):
just saying ;-)
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:41:35 GMT):
much less.... brutal
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:41:38 GMT):
You are not
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:41:56 GMT):
@lehors evidence is you are still typing
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:42:25 GMT):
that's my point vipin!
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:42:32 GMT):
I think you misread my statement :)
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:43:03 GMT):
That's @Dan's open close bracket
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:43:32 GMT):
I like the brackets
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:43:59 GMT):
next improvement would be to record the change of agenda items as we go through the call
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:44:16 GMT):
to make the record easier to read later on
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:44:27 GMT):
@lehors you are still extolling the virtues of RC over gtm chat, I see
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:44:40 GMT):
yes! :)
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:45:01 GMT):
We want to institute this in our WG calls as well
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:45:32 GMT):
However there is still a reluctance to read the RC - maybe with time this will improve
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:45:50 GMT):
We are also eagerly awaiting change to zoom
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:46:13 GMT):
ok, gotta go
lehors (Thu, 25 Jan 2018 15:46:14 GMT):
ttyl
baohua (Fri, 26 Jan 2018 02:06:17 GMT):
zoom +1, gtm seems unstable to connect recently.
silasdavis (Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:05:19 GMT):
Hi channel, I'm seeking a little orientation on what work/thought may have already been undertaken on cross-chain communication in the sense of:
A: Atomic exchange of transactions between (separate instances/deployments of) chains of the same type (i.e. Hyperledger projects)
B: Transaction (um) 'fungibility' between chains of different types (e.g. mapping a fabric transaction/payload to a sawtooth one and having it run there with the same underlying logic)
C: Atomic exchange of transactions between chains of different types
Regarding A and C, I know that Fabric has a channels mechanism - I think Sawtooth probably does (?), not sure about Iroha. I don't know how applicable same chain type channels/subnet/zones notions might be to facilitating cross-chain communication with some form of consensus guarantees. In a most basic form a single client could claim a transaction on chain X, then send the equivalent transaction to chain Y (using some B-like ability). Some kind of distributed lock could be used to ensure consistency but it would still be a single point of failure.
My particular interest is in building various types of compatibility between chains with the Ethereum virtual machine as the broker of that compatibility. In particular for the upcoming EVM support in Hyperledger projects - in Burrow, Sawtooth, and Fabric. I have in mind a few layers of possible compatibility:
- EVM bytecode portability - where we aim to be after the basic integration in Seth/Fabric stabilises.
- Transaction portability - where we could deliver EVM payloads, basically CallTxs, in a native format to a particular chain - this would give a migration path and the ability to develop against multiple 'ledger backends' but wouldn't synchronise heterogeneous running networks.
- Atomic swap of transactions - simplest form is a single client claiming a distributed lock between two chains and sending the complementary state updates to both, ensuring those transactions commit before releasing the lock.
- Shared consensus layer - something like Cosmos - where we have some protocol level way of committing transactions with a below quorum voting (i.e. for some transactions votes by just those validators on the hub are sufficient - chain is a light client for some remote transactions). Hopefully we could have a formally quantifiable drop-off in fault tolerance guarantees for consensus on remote transactions.
Anyway I wanted to make sure I was aware of any existing work, with a view to proposing a discussion on this area (possibly a working group) and maybe use it as basis for some cross-team hacking in future hackfest...
silasdavis (Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:05:19 GMT):
Hi channel, I'm seeking a little orientation on what work/thought may have already been undertaken on cross-chain communication in the sense of:
A: Atomic exchange of transactions between (separate instances/deployments of) chains of the same type (i.e. the same Hyperledger project)
B: Transaction (um) 'fungibility' between chains of different types (e.g. mapping a fabric transaction/payload to a sawtooth one and having it run there with the same underlying logic)
C: Atomic exchange of transactions between chains of different types
Regarding A and C, I know that Fabric has a channels mechanism - I think Sawtooth probably does (?), not sure about Iroha. I don't know how applicable same chain type channels/subnet/zones notions might be to facilitating cross-chain communication with some form of consensus guarantees. In a most basic form a single client could claim a transaction on chain X, then send the equivalent transaction to chain Y (using some B-like ability). Some kind of distributed lock could be used to ensure consistency but it would still be a single point of failure.
My particular interest is in building various types of compatibility between chains with the Ethereum virtual machine as the broker of that compatibility. In particular for the upcoming EVM support in Hyperledger projects - in Burrow, Sawtooth, and Fabric. I have in mind a few layers of possible compatibility:
- EVM bytecode portability - where we aim to be after the basic integration in Seth/Fabric stabilises.
- Transaction portability - where we could deliver EVM payloads, basically CallTxs, in a native format to a particular chain - this would give a migration path and the ability to develop against multiple 'ledger backends' but wouldn't synchronise heterogeneous running networks.
- Atomic swap of transactions - simplest form is a single client claiming a distributed lock between two chains and sending the complementary state updates to both, ensuring those transactions commit before releasing the lock.
- Shared consensus layer - something like Cosmos - where we have some protocol level way of committing transactions with a below quorum voting (i.e. for some transactions votes by just those validators on the hub are sufficient - chain is a light client for some remote transactions). Hopefully we could have a formally quantifiable drop-off in fault tolerance guarantees for consensus on remote transactions.
Anyway I wanted to make sure I was aware of any existing work, with a view to proposing a discussion on this area (possibly a working group) and maybe use it as basis for some cross-team hacking in future hackfest...
silasdavis (Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:05:19 GMT):
Hi channel, I'm seeking a little orientation on what work/thought may have already been undertaken on cross-chain communication in the sense of:
A: Atomic exchange of transactions between (separate instances/deployments of) chains of the same type (i.e. the same Hyperledger project)
B: Transaction (um) 'fungibility' between chains of different types (e.g. mapping a fabric transaction/payload to a sawtooth one and having it run there with the same underlying logic)
C: Atomic exchange of transactions between chains of different types
Regarding A and C, I know that Fabric has a channels mechanism - I think Sawtooth probably does (?), not sure about Iroha. I don't know how applicable same chain type channels/subnet/zones notions might be to facilitating cross-chain communication with some form of consensus guarantees. In a most basic form a single client could send a transaction on chain X, then send the equivalent transaction to chain Y (using a B-like ability). Some kind of distributed lock could be used to ensure consistency but it would still be a single point of failure.
My particular interest is in building various types of compatibility between chains with the Ethereum virtual machine as the broker of that compatibility. In particular for the upcoming EVM support in Hyperledger projects - in Burrow, Sawtooth, and Fabric. I have in mind a few layers of possible compatibility:
- EVM bytecode portability - where we aim to be after the basic integration in Seth/Fabric stabilises.
- Transaction portability - where we could deliver EVM payloads, basically CallTxs, in a native format to a particular chain - this would give a migration path and the ability to develop against multiple 'ledger backends' but wouldn't synchronise heterogeneous running networks.
- Atomic swap of transactions - simplest form is a single client claiming a distributed lock between two chains and sending the complementary state updates to both, ensuring those transactions commit before releasing the lock.
- Shared consensus layer - something like Cosmos - where we have some protocol level way of committing transactions with a below quorum voting (i.e. for some transactions votes by just those validators on the hub are sufficient - chain is a light client for some remote transactions). Hopefully we could have a formally quantifiable drop-off in fault tolerance guarantees for consensus on remote transactions.
Anyway I wanted to make sure I was aware of any existing work, with a view to proposing a discussion on this area (possibly a working group) and maybe use it as basis for some cross-team hacking in future hackfest...
silasdavis (Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:05:19 GMT):
Hi channel, I'm seeking a little orientation on what work/thought may have already been undertaken on cross-chain communication in the sense of:
A: Atomic exchange of transactions between (separate instances/deployments of) chains of the same type (i.e. the same Hyperledger project)
B: Transaction (um) 'fungibility' between chains of different types (e.g. mapping a fabric transaction/payload to a sawtooth one and having it run there with the same underlying logic)
C: Atomic exchange of transactions between chains of different types
Regarding A and C, I know that Fabric has a channels mechanism - I think Sawtooth probably does (?), not sure about Iroha. I don't know how applicable same chain type channels/subnet/zones notions might be to facilitating cross-chain communication with some form of consensus guarantees. In a most basic form a single client could send a transaction on chain X, then send the equivalent transaction to chain Y (using a B-like ability). Some kind of distributed lock could be used to ensure consistency but it would still be a single point of failure.
My particular interest is in building various types of compatibility between chains with the Ethereum virtual machine as the broker of that compatibility. In particular for the upcoming EVM support in Hyperledger projects - in Burrow, Sawtooth, and Fabric. I have in mind a few layers of possible compatibility:
- EVM bytecode portability - where we aim to be after the basic integration in Seth/Fabric stabilises.
- Transaction portability - where we could deliver EVM payloads, basically CallTxs, in a native format to a particular chain - this would give a migration path and the ability to develop against multiple 'ledger backends' but wouldn't synchronise heterogeneous running networks.
- Atomic swap of transactions - simplest form is a single client claiming a distributed lock between two chains and sending the complementary state updates to both, ensuring those transactions commit before releasing the lock.
- Shared consensus layer - something like Cosmos - where we have some protocol level way of committing transactions with a below quorum voting (i.e. for some transactions votes by just those validators on the hub are sufficient - chain is a light client for some remote transactions). Hopefully we could have a formally quantifiable drop-off in fault tolerance guarantees for consensus on remote transactions.
Anyway I wanted to make sure I was aware of any existing work, with a view to proposing a discussion on this area at TSC (possibly a working group) and maybe use it as basis for some cross-team hacking in future hackfest...
compleatang (Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:15:57 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
silasdavis (Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:31:02 GMT):
Oh perhaps also some 'why':
- To support multiple vendors that provide this level of interop (weaker than what seems to be being proposed by EEA)
- To provide migrations of live state
- To shard based on chain capabilities/usage
- To shard based on participant visibility
- To decentralise networks across projects not just servers
Dan (Tue, 30 Jan 2018 14:04:32 GMT):
Sawtooth 1.0 is live!!!
Dan (Tue, 30 Jan 2018 14:04:34 GMT):
https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/30/hyperledger-releases-new-open-source-distributed-ledger-called-hyperledger-sawtooth/
binhn (Tue, 30 Jan 2018 15:07:36 GMT):
Dan and team, congrats!
kelly_ (Tue, 30 Jan 2018 16:20:05 GMT):
congrats!
hartm (Tue, 30 Jan 2018 18:23:08 GMT):
Congrats Sawtooth team!
Dan (Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:30:54 GMT):
thanks!
baohua (Wed, 31 Jan 2018 01:26:38 GMT):
congrats!
cbf (Wed, 31 Jan 2018 20:20:58 GMT):
nice job, @Dan and team!
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 00:21:31 GMT):
Registration is now open for the June Hackfest in Amsterdam on June 27-29.
Please register now: https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestjune2018
Draft agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hDlWTKSBmXM6UQW5s9qRjFwO_eZv0LU8nppHqMwoIxM/edit
hartm (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:00:38 GMT):
Good morning everyone...
JonathanLevi (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:00:57 GMT):
Hello hello!
Dan (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:01:15 GMT):
Go go gadget :rocket: chat
baohua (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:01:51 GMT):
morning and evening
Dan (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:02:57 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180201 ~~~~~~~~~
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:04:20 GMT):
Time to buy us some drinks
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:04:32 GMT):
Maybe it is the other way around
JonathanLevi (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:04:50 GMT):
Very nice job "Sawtooth people" ;-)
Congrats!
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:06:23 GMT):
Did you have chaos monkey type tests
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:07:28 GMT):
LA registration: http://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestfebruary2018
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:07:32 GMT):
LA agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14yNuJsFEWnVsAclKb1QjPluRKgz3rIpaApRSppJj6to/edit
Dan (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:08:13 GMT):
In the process of getting the test infrastructure automated we found we could accidentally be our own chaos monkeys
dhuseby (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:08:14 GMT):
Link to tsc agenda doc?
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:08:49 GMT):
AMS reg: https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestjune2018
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:09:14 GMT):
AMS agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hDlWTKSBmXM6UQW5s9qRjFwO_eZv0LU8nppHqMwoIxM/edit
Dan (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:09:38 GMT):
@dhuseby TSC agenda https://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/2018-February/001367.html
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:09:55 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/internship/program_overview
dhuseby (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:10:04 GMT):
I found it immediately after posting that
dhuseby (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:10:06 GMT):
Thanks
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:10:42 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/internship/for_mentors
binhn (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:12:55 GMT):
@tbenzies could post the link the the last intern projects if we have it
tkuhrt (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:13:11 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/template.txt
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:13:37 GMT):
@VipinB these were the 5 accepted projects for the interns last year: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/internship/project_ideas
Daniela_Barbosa (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:13:51 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:15:33 GMT):
Why me @tbenzies ?
lehors (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:15:56 GMT):
I think this is a case where we could have asked for any objection ;-)
lehors (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:16:28 GMT):
but it makes us feel like we're doing something when we actively vote I guess :)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:16:37 GMT):
Totally.
hartm (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:16:42 GMT):
You can start in two weeks or so if you like.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:16:47 GMT):
I feel so much more productive when I say *yes*
JonathanLevi (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:16:47 GMT):
@lehors I feel so much more productive when I say *yes*
hartm (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:16:48 GMT):
It doesn't seem like a big obligation.
binhn (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:16:57 GMT):
@VipinB that was for me
Dan (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:17:18 GMT):
@lehors don't take away my vote. someone in england tried to do that once.
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:17:19 GMT):
I do look a lot like you
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:17:19 GMT):
I do look a lot like you @binhn
Dan (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:18:55 GMT):
nice work @tkuhrt . thanks for doing that along with all the travel.
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:22:35 GMT):
@Dan aberrations?
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:24:41 GMT):
We will send someone to visit them....
Dan (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:24:48 GMT):
outliers maybe?
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:25:05 GMT):
@Dan I like that better
Dan (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:25:36 GMT):
If you want better erudition I need more :coffee:
VipinB (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:25:39 GMT):
Danke
Dan (Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:25:58 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180201 ~~~~~~~~~
tbenzies (Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:06:22 GMT):
Reminder to register for the February Hackfest in Los Angeles on February 20-22: www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestfebruary2018
tbenzies (Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:07:20 GMT):
Also, please contribute to the draft agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14yNuJsFEWnVsAclKb1QjPluRKgz3rIpaApRSppJj6to/edit
kumarlax (Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:53:21 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Feb 2018 14:07:25 GMT):
@here tsc meeting for today cancelled per Chris Ferris' email
Dan (Thu, 08 Feb 2018 21:25:36 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180208 ~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180208 ~~~~~~~~~
:D
rjones (Wed, 14 Feb 2018 23:03:26 GMT):
This will impact us: https://status.linuxfoundation.org/incidents/v0bs1g958b6g outages this Saturday
rjones (Wed, 14 Feb 2018 23:03:26 GMT):
This will impact us: https://status.linuxfoundation.org/incidents/v0bs1g958b6g outages this Friday
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:02:33 GMT):
@here Good Morning
baohua (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:02:51 GMT):
Morning and evening!
baohua (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:03:01 GMT):
Happy Spring Festival!
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:03:23 GMT):
Morning and evening !
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:04:07 GMT):
@JonathanLevi expect you to rap my knuckles for using "here" indiscriminatingly
tbenzies (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:04:31 GMT):
hackfest agenda; https://docs.google.com/document/d/14yNuJsFEWnVsAclKb1QjPluRKgz3rIpaApRSppJj6to/edit
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:04:47 GMT):
LOL. @VipinB Do you in the #general answer and my bot will take care of it ;-)
lehors (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:04:48 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180215 ~~~~~~~~~
hartm (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:04:55 GMT):
Yeah, I really wish "here" was disabled. It makes it very hard to follow when something needs your attention or not.
tbenzies (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:05:49 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/internship/for_mentors
tbenzies (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:07:33 GMT):
Composer: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/composer-2018-feb
cbf (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:15:55 GMT):
the way that open source works, if you want something, roll-up your sleeves and dig in ;-) Basically, what Simon is saying is that the maintainers would be open to contribution that integrated another DLT platform
lehors (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:18:15 GMT):
Simon has been consistently against anything other than GitHub for about everything
dhuseby (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:20:09 GMT):
So for composer to support another DLT the DLT must be able to run smart contracts written in JavaScript?
lehors (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:21:24 GMT):
I think that's right
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:21:31 GMT):
Unless there is a translator like they had for go<->js
dhuseby (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:21:36 GMT):
Also, with github issues, there is no support for confidential security bugs. To adhere to responsible disclosure and the internet infrastructure initiative rules, we need to have a confidential security bug process.
lehors (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:21:56 GMT):
because the core engine of Composer is installed as the chaincode/smart contract
baohua (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:22:58 GMT):
@lehors i think the existing run-time support is still golang-based chaincode inside the network?
baohua (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:23:13 GMT):
i.e. the `core-engine` you mentioned
lehors (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:24:08 GMT):
it'd be better to ask Simon but that's not my understanding
lehors (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:25:06 GMT):
Composer used to install itself as chaincode using a Javascript VM written in go
lehors (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:25:21 GMT):
now that Node.js is supported as chaincode, they use that instead
baohua (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:25:23 GMT):
yeap
lehors (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:25:25 GMT):
which is much faster
dhuseby (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:25:42 GMT):
Gotcha
dhuseby (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:25:48 GMT):
Thanks for the clarification.
baohua (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:26:19 GMT):
aha, then the dashboard uses node sdk to interact with the node js chaincode, right?
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:27:49 GMT):
Simon Stone
as long as you can run JS (either via node.js or an interpreter) composer should be portable to that DLT
lehors (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:28:42 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180215 ~~~~~~~~~
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:28:44 GMT):
In the words of ss himself from the other chat source
sstone1 (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:30:24 GMT):
> aha, then the dashboard uses node sdk to interact with the node js chaincode, right?
yeah, all the composer client components (Node.js APIs, REST APIs, web playground, app generator, etc) use the Node.js SDK to call the Node.js chaincode
sstone1 (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:31:53 GMT):
also, nothing about the design of composer means that it's JavaScript and JavaScript only... someone could port all the code to Java or whatever
sstone1 (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:32:04 GMT):
but that's a much bigger piece of work then just getting the existing JS codebase up and running
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:32:07 GMT):
@lehors It installs Composer runtime as chaincode (Golang - for `Fabric 1.0.x`, NodeJS - for `Fabric 1.1.0-alpha`)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:32:45 GMT):
@sstone1 and @dhuseby [ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=S2HX37f7Nv8yXBuP5) I believe it really depends on how much we or others want to invest here.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:33:19 GMT):
Yes, I agree - having another language is not an issue, the porting is easy.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:33:22 GMT):
*BUT*
sstone1 (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:33:30 GMT):
:joy: thanks for volunteering
rjones (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:33:34 GMT):
@hartm that feature is in the next version of the chat server. a ticket to upgrade this server to support that feature is in the hopper.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:33:59 GMT):
If we really want to have cross DLT support, then I would actually suggest that we "sit down" and review the API.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:34:01 GMT):
I thought single dlt based efforts were deprecated as full incubations- however I am afraid that decision (or rather direction) came after Composer was incubated
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:34:41 GMT):
Maybe we can make it easier for other DLTs to work well with Composer (in a way that is only easy for "Fabric", or so).
hartm (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:34:47 GMT):
@rjones Awesome! It's annoying to wake up and not know whether someone has asked me a crypto question deep in chat or someone is just spamming "here"
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:34:49 GMT):
Just thinking out loud. Not hinting at anything.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:36:02 GMT):
Maybe an abstraction layer or so? Happy to list out requirements.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:36:08 GMT):
So incubations that either a. create a brand new dlt or b. aim to be be usefull across multiple dlts as libraries would be used
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:36:08 GMT):
So incubations that either a. create a brand new dlt or b. aim to be be usefull across multiple dlts as libraries would be incubated fresh
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:36:42 GMT):
@sstone1 - I'm not volunteering you or bringing in more work ;-) I'm just trying to see what's potentially needed to bring more people "over".
sstone1 (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:36:58 GMT):
we have an existing abstraction layer already - we needed to build one to handle Fabric v0.6 vs Fabric v1.0, and running in-memory and in a web browser without Fabric
sstone1 (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:37:20 GMT):
80-90% of the Composer codebase does not know it's talking to Fabric
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:37:21 GMT):
@hartm, in channels like identity and architecture and tsc- "here" is useful for general announcements
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:37:31 GMT):
And by the way, we at HACERA, actually extended that layer for a project last year (2017)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:38:00 GMT):
Maybe we can collect some requirements for that layer, is what I meant (from non Fabric DLTs)
sstone1 (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:39:13 GMT):
oh, sure
hartm (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:39:17 GMT):
@VipinB That's true in theory, but in practice it's not what it is used for.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:40:23 GMT):
Beware of broad generalizations and removal of features for one purpose, it depends on the channel (the traffic, members etc.) so it should be settable on a channel basis @hartm
rjones (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:42:15 GMT):
@vipin @hartm I wrote the feature. It is a permission, like at-all. By allowing use by `moderators`, you both can get what you would like
rjones (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:42:15 GMT):
@VipinB @hartm I wrote the feature. It is a permission, like at-all. By allowing use by `moderators`, you both can get what you would like
hartm (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:42:57 GMT):
@rjones @VipinB Thanks Ry! That's exactly what I was hoping.
rjones (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:43:13 GMT):
it will be much like the read-only channels where moderators can talk, but everyone can read, for instance.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:54:25 GMT):
Also @hartm if it helps the notification icon for "here" will be just an outline with a number, however the one for actual name mentions is a background color so in theory (and in practice) you can distinguish the mention just by looking at the notification. Also @rjones thanks!
VipinB (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:56:03 GMT):
We have work to do to fine-tune the channel settings
jwagantall (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 23:13:30 GMT):
Hi team, there will be a Gerrit-Jenkins outage today at 16:30 Pacific to upgrade Gerrit to v2.14.6. This should just take about 30 min or less.
rjones (Thu, 15 Feb 2018 23:27:01 GMT):
There is an upcoming chat outage to upgrade. More on timing when I know timing.
jwagantall (Fri, 16 Feb 2018 00:47:28 GMT):
Team, Gerrit is now v2.14.6.. services are back! .. thanks!
Dan (Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:17:01 GMT):
_resists urge to type `at here` repeatedly before :rocket: upgrade_
Dan (Tue, 20 Feb 2018 08:11:45 GMT):
Anyone have the hack fest agenda link?
JonathanLevi (Tue, 20 Feb 2018 11:01:21 GMT):
@Dan https://docs.google.com/document/d/14yNuJsFEWnVsAclKb1QjPluRKgz3rIpaApRSppJj6to/edit
Dan (Tue, 20 Feb 2018 16:34:49 GMT):
Gracias
bbehlendorf (Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:38:17 GMT):
Didn't realize until now that SSH and IMAP and likely other ports/services are blocked from the Wifi here at UCLA; Todd is looking into it
bbehlendorf (Tue, 20 Feb 2018 19:10:21 GMT):
OK, I think we have a solution for the SSH/IMAP block, Todd has a bunch of 1-day access codes for unfettered access, but it's complicated (requires a unique name & password and registering for an account) so if you need it you can see him for it. He's off getting the list printed out.
bbehlendorf (Tue, 20 Feb 2018 19:10:44 GMT):
come over to #hackfest if you're on site or want to follow the backchannel.
tbenzies (Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:34:33 GMT):
[DEADLINE] Last call to apply to mentor a Hyperledger Intern (will close this Friday, February 23rd).
Please indicate your interest in mentoring an intern by completing the following form (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfO3RAeR0fr6WQIFs4J_kBJzQxp4Vs7Y0FHiyecGSwt24d4jQ/viewform)
For more information on the program, please see https://wiki.hyperledger.org/internship/program_overview.
greg.haskins (Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:05:15 GMT):
call canceled this week?
baohua (Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:09:53 GMT):
i think so
baohua (Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:10:04 GMT):
as most guys attend the hackfest
rjones (Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:24:32 GMT):
Yes
rjones (Thu, 22 Feb 2018 20:22:20 GMT):
There will be a one hour chat outage at 1800 Pacific tonight (about four and a half hours from now) https://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/2018-February/001397.html
Dan (Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:49:14 GMT):
@bbehlendorf does the linux foundation have a policy on copyright notices in headers? I don't see anything in our HLP charter.
@TomBarnes suggested this Apache guidance http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers to remove copyright notices from source and place them in a NOTICES file.
Further it appears from examples that it is not a copyright that goes in the NOTICES file but a statement like "This product includes software developed at..."
Finally some files (e.g. build scripts) have meta fields for things like "Author". Should those be removed? If not or if they cannot be removed is the appropriate author "Hyperledger Project"?
TomBarnes (Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:49:14 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:09:44 GMT):
IANAL, but I thought I understood that copyright retained to the submitter while the rights on claims for use of the software to the project... I'd be happy either way (e.g. make all copyright LF rather than company XYZ).
Dan (Mon, 26 Feb 2018 00:35:51 GMT):
@here Ry nice update! _(he gambled)_
rjones (Mon, 26 Feb 2018 01:03:18 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=rT6r8wEehRRExxYmx) @Dan @tbenzies
rjones (Mon, 26 Feb 2018 01:03:40 GMT):
@Dan I don't think @bbehlendorf uses chat
Dan (Mon, 26 Feb 2018 01:49:21 GMT):
Yeah I kinda was getting that feeling. I'll copy to a note to him and Mike D. when I get back to my email machine.
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 14:52:07 GMT):
Reposting Todd's note that we are switching to zoom this week: ```Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/317239767
Or iPhone one-tap :
US: +16699006833,,317239767# or +16465588656,,317239767#
Or Telephone:
Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 877 369 0926 (Toll Free) or +1 855 880 1246 (Toll Free)
Meeting ID: 317 239 767
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=BYDz1WGXJTTJ_s4_zumD9hqKjJv-Whgs
```
hartm (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:02:57 GMT):
Good morning everyone!
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:03:36 GMT):
@Dan I'm missing
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:05:15 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180301 ~~~~~~~~~~
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:05:22 GMT):
now i feel better... :-)
hartm (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:10:00 GMT):
We should just have a happy hour at the end of day 3! That way everyone would stay ;)
lehors (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:11:37 GMT):
:)
VipinB (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:15:25 GMT):
Maybe look at successes from the past
VipinB (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:15:58 GMT):
Those global ones should be more roadshow like
nage (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:23:35 GMT):
+1 to the three days, especially we have fewer per year. We were able to get a lot more working group work done with the third day.
VipinB (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:26:01 GMT):
We do not have budget to travel (from the banks)- seems like the technology companies are more open to this kind of activity
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:26:34 GMT):
i won't be able to make dubai
kelly_ (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:26:34 GMT):
I am probably out for Dubai
nage (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:26:37 GMT):
I will not be at Dubai
lehors (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:26:46 GMT):
me neither
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:27:02 GMT):
likewise won't be able to make that
hartm (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:28:13 GMT):
Schedule idea: Winter in SF, Spring in Asia, Summer in Europe, Fall in NY?
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:28:47 GMT):
deep winter in minneapolis
VipinB (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:29:13 GMT):
Just Europe will do for Winter- with Beast from the East
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:33:19 GMT):
arch wg https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/architecture-wg-2018-mar
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:39:04 GMT):
_
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:41:50 GMT):
_
hartm (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:41:59 GMT):
9 am eastern risks losing the west coast.
hartm (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:42:05 GMT):
But rotating the time slot is a good idea.
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:42:12 GMT):
west coast is over valued
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:43:31 GMT):
more time at the hackfest! ;-)
tbenzies (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:44:51 GMT):
Indy WG https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/indy-2018-feb
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:44:52 GMT):
and we haven't figured out how best to use rocket chat and the mailing lists for discussions
cbf (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:44:55 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/indy-2018-feb
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:45:05 GMT):
which do have the advantage of being "async"
cbf (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:46:47 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=8x9d7X9sY2vtDibNj) @Dan with global warming, we will soon be spending more time in Minnesota I'm sure
rjagadee (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:47:17 GMT):
Yes, we need to better with the doing discussions on mail-list or rocket-chat
nage (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:49:03 GMT):
Accumulator based revocation support is nearly complete in master and should promote to stable in the next release.
mwagner (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:50:45 GMT):
stall stall stall
mwagner (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:54:58 GMT):
stalling worked!
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:56:33 GMT):
#teamwork
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:57:11 GMT):
:seedling:
mwagner (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:58:32 GMT):
so Caliper may tet this in the near future
mwagner (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:58:35 GMT):
test
kelly_ (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:59:40 GMT):
it's also possible that we may bring in a post 1.0 project into HL in the future
kelly_ (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:59:51 GMT):
would that then go straight to active?
kelly_ (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:00:10 GMT):
or is it about release a 1.0 once you are already an incubated project
nage (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:00:21 GMT):
Indy released a 1.0 shortly before joining Hyperledger, so I've been trying hard to prevent version number inflation as we complete our incubation tasks. We have been avoiding a declaration of Hyperledger GA until we have a reference agent and better support the open standards we're developing at the W3C, but I think technically we're just missing CII badging and some procedural requirements.
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:01:05 GMT):
Gotta drop for next call (Sawtooth Planning btw, for those interested in participating / being aware of the next sprint)
lehors (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:01:19 GMT):
worth further discussion for sure
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:01:47 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180301 ~~~~~~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:03:10 GMT):
good job mic ;)
nage (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:06:27 GMT):
kelly_: having lived through that case, I like the idea of being incubation while you solve any branding, tooling or process issues before declaring GA, but it means that like JonathanLevi stated in the call GA triggers the marketing and other Hyperledger support, rather than the 1.0 moniker, at least for projects that have the issue described.
nage (Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:06:27 GMT):
kelly_: having lived through that case, I like the idea of being in incubation while you solve any branding, licensing, tooling or process issues before declaring GA, but it means that like JonathanLevi stated in the call GA triggers the marketing and other Hyperledger support, rather than the 1.0 moniker, at least for projects that have the issue described.
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:01:19 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180308 ~~~~~~~~~~
hartm (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:01:21 GMT):
Good morning everyone!
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:01:25 GMT):
good morning
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:01:27 GMT):
hi!
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:01:49 GMT):
is everybody silent or am I having a sound problem?
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:02:27 GMT):
ok, Todd broke the silence :)
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:02:45 GMT):
GM
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:07:45 GMT):
+1 Chris, Hart
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:12:14 GMT):
Between the devil & the deep blue sea as usual
hartm (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:12:52 GMT):
I think if we have a separate registration form for the hackfest and the day 0, then this will help filter the groups.
hartm (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:15:00 GMT):
I think the 3-day meetings are good--if we have to travel, most people won't mind staying an extra day, particularly if it means less travel overall.
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:16:24 GMT):
we really need to agree on whether this a 0-base index or 1-base index (re Day 0,1,2 or 1,2,3) :-)
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:16:24 GMT):
we really need to agree on whether this a 0-based index or 1-based index (re Day 0,1,2 or 1,2,3) :-)
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:16:24 GMT):
we really need to agree on whether this is a 0-based index or 1-based index (re Day 0,1,2 or 1,2,3) :-)
nage (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:16:25 GMT):
+1 to being better prepared to fill in the unconference agenda
nage (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:17:57 GMT):
-1 to a separate registration, I’d hope these folks would be highly encouraged to lurk and try to contribute (different registrations may scare away the timid)
tbenzies (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:20:24 GMT):
Burrow: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/burrow-2018-mar
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:28:29 GMT):
Burrow guys, please show up on Identity WG to volunteer on the Burrow Identity model in our Paper doc
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:29:13 GMT):
See https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zDPVDer9G-IjqicB65G9Uo2RhzpYLY4mGpVpEPu_Wt4/edit?usp=drivesdk for the more complete volunteer list by section. The burrow section is empty...
MicBowman (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:35:01 GMT):
great update, silas!
hartm (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:35:12 GMT):
Haha, great answer Silas!
cbf (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:35:37 GMT):
+1 what I could hear, sounds like great progress
cbf (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:35:45 GMT):
apologies for my lame internet connection
tbenzies (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:40:35 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/2018-March/001408.html
cbf (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:45:50 GMT):
I think Silas is saying he might want to go to 1.0? I lost audio
silasdavis (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:46:35 GMT):
yes... It's something that I would like to have the option to do a few releases after this refactoring
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:47:31 GMT):
is our zoom session in limbo?
cbf (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:47:56 GMT):
understood thanks
cbf (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:47:56 GMT):
and my connection is now completely crap
silasdavis (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:48:01 GMT):
I can hear Jonathon
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:48:25 GMT):
did you guys hear what I said?
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:48:38 GMT):
about the current state of things
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:48:54 GMT):
@lehors this is what active entails
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:48:56 GMT):
Projects seeking to graduate from Incubation must:
have fully functional code base
have test coverage commensurate with other Active projects
have an active and diverse community of developers
have a history of releases that follow the Active release process
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:49:07 GMT):
so I think we would all agree that most of those would be required for 1.0
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:49:16 GMT):
the only open question is around active and diverse community
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:49:29 GMT):
How is diversity measured today? @kelly_
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:49:54 GMT):
the fabric and sawtooth included stats on # of contributors/PRs from different companies
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:50:24 GMT):
that's the main question though
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:50:38 GMT):
do you have to have a broad community to have a 1.0?
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:51:07 GMT):
could we make it that a project either needs to a) be an active project, or b) get tsc approval?
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:51:27 GMT):
once we 'bless' something as 'active' it seems like we are signing off that the project has good governance
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:51:30 GMT):
a small team could very well have produced a quality piece of code that is worth labeling 1.0
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:51:35 GMT):
Projects supported by Smaller companies are at a disadvantage
hartm (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:51:53 GMT):
Yeah +1 to @kelly_ and @lehors.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:51:54 GMT):
+1 lehors
MicBowman (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:03 GMT):
the 1.0 designation of a HL project carries at least some of the blessing of HL
MicBowman (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:16 GMT):
that should imply... viable HL project
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:19 GMT):
how about a tsc sponsor is required for 1.0
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:23 GMT):
or x number of tsc sponsors
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:31 GMT):
so they are putting their name on the line with regard to quality
MicBowman (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:36 GMT):
with code and community and all "gates" passed for HL blessing
MicBowman (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:40 GMT):
"blessin"
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:44 GMT):
my zoom client and/or connections is in limbo - I get fragmented pieces of audio
silasdavis (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:46 GMT):
+1 also what Chris is saying, to linking exit-incubation with release-1.0 creates an odd sort of deadlock - should a pre-1.0 be allowed to leave incubation?
MicBowman (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:53:15 GMT):
if the code is mature... and the community is mature... then the process will be accelerated
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:55:23 GMT):
Majority of tsc have to vote @kelly_ - so sponsor is moot
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:56:11 GMT):
@VipinB for active status, not for 1.0
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:57:48 GMT):
if anything I think it's clear that we need not to jump to making a decision :)
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:57:54 GMT):
@kelly_ seems like what you are asking for will be difficult for amsller projects with no real tsc member involvement
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:58:01 GMT):
smaller
baohua (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:58:19 GMT):
We may take a look at other community like openstack, Apache. Whether there is requirement of 1.0 on the incubation exit.
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:59:05 GMT):
we need to get a clear and shared understanding of what active means and what 1.0 means and the dependency between the two if any
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:59:19 GMT):
@lehors agreed
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:59:23 GMT):
based on the discussion so far I don't think we are there yet
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:59:58 GMT):
active to mean means good governance and good processes
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:00:14 GMT):
1.0 is a measure of code quality
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:00:19 GMT):
to me*
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:00:33 GMT):
yes I agree with that
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:00:41 GMT):
and compliance (e.g. open source compliance, security review, etc.)
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:01:14 GMT):
So far we seem to be OK with active projects declaring 1.0 on their own (as with fabric and sawtooth)
Dan (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:01:24 GMT):
I think the active conditions are necessary but insufficient for the 1.0 conditions
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:02:00 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=viZdTfEwvNneJscjd) @Dan can you please explain why?
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:02:18 GMT):
why is it necessary?
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:02:19 GMT):
So @Dan ergo you cannot go to 1.0 without being out of incubation.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:02:29 GMT):
Is that what you are saying
Dan (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:02:49 GMT):
yes. or stated negatively.. can you claim that you are production ready if your commit process is erratic, you don't have CI, you don't ...
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:03:02 GMT):
what if you ahve all that but not an 'active or diverse community'
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:03:07 GMT):
I think that is the only point of contention
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:03:20 GMT):
what if you have all that sorted out but you don't have a diverse community?
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:03:34 GMT):
I have not yet seen a true measure of diversity
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:04:06 GMT):
well in that case the bar for diversity is low and therefore active status should be required :)
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:04:10 GMT):
at least kelly and I are on the same wavelength ;-)
Dan (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:04:18 GMT):
:)
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:05:35 GMT):
so, maybe the conditions isn't so much to be "active" but to have those things sorted out
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:06:31 GMT):
I think it is highly desirable to also have a "diverse community" but I don't see that as a necessary must have
Dan (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:07:17 GMT):
well maybe we take that into account in a proposal to become active?
Dan (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:07:48 GMT):
A small project that is making clear efforts to grow its community could be active?
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:07:57 GMT):
no, I wouldn't want to dilute what becoming active means
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:08:15 GMT):
I think we'd remove a big incentive for people to work on growing their community
Dan (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:08:27 GMT):
true
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:08:41 GMT):
but in a way, preventing them to also issue a 1.0 release is hitting them twice for the same thing
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:09:34 GMT):
maybe we can say that if a project is active they automatically qualify for 1.0 release for project in incubation they have to get tsc approval?
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:09:34 GMT):
maybe we can say that if a project is active they automatically qualify for 1.0 release, and for projects in incubation they have to get tsc approval?
Dan (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:10:51 GMT):
that could work
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:11:05 GMT):
@lehors saves the day
Dan (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:11:22 GMT):
definitely mull that over until next thursday
lehors (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:11:23 GMT):
as part of the tsc approval process we could ask the project to document how they meet all the other criteria related to having proper engineering practice (test-suite etc)
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:28:18 GMT):
Diversity (according to what I can see in project reports for Fabric/Sawtooth) is measured as number of committers/Maintainers and their companies... (based on emails I think). But this does not really measure the contributions, since that is tougher to measure (you could count lines committed- but that could be an absurd measure), even someone who committed something insignificant once is counted as a committer. Just mulling over a true measure of this, since it seems to be given a lot of prominence in this process. What are the communities thoughts on this?
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:28:18 GMT):
Diversity (according to what I can see in project reports for Fabric/Sawtooth) is measured as number of committers/Maintainers and their companies... (based on emails I think). But this does not really measure the contributions, since that is tougher to measure (you could count lines committed- but that could be an absurd measure), even someone who committed something insignificant once is counted as a committer. Just mulling over a true measure of this, since it seems to be given a lot of prominence in this process. What are the community's thoughts on this?
rjones (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:09:18 GMT):
I have a keen interest in graduation requirements being formalized.
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:17:30 GMT):
@VipinB I think diversity is an aspirational thing. I agree with Dan that it is a risk mitigation thing, let's make sure that HL isn't a marketing vehicle for a project dominated by a single company, and let's make sure that one company doesnt determine if a project lives or dies
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:18:18 GMT):
I think it's critical that a project is open and has a clear process on contributing/ becoming a maintainer. and that they follow through on that by working with teh community to integrate PRs etc.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:18:40 GMT):
Surely I agree with this @kelly_
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:19:14 GMT):
However, reality does not jell with this. starting with the diversity of the tsc
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:19:35 GMT):
beyond that, at this point in the 'enterprise blockchain' space i think contributors are going to be driven by a financial motivation e.g. some sort of product offering
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:19:49 GMT):
it's not public ethereum where you get to see your code added to an open project
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:20:10 GMT):
so I think it's unreasonable to expect that we will have a lot of random contributions at this point in the tech lifecycle
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:20:54 GMT):
as these projects move into production then consumers of the technology will be motivated as well, not just sellers of the technology
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:20:58 GMT):
I just don't think we are there yet
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:21:18 GMT):
This diversity is more in working groups where the problems are more generic
VipinB (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:22:08 GMT):
Not tied to the commercial aspirations of one company... There are also smaller projects that could ignite like quilt or burrow
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:22:55 GMT):
So i'm leaning a little bit more towards making the requirements for an active project less onerous with regard to established diversity as long as the other requirements are met, and making active status a requirement for 1.0
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:22:59 GMT):
at least where my head is at now.
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:23:35 GMT):
There is also this chicken and egg thing, active projects and 1.0 projects get more interest and therefore have a higher chance of getting new contributors
cca88 (Fri, 09 Mar 2018 14:40:51 GMT):
Hello TSC - In which forms does Hyperledger support academic efforts and initiatives?
More concretely, is there sponsorship for relevant research events, for example, conferences like CRYPTO (crypto.iacr.org/2018/) , PODC (www.podc.org) or workshops (www.blockchain-workshop.net) ?
VipinB (Fri, 09 Mar 2018 14:44:40 GMT):
@mpiekarska was managing academic outreach @cca88
mpiekarska (Fri, 09 Mar 2018 14:44:40 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
hartm (Fri, 09 Mar 2018 16:08:25 GMT):
@cca88 We have talked about putting together a working group for something like this. Historically there hasn't been that much overlap between Hyperledger folks and places like crypto, and this is something we should probably change. As Vipin pointed out, Marta (@mpiekarska) is trying to put something together around this.
cca88 (Fri, 09 Mar 2018 19:29:58 GMT):
thanks both. I'll connect with Marta, I'd be glad to help with this.
compleatang (Wed, 14 Mar 2018 00:38:43 GMT):
I really enjoyed catching up on this discussion regarding formalizing the path to 1.0 (and/or out of incubation). It has been on @silasdavis and my minds lately. For those that do not know me, I mostly lurk in this room, but I work with Silas at Monax.
I'd like to highlight how difficult the diversity metric is for small teams to achieve. Even those that have good (we hope) engineering practices and are doing things "correctly" in terms of trying to build a community of contributors. The reality is that it is a heavy burden to shepherd the pipeline of users one would eventually hope to convert into contributors.
There is a very small world of engineers that can effectively contribute to these codebases. As an example, we have a new engineer we're about to onboard who has dozens of substantive contributions to the kernel, years of distributed database experience, and I expect it will be 2-3 months before he's able to contribute substantively. And that will be working on burrow full-time and sitting next to Silas every day.
While I'm 100% for sustainability of the Hyperledger codebases, and while I also understand that this is a tricky issue, I do think that there should be a practical avenue for a smaller team to get to a 1.0 without having to meet a relatively arbitrary diversity metric that I'm not entirely sure is meaningful pre-1.0. In that (pre-1.0) phase, the signal is that a codebase is in incubation / not ready for production / may go away / etc. As Kelly noted, contributors to Hyperledger codebases are almost always doing so for a business reason. This means that there needs to be a business reason to contribute, and it is quite hard for small teams to get other teams to see that business reason without the "mark" of 1.0.
Genuinely not trying to moan; sorry for the long post; and thanks for letting me lurk.
silasdavis (Wed, 14 Mar 2018 12:14:57 GMT):
Yes to chime in here, I think the diversity of contribution metric is the only thing I would have a problem with - CI, testing, design, code review I am fine with being a requirement. It may make sense to codify that going 1.0.0 in incubation is non-standard and should be taken into consideration in the 1.0.0 process, but I think decoupling them makes sense. Also, I'm in believer in 'just enough process' - do we need a hard requirement here - are we fixing something that is broken?
silasdavis (Wed, 14 Mar 2018 12:14:57 GMT):
Yes to chime in here, I think the diversity of contribution metric is the only thing I would have a problem with - CI, testing, design, code review I am fine with being a requirement. It may make sense to codify that going 1.0.0 in incubation is non-standard and should be queried in any 1.0.0 approval process, but I think decoupling them makes sense. Also, I'm in believer in 'just enough process' - do we need a hard requirement here - are we fixing something that is broken?
silasdavis (Wed, 14 Mar 2018 12:14:57 GMT):
Yes to chime in here, I think the diversity of contribution metric is the only thing I would have a problem with - CI, testing, design, code review I am fine with being a requirement. It may make sense to codify that going 1.0.0 in incubation is non-standard and should be queried in any 1.0.0 approval process, but I think decoupling graduation from incubation and going 1.0.0 makes sense. Also, I'm in believer in 'just enough process' - do we need a hard requirement here - are we fixing something that is broken?
VipinB (Wed, 14 Mar 2018 15:36:26 GMT):
+1 @silasdavis and @compleatang
Dan (Wed, 14 Mar 2018 21:40:42 GMT):
As I think it was @lehors put it we don't want to punish a project twice for the same thing or create a catch 22 as @kelly_ implied. My main concern is on the functional aspects like CII. Since this diversity condition is the main sticking point though, we should give it some thought. Are there conditions we can apply that maintain the spirit of the rule without raising an unnecessary or counterproductive barrier?
baohua (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 01:26:15 GMT):
+1 @Dan
hartm (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:04:13 GMT):
Good morning everyone!
Dan (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:05:30 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180315 ~~~~~~~~~~
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:07:18 GMT):
Gm
tbenzies (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:08:23 GMT):
Requirements WG - https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/requirements-wg-2018-mar
tbenzies (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:08:46 GMT):
Cello update: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/cello-2018-mar
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:20:19 GMT):
+1 dan
tbenzies (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:23:12 GMT):
Caliper: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cwScsNgYUj72vP2fqZ6vihYiuQcy45Ml2C_yLRI7EoQ/edit?usp=sharing
baohua (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:27:31 GMT):
Caliper attracts interests: https://www.coindesk.com/huawei-building-tech-can-stress-test-blockchains/
cbf (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:27:58 GMT):
that can be a double edged sword;-)
baohua (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:30:00 GMT):
people is getting interested with the blockchain performance and stability due to lots product user cases recently, i feel HL should have some tools on this part.
baohua (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:30:00 GMT):
people are getting interested with the blockchain performance and stability due to lots product user cases recently, i feel it would be better for HL to have some tools.
baohua (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:30:00 GMT):
people are getting more and more interested with the blockchain performance and stability due to lots product user cases recently, i feel it would be better for HL to have some tools.
MicBowman (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:33:56 GMT):
in many ways... the relationship between caliper and the performance wg represents a great way for general advancement from the wg to influence specific projects... sounds great!
Dan (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:34:56 GMT):
Per @lehors request, here is the working group link you might add @smcnamara https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/pswg/performance-and-scale-wg
lehors (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:35:07 GMT):
thanks Dan
Dan (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:35:29 GMT):
The actual metrics doc is still .. drafty :)
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:35:37 GMT):
yup - will do Dan
lehors (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:35:52 GMT):
I think the Caliper project should also point to the document they implement (or try to)
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:35:56 GMT):
it has a link to the draft but pointing to the WG itself might make more sense
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:36:24 GMT):
Happy to link to both :)
lehors (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:36:34 GMT):
ok :)
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:37:04 GMT):
done
Dan (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:38:07 GMT):
As an example of a tools project, I'd also like to complement caliper in supporting multiple infrastructure projects from the outset.
lehors (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:38:13 GMT):
looks good. thanks
MicBowman (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:39:01 GMT):
congrats!!!!!
baohua (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:39:03 GMT):
congrats for the 10th HL project
Dan (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:39:07 GMT):
congrats #caliper!
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:39:15 GMT):
thanks all!
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:41:43 GMT):
Stuck in mute hell- otherwise would have vocally contributed to discussion on Caliper
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:41:56 GMT):
Which Dan ably did-
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:43:05 GMT):
I like @lehors suggestion that 1.0 before leaving incubation needs tsc vote otherwise not
hartm (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:44:33 GMT):
The only thing that incubation requires that wouldn't be relevant for a 1.0 is the "contributor diversity" requirement. So this discussion is really just a referendum on what we, as a community, think about small pojrects.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:44:38 GMT):
Having diversity is a sore point, since diversity is not truly measured... especially for smaller projects
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:47:37 GMT):
Diversity is not measured properly even now...not effectively
Dan (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:48:49 GMT):
Do we require carrying an incubation notice in a README.md?
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:50:53 GMT):
@JonathanLevi sounds like you are agreeing with @lehors
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:51:23 GMT):
Looks like @lehors ... suggestion passes
lehors (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:51:31 GMT):
:)
MicBowman (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:51:50 GMT):
that feels like a nice compromise... thanks @lehors for pushing that idea!
baohua (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:51:51 GMT):
seems we need to define some implicit exit-incubation criteria first
baohua (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:51:51 GMT):
seems we need to define some explicit exit-incubation criteria first
hartm (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:53:02 GMT):
YES!
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:53:08 GMT):
review of tsc @tkuhrt so indeed the project can be in 1.0 and in incubation
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:53:22 GMT):
if it passes the tsc
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:54:24 GMT):
Indeed - I think we can state this explicitly (that a TSC vote is needed for 1.0)
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:54:32 GMT):
No @tkuhrt that is not what it means- if project becomes active it needs vote-
hartm (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:54:40 GMT):
Some project is going to index versions with the busy beaver function!
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:54:45 GMT):
Not @JonathanLevi that is a power grab
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:55:03 GMT):
How so?
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:56:03 GMT):
Because, if 1.0 is needed before exiting incubation vote is needed
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:56:13 GMT):
Otherwise not
Dan (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:56:34 GMT):
first "Production" release
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:57:19 GMT):
Now you guys have expanded your boundaries
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:58:25 GMT):
@VipinB It was not (just?) me
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:58:28 GMT):
;-)
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:59:47 GMT):
Did 1.0 always require tsc approval?
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:00:09 GMT):
In that case this whole discussion was a waste of time
Dan (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:00:53 GMT):
no it did not :)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:01:30 GMT):
I'm just worried that by deferring the vote for a later "major release", we will be in the same situtation
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:02:00 GMT):
(of needing to define/evaluate maturity, community, impact, etc.)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:02:26 GMT):
For me, 1.0 is a big thing (currently)
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:03:22 GMT):
In that case, @Dan the discussion of whether the 1.0 release could happen while in incubation was turned around to requiring tsc approval for 1.0 period (whether or not in incubation), hence my use of the words power grab
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:03:48 GMT):
Sure, sure, the "power grab" thingy is understood.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:04:06 GMT):
Now, if we allow a "1.0" during incubation, we need to figure our what does "1.0" will mean.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:04:34 GMT):
Sure, but what about 1.0 after incubation- meaning in active status
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:04:35 GMT):
And or, whether people would like to suggest an alternative to the current "1.0" status
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:04:35 GMT):
And whether people would like to suggest an alternative to the current "1.0" status
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:04:57 GMT):
This did not need tsc approval according to @Dan, now it does
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:05:25 GMT):
So effectively the debate has been turned around and stood on its head
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:05:32 GMT):
We haven't made any change/decisions = so "back in the good ol' day" == "now()" ;-)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:05:32 GMT):
We haven't made any change/decision = so "back in the good ol' day" == "now()" ;-)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:06:01 GMT):
Yes, the debate has been turned around and stood on its head.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:06:12 GMT):
While I still haven't changed my position ;-)
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:06:24 GMT):
Yes you have- if you require tsc approval for 1.0 AFTER exting from incubation (which always required tsc approval)
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:06:24 GMT):
Yes you have- if you require tsc approval for 1.0 AFTER exting from incubation ( exiting incubation always required tsc approval)
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:07:00 GMT):
And the terms of the debate that has been raging for a couple of weeks
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:07:16 GMT):
Currently 1.0 is a big thing (let's call it the Ace of Spades card). If we allow "inflation", than I want to know what is the new "Ace"
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:07:16 GMT):
Currently 1.0 is a big thing (let's call it the Ace of Spades card). If we allow "inflation", then I want to know what is the new "Ace"
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:07:45 GMT):
I suggested that vote, so that we can block the inflation of projects that don't qualify as 1.0
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:07:45 GMT):
I suggested that vote, so that we can block the inflation of projects that don't qualify as/for 1.0
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:07:45 GMT):
I suggested/supported that vote, so that we can block the inflation of projects that don't qualify as/for 1.0
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:08:08 GMT):
Again, unless, we re-define the significance/meaning of 1.0.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:08:24 GMT):
That's my view at least.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:09:20 GMT):
And my view is that the result of this debate was misinterpreted to require tsc approval for 1.0 period at the last moment
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:10:57 GMT):
Thankfully we can have different opinions on this topic
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:11:44 GMT):
Sure - I don't think we have concluded anything.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:12:22 GMT):
I think that it's not bad to have the TSC protecting the brand.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:12:30 GMT):
Obviously you trust people to have considered what going to 1.0 means- even when you started incubating the project- you had some trust in the contributors
cbf (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:41:54 GMT):
congrats to the Caliper team!
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:49:50 GMT):
Thanks Chris. We already have #caliper ready for folks to join in the chat.
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:49:50 GMT):
Thanks Chris. We already have #caliper open for folks to join in the chat.
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:56:04 GMT):
FWIW I think 1.0 and progress beyond incubation are somewhat orthogonal. To Vipins point if the project was ok to start and has sufficient community, process and progress then it gets TSC approval. After that the progress from 1.0 and beyond is up to the community.
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:56:04 GMT):
FWIW I think 1.0 and progress beyond incubation are somewhat orthogonal. To Vipins point if the project was ok to start and has sufficient community, process and progress then it gets TSC approval. After that the progress to 1.0 and beyond is up to the community.
smcnamara (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 16:19:20 GMT):
To me 1.0 is the start of a project, not the end. It suggests sufficient features, maturity and absence of egregious bugs that you could reasonably use it in your work.
hartm (Thu, 15 Mar 2018 17:28:16 GMT):
Would it make more sense to have some sort of "TSC Production-ready stamp of approval" that projects can seek out? We could tie all of the marketing efforts, etc. that are currently tied to the 1.0 release to this and make seeking this approval totally optional--you just wouldn't get all the extra stuff without it. This way we can also deal with "legacy" numbering systems for projects.
Haojun (Mon, 19 Mar 2018 03:05:49 GMT):
Has left the channel.
ShikarSharma (Tue, 20 Mar 2018 22:56:35 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
neewy (Wed, 21 Mar 2018 14:39:07 GMT):
How come that Caliper is an archived project? https://github.com/hyperledger-archives/caliper :(
neewy (Wed, 21 Mar 2018 14:46:52 GMT):
Oh, they have an archive and an active project, sorry
rjones (Wed, 21 Mar 2018 19:05:34 GMT):
@neewy the original repo did not have DCO
Dan (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:02:25 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180322 ~~~~~~~~~~~~
tbenzies (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:04:24 GMT):
Explorer https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/explorer-2018-mar
VipinB (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:18:31 GMT):
That was the impetus behind Caliper cross dlt compability.
VipinB (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:21:20 GMT):
Loosely coupled works more in theory, unless we work actively to create this.
hartm (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:22:23 GMT):
This is going back down the sub-project debate. Not sure we want to go there...
VipinB (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:23:37 GMT):
If sub projects are coming up, it is because it is germane
MicBowman (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:23:41 GMT):
if we bring in a project that is focused on extending one platform it will be very difficult to expect that project to add support for other platforms... there is very little motivation... sawtooth explorer is reflective of the fact that its easier (in this case) to start from scratch than to integrate... starting from scratch allows for customization... "you get what you want"
MicBowman (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:25:20 GMT):
+1 @lehors
Dan (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:25:58 GMT):
sawtooth explorer: https://github.com/hyperledger/sawtooth-explorer
API: https://sawtooth.hyperledger.org/docs/core/releases/latest/rest_api.html
nage (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:33:10 GMT):
I don’t think the question is “what is the reality of a cross-project explorer?” Is it realistic to have a cross-project charter if no one steps forward to make it cross-project? (and how long would we wait to see if it will naturally emerge before admitting that promoting it project status outside its framework was a distraction more than a benefit)
nage (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:33:10 GMT):
I think the question is “what is the reality of a cross-project explorer?” Is it realistic to have a cross-project charter if no one steps forward to make it cross-project? (and how long would we wait to see if it will naturally emerge before admitting that promoting it project status outside its framework was a distraction more than a benefit)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:33:40 GMT):
This is one of the most important discussions of the year, IMO.
Dan (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:33:56 GMT):
Just wait til we get to the WG review ;)
MicBowman (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:33:57 GMT):
and... there is a momentum that makes generalizing harder and harder as time progresses... the channels feature in explorer is an example
tbenzies (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:34:48 GMT):
Requirements WG: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/requirements-wg-2018-mar
JonathanLevi (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:34:59 GMT):
We have similar discussions around Composer, if you see the similarities.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:36:04 GMT):
Ok, let's let it lay for now, as suggested - but we should address matters before they get out of proportion.
hartm (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:37:54 GMT):
This has been a point of debate for a long, long time--not sure we're going to do better than resolve it on a case-by-case basis.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:39:12 GMT):
Feels like many symptoms stemming from one issue (underlying debate).
JonathanLevi (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:40:11 GMT):
Fair enough - as long as we resolve it, even on a case-by-cass... sure
Dan (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:50:08 GMT):
I move to thank the Requirements WG participants for their efforts and close the Requirements WG and archive the artifacts produced to date. I also encourage Mr. Boulton and the other participants to continue their discussions in a forum.
lehors (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:50:11 GMT):
I agree with Dan's suggestion and given that Clive does too I suggest we put that before the TSC for decision
MicBowman (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:51:16 GMT):
+1
hartm (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:51:21 GMT):
+1.
hartm (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:52:23 GMT):
It sounds like we need some kind of "onboarding forum" or "onboarding call".
Dan (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:55:30 GMT):
Shall we vote in our last minutes?
lehors (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:55:49 GMT):
yes
lehors (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:56:12 GMT):
all of this is in my opinion orthogonal to the status of the req WG
Dan (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:56:22 GMT):
yes
lehors (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:00:12 GMT):
:)
lehors (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:00:45 GMT):
I think it's not doing a service to anyone to keep the WG in a ghostly state
MicBowman (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:01:02 GMT):
thanks all
Dan (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:01:07 GMT):
Agreed. As much as I love dragging discussions over months ;)
lehors (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:01:08 GMT):
if anyone has an interest in restarting for good they are welcome to put a proposal before the TSC
lehors (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:01:47 GMT):
I note that the proposed template for new WG calls for a list of initial participants
Dan (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:01:48 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180322 ~~~~~~~~~~~~
lehors (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:01:58 GMT):
that would make it clear whether there is enough interest
shimos (Thu, 22 Mar 2018 18:26:38 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
KOttoni (Wed, 28 Mar 2018 16:57:51 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:05:04 GMT):
any deals on hotels in amsterdam ?
rjones (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:05:56 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180329 ~~~~~~~~~~~~
tbenzies (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:09:16 GMT):
Quilt update: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/quilt-2018-mar
tbenzies (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:16:59 GMT):
Identity WG update: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/identity-wg-2018-mar
tbenzies (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:30:08 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/project-lifecycle?&#draft_first_major_release
tbenzies (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:30:34 GMT):
^^proposed verbiage
tbenzies (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:44:51 GMT):
WT template: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16GJw2cxXf_Sw1DFbsInkgQ1jy_eXxteUgKdge09jw-k/edit
tbenzies (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:44:51 GMT):
WG template: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16GJw2cxXf_Sw1DFbsInkgQ1jy_eXxteUgKdge09jw-k/edit
hartm (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:55:14 GMT):
So we just game it a little earlier....
rjones (Thu, 29 Mar 2018 15:01:15 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180329 ~~~~~~~~~~~~
rjones (Fri, 30 Mar 2018 20:40:35 GMT):
https://status.linuxfoundation.org/incidents/tqkfpb0c3ywb
VipinB (Sat, 31 Mar 2018 14:18:47 GMT):
The task of extracting real contributors is more difficult .. Maybe should be 1. On meeting notes for at least the prior two or three calls as having attended 2. Actually contributed to discussion or paper or any other work product. Not just on the mailing list.
tbenzies (Mon, 02 Apr 2018 14:51:15 GMT):
As discussed on the TSC call, we are exploring the possibility of scheduling a Hackfest in tandem with an industry event this fall.
As such, please indicate your interest in either, both, or neither of the following dates/locations.
https://doodle.com/poll/p2uymsw64u5kfgc7
tbenzies (Tue, 03 Apr 2018 16:30:44 GMT):
Just a quick reminder to indicate your preferences on dates/locations for a potential fall Hackfest at https://doodle.com/poll/p2uymsw64u5kfgc7.
Dan (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:01:43 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180405 ~~~~~~~~~~
lehors (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:12:15 GMT):
@cbf Don Thibeau is now on the call and can talk to the Composer 1.0 request
tbenzies (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:15:44 GMT):
WG proposal template: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16GJw2cxXf_Sw1DFbsInkgQ1jy_eXxteUgKdge09jw-k/edit
hartm (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:19:05 GMT):
Some groups are more likely to be politicized than others. For instance, PSWG....
Dan (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:22:33 GMT):
in the _unhackable_ wiki
hartm (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:24:10 GMT):
The "chair writes down the active participants" method seems to work for the TSC elections (with the recourse that people can complain to the TSC if they think they are excluded). Would this work for working group elections?
kelly_ (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:25:00 GMT):
Is that right? I thought it was a vote by people who have commits in HL repos
hartm (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:26:12 GMT):
@kelly_ , it's also "active" working group contributors. I also think the "commits in HL repos" can be abused as well, but to my knowledge no one has done it yet. One maintainer could probably hijack the election....
kelly_ (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:28:48 GMT):
oh right @hartm, forgot that part
baohua (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:29:19 GMT):
for the projects, it can count the code commit; while for working groups, can only count on the participant of the call meeting.
baohua (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:29:19 GMT):
for the projects, it can count the code commit; while for working groups, can only count on the participant of the call meeting.
mpiekarska (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:30:41 GMT):
how about "if you don't show up to the meeting for two weeks in a row, you loose the right to vote for two weeks?"
mpiekarska (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:31:04 GMT):
gsma had such a role
mpiekarska (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:31:04 GMT):
gsma had such a rule
rjones (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:31:49 GMT):
@mpiekarska that is how AllSeen Alliance did it for the TSC. The quorum would go down, and you wouldn't regain your right to vote until you attended so many subsequent TSC meetings.
hartm (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:32:31 GMT):
THE BEATINGS WILL CONTINUE IN THE WHITEPAPER WORKING GROUP!
baohua (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:32:39 GMT):
yeah, can count the `show-up` person in a past period (e.g., 3 months or half year) for the working group. In many open-source community, project election is for the code committer in that year.
cbf (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:41:58 GMT):
here's the link to the proposal email https://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/2018-March/001436.html
cbf (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:54:27 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/fabric-2018-apr
mwagner (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 14:55:44 GMT):
@cbf hopefully you are not blaming rocketchat perf issues on the PSWG ;)
cbf (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 15:01:05 GMT):
no
cbf (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 15:01:08 GMT):
lol
Dan (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 15:01:14 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180405 ~~~~~~~~~~
cbf (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 15:01:32 GMT):
just that cutting/pasting the link took like 30 seconds to post
cbf (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 15:01:34 GMT):
weird
rjones (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 16:16:36 GMT):
@cbf to answer your question about long mailing list names - lists.*.* for all LF CP are one mailman host, so the list names need to be unique. I know that's an implementation detail, but you asked, and that is the answer.
rjones (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 16:16:36 GMT):
@cbf to answer your question about long mailing list names - lists.*.* for all LF CP are one mailman instance, so the list names need to be unique. I know that's an implementation detail, but you asked, and that is the answer.
cbf (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 16:42:47 GMT):
@rjones I was more interested in shortening the redundant hyperledger-* e.g. instead of 'hyperledger-fabric@lists.hyperledger.org" we could have "fabric@lists.hyperledger.org" and "sawtooth@lists.hyperledger.org" etc
rjones (Thu, 05 Apr 2018 16:47:53 GMT):
@cbf yes. We agree. Previously, one list named fabric would preclude any other project from having a list called fabric. Once we're on groups.io, that goes away.
baohua (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:04:30 GMT):
@Dan when to begin?
kelly_ (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:05:18 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC MEETING 20180412 ~~~~~~~~~~
kelly_ (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:05:25 GMT):
I'll fill in for Dan today :)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:05:48 GMT):
No double-voting please! ;-)
mwagner (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:08:28 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/pswg-2018-apr PSWG update
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:15:27 GMT):
i think i've lost the thread... what question are discussing? it seems like there is 1) should composer go 1.0, 2) should we just escalate the active discussion, 3) should we approve composer as active?
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:15:42 GMT):
comments seem to be going back and forth...
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:21:35 GMT):
Mic: core question is approval for Composer 1.0.
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:22:21 GMT):
@bbehlendorf i'm aware of what is on the agenda... we seem to have... "complicated" that question
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:39:32 GMT):
i certainly think composer is mature enough to warrant the security scan
nage (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:40:48 GMT):
Sounds good
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:40:53 GMT):
If supportability is a 1.0 requirement, is something considered supportable if there isn't a diverse enough community of developers?
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:41:45 GMT):
thats a great question @toddinpal
kelly_ (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:42:14 GMT):
I feel pretty comfortable that Composer is mature and has been developed with a process open to new contributors/maintainers. However, based on Brian's comments we should think about what the minimum community requirements are before becoming 1.0. For example, if Ripple (or whoever) starts an incubated project next week, and wants to go to 1.0 the following week because it's mature, would that be sufficient?
kelly_ (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:42:57 GMT):
@toddinpal yea, 1.0 for an open source project does seem to signal something different than for a proprietary 1.0
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:44:13 GMT):
It's the old "what if he gets run over by a truck" issue
kelly_ (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:44:17 GMT):
exactly
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:44:20 GMT):
where he is the org
Dan (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:52:27 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/sawtooth-2018-apr
baohua (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:58:27 GMT):
nice progress to sawtooth!
JonathanLevi (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:58:36 GMT):
Made some very minor typo corrections... just my OCD, feel free to reject ;-)
mwagner (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:01:01 GMT):
@JonathanLevi I have CDO, its like OCD but I need the letters in alphabetical order
Dan (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:01:16 GMT):
Nice!
JonathanLevi (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:02:22 GMT):
Ha ha. As long as it's not those Collateral Debt Obligations... I am cool with DCO'ing too ;-)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:02:22 GMT):
Ha ha. As long as it's not one of those Collateralized Debt Obligations... I am cool with DCO'ing too ;-)
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cdo.asp
JonathanLevi (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:04:46 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC MEETING 20180412 ~~~~~~~~~~
I believe
rjones (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 21:20:02 GMT):
TSC members, I have a process question. How do I get `ci-management` into `incubation` status? It pre-exists many of the other projects operating under the Hyperledger aegis.
rjones (Thu, 12 Apr 2018 21:21:02 GMT):
When I look here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/project-lifecycle it isn't clear what state `ci-management` is in
Dan (Fri, 13 Apr 2018 01:05:43 GMT):
ummm what's in ci-management? :insert sheepish emoji here: Is it intended to be a releasable project?
rjones (Fri, 13 Apr 2018 01:23:05 GMT):
it is the jenkins CI repo. If you use jenkins.hyperledger.org, you use `ci-management`
rjones (Fri, 13 Apr 2018 01:24:24 GMT):
@Dan it kind-of pre-exists all of the other repos in gerrit. It really doesn't fit in to the project lifecycle. it doesn't have use cases, etc, so it can become active.
baohua (Fri, 13 Apr 2018 01:40:59 GMT):
@rjones i agree with chris's suggestion, and i guess it's safe to remove all `Hyperledger-***` naming prefix from those mail lists?
rjones (Fri, 13 Apr 2018 01:44:26 GMT):
@baohua there will be an email clarifying exactly what will happen very soon, the prefix is gone
baohua (Fri, 13 Apr 2018 01:44:49 GMT):
thanks!
rjones (Fri, 13 Apr 2018 01:44:55 GMT):
sure thing!
cbf (Wed, 18 Apr 2018 22:08:09 GMT):
@here canceling tomorrow's TSC call due to lack of agenda
baohua (Thu, 19 Apr 2018 01:29:44 GMT):
got, have a nice weekend!
Kitsu (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:41:41 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:58:58 GMT):
TSC Call Start
cbf (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:59:07 GMT):
---------------------
lehors (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:00:03 GMT):
hello
cbf (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:00:22 GMT):
Reminder / Hackfest Planning
June 27-29 | Amsterdam (registration | draft agenda)
October 3-4 | Montreal (registration coming soon)
Quarterly project updates
Hyperledger Iroha update and Hyperledger Composer update
Next week: Hyperledger Indy update
Quarterly WG updates
Healthcare WG update
May 10th: Technical WG China update
Discussion: Public Sector WG proposal
Dan (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:00:38 GMT):
bonjour
cbf (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:01:08 GMT):
https://www.regonline.com/registration/Checkin.aspx?EventID=2175654
tkuhrt (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:03:29 GMT):
Agenda with links: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/1468
tbenzies (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:05:26 GMT):
Iroha: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/iroha-2018-apr
mhomaid (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:11:52 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
NateDiNiro (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:12:58 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
NateDiNiro (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:13:07 GMT):
Hey there, tried to unmute to say that the Healthcare group is represented.
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/healthcare-wg-2018-apr
Apparently only hit “Preview” and not “Save on the Wiki entry...
mdolan (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:13:49 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
kelly_ (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:21:34 GMT):
For Iroha I did notice the GitHub repo has a blanket Soramitsu copyright under the license section of the readme. If there are contributions from other individuals/companies this should likely be removed
kelly_ (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:22:40 GMT):
here is the maintainers: https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha/blob/master/MAINTAINERS.md
Dan (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:25:42 GMT):
Re-posting from zoom chat, the Iroha representative is Eugene.
tbenzies (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:27:38 GMT):
Composer: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/composer-2018-apr
Dan (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:36:23 GMT):
Community Calendar: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/calendar-public-meetings
Kitsu (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:38:53 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=EkYab88Stgu3Dtq2q) @kelly_ Indeed, thanks!
tbenzies (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:43:11 GMT):
Healthcare WG: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/healthcare-wg-2018-apr
Dan (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:45:25 GMT):
Who is presenting for Healthcare?
tkuhrt (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:45:49 GMT):
Nate DiNiro
Dan (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:55:27 GMT):
Per discussion of community meetings ... Sawtooth Tech Forum immediately following this TSC
https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/sawtooth?msg=LqjTAQj7rnEkEEtmE
Dan (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:55:57 GMT):
Indy also has a community meeting following this TSC call.
Dan (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 15:02:33 GMT):
thx everyone!
cbf (Thu, 26 Apr 2018 15:04:17 GMT):
----- TSC EOJ -----
baohua (Thu, 03 May 2018 13:59:18 GMT):
are we using the new zoom channel today?
baohua (Thu, 03 May 2018 13:59:25 GMT):
@tbenzies
hartm (Thu, 03 May 2018 13:59:45 GMT):
Yeah, which zoom channel are we using? Hyperledger.community or the one listed in the wiki?
hartm (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:00:21 GMT):
OK, looks like the one on wiki.hyperledger.org
toddinpal (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:02:02 GMT):
whichi is?
tbenzies (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:02:32 GMT):
wiki
MicBowman (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:03:04 GMT):
TSC Start
tbenzies (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:04:12 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hDlWTKSBmXM6UQW5s9qRjFwO_eZv0LU8nppHqMwoIxM/edit
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:04:53 GMT):
(fyi I'm on the phone but having some zoom problems)
hartm (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:05:32 GMT):
Suggestion: have pre-planned hacking ideas if we want to actually have hacking.
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:11:21 GMT):
We had some javascript style devs.
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:11:41 GMT):
A few 'business' interested people around the periphery
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:12:02 GMT):
but I don't think it was a lopsided mix.
hartm (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:13:58 GMT):
Yeah, I'm just curious if we should have a separate track for the "business" people for those that don't want to take out their laptops.
baohua (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:14:50 GMT):
the first day for new beginner is a good rule
baohua (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:14:50 GMT):
the first day for new beginners is a good rule
baohua (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:14:50 GMT):
the first day for new beginners is a good idea
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:17:16 GMT):
@hartm are you volunteering to run the business track?
hartm (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:18:05 GMT):
Let's put the guy with the academic background in charge of the business track! But I'd be happy to give a talk if that helped...
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:18:45 GMT):
:)
cbf (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:20:55 GMT):
LOL @hartm
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:22:44 GMT):
I think we are all grown-ups and know how to discuss things objectively. Can we get back on the agenda?
cbf (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:22:59 GMT):
I've been trying to cut this off
MicBowman (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:23:05 GMT):
i think we've had this conversation before
baohua (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:23:07 GMT):
agree!
cbf (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:23:08 GMT):
said let's take to the mailing list
hartm (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:23:26 GMT):
Main point: we need to achieve balance between work and evangelism. We've had this discussion before. How to do it is unclear.
tbenzies (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:23:49 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/copyright-and-license-policy
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:24:23 GMT):
Regarding copyright, I would prefer we don't all start offering legal opinions. (at least those of us who are not lawyers)
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:24:54 GMT):
Related I don't think this is a TSC voting item.
mwagner (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:25:40 GMT):
sorry for the diversion, my goal to make sure that we give people the information they need to pick the best solution for their use case
hartm (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:28:05 GMT):
Do we have a lawyer on this talk?
hartm (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:28:08 GMT):
If not, we may want to wait.
mwagner (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:28:31 GMT):
Did anyone stay at a Holiday inn last night ?
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:29:05 GMT):
Another question for LF legal: I've heard some questions about if a contribution is to add "copyright hyperledger..." is that assigning copyright (i.e. giving up the contributors copyright)?
nage (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:30:18 GMT):
We have also had a case or two where contributors assigned their copyrights to the Sovrin Foundation inside Indy, which means tracking through headers alone has been tricky.
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:30:46 GMT):
Yeah same problem with Sawtooth & Intel. Non-intel contributors thinking they needed to add that intel copyright.
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:30:46 GMT):
Yeah same problem with Sawtooth & Intel. Non-intel contributors thinking they needed to have that intel copyright.
baohua (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:31:50 GMT):
if we have the license header, do we need copyright description at the same time?
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:32:31 GMT):
I expect that the Linux Foundation has a little experience here. :) I imagine they can give some clear guidance.
nage (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:32:49 GMT):
In our case, they actually donated their copyright to the Sovrin Foundation, rather than just confused the header, but then do we go back and change the existing headers? What if more than one org has edited the file, etc...
lehors (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:32:58 GMT):
@dan @nage did the contributions get merged in with the wrong copyright?
lehors (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:33:19 GMT):
hmm
nage (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:33:21 GMT):
In our case, no, I do not believe so.
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:33:49 GMT):
I requested a change in the PR. I don't recall if that one was merged yet.
rjones (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:34:21 GMT):
sounds like a probot needs to exist for license checks
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:34:25 GMT):
@baohua Apache 2 template has a copyright line at the top.
baohua (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:34:43 GMT):
yes, that's why i ask the question
baohua (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:35:08 GMT):
if we include apache license info in the header, no need to duplicate the copyright info?
lehors (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:35:12 GMT):
I think it's a matter of size of change: if the change was significant the contributor could claim copyright
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:35:29 GMT):
My legal opinion is that you should sign a unlimited power of attorney to me, and I will take care of *everything* for you. :D
lehors (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:35:34 GMT):
but this is not a black and white issue
lehors (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:35:42 GMT):
:)
Dan (Thu, 03 May 2018 14:37:31 GMT):
~~~~~ End of TSC 2018-05-03 ~~~~~~
VipinB (Fri, 04 May 2018 16:13:14 GMT):
https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2014/jun/09/do-not-need-cla/
Additional opinion according to knowledgeable people (read patent lawyers) who I spoke with yesterday, will be to obtain some kind of provenance and DCO (Digital Certificate of Origin) for all incoming work, which then translates to safety for all outgoing streams when additional statements in all public venues state that continued participation (new work in the form of new code, patches etc.) are undertaken under Apache 2.0. Obviously to be clarified by counsel that we have retained.
Starseven (Tue, 08 May 2018 11:54:19 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:05:16 GMT):
~~~~~ Start of TSC 2018-05-10 ~~~~~~
tkuhrt (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:10:06 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hDlWTKSBmXM6UQW5s9qRjFwO_eZv0LU8nppHqMwoIxM/edit
rjones (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:10:16 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/discuss/message/104
tkuhrt (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:15:40 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/copyright-and-license-policy
hartm (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:21:39 GMT):
Is there a document that explains all of this stuff?
hartm (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:22:48 GMT):
(i.e., a TL;DR telling me what I "should" be doing)?
Dan (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:23:14 GMT):
https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Dan (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:23:20 GMT):
See template at the end of ^
Dan (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:23:53 GMT):
(regarding the question about needing to include a copyright notice)
Dan (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:24:27 GMT):
Discussion in the call is that copyright notice is not required. But that it is helpful for attribution as files are copied around.
hartm (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:25:13 GMT):
Thanks Dan. That's useful.
lehors (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:25:52 GMT):
From Steve Winslow to Everyone:
SPDX License List: https://spdx.org/licenses/
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:26:05 GMT):
```
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:26:13 GMT):
```
Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
limitations under the License.
```
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:26:22 GMT):
suggested by apache license
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:26:22 GMT):
suggested by apache license: https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:31:01 GMT):
contributors may prefer it to be simple and explicit, so one declaration header should be good for most cases?
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:31:01 GMT):
contributors may prefer it to be simple and explicit, so one declaration header should be good enough for most cases?
Dan (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:33:44 GMT):
Question for legal committee: Is there a best practice for referencing a LICENSES file in lieu of the copyright notification at the top of a source file?
lehors (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:35:02 GMT):
yeah, maybe the header should be something like Copyright:
bbehlendorf (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:35:25 GMT):
@lehors that needs to be able to survive forever, though; URLs expire
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:35:39 GMT):
whatever header line should be include, hopefully it should be implemented automatically, e.g., use git commit hook to check and add missed header info when submit.
lehors (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:35:46 GMT):
well, not if you have be trained by timbl ;-)
tkuhrt (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:36:51 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/indy-2018-may
Dan (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:36:54 GMT):
Discussion: Hyperledger is not a legal entity. The LF is the legal entity.
Dan (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:38:47 GMT):
Conclusion on copyright discussion is that the issue will be brought to the legal committee for further discussion and direction.
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:44:49 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/technical-wg-china-2018-may
amundson (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:48:55 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Thu, 10 May 2018 14:59:45 GMT):
~~~~~ End of TSC 2018-05-10 ~~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 10 May 2018 15:00:04 GMT):
Thanks for the update @baohua !
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 15:00:53 GMT):
thanks dan! in this month's meetup in hangzhou, we have some speaker sharing sawtooth :)
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 15:01:43 GMT):
and we welcome more projects developers to share their experience in China!
tkuhrt (Thu, 10 May 2018 15:23:15 GMT):
When I visited China at the beginning of the year, a suggestion was made to do maintainer roadshows that would connect the maintainers of the different projects to the people in China who wish to contribute to the project.
baohua (Thu, 10 May 2018 15:25:47 GMT):
The coming LC3 might be a good timing to organize some event?
hartm (Thu, 10 May 2018 21:52:51 GMT):
+1 to the roadshows. I think people would probably like to meet some of the "big names" that they associate with the projects. China would probably be a great place to try this out.
VipinB (Wed, 16 May 2018 14:04:04 GMT):
Identity working group Call May 16, 2018 12 noon EST will happen on Zoom...(details below)
Please note changed zoom link
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community
Or iPhone one-tap :
US: +16465588656,,4034983298# or +16699006833,,4034983298#
Or Telephone:
Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
US: +1 646 558 8656 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 855 880 1246 (Toll Free) or +1 877 369 0926 (Toll Free)
Meeting ID: 403 498 3298
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/bAaJoyznpThis is an open call, all are welcome.-
Agenda:
Review work on the paper.
The paper is: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ExFNRx-yYoS8FnDIUX1_0UBMha9TvQkfts2kVnDc4KE/edit#
Additions since last week:
Switched Intro to Core Concepts and expanded intro as discussed in last meeting- Vipin Bharathan
MiFID 2 Giedre Garbinciute-We will review
Aadhar - Nitin Agarwal - talked about changes to Aadhar section. We will revisit if Nitin on deck
Look through comments-
Document for volunteering: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zDPVDer9G-IjqicB65G9Uo2RhzpYLY4mGpVpEPu_Wt4/edit?usp=drivesdk
includes the sections and brief descriptions to work on the Identity WG Paper. We also have an estimate of the length (in words). Please take a look and volunteer to do a section. References are important and please keep track of the works you reference as you go along.
Once you feel your section is complete, please insert it into the paper (we can always refine this further). Current Volunteers (you know who you are), please insert your contributions.
gut (Thu, 17 May 2018 11:41:59 GMT):
Question about scope: Have ever been a proposal to make a Hyperledger client app? My team has been discussing today about the possibility to migrate the API functions to a client, like a general purpose DApp (maybe a desktop app or browser plugin), and it could be maintained through an open project. Maybe any of you know a technical problem. Or it's just out of project scope, because it would be considered a custom app at App Layer (ref: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/scope).
Dan (Thu, 17 May 2018 14:00:09 GMT):
There are lots of client apps in all the projects.
neewy (Thu, 17 May 2018 14:08:39 GMT):
Is TSC meeting about to begin?
DumitruSavva (Thu, 17 May 2018 14:11:32 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
neewy (Thu, 17 May 2018 14:17:26 GMT):
Are we going to skip it this week?
neewy (Thu, 17 May 2018 14:34:03 GMT):
Was there an announcement somewhere that today there is no meeting?
rjones (Thu, 17 May 2018 18:37:06 GMT):
@neewy it was on the mailing list IIRC
rjones (Thu, 17 May 2018 18:38:59 GMT):
@neewy I was wrong, it was not announced on the mailing list.
tkuhrt (Fri, 18 May 2018 18:41:46 GMT):
It was announced on mailing list https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/topic/cancel_may_17_tsc_call/18717608
rjones (Fri, 18 May 2018 18:44:27 GMT):
I missed that when I looked at the TSC archives :(
tkuhrt (Thu, 24 May 2018 14:06:06 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/burrow-2018-may
hartm (Thu, 24 May 2018 14:23:24 GMT):
This sounds like a good topic for hackfest work!
MicBowman (Thu, 24 May 2018 14:33:26 GMT):
great update, silas!
tkuhrt (Thu, 24 May 2018 14:33:40 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/cello-2018-may
tkuhrt (Thu, 24 May 2018 14:38:58 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/training-and-education-wg-2018-may
hartm (Thu, 24 May 2018 14:45:43 GMT):
+1 to Chris on working with projects to improve educational experiences.
tkuhrt (Thu, 24 May 2018 14:46:12 GMT):
+1 to Chris....there have been comments coming out in the WG that focus on just this aspect
rjones (Thu, 24 May 2018 17:38:04 GMT):
TSC members: a proposal for your consideration. If the TSC rotated the meeting time by eight hours a meeting, it would give members around the world the opportunity to participate in at least two business-hours meetings out of three.
hartm (Fri, 25 May 2018 00:42:15 GMT):
@rjones, do you have an estimate of how many more people would attend if the times were more convenient? This is probably worth trying if we think lots more people will attend.
rjones (Fri, 25 May 2018 02:14:07 GMT):
@hartm I do not. The current time is 11pm-midnight in Japan, and 10pm-11pm in China.
donatopellegrino (Mon, 28 May 2018 13:32:37 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
DumitruSavva (Thu, 31 May 2018 14:07:34 GMT):
Greetings!
Will we have a TSC meeting today?
cbf (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:03:25 GMT):
yes
cbf (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:03:25 GMT):
begin TSC
cbf (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:03:47 GMT):
-------------------
tbenzies (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:03:56 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hDlWTKSBmXM6UQW5s9qRjFwO_eZv0LU8nppHqMwoIxM/edit
tbenzies (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:06:14 GMT):
If you have not yet, please register for Amsterdam ASAP (we will be closing reg shortly): https://www.regonline.com/hyperledgerhackfestjune2018
hartm (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:06:57 GMT):
Do we have an estimate of people who were interested in "getting set up" on each of these platforms?
VipinB (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:11:25 GMT):
The initial day seems full
VipinB (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:11:34 GMT):
when I registered
lehors (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:12:21 GMT):
+2 to what Chris is saying!!
baohua (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:15:37 GMT):
Cello project will find developers to attend the hackfest!
baohua (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:15:45 GMT):
Besides, anyone will go to Beijing to attend LC3 in June? We consider to have some developer meetup around the conference. Pls let me know if feel interested to meet local developers :-)
tbenzies (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:15:55 GMT):
Explorer: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/explorer-2018-jun\
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:16:29 GMT):
Hi
tbenzies (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:25:46 GMT):
Architecture WG: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/architecture-wg-2018-jun
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:35:38 GMT):
@pardha I suggest we update the Hyperledger Explorer wiki page, given today's update (to sound more positive)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:35:52 GMT):
@Pardha I suggest we update the Hyperledger Explorer wiki page, given today's update (to sound more positive)
Pardha (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:35:53 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:36:14 GMT):
Can I make a suggestion ?
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:37:26 GMT):
Maybe instead of saying:
Issues
*There are some issues at this time for certain functionality not available in Fabric Node SDK that we are working around.*
tbenzies (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:37:56 GMT):
Labs: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/labs/2018-q2-update
Dan (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:38:06 GMT):
per arch wg discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_composability
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:39:13 GMT):
*There is some added functionality that we would like to add to the Hyperledger Explorer project (such as a node's health-check and/or performance matrix), which rely on some functionality which, once added to the Fabric Node SDK, will be highly beneficial. We are reporting and logging such requests and requirements via Hyperledger's JIRA and following closely.*
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:40:08 GMT):
@Pardha Is this a correct summary for what you reported today regarding the issues? ^^^
Pardha (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:42:43 GMT):
Yes
Pardha (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:43:53 GMT):
I would categorize health check/performance metrics as improvements.. not issues :)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:45:26 GMT):
You've got it !
Dan (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:47:49 GMT):
It's always easiest to just say no to mic :D
baohua (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:50:38 GMT):
we can be more optimistic~~
baohua (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:51:08 GMT):
MVCC!
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:51:41 GMT):
Ha ha ;-)
MicBowman (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:54:01 GMT):
JIRA query language... that sounds seriously scary
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:54:44 GMT):
Also, when we say check in to Github... shall we start saying "check in to Microsoft" ?
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:56:01 GMT):
It may indeed be easier to start with a new JIRA project from the "get go"
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:56:14 GMT):
Especially as we don't have that many labs (for now)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:56:14 GMT):
Especially as we don't have that many labs (yet)
rjagadee (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:58:37 GMT):
+1 on Jira for labs as an experiment.
tkuhrt (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:58:55 GMT):
We should make sure that the Jira project has the "labs-" prefix
tkuhrt (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:59:07 GMT):
unless we go with a single labs project
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:59:27 GMT):
Yes, let's prefix everything with "labs-"
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:59:47 GMT):
Or a "lab-..." even
Dan (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 14:59:47 GMT):
Unless labs prefix makes issue tracking messed up if the lab becomes a project.
lehors (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:00:00 GMT):
agreed labs-JonathanLevi
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:00:18 GMT):
Hey, I have incubated ! ;-)
lehors (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:00:28 GMT):
have you? ;-)
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:00:39 GMT):
Well, more or less ;-)
Dan (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:00:50 GMT):
We're pretty deep in the HL bowels for someone to come along and mine into jira and get confused on what's a lab. i.e. that's quite a bit different from a webpage listing labs alongside projects.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:00:56 GMT):
BTW: JIRA projects will need like a 3 or 4 letter alias
Dan (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:01:21 GMT):
I have a list of 4 letter words.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:01:37 GMT):
FAB... ...BUR.... QUIL....
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:02:06 GMT):
So we can't prefix the JIRA project name, but we can prefix everything else
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:02:59 GMT):
I have to go, btw, but how about we summarize as follows:
Labs that want a JIRA project (even though Github/MS is easier to start with) - we will go ahead and support
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:03:39 GMT):
If we see either that there are too many labs (== JIRA overhead)... or too much demand for Github vs JIRA... then let's re-revisit.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:03:39 GMT):
If we see either that there are too many labs (== JIRA overhead)... or too much demand for Github instead of JIRA... then let's re-revisit.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:03:44 GMT):
Works?
JonathanLevi (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 15:03:44 GMT):
Works/objections... let us know.
Dan (Thu, 07 Jun 2018 21:27:22 GMT):
lgtm
abraham (Fri, 08 Jun 2018 04:48:22 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:00:39 GMT):
hi guys
lehors (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:01:47 GMT):
hola!
lehors (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:01:47 GMT):
~~~~~ Start of TSC 2018-06-14 ~~~~~~
hola!
tbenzies (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:05:04 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hDlWTKSBmXM6UQW5s9qRjFwO_eZv0LU8nppHqMwoIxM/edit
tbenzies (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:06:14 GMT):
Identity WG: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/identity-wg-2018-jun
VipinB (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:27:08 GMT):
Can you hear me?
lehors (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:27:28 GMT):
we lost you
VipinB (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:27:34 GMT):
i am back
lehors (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:27:46 GMT):
you hear Jonathan?
VipinB (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:27:50 GMT):
yes
lehors (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:27:52 GMT):
cool
MicBowman (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:30:33 GMT):
maybe the first task should be to come up with a taxonomy of problems
MicBowman (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:30:51 GMT):
the set of problems that arch wg tackled was not by accident
MicBowman (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:31:14 GMT):
we spent a lot of the first "thrashing" stage of the wg focused on articulating the pieces
MicBowman (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:33:58 GMT):
+1 @VipinB
VipinB (Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:34:57 GMT):
I am out again
abraham (Fri, 15 Jun 2018 00:19:02 GMT):
hi, i tried to join this meeting last night by https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/technical-steering-committee , i found out that there was no body there. and you started the meeting by Go-meeting from meeting notes written by Todd. Any new information of meeting address will be updated ?
lehors (Fri, 15 Jun 2018 09:18:23 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=yF8XP2izEqW7AoB64) @abraham Hi, at what time did you try to call? According to RocketChat you're in the Beijing timezone, which would put the call at 10pm.
lehors (Fri, 15 Jun 2018 09:18:32 GMT):
the info on the wiki is correct
lehors (Fri, 15 Jun 2018 09:20:45 GMT):
I added a link to a time converter hoping this helps
abraham (Fri, 15 Jun 2018 10:59:31 GMT):
thanks for your editing. i will keep trying next Thursday.
baohua (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 05:24:50 GMT):
@abraham the entire community calendar can be found at https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=linuxfoundation.org_nf9u64g9k9rvd9f8vp4vur23b0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=UTC+8
abraham (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:02:41 GMT):
the link you sent is different from the schedule from https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/calendar-public-meetings
abraham (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:03:52 GMT):
and all of meeting schedule was NOT specified Time Zone. That's not efficient notice.
rjones (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:11:13 GMT):
@abraham I apologize for the oversight.
rjones (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 11:38:01 GMT):
@baohua The link you posted shows them in my local timezone, UTC-8. I added a functional link to the wiki page. This link: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?mode=AGENDA&src=linuxfoundation.org_nf9u64g9k9rvd9f8vp4vur23b0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=Asia%2FShanghai will show times in CST even if your default timezone is something else.
rjones (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 11:38:30 GMT):
basically, Google Calendar defaults to your local time zone when you give it an invalid one.
baohua (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:14:15 GMT):
thanks for the correction, ry! @rjones seems the calendar changed its grammar...
rjones (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:25:11 GMT):
@baohua yes they did. It broke our plugin and any links to existing calendars using that syntax.
VipinB (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:38:20 GMT):
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?mode=AGENDA&src=linuxfoundation.org_nf9u64g9k9rvd9f8vp4vur23b0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=*EST* for Eastern standard Time (New York and East coast of USA)
Three letter abbreviations can be found here: https://www.timeanddate.com/time/zones/
Since these three letter abbreviations are not unique they can cause problems. For Example CST maps to both Central Standard Time as well as China Standard Time, so best to use UTC relative time (UTC+8) or something like Asia/Shanghai
rjones (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:52:55 GMT):
@VipinB it defaults to _your_ timezone. When I click the link you just posted, it shows up in pacific. CST? Pacific. EST? Pacific. The three letter codes don't work (or I couldn't get them to work)
rjones (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:53:42 GMT):
I tried URL encoding the +, adding UTC+08 and UTC%2B08
rjones (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:53:47 GMT):
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
VipinB (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 15:51:59 GMT):
It works (I tried to put it as bold that is why those stars are there. That was my error@Ry )
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?mode=AGENDA&src=linuxfoundation.org_nf9u64g9k9rvd9f8vp4vur23b0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=EST (shows up as Eastern Standard Time) (need to delete the stars)
if I do https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?mode=AGENDA&src=linuxfoundation.org_nf9u64g9k9rvd9f8vp4vur23b0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=HT (it shows up in Hawaii time.- maybe we should move this discussion out of there since the tsc could probably care less about this
VipinB (Wed, 20 Jun 2018 15:51:59 GMT):
It works (I tried to put it as bold that is why those stars are there. That was my error@Ry )
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?mode=AGENDA&src=linuxfoundation.org_nf9u64g9k9rvd9f8vp4vur23b0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=EST (shows up as Eastern Standard Time) (need to delete the stars)
if I do https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?mode=AGENDA&src=linuxfoundation.org_nf9u64g9k9rvd9f8vp4vur23b0%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=HT (it shows up in Hawaii time.- maybe we should move this discussion out of there since this is not a tsc specific issue
lehors (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 13:59:55 GMT):
hi all
lehors (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:00:57 GMT):
~~~~~ Start of TSC 2018-06-21 ~~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:01:26 GMT):
Aloha
baohua (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:02:56 GMT):
there it is!
Dan (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:04:54 GMT):
quilt update? a blanket of silence
Dan (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:05:08 GMT):
caliper update is immeasurable
Dan (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:05:51 GMT):
_ok no more puns_
lehors (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:07:48 GMT):
too bad
JonathanLevi (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:08:20 GMT):
Yes, that's very strange
Dan (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:08:47 GMT):
it's not that big of a deal
Dan (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:08:55 GMT):
i can start making puns again
JonathanLevi (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:09:18 GMT):
The blanket or the messearableness ?
Dan (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:11:16 GMT):
I'm willing to stitch something together that covers everything.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:12:05 GMT):
And fast...
lehors (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:25:00 GMT):
~~~~~ Early end of TSC 2018-06-21 - it didn't really happen ~~~~~~
JonathanLevi (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:25:33 GMT):
What a call !
JonathanLevi (Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:25:44 GMT):
Oh, it's over.
adrianhopebailie (Thu, 28 Jun 2018 17:04:34 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
adrianhopebailie (Thu, 28 Jun 2018 17:05:00 GMT):
Is there a call today?
adrianhopebailie (Thu, 28 Jun 2018 17:06:03 GMT):
Guessing not
neewy (Thu, 28 Jun 2018 17:31:05 GMT):
It was cancelled due to hackfest
jwagantall (Thu, 28 Jun 2018 22:34:24 GMT):
User User_1 added by jwagantall.
n1zyz (Mon, 02 Jul 2018 12:39:55 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
baohua (Mon, 02 Jul 2018 13:01:03 GMT):
There's an ACM SAC dapps track recently call for peer review and proposal, if some one feel interested, just see https://www.cas-blockchain-certification.com/en/acm-sac-dapp-track
baohua (Mon, 02 Jul 2018 13:01:03 GMT):
There's an ACM SAC dapps track recently calling for peer review and proposal, if some one feel interested, just see https://www.cas-blockchain-certification.com/en/acm-sac-dapp-track
baohua (Mon, 02 Jul 2018 13:01:03 GMT):
There's an ACM SAC dapps track recently calling for peer review and proposal, if someone feels interested, just see https://www.cas-blockchain-certification.com/en/acm-sac-dapp-track
knagware9 (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 01:49:26 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
hvandurme (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 13:51:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:01:49 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Begin TSC Meeting ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
hartm (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:03:39 GMT):
I'm here Todd!
tbenzies (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:18:54 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18YE2l4UZJry7LAcXCMnGQdQuCKuT5mfQS5IRetTeevI/edit
hvandurme (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:18:54 GMT):
I was there and had a great time, learned a lot, met some great folks so def something I would participate in again.
hartm (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:20:41 GMT):
What about labs contributors?
hartm (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:20:44 GMT):
Just curious.
Dan (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:20:50 GMT):
@lehors any significant scheduling issue with the election ^ (regarding traditional August vacation schedules)
hartm (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:25:05 GMT):
We've debated extensively about the workgroups being added for two years, and have come to the same decision twice.
tbenzies (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:25:43 GMT):
we also include the list of WG Chairs and collect from each a list of individual "WG Contributors." There should also be a dispute resolution process where an individual who believes they should be included (but was not) can appeal to the WG Chair and Hyperledger Technical Advocate(s) with the final determination left to Hyperledger staff.
MicBowman (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:26:00 GMT):
this seems to have worked well in the past
cbf (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:28:38 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/charter-template
hvandurme (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:31:52 GMT):
That wasn't me Chris, probably another Adrian
neewy (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:32:46 GMT):
yet Caliper is a nice project, and we still contribute to it. Hopefully Haojun will report soon
mwagner (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:41:22 GMT):
@tbenzies can you screen share the pswg update page when we are up ?
tbenzies (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:44:46 GMT):
PSWG: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/pswg-2018-jun
hartm (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:54:23 GMT):
+1 Mark, submit the talk topic!
cbf (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 14:56:35 GMT):
argh Zoom crashed
Dan (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 15:02:32 GMT):
I think it's a reasonable expectation that WG chairs and Project maintainers read the TSC agenda each week. (Regarding notifying teams their update is due)
Dan (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 15:05:12 GMT):
Regarding the Community calendar, the ical option does not work well. If you are using something like outlook, you can download a snapshot of the calendar but if the meetings are updated or canceled there's no notification. Perhaps that's automatic if you are using google calendar but maybe only google calendar?
MicBowman (Thu, 05 Jul 2018 15:57:59 GMT):
the google calendar options work well
lehors (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:00:20 GMT):
I'm so used to the call being open early that when it's "only" just on time I start wondering what's going on :)
lehors (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:01:19 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Begin TSC Meeting ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
lehors (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:01:44 GMT):
agenda: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/1544
cbf (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:06:20 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/fabric-2018-jul
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:19:57 GMT):
TSC committee, please check this web page https://www.atlassian.com/software/views/open-source-license-request
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:20:18 GMT):
Infrastructure and the tool is free for open-source
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:20:34 GMT):
(in case of cloud)
tbenzies (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:23:34 GMT):
IBANP: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/1542
Dan (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:25:28 GMT):
I joined right in time for the close :)
dhuseby (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:25:37 GMT):
Hi everybody.
dhuseby (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:26:15 GMT):
So we have a Jira consultant onsite working with the Fabric team and we received a presentation on confluence yesterday.
dhuseby (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:26:43 GMT):
If you have questions, please ask here or in the tsc mailing list.
rjones (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:27:31 GMT):
I question how much effort non-Iroha, non-Fabric users are going to have to put into learning a new platform
dhuseby (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:28:00 GMT):
I think the current plan is to ask them for migration tool information and for us to enumerate the cost of switching both literal and mental.
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:28:43 GMT):
The rate of downloads of Fabric binaries and images continues to average just under 100/day
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:28:48 GMT):
How do you know that
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:28:51 GMT):
@cbf
dhuseby (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:28:58 GMT):
@rjones we should look at the number of active wiki users to judge that impact. If very few people are using wiki outside of the Iroha and fabric teams then the concern is lessened.
rjones (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:30:36 GMT):
@neewy they use a URL obfuscator to collect statistics, you can see that in the instructions
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:30:41 GMT):
Thanks!
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:31:16 GMT):
Are the instructions available in the repo of Fabric?
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:32:23 GMT):
@dhuseby I would assign someone to explore possibility of transition and estimate that. One good feature of Confluence cloud is commenting function and the other is an integration with mobile app
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:32:54 GMT):
Maintainers just love to track the state and comments and updates with push notifications in the app.
rjones (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:37:24 GMT):
that Iroha and Fabric maintainers are super excited about this is nice, but we need community consensus about switching.
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:44:31 GMT):
Sure. But please try to check if 1) we are eligible for a free infrastructure and platform 2) explore if switching is that demanding at all or there is an export functionality
If we need help of someone from the community — let's state this so that people can volunteer and help
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:45:33 GMT):
And I think that if it takes for so long we definitely need someone to help us prove or disprove that migration is really a long process or not
Dan (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:46:36 GMT):
is this about switching the wiki?
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:47:08 GMT):
Are there any proposals how to move further with that? Maybe we can create a chat or would you like to continue in email thread?
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:47:17 GMT):
@Dan yes
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:47:50 GMT):
I would be happy to form a document with pros and cons where we can collaborate and review at TSC call
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:47:50 GMT):
I would be happy to form a document with pros and cons where we can collaborate and review it at TSC call
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:47:50 GMT):
For Iroha update
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/iroha-2018-jul
https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha
Nakayoshi bot https://github.com/soramitsu/nakayoshi
Beta-4 release https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha/pull/1597
IrohaWeekly https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/iroha/topics
neewy (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:47:50 GMT):
For Iroha update
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/iroha-2018-jul
https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha
Nakayoshi bot https://github.com/soramitsu/nakayoshi
Beta-4 release https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha/pull/1597
IrohaWeekly https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/iroha/topics
cbf (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:58:46 GMT):
@neewy I have analytics on the short link to the download bootstrap script
rjones (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 15:07:52 GMT):
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ END TSC Meeting ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
rjones (Thu, 12 Jul 2018 15:07:58 GMT):
@lehors :)
ales100 (Mon, 16 Jul 2018 13:41:54 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
baohua (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:58:56 GMT):
meeting not started?
kelly_ (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:01:55 GMT):
Think we are waiting on Chris
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:02:04 GMT):
I'm on
kelly_ (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:02:16 GMT):
oh indeed you are :)
baohua (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:02:31 GMT):
started!
kelly_ (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:09:06 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/sawtooth-2018-jul
tbenzies (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:09:09 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/sawtooth-2018-jul
hartm (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:09:54 GMT):
LOL @ the additional information...
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:13:18 GMT):
@Dan good choice re: rust
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:13:44 GMT):
The security gods approve.
kelly_ (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:22:17 GMT):
RFCs: https://github.com/hyperledger/sawtooth-rfcs/pulls
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:26:04 GMT):
@Dan PoET for any Secure Enclave (e.g. trust zone any sgx)?
baohua (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:26:05 GMT):
well done, dan!
Dan (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:27:34 GMT):
thanks :)
Dan (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:28:05 GMT):
PoET2 just reduces the SGX requirements.. there's some SGX features that aren't on all platforms yet. However this also would make it easier to expand to other TEEs.
baohua (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:28:34 GMT):
this feature is important, and hope it remains similar performance
Dan (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:29:05 GMT):
absolutely
binhn (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:32:19 GMT):
probably they should turn video off
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:33:11 GMT):
@Dan I noticed your comment on editing the wiki. The Iroha and Fabric teams are pushing to switch to confluence. Will you take a look and talk about it in your team?
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:34:48 GMT):
@dan yeah, confluence looks much more powerful esp the integration with JIRA and I think might facilitate your RFC process as well
tbenzies (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:36:02 GMT):
IBANP https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nulhp3oc-65_piWgKR8slg6zPvibFpDrYDVChpzMzrc/edit
hartm (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:41:38 GMT):
This seems like a really worthwhile thing to do, but is it in the scope of an actual Hyperledger project?
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:42:28 GMT):
not really
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:42:43 GMT):
the scope is technology, not applications
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:42:52 GMT):
we approved DBE Core into Labs
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:43:06 GMT):
I am thinking that this should be considered for Labs by Tracy and company
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:43:17 GMT):
was Vipin a Labs steward?
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:49:37 GMT):
this also sounds very much like an Indy kind of application
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:53:49 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/whitepaper-wg-2018-jul
Dan (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:58:30 GMT):
@dhuseby sawtooth maintainers have not been active on the wiki. I guess I could have mentioned that in the update. We feel like maintaining the sawtooth docs is the main focus and a wiki only adds another place for redundant info to follow out of shape.
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:59:01 GMT):
TBH we haven't used it for much more than a place to host the roadmap
cbf (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:59:52 GMT):
but we are looking to make use of Confluence to pull together an improved roadmap
binhn (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:00:17 GMT):
thanks @hartm
Dan (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:00:32 GMT):
thanks WP Working group :fireworks:
Dan (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:06:04 GMT):
I felt the frustration especially last year when we kept changing directions for you guys. I'm very appreciative that you all stuck with it.
hartm (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:06:30 GMT):
It involved many more people than me--couldn't have done it without probably 10 or so people who really pitched in.
hartm (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:06:48 GMT):
And wait until you see the final version before you thank us ;")
Dan (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:07:35 GMT):
_quietly takes down banner_ ;)
hartm (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 17:25:31 GMT):
Just wait until you see section 11, entitled "Dan Middleton is the cause of all problems in Hyperledger" ;)
Dan (Thu, 19 Jul 2018 17:27:04 GMT):
rjones (Fri, 20 Jul 2018 17:18:12 GMT):
Dan Middleton is the source, and solution, to all problems Hyperledger
Dan (Fri, 20 Jul 2018 17:48:40 GMT):
:facepalm_tone4:
tbenzies (Mon, 23 Jul 2018 20:18:41 GMT):
Reminder to register for the final Hackfest of the year in Montreal (October 3-4) http://hyperledger.org/event/hyperledger-hackfest-october-2018
amundson (Tue, 24 Jul 2018 03:00:18 GMT):
re:wiki - a better solution than the wiki or confluence is an approach that uses git and the normal github PR process
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:01:35 GMT):
~~~~~~~ Begin TSC Meeting ~~~~~!~
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:03:15 GMT):
For Iroha update
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/iroha-2018-jul
https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha
Nakayoshi bot https://github.com/soramitsu/nakayoshi
Beta-4 release https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha/pull/1597
IrohaWeekly https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/iroha/topics
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:04:58 GMT):
@cbf want to bring up the JIRA consultant at next weeks TSC?
cbf (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:05:23 GMT):
can do the 9th
tbenzies (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:05:44 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-R43fMOia9P1JsFiSWe3wxkOmkzK_EM7HT2kmYNEn0M/edit#gid=31088272
rjones (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:05:51 GMT):
@dhuseby when is that contract over?
tbenzies (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:10:46 GMT):
Iroha: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/iroha-2018-jul
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:25:53 GMT):
Sawtooth is good at solving blockchain problems. ;)
rjones (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:26:40 GMT):
This question of "how do I choose one of your blockchains" was the #1 question at the OSCON booth.
hartm (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:27:10 GMT):
"The Nobel Peace Prize"? ;)
hartm (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:27:24 GMT):
I think I'd settle for a Turing award.
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:27:54 GMT):
Yeah keep your goals small Hart :D
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:27:58 GMT):
We are also measuring our throughput with Caliper. For beta-3 it is 151tx/s, and it was something like 30tx/s in beta-2. We were working hard on throughput in this release and expect a rate of 1.5-2 times
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:27:58 GMT):
We are also measuring our throughput with Caliper. For beta-3 it is 151tx/s, and it was something like 30tx/s in beta-2. We were working hard on throughput in this release and expect a rate of 1.5-2 times more
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:28:21 GMT):
beta-4 is not measured yet
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:28:44 GMT):
https://bit.ly/2lZKPbJ
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:28:54 GMT):
(report from Caliper)
lehors (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:29:41 GMT):
In light of the current discussion, I think the Iroha doc would gain from being updated: http://iroha.readthedocs.io/en/latest/overview.html#how-is-it-different-from-the-rest-of-hyperledger-frameworks-or-other-permissioned-blockchains
lehors (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:32:49 GMT):
In particular, I suspect the statement "Iroha is the only ledger that has a robust permission system, allowing permissions to be set for all commands, queries, and joining of the network." is pretty controversial and in any case isn't in line with the idea just discussed of focusing on highlighting what problem a framework is addressing
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:35:32 GMT):
Interesting.. is Iroha essentially a relational database (as opposed to most blockchains are key:value stores)?
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:40:18 GMT):
Yes
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:40:25 GMT):
Well our state is relational
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:40:42 GMT):
@lehors right
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:40:44 GMT):
Cool. Thanks
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:41:00 GMT):
@neewy are you Ales?
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:41:11 GMT):
No, I am Nikolay
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:41:22 GMT):
I am not sure how to put here my name :)
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:41:23 GMT):
Ok thanks :)
neewy (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:41:50 GMT):
Thanks everyone!
baohua (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:42:00 GMT):
thanks for the sync!
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:42:21 GMT):
Yes I think that was one of the better discussions arising from these updates.
tbenzies (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:42:25 GMT):
Healthcare WG: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/healthcare-wg-2018-jul
baohua (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:49:05 GMT):
TWG-China quarterly update: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/technical-wg-china-2018-jul
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:00:21 GMT):
Thanks for the update Baohua!
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:00:37 GMT):
I did not get a chance to bring up some discussion about how we can get more projects represented within your WG.
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:01:09 GMT):
An obvious approach is that each the project do a better job encouraging participants to join the Tech WG China.
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:01:22 GMT):
I wonder if there are other things from your perspective that would be helpful?
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:02:37 GMT):
~~~~~~ End TSC Call ~~~~~
_chat discussion continues_
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:02:37 GMT):
~~~~~~ End TSC Call ~~~~~
_chat discussion continues~
baohua (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:03:52 GMT):
@Dan definitely! there're more and more persons feeling interested with hyperledger now!
baohua (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:04:11 GMT):
Some core developers showing up for each project will definitely help grow the community up!
Dan (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:16:44 GMT):
Ok that's helpful feedback. If additional items occur to you please let us all know.
I gather I can find the timing for your meetings on the hyperledger calendar on the wiki?
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Jul 2018 17:23:24 GMT):
@rjones the engagement ended last Friday but I think there is a few hours of remote support that the consultant is using to iron out the last issues.
IsaacWong (Fri, 27 Jul 2018 10:32:18 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
jg507 (Tue, 31 Jul 2018 23:39:14 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
GopalPanda (Fri, 03 Aug 2018 19:06:59 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Mon, 06 Aug 2018 23:38:13 GMT):
User User_2 added by rjones.
tbenzies (Wed, 08 Aug 2018 01:04:37 GMT):
The is the final reminder for the upcoming TSC election (nominations begin on August 9th) -- please double check that your name/email is on the "Master" tab of the eligibility list (and correct) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-R43fMOia9P1JsFiSWe3wxkOmkzK_EM7HT2kmYNEn0M/edit#gid=31088272. We will consider the list final at 5pm PT on Wednesday, August 8th. If you have questions/edits, please reach out directly to both me and Tracy Kuhrt.
VipinB (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 14:03:38 GMT):
~~~Start of meeting~~~~
tbenzies (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 14:12:26 GMT):
Training and Education WG: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/training-and-education-wg-2018-aug
lehors (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 14:19:41 GMT):
it sounds rather painful though
Dan (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 14:22:30 GMT):
teaching `-s` alone is valuable
MicBowman (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 14:23:02 GMT):
surprising how many problems that has caused (or rather the lack of that)
lehors (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 14:23:04 GMT):
yes but as Tracy said, they rely on the web UI which is quite limited
cbf (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 14:23:52 GMT):
sounds like someone is working a heavy bag
lehors (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 14:23:59 GMT):
yes
Steve-Boyd (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 15:44:34 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Thu, 09 Aug 2018 16:15:45 GMT):
~~~End of meeting~~~
rjones (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:00:51 GMT):
~~~Start of meeting~~~
hartm (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:04:51 GMT):
Not sure anyone has planned that far out...
mwagner (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:06:58 GMT):
but its ski season here....
nrohith (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:12:44 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:20:10 GMT):
I lost audio somehow, is it just me?
hartm (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:20:24 GMT):
It's just you.
rjones (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:20:26 GMT):
my audio is working, Arnaud
lehors (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:20:31 GMT):
ok, thanks
tbenzies (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:21:35 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/public-sector-wg-2018-aug
Dan (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:30:04 GMT):
I appreciate Marta filling in. I think the health of a working group is better, though, if one of the community participants / chair gives the report. I imagine this is a one time conflict, but I would just want to avoid setting precedent that LF staff delivers project or wg reports.
rjones (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:31:38 GMT):
~~~End of meeting~~~
rjones (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:31:38 GMT):
~~~Nominal end of meeting~~~
mwagner (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:32:18 GMT):
ry was quick with the end of meeting notice
lehors (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:32:41 GMT):
back to my busy vacation schedule on the French Riviera... pool + drinks + food + beach + more drinks, repeat ;-)
Dan (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:42:11 GMT):
You're not winning any 'amis' with that taunting, @lehors ;)
lehors (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:49:12 GMT):
@dan ok, I'll share a bit of the experience then: https://photos.app.goo.gl/bJo5btgwjfBaNLfDA
lehors (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:49:12 GMT):
@Dan ok, I'll share a bit of the experience then: https://photos.app.goo.gl/bJo5btgwjfBaNLfDA
lehors (Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:49:19 GMT):
or does that make it worse? ;-)
Sean_Bohan (Fri, 17 Aug 2018 15:07:27 GMT):
Did anyone get the civs@cs.cornell.edu email for voting yet?
Sean_Bohan (Fri, 17 Aug 2018 15:07:27 GMT):
Did anyone get the civs@cs.cornell.edu yet?
rjones (Fri, 17 Aug 2018 16:24:58 GMT):
over five percent of the eligible voters have voted, so some have
kelly_ (Fri, 17 Aug 2018 17:38:18 GMT):
I haven't seen it yet
VipinB (Fri, 17 Aug 2018 19:28:59 GMT):
We did not get it
rjones (Fri, 17 Aug 2018 19:30:56 GMT):
Todd isn't in town today. I think the plan is to re-send the ballot links Monday when he's back
hartm (Fri, 17 Aug 2018 20:43:40 GMT):
I haven't gotten the email either.
Sean_Bohan (Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:26:15 GMT):
thanks Ry!
MicBowman (Mon, 20 Aug 2018 21:48:25 GMT):
several people i know have not received the ballot as of today
baohua (Tue, 21 Aug 2018 01:39:27 GMT):
it might be email system problem, let's help promote the voting ballot.
baohua (Tue, 21 Aug 2018 01:39:27 GMT):
it might be email system problem, let's help promote the voting news.
kelly_ (Wed, 22 Aug 2018 19:16:47 GMT):
@tbenzies do you have a count on % voter participation? just wondering if we have systemic issue or if there are a couple that ended up in the spam folder or something
szewong (Wed, 22 Aug 2018 19:33:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Wed, 22 Aug 2018 22:15:58 GMT):
Kelly, I never got my ballot either. I think it was systemic. I did get the "you need to vote" email. Todd sent my ballot manually, which I got
silasdavis (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:29:01 GMT):
Project update for Burrow is available: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/burrow-2018-aug. Will talk through it on today's TSC meeting.
silasdavis (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:29:25 GMT):
Also done some update of our best-practice badge and some updates to: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/projects/burrow
tbenzies (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:02:51 GMT):
https://doodle.com/poll/fibt39eh2sbfirey
kelly_ (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:06:53 GMT):
welcome @silasdavis @mwagner to the TSC! I also second Brian's thanks to @JonathanLevi and @greg.haskins for your work these past couple of years and helping make HL what it is today
baohua (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:08:00 GMT):
+1! Welcome and that will be more responsibilities!
tbenzies (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:09:59 GMT):
Hyperledger Burrow: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/burrow-2018-aug
dhuseby (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:17:28 GMT):
The kubernetes/Helm effort is coalescing in the Cello project
dhuseby (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:18:07 GMT):
The Cello meeting tomorrow is going to focus on that somewhat.
silasdavis (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:38:05 GMT):
FYI, burrow hard fork: https://github.com/gallactic/gallactic
silasdavis (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 16:20:39 GMT):
@dhuseby when is Cello meeting?
rjones (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 16:31:27 GMT):
@silasdavis 0530 Pacific on Friday
rjones (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 16:31:41 GMT):
so, a little less than 20 hours from now
rjones (Thu, 23 Aug 2018 16:33:01 GMT):
@silasdavis https://wiki.hyperledger.org/projects/cello has links to schedule
silasdavis (Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:51:16 GMT):
@rjones thanks for that, unfortunately I couldn't make it due to a prior engagement. I'll pick up the recording.
tbenzies (Fri, 24 Aug 2018 18:39:10 GMT):
please take a quick minute to complete availability for Q1 Hackfest https://doodle.com/poll/fibt39eh2sbfirey
sstone1 (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 12:31:34 GMT):
Hello TSC - I have added the Composer community update to the Wiki (https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/composer-2018-aug), and will be attending the TSC call later today. Please take a moment if you can to read through this mailing list post as well: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/composer/message/125
rjones (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:02:05 GMT):
~~~~~ MEETING BEGINS ~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:07:33 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17UCtPEgD0l4LDzwMe3wtlyF04NS2wIxdujApYYbzcl0/edit
hartm (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:17:31 GMT):
Vipin makes a good point here--we probably don't want this group to have a hostile relationship with other working groups. Can we add in points in the charter that suggest the mission is to help other working groups?
kelly_ (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:22:19 GMT):
There seems to be two pieces of the proposal: 1) creation of a dashboard for quantitative metrics re: community health and 2) a task force to experiment/discuss ways to improve community adoption
kelly_ (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:22:40 GMT):
1) seems more like a repository that could be created for hyperleder-labs or others that would be useful for all projects
kelly_ (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:23:00 GMT):
right now maintainers need to pull metrics around contributors, companies, mailing list metrics, rocket chat messages, docker pulls, etc. etc.
kelly_ (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:23:19 GMT):
so I can see an opportunity for re-use there across the projects
kelly_ (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:24:09 GMT):
I know the Sawtooth team has some scripts that would be useful to contribute, I suspect Fabric and Hyperledger staff do as well
kelly_ (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:29:04 GMT):
There are probably also some metrics that would be good to understand more broadly than what is captured by individual maintainers. A set of macro metrics re: Hyperledger as a whole. e.g. geography, gender, ethnicity, etc.
Dan (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:31:24 GMT):
I think there's a good opportunity to bring in SMEs in these areas. Like how contributing is not just for coders - we need tech writers, ux designers etc. This is a good place to bring in HR specialists. Can our member/contributor companies lend experts in this fields like they are in the others.
hartm (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:35:38 GMT):
@Dan Yeah, I agree with you--I think the charter needs to be reworded so that it sounds less adversarial and focuses more on these things.
cbf (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:39:19 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/composer-2018-aug
Dan (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:39:23 GMT):
composer update: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/composer-2018-aug
Dan (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:39:26 GMT):
jinx
cbf (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:39:50 GMT):
lol
Dan (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:54:16 GMT):
is <7min sufficient for cello?
lehors (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:55:16 GMT):
yeah, I was wondering the same
lehors (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:55:40 GMT):
we might be better off postponing it at this point
Dan (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:55:49 GMT):
I do appreciate Cello providing their quarterly report on time.
binhn (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:56:04 GMT):
@sstone1 out of time to ask my question, but could you provide some thoughts on DAML vs the modeling language in Composer?
sstone1 (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:56:34 GMT):
i'll defer that question to @dselman ;-)
dselman (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:56:34 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
binhn (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:56:55 GMT):
thanks
dselman (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:58:04 GMT):
DAML is an execution language. CML is a cross-platform schema language. It explicitly tries to separate the structure of the data from the operations that you want to perform on the data.
binhn (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:59:04 GMT):
so one could use CML to generate DAML
dselman (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:59:09 GMT):
DAML is also not OSS AFAIK
dselman (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:59:21 GMT):
You mean this: https://daml.com
Dan (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 14:59:43 GMT):
For those interest Sawtooth Tech Forum starting now on the community channel. Gotta drop for that myself.
Dan (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:00:12 GMT):
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community
lehors (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:00:34 GMT):
isn't attracting more contributors a general challenge for all open source projects?
binhn (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:00:37 GMT):
yes, i was thinking about DA's work
lehors (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:00:57 GMT):
obviously you always have many more users than contributors
VipinB (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:01:05 GMT):
There are a host of such languages like Ivy for example
dselman (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:01:11 GMT):
Here are some example CML models: http://models.accordproject.org which should give you a sense.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:01:20 GMT):
I think the only thing I would have hoped the Composer dev community had done differently in the last few months is air some of these conversations and concerns about the approach publicly on the composer mailing list,even at the risk of appearing uncertain or weak. There is a lot of good thinking and POV-sharing that goes on into any decision about product futures, and that shouldn't be locked up in the heads of just the few core developers. Always assume there are more smart people than you know out there whose input or, hopefully, willingness to contribute to a solution can be tapped into.
VipinB (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:02:05 GMT):
But as @dselman notes they are not OSS
VipinB (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:02:27 GMT):
Modeling is a tough problem
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:03:03 GMT):
I also wanted to note that any software product whose userbase target is non-technical (think Firefox or OpenOffice) has challenges in getting those users to be willing and able to cross over from user to contributor, let alone to maintainer. There may have been more we could do to encourage the small docs or bugfix contributors to become more actively involved, but this is always harder than, say, getting new devs for a javascript framework
VipinB (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:03:04 GMT):
Hope to speak more about this @dselman
dselman (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:03:14 GMT):
I believe that there's a lot of value in separating CML from Composer. It will allow all the projects to use CML to model assets, participants, transactions etc and to have a consistent serialization to JSON and schema validation. This could drive a lot of interop between the projects.
lehors (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:03:14 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=C5Q453CMQNjDM4A8s) @bbehlendorf for what it's worth I only found out about this very recently myself so I agree - companies tend to be shy about this kind of stuff but I don't think it is for good reasons
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:03:53 GMT):
As part of the future-of-composer discussions I'd love to see people thinking about other dev tooling in the blockchain ecosystem: Truffle, for example, Metamask, Web3.js, etc. Or even other IDEs and dev toolkits.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:04:39 GMT):
But I do think anyone interested in this thread should discuss it on the composer mailing list, and from there we can figure out if it's about rebooting Composer, finding new devs to continue iterating Composer, or time for a new project
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:05:20 GMT):
And @dselman very interested in what you can bring to the picture - I will follow up on private notes but don't make me a bottleneck :)
rjones (Thu, 30 Aug 2018 15:05:29 GMT):
~~~~~ MEETING ENDS ~~~~~
dselman (Sat, 01 Sep 2018 08:58:15 GMT):
@bbehlendorf FYI, I've created a proposal that we will discuss with the Composer contributors. Others are of course welcome as well! https://github.com/hyperledger/composer/issues/4365
ThangDC (Tue, 04 Sep 2018 04:46:21 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
kelly_ (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 13:59:58 GMT):
:wave:
Dan (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:01:24 GMT):
~~~~~ Begin TSC Mtg ~~~~~
VipinB (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:02:52 GMT):
Congrats Dan
Dan (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:03:14 GMT):
thx
VipinB (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:04:11 GMT):
What is the new direction @dan
MicBowman (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:04:25 GMT):
congratulations, @Dan !!!!!!
MicBowman (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:04:43 GMT):
and many many thanks, @cbf
lehors (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:05:16 GMT):
congrats Dan
binhn (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:07:24 GMT):
Dan, congrats!!!
baohua (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:08:22 GMT):
+1!
dhuseby (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:20:30 GMT):
The Cello meetings are at 5:30am pacific time on fridays
dhuseby (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:26:57 GMT):
Are they planning to support other HL blockchains before graduating to active status?
VipinB (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:28:26 GMT):
+1 @dhuseby
dhuseby (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:30:43 GMT):
There are Helm charts for most of the HL blockchains.
dhuseby (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:31:05 GMT):
I have been rounding the authors up
dhuseby (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:32:00 GMT):
And organizing meetings at the Cello team meetings
nage (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:34:33 GMT):
This is an important point, if we expect cross project effort we will need contributors that want to put in that effort for their own reasons. Dave has done a good job reaching out to the Indy community on this.
tbenzies (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:35:07 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/architecture-wg-2018-sep
rjagadee (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:40:45 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10D0WgbMV91YBPzKTutc5TNirDC1RRzB_8GSF84hv4l4/edit
MicBowman (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:47:04 GMT):
"holy grail"
Dan (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:49:01 GMT):
thanks, Ram
rjones (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:50:27 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17UCtPEgD0l4LDzwMe3wtlyF04NS2wIxdujApYYbzcl0/edit?usp=sharing
tbenzies (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:58:50 GMT):
https://chaoss.community/
mwagner (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 15:00:57 GMT):
need to drop for my day job
Dan (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 15:01:20 GMT):
~~~~~ End of TSC Mtg ~~~~~
rjones (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 15:01:36 GMT):
~~~~~ meeting of the TSC ends ~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 16:03:29 GMT):
~~~~~ Fin ~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 16:03:37 GMT):
;)
mighty-pirate (Thu, 06 Sep 2018 17:57:05 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Fri, 07 Sep 2018 13:24:19 GMT):
Reference to paper about building community using Quadratic Voting incentives: most of this is heavy stuff (Economics dressed up to look like science) but there are some interesting observations on open source and crypto in particular; I suggest skimming through until you find interesting text. Particularly interesting are observations about open source communities and amplification of the voice of "the little guy" https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3243656
knagware9 (Sat, 08 Sep 2018 06:54:11 GMT):
Congrts Dan
Dan (Tue, 11 Sep 2018 17:27:21 GMT):
@VipinB I didn't get through the signup wall there yet. Could you summarize the part of open source communities that peaked your interest?
VipinB (Wed, 12 Sep 2018 14:58:08 GMT):
@Dan - I will certainly do a summary of the key findings that piqued my curiosity- May take some time-hopefully soon
VipinB (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 13:59:39 GMT):
Good day indeed
lehors (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:04:44 GMT):
~~~~~ TSC Call begins ~~~~~~`
VipinB (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:04:45 GMT):
Start of meeting
lehors (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:04:59 GMT):
proposed charter: https://docs.google.com/document/d/17UCtPEgD0l4LDzwMe3wtlyF04NS2wIxdujApYYbzcl0/edit
cbf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:16:24 GMT):
it could be that we start a project, not a wg, to develop (or adapt) the tooling necessary to track the various metrics that we want projects to track
tkuhrt (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:18:34 GMT):
@cbf : a lab would be good
VipinB (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:18:45 GMT):
+1
tkuhrt (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:19:11 GMT):
Anyone here want to be a sponsor? If so, I will write up a proposal for a lab
tkuhrt (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:19:19 GMT):
I already have a bunch of tooling that we could adapt
VipinB (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:19:28 GMT):
I can be
VipinB (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:19:43 GMT):
a sponsor
nage (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:22:16 GMT):
@esplinr is very interested in helping with metrics and that "project style" community health
esplinr (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:22:16 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tkuhrt (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:23:46 GMT):
Thanks, @nage - Any other people who want to be initial committers?
nage (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:25:08 GMT):
_will ping the #indy-outreach channel_
cbf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:25:20 GMT):
I have some stuff, I would be glad to participate
kelly_ (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:25:25 GMT):
approving this working group seems like a low risk to me. we've all agreed that improving the health and diversity of the community is a priority, we have a proposal and people willing to go help in this area. so I'm not sure what the big risk is? that we have an update once a quarter on their progress in the TSC
kelly_ (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:26:09 GMT):
If people find value in an established working group it seems like a low resource impact to HL
Dan (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:27:50 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/explorer-2018-sep
lehors (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:29:14 GMT):
I agree with @kelly, and we seem to have the assumption that WGs are necessary there for a long time. They don't have to be. We can very well close them quickly.
lehors (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:29:14 GMT):
I agree with @kelly_ , and we seem to have the assumption that WGs are necessary there for a long time. They don't have to be. We can very well close them quickly.
lehors (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:29:14 GMT):
I agree with @kelly_ , and we seem to have the assumption that WGs are necessarily there for a long time. They don't have to be. We can very well close them quickly.
Dan (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:35:37 GMT):
@baohua props for looking back to the previous quarterly report.
VipinB (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:36:21 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/identity-wg-2018-sep
baohua (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:40:22 GMT):
here, and i remember it was asked that time: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/explorer-2018-jun.
Dan (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:41:40 GMT):
ID charter https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NZIOmxBSKCPkJ2OW9bPdUgH7T4JVSP4zbaumXtsyOpg/edit
Dan (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:41:40 GMT):
Ident. charter https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NZIOmxBSKCPkJ2OW9bPdUgH7T4JVSP4zbaumXtsyOpg/edit
Dan (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:41:59 GMT):
ID paper: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ExFNRx-yYoS8FnDIUX1_0UBMha9TvQkfts2kVnDc4KE/edit#heading=h.ajr7gepdonan
nage (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:48:22 GMT):
We have tried to be careful not to co-opt the group to be "the Indy way", I am trying to rally Indy contributors to push harder to help finish up the paper
nage (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:50:54 GMT):
Thanks @VipinB!
VipinB (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:52:36 GMT):
@nage There is a lot of SSI folks, not just from Indy!
nage (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:53:07 GMT):
And we want to help them *all* participate at Hyperledger!
VipinB (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:53:23 GMT):
That is true!
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:55:09 GMT):
is anyone else having serious dropouts from audio on Zoom or am I the only one? Like multi-second silences in the middle of when people are talking
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:55:13 GMT):
could be the wifi at this cafe, sigh
baohua (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:55:28 GMT):
same to me, sometimes breaking out
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:58:00 GMT):
I bet we could cut the amount of time we spend on concalls by 2/3rds by adopting more async processes via email or version control.
MicBowman (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:58:35 GMT):
agreed @bbehlendorf
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:58:55 GMT):
I should have added cut the time without compromising our output
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:59:05 GMT):
it's easy to cut the time on calls if we don't care about getting things done :)
Dan (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:59:19 GMT):
:)
mwagner (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:59:23 GMT):
@bbehlendorf I was having the same issues here in my office
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:59:35 GMT):
I appreciate how concalls are a sort of forcing function to complete a report or discuss a certain issue
mwagner (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:59:52 GMT):
there were a lot of long quiet periods
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:59:53 GMT):
but as I said on the first day of my job, I really think an over-reliance on them can be harmful to community development
Dan (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 14:59:57 GMT):
@VipinB actually about to talk about Next Directory on sawtooth forum call now: https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 15:00:29 GMT):
I hate chat too, but I'll take a conversation on chat over a conversation in a phone recording any day, even if minuted or transcribed
MicBowman (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 15:00:34 GMT):
concalls --> one person providing feedback at a time
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 15:00:40 GMT):
(er, hate is a strong word, soften that)
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 15:01:00 GMT):
Mic: yes, multithreading FTW
Dan (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 15:01:32 GMT):
channel switched networks are the best!
kelly_ (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 19:07:02 GMT):
+1 to async processes. I also think it adds more transparency
kelly_ (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 19:07:33 GMT):
while people can go back and listen to a concall that is recorded, reading a chat log would probably 10x faster
hartm (Thu, 13 Sep 2018 19:23:30 GMT):
+1 to this discussion. We should definitely require TSC members (and others) to read the quarterly reports in advance. It should be more of a Q&A rather than a presentation, and if there are no big concerns, "no questions" is certainly a valid option.
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:02:59 GMT):
~~~~~ Begin TSC Meeting ~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:03:02 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/hyperledger-project-code-of-conduct
kelly_ (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:04:19 GMT):
:woo:
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:04:49 GMT):
I came here for an argument
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:05:17 GMT):
:rage:
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:05:31 GMT):
lol
tbenzies (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:06:46 GMT):
Hackfest Agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pYhoy5CxgSyXclIsQs-W8yaIcndjfD-qPWvJmpAehP0/edit
mwagner (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:11:03 GMT):
@cbf NO YOU DID NOT!
bobsummerwill (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:11:23 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:11:24 GMT):
@mwagner discussion of k8s and helm charts and (for fabric) how to manage launching containers would be useful
mwagner (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:11:52 GMT):
@cbf tnx
bobsummerwill (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:11:58 GMT):
Thanks for the redirect, @kelly_!
Morning all :-)
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:12:20 GMT):
this has come up a fair bit and we are definitely interested in contribution to leverage k8s rather than docker to launch
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:12:26 GMT):
or as an alternative
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:12:45 GMT):
there was some email discussion of this IIRC
bobsummerwill (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:15:14 GMT):
RE: Inclusiveness, for anybody who has not seen this ....
https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/after-years-of-abusive-e-mails-the-creator-of-linux-steps-aside
mwagner (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:16:48 GMT):
@cbf cool, will pull some together
baohua (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:17:35 GMT):
OCI seems promising, where docker is an important contributor.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:19:42 GMT):
(commenting here since I'm getting dropouts calling in from china) the community health work should be a TSC-chartered working group (or call it task force, though there's no meaningful difference between the two AFAIK) rather than a GB-chartered one, as these are not issues the devs can kick upstairs but instead are core to how we work and what we do.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:20:54 GMT):
GB could provide some guidance if asked, of course. But they aren't active or expected to be active on the level of these issues as often as the TSC is
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:21:26 GMT):
last thing y'all want will be the GB being tempted into micromanaging the projects
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:22:34 GMT):
Even the TSC shouldn't be micromanaging, but if interventions are required (positive or negative) it'll come across better coming from an elected group of devs than from the GB
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:22:52 GMT):
when you get into the measurement of diversity, then gender, race and nationality come into play - I think that this is what dan is referring when noting that there may be GDPR concerns around sharing that
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:23:12 GMT):
we definitely need to get guidance on this from board and legal
silasdavis (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:23:20 GMT):
Sorry I'm on Croatian 2g... Suggesting a generic effort to collect and aggregate what happens to be measurable is _probably_ a good thing if doing so does not prima facie imply such metrics are important
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:23:27 GMT):
all within what a TSC-chartered WG/TF can do
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:25:29 GMT):
I would note that it is also what the TSC is supposed to do
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:25:43 GMT):
CBF: true, but WG's are a way to delegate things out
tkuhrt (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:26:58 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/quilt-2018-sep
silasdavis (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:28:20 GMT):
Getting a 404 on go-ilp github...
silasdavis (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:30:08 GMT):
https://github.com/interledger/go-ilp
VipinB (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:32:40 GMT):
https://github.com/interledger/rfcs
tkuhrt (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:34:49 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/pswg-2018-sep
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:35:06 GMT):
Regarding Comm. Health, the thing I don't know how to do is measure what our diversity is. That's a precursor to identifying and fixing any issues. I've convinced myself that the right people to do that measurement are HR specialists .. they know how and the laws around how.
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:38:21 GMT):
@hartm Montreal Hackfest Crypto-lib agenda doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1103TbY1h_1p9LN7xBAjPYqsLu3kzMgdeQMWq6Mk4c1Y/edit?usp=sharing
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:38:28 GMT):
I dumped my notes from the latest meeting in there
hartm (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:38:53 GMT):
@dhuseby Looks like a good start.
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:39:01 GMT):
I invite anybody who has an interest in the crypto-lib's design/implementation to join in
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:39:38 GMT):
our greatest challenge is to gather requirements from all of the projects that will hopefully use the crypto-lib so that we can make a clean interface that doesn't get in the way of adoption
VipinB (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:41:11 GMT):
Just looking at gender diversity on this call @Dan. Other than LF employees there do not seem to be any gender diversity.
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:48:34 GMT):
@VipinB that's exactly what precipitated this priority for the community.
silasdavis (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:51:35 GMT):
I think that an obvious top level taxonomical thing I would like to see on the metrics an upfront distinction between how platforms deal with the CAP and FLP theorems, which end up being related for blockchain a since we mostly trade availability. I always tend to ask of a blockchain, if finality then where is partial synchrony entering? If message complexity scales linearly with nodes where are random choices being made?
cliveb (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:58:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:00:42 GMT):
H1 is not all that and a bag of chips IMO
rjones (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:00:57 GMT):
@cbf we did just get a report yesterday that may not be crap
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:01:00 GMT):
wait, were we offered chips?
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:01:01 GMT):
@cbf I agree with your general assessment and my recommendation was to *not* pay them for their services anymore but still use their platform and payments processing
cbf (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:01:04 GMT):
yes, I did see that
rjones (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:01:09 GMT):
I'm anti-H1 at this point.
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:01:16 GMT):
@rjones responsible disclosure
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:01:33 GMT):
there is no doubt that we have receive legitimate bug reports
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:01:40 GMT):
~~~~~~ End of TSC Voice call ~~~~~
cliveb (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:01:54 GMT):
"[pending] Copyright discussion - with Hyperledger Legal committee." the current DCO git implementation looks very circumventable by 'East Texas' patent troll lawyers.
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:01:58 GMT):
the signal to noise ratio is roughly 1:20
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:02:06 GMT):
we get 20 bogus report to 1 good one
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:02:41 GMT):
I think we can handle the triage, the security team didn't really have to be activated last year in any meaningful way
rjones (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:03:34 GMT):
I'm not sure why H1 is popular. I went around with tptacek about this
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:04:01 GMT):
H1 organizes the bug bounties for lots of large companies like Netflix and Twitter
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:04:08 GMT):
that's why H1 is a thing
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:04:34 GMT):
I don't think they offer much to us other than a payments processor
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:04:46 GMT):
even their report tracking is not ideal for us
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:05:06 GMT):
i would much prefer that we use JIRA instead just to eliminate the extra layer of indirection
rjones (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:05:21 GMT):
I get that they are popular. I don't see the value.
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:05:34 GMT):
we can integrate H1's platform with our JIRA so that we can coordinate payments of bounties tied to JIRA tickets on our JIRA
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:05:53 GMT):
@rjones my recommendation is along those lines
rjones (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:05:57 GMT):
That Netflix and Twitter make bad choices doesn't mean we need to jump off the bridge, too.
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:06:17 GMT):
it's really the payment processing in 30 different currencies and a handful of cryptocurrencies that is the real value there
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:06:47 GMT):
but I'm curious to see if we can do payments processing through a different provider
rjones (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:06:53 GMT):
@cliveb it is
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:06:56 GMT):
like, maybe somebody in our community?
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:07:49 GMT):
do we have any payments processing companies in our community that could process bug bounty payments for us?
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:07:56 GMT):
I don't have an answer to that
cliveb (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:10:39 GMT):
@rjones ca we submit change to git to link the hyperledger DCO to hyperledger projects? My old job we were sued in Texas. They used wishy washy to circumvent licence...
cliveb (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:10:39 GMT):
@rjones can we submit design change to git(github) to link the hyperledger DCO to hyperledger projects? My old job we were sued in Texas. They used wishy washy to circumvent licence...
cliveb (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:10:39 GMT):
@rjones can we submit design change to git(github) to link the hyperledger DCO to hyperledger projects? My old job we were sued in Texas. They used wishy washy technical linkage to circumvent licence...
mwagner (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:24:57 GMT):
@tracy can you review the "about this Paper" section and see if it already captures the caveat ?
tracy (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:24:57 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:25:19 GMT):
in the pswg paper
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:26:16 GMT):
```We expect that refinements to these definitions and new blockchain-specific metrics will warrant future revisions of this document. ```
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:26:48 GMT):
We could add a line saying ```We welcome community feedback to inform subsequent versions.```
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:27:05 GMT):
(thanks :rocket: chat for the arbitrary highlighting)
rjones (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:27:41 GMT):
Totally _not_ "*arbitrary*"
rjones (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:27:41 GMT):
Totally _not_ 'arbitrary'
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:28:11 GMT):
(thanks :rocket: for the deterministic highlighting of arbitrary words)
tkuhrt (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 20:50:52 GMT):
@mwagner @Dan : Or something such as "To inform subsequent versions and provide feedback, please join us in the Performance and Scale working group"
Dan (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 20:51:27 GMT):
oooh i like that
mwagner (Thu, 20 Sep 2018 21:52:04 GMT):
@tkuhrt Sounds great, I may also a blurb about joining in the discussions :)
MicBowman (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:03:56 GMT):
~~~~~ Begin TSC Meeting ~~~~~
cbf (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:06:59 GMT):
Event Reminders
Next Hackfest -- October 3-4 | Montreal (registration / agenda)
APAC Hackfest -- week of March 4th (details coming soon)
Schedule announced for Hyperledger Global Forum, December 12-15 (Basel, Switzerland)
Hackfest Agenda Planning
Quarterly project update
Hyperledger Caliper update
October 11th: Hyperledger Fabric update
Quarterly WG update
None this week
October 11th: Healthcare WG update
Bug Bounty discussion
Social Impact WG discussion
Hyperledger Community Health WG discussion (continued)
bobsummerwill (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:08:33 GMT):
Morning, all!
Dan (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:09:25 GMT):
Morning!
Dan (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:09:35 GMT):
(or evening, afternoon, etc. as the case may be)
Dan (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:20:31 GMT):
Social Impact WG proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/191UvgXfzWeBKE9GUn-9JUwYXovUOP-mMa35EUKAoflA/edit
hartm (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:21:34 GMT):
I am having a really hard time understanding Marta--the audio isn't wonderful.
cbf (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:30:50 GMT):
well, we don't want to create another Manhatten Project ;-)
cbf (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:31:47 GMT):
we should be thinking about such things... what is less clear to me is what the expectations of the WG proposers are vis-a-vis what we are discussing here
nage (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:32:34 GMT):
Yes @silasdavis our group in Sovrin is more use case focused. It is an interesting question on how to keep general verticals on the same page (other IGs will have to wrestle with similar issues, as Dan points out).
MicBowman (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:36:02 GMT):
@cbf i agree that the proposal seems more focused on blockchain impact on social good... i would like to see that balanced with requirements from social good usages impacting blockchain
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:36:54 GMT):
Is there precedent for this elsewhere in the Linux Foundation?
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:37:16 GMT):
Maybe we can borrow from and learn from that if it’s been done before.
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:37:33 GMT):
@Dan ^^^
MicBowman (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:42:56 GMT):
by the way... should we archive the white paper working group?
nage (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:43:00 GMT):
I agree that hasn't been happening well. Part of the question is how to do that. I think we are focusing on how the technical deliverables can do that (in terms or requirements here?)
nage (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:43:00 GMT):
I agree that hasn't been happening well. Part of the question is how to do that. I think we are focusing on how the technical deliverables can do that (in terms of requirements here?)
silasdavis (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:43:33 GMT):
Would for such a group to report on which common problems social impact use cases have that are not being worked on as heavily for other reasons
silasdavis (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:43:33 GMT):
Would want such a group to report on which common problems social impact use cases have that are not being worked on as heavily for other reasons
silasdavis (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:43:33 GMT):
Would want such a group to report on which common problems social impact use cases have that are not being worked on as heavily in the projects
cbf (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:45:26 GMT):
A special interest group, that is supported by a mailing list and rocket chat channels, and zoom meeting availability that is not required to report out to the TSC would be one way of enabling such conversaions in the broader community
MicBowman (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:45:58 GMT):
but that will diminish the impact... if its too separate then there is no opportunity to communicate results
baohua (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:47:04 GMT):
true, hence a general user-case group might be a good start.
baohua (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:47:11 GMT):
which is more flexible
nage (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:47:13 GMT):
+1 to the substantial value of these groups. It helps the projects understand their use cases and just as important, it helps these spaces understand our projects.
cbf (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:47:20 GMT):
right but the WG as proposed is more about use cases than it is about developing a deliverable that makes the case against use of crypto-currencies because they can be used to facilitate drug and human trafficking
cbf (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:47:45 GMT):
(that's just for argument sake)
baohua (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:47:59 GMT):
the deliverable can be something like the best technical practices to adopt hyperledger techniques.
nage (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:48:01 GMT):
The question is how to govern them and support mutually constructive output
baohua (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:48:22 GMT):
and even whitepapers for typical adoption examples.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:48:50 GMT):
Maybe one lens for considering groups like Social Impact is to consider what purpose Hyperledger as a whole solves - which is as an umbrella for open source blockchain projects. The EEA is a standards body. So the reason for any particular working group is to feed into that broader mission.
For the EEA that is exploring topics which will feed into the standards process (maybe exploring use-cases which drive the protocol layer, or which might lead to industry-specific standards higher up).
For Hyperledger, I think that means exploring use-cases which will lead to open source projects (or feed into existing open source projects). So understanding the technical needs of various social impact projects would make sense to me.
baohua (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:49:01 GMT):
i agree that techniques should keep close relationship with adoption cases.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:51:03 GMT):
I agree, @baohua.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:54:10 GMT):
So wait, no vote on the social impact proposal?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:54:40 GMT):
we can figure out this other question of where sector-specific WGs report in parallel, no?
bobsummerwill (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:55:01 GMT):
On the flip-side, then, your razor for when WGs should likely not be approved to move forward is when they don't really have potential to contribute to the greater mission of the organization. In the EEA's case that would be discussion on topics which are realistically not going to inform the standards process and in Hyperledger's case that would be groups which are not realistically going to alter the direction of existing open source projects or lead to new projects.
There are many things which are "good", but may make better sense outside of Hyperledger.
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:58:43 GMT):
I’m worried that the social impact WG will go down the road of human rights activism. It might get controversial and might take away from our technical mission.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 14:58:52 GMT):
sorry have to drop :(
rjones (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 15:01:36 GMT):
Is Dr LaPointe part of the social impact WG?
rjones (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 15:02:02 GMT):
@bbehlendorf she mentioned working with you
baohua (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 15:02:59 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=hX9t00yOG1TuBfpWrP) @dhuseby +1, let's keep attention of that.
rjones (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 15:06:07 GMT):
I will paraphrase Cara's presentation from this weekend: you cannot develop tech in a vacuum. One thing that stands out to me is the number of times identity documents have been used for ill. Rwandan genocide, for example
rjones (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 15:06:07 GMT):
I will poorly summarize Cara's presentation from this weekend: you cannot develop tech in a vacuum. One thing that stands out to me is the number of times identity documents have been used for ill. Rwandan genocide, for example
mwagner (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 15:25:15 GMT):
~~~~~~ End of TSC Voice call ~~~~~
mwagner (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 15:25:33 GMT):
actually ended 25 mins ago
bobsummerwill (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:32:06 GMT):
That is for sure, @ry. Various people have pointed out that there is likely a need for a Hippocratic Oath equivalent for computer scientists. The chemists had their Dynamite moment, the physicists their Atomic Bomb. There are serious consequences to our actions and to the societal impact of the systems which we create.
There is the Satoshi Oath, for example:
http://ipfs.b9lab.com:8080/ipfs/QmXysWEAexXQqYZhTGpECvksnaBkSEWHdGhM7vNeHxue2g/
But ethics are somewhat orthogonal to "Social Impact". Such groups that I have seen in that area are more directly concerned with altruistic and public good applications of the technology than they are directly concerned with ethics per-se.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:35:05 GMT):
If we are looking for a group of people concerned with ethical standards of the open source projects within Hyperledger (see Code of Conduct controversy in the Linux kernel community right now, for example) then that is one thing.
If we are looking at something which is orthogonal to industry verticals, but for the public sector, charity and similar use cases that is something different.
No value judgement from me in any of this. Just trying to pull apart the threads and understand what we are really shooting to achieve. What are the desired outputs?
VipinB (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 19:50:45 GMT):
IMO The social impact WG is a sector specific working group just like the healthcare WG or the public sector working group. They have special needs specific to the sector and there are many who are working on a bunch of solutions. So the TSC should approve the creation of such a group since they have already approved the creation of sector specific working groups.
VipinB (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 19:51:54 GMT):
There is no need to read deeper into this, there are specific problems to be addressed in the social impact areas which may be best achieved using DLT for many reasons
VipinB (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 19:56:30 GMT):
Decentralization, use of cryptographic methods to increase privacy, service delivery in remote regions - real solutions to real problems- this is not just a bunch of do-gooders and bleeding hearts without a realistic plan to solve some of these problems.
VipinB (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 19:56:53 GMT):
So please approve the WG- I support it
hartm (Thu, 27 Sep 2018 23:03:54 GMT):
+1 to Vipin. The social impact WG is not about social impact, per se (we're not anthropologists or sociologists, after all)--it's about the technical requirements and difficulties involved in utilizing Hyperledger blockchains in the general application area of social impact. We're not going to necessarily be endorsing the position of any of the groups or people that may join--we just are giving them a place to discuss technical things related to their blockchain implementations (or goals around that).
Mindey (Sun, 30 Sep 2018 19:21:28 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
bobsummerwill (Tue, 02 Oct 2018 03:56:37 GMT):
Hey everyone! I am so so happy to see today's EEA/Hyperledger announcement. Many congratulations. I am sure this will open up so many avenues for future collaboration. Bravo, @bbehlendorf and everybody else who was involved.
https://twitter.com/BobSummerwill/status/1046811233070940165
bobsummerwill (Tue, 02 Oct 2018 03:58:07 GMT):
It has been a long time I first met @cbf and @bbehlendorf in Austin at OSCON 2016, and the Hyperledger AND Ethereum adventure began. Well, a few months further back than that even, with ConsenSys as HL launch members!
https://bobsummerwill.com/2016/06/12/cats-and-dogs-can-be-friends/
bobsummerwill (Tue, 02 Oct 2018 03:59:28 GMT):
Brian incognito that evening. He was appointed the ED the following morning :-)
tracy (Wed, 03 Oct 2018 14:29:52 GMT):
Has left the channel.
Everymans.ai (Thu, 04 Oct 2018 17:20:03 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
silasdavis (Tue, 09 Oct 2018 12:14:13 GMT):
I thought you'd be pleased ;)
baoyangc (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 11:56:41 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
tkuhrt (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 13:57:03 GMT):
TSC Agenda: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/1723
Dan (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:02:14 GMT):
~~~~~ Begin call ~~~~~
hartm (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:07:31 GMT):
"Special interest group" might be a bit pejorative in today's times...
mwagner (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:13:45 GMT):
@tkuhrt I noticed the emails. Thanks!
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:19:18 GMT):
"aye" and "nay"... some old words never die
hartm (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:24:25 GMT):
+1 @tkuhrt.
hartm (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:28:49 GMT):
@dhuseby : yeah, that was really useful.
hartm (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:45:33 GMT):
It seems like it might be difficult for a project in Hyperledger to implement an EEA standard if all of the developers involved in the project in Hyperledger are not EEA members.
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:46:03 GMT):
+1
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:46:30 GMT):
`It would be interesting to know how many EEA members are already HL members, and in turn`.
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:46:30 GMT):
It would be interesting to know how many EEA members are already HL members, and in turn.
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:49:43 GMT):
it should be easier to go from EEA to HL... but it is going to be hard for HL to influence spec development unless we are members of both
Dan (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:51:29 GMT):
one indirect way is whether or not a HL project implements to an EEA spec.
A more direct way would be to provide feedback on a published spec.. obviously that's much better if the feedback comes before the spec is published.
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:52:07 GMT):
@Dan time flies quickly!
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:52:23 GMT):
we do not start the WG reports yet.
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:52:57 GMT):
EEA != Ethereum project.
Dan (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:52:59 GMT):
yep. given the interest in this conversation i thought it best to let us do this thoroughly.
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:53:21 GMT):
EEA is more like a business consortium
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:54:21 GMT):
it would be more suitable for TSC to discuss what we can learn from Ethereum project itself.
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:54:21 GMT):
it would be more suitable for TSC to discuss what we can learn from Ethereum project itself, which is more technically related.
silasdavis (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:55:45 GMT):
One area I would like to offer as a concrete thing to work on standardising: pluggable ethereum state interfaces - consisting of some kind of authenticated merkle tree - there is already diversity of implementations here like https://github.com/tendermint/iavl , a trie structure in Burrow, geth's https://github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum/blob/master/trie/trie.go etc... So a standard could allow vendors to provide some powerful optimisation under this (like DBs with the right native data structure). For me a concrete test case like this (as to whether there is willingness to unbundle spec) would be a good place to start collaborating.
silasdavis (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:56:53 GMT):
@baohua I agree with that idea also, but issue is that public eth community is relatively uninterested in a lot of permissioned network issues
silasdavis (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:57:16 GMT):
(which is an improvement from when they were actively hostile towards it :) )
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:57:52 GMT):
permissioned, or permissioless, it's only meaningful for early-stage DLT. believe me, they will go to same goal :)
baohua (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:57:52 GMT):
permissioned, or permissioless, it's only meaningful for early-stage DLT. believe me, they will go to the same goal :)
silasdavis (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:57:56 GMT):
sorry caliper @hurf !
Dan (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:58:30 GMT):
~~~~~ End of Call ~~~~~ (continue chat discussion ...)
hurf (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:59:24 GMT):
@silasdavis :joy:
hurf (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:59:55 GMT):
in fact this emoj is called "joy":joy:
wyatt-noise (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 20:22:37 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
wyatt-noise (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 20:24:50 GMT):
Hi everyone, I'm Wyatt with Constellation Labs. Could someone share a calendar invite for the technical steering committee meeting? Really excited to meet you all and get involved!
wyatt-noise (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 21:38:37 GMT):
just clarified I had the wrong time, I'll see you all next week!
Dan (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 22:00:58 GMT):
hi @wyatt-noise here's a link to the full community calendar
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/community/calendar-public-meetings
You'll see the TSC meeting listed at 1400 UTC on Thursdays.
Agendas are published to the TSC mail list usually the day prior.
Most supporting documents (e.g. project updates) are scheduled to be prepared the Monday ahead of the meeting.
wyatt-noise (Thu, 11 Oct 2018 23:03:38 GMT):
Thanks Dan!
agunde (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 12:32:43 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:43:33 GMT):
Who do we have presenting the update from Fabric today?
Dan (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:44:18 GMT):
@hurf will you be presenting for Caliper?
Dan (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:44:38 GMT):
I know @agunde will be presenting for Sawtooth.
Dan (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:05:03 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b6ES0bKUK30E2iZizy3vjVEhPn7IvsW5buDo7nFXBE0/edit
MicBowman (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:10:23 GMT):
is this a different version of the proposal? I had added comments earlier that i dont see
MicBowman (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:11:18 GMT):
ah... it is a different file
hartm (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:14:30 GMT):
Can someone (Dan, David, or Shawn) compare this project and the structure of the project to Composer? How does the scope compare? Is the proposed functionality similar?
baohua (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:15:57 GMT):
Certainly supply chain is an important usage scenario of DLT.
baohua (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:16:27 GMT):
Would see what's an appropriate form for the work.
baohua (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:16:27 GMT):
Would see what's the appropriate form for the work.
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:17:52 GMT):
I'll present Fabric @Dan
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:21:04 GMT):
why wouldn't existing supply-chain standards suffice? http://www.apics.org/apics-for-business/frameworks/scor
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:21:32 GMT):
I'm sure there are others
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:21:49 GMT):
SCOR is one I recall from my industry standards days
baohua (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:27:06 GMT):
how about we have some supply chain WG first? like the PSWG, then it can cook some code (like caliper does) and propose as project later.
baohua (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:27:06 GMT):
how about we have some supply chain WG first? like the PSWG, then it can cook some code and propose as project (like caliper does) later.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:27:53 GMT):
Not to nanny, but we should time-bound this discussion so that we can get to other agenda items
cecchi (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:28:07 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
silasdavis (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:28:21 GMT):
If the proposal was something like "the Hyperledger implementation of the SCOR object model" it would be a more understandable scope
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:28:22 GMT):
indeed, I don't think we're going to solve this here and now
bbehlendorf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:28:22 GMT):
email might also continue to be a better forum for discussing something this complex, so that everyone can be heard
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:28:28 GMT):
and the board has yet to weigh in
silasdavis (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:28:47 GMT):
Would agree with that
baohua (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:28:53 GMT):
+1
nage (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:31:24 GMT):
Apologies, my connection is degrading and I will probably have to drop
MicBowman (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:34:26 GMT):
the balance between specific domains (for the purpose of building something in a finite amount of time) vs general purpose components (that are not constrained)
Dan (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:35:13 GMT):
going to wrap up this conversation now.
MicBowman (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:37:24 GMT):
move the supply chain conversation to the document/email?
Dan (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:37:50 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/caliper-2018-sep
bbehlendorf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:37:50 GMT):
I'd suggest specific comments on the proposal on the google doc, and comments about what's in/out of scope on the TSC list
hartm (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:40:42 GMT):
One quick question: what's the current level of communication between Caliper and the PSWG?
hartm (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:44:26 GMT):
Great! Thanks!
Dan (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:45:03 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/fabric-2018-oct
silasdavis (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:47:32 GMT):
@hurf I know we spoke a looong time ago about getting burrow supported by caliper. I was just poking around the code and it seems very doable. We have a new SRE marmot who is a bit busy now with test net work but I think we could find time to add support in the next month. Who would be the best person to approach to work through this?
Dan (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:52:31 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/sawtooth-2018-oct
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:53:00 GMT):
A lot of projects don’t use chat (e.g. linux kernel)
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 14:54:03 GMT):
they also use email for submitting patches;-)
lehors (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:00:39 GMT):
my observation is that any new communication means is first seen as much better than everything else until it is heavily used and then suffers the same fundamental problem: volume
nage (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:01:06 GMT):
Indy is also interested in test nets in this context
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:01:17 GMT):
do we also budget the operations and support staff for a testnet? seriously, this is not just a hardware issue
silasdavis (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:01:17 GMT):
@dhuseby ++
mwagner (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:01:45 GMT):
~~~~~ End of Call ~~~~~ (continue chat discussion ...)
bobsummerwill (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:09:25 GMT):
Testnets are so, so important.
For anybody who didn't see, the Ethereum Constantinople hard fork went live on the Ropsten testnet a few days back and blew up, so the mainnet update is delayed. Here is some analysis from Lane Rettig:
https://twitter.com/lrettig/status/1051933396065288192
Not blowing up would be better, of course, but the testnet did its job marvellously in this case, and we learnt a lot. I think that the Hyperledger community could learn a lot from looking at the infrastructure and process which is put in place around the Ethereum public protocol. This stuff is hard. Really hard.
Do any of the Hyperledger projects have multiple implementations and specification/implementation split? Maybe just Quilt? That is another level of quality to shoot for. If there is only a single implementation and there is not a contiguously maintained mainnet then it is a lot easier to have protocol bugs.
Anyway ...
bobsummerwill (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:11:35 GMT):
Not that Ethereum has perfect processes. Far from it.
But we are improving and learning all the time.
Mainly coming to understand just how hard it is not to make mistakes - even with the eyes of the world on you and proceeding with extreme caution and multiple levels of safeguards.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:16:55 GMT):
I understand that the EEA are launching a public testnet imminently.
Corda have a public testnet.
They now have https://docs.corda.r3.com/corda-firewall.html too, which is a pretty great attempt at solving a hard problem.
https://medium.com/corda/peer-to-peer-enterprise-blockchain-networking-with-the-corda-firewall-4f6a427ebd97
I think it would be hugely useful to have public testnets for Fabric, Sawtooth, Iroha, Burrow, Seth, Sabre, etc.
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:21:58 GMT):
I'm not saying they aren't valuable, I am saying that the costs are not insignificant in terms of people
bobsummerwill (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:22:14 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=LSuPofaYEgwjkHaYK) @silasdavis FYI ... Chaals Nevile and Daniel Burnett from the EEA are going to be attending Ethereum Magicians in Prague on Oct 29, and will also be part of a session within DEVCON4 proper, along with me, Jamie Pitts, Nick Johnson, Boris Mann talking about how the EEA and public Ethereum protocol folks can work together.
I will bang their heads together until they all work together!
As you say, I think the climate is very different in 2018 to how it was in 2016, let alone in 2014. The "dug in heels" are really not so dug in anymore, and the false perception that there is any real conflict between public and private scenarios is melting away. I think that soon enough we will get to the modular specifications which we really need, so that all the enterprise folks and public folks can be sitting at the same tables talking about common issues. How that gets deployed is pretty orthogonal to the technical discussions.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:22:40 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=u8gB5M4KYzjY585et) @cbf For sure.
How can we quantify that cost/benefit, do you think, Chris?
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:24:25 GMT):
I would think at a minimum 24x7x365 coverage needed - could be pagerduty oncall but someone needs to be erspinsive and able to address if there are operational issues
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:24:33 GMT):
these thngs don't run themselves
cbf (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:24:33 GMT):
these things don't run themselves
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:43:59 GMT):
@cbf I totally agree.
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:44:22 GMT):
That’s why I’m having a hard time putting a number to this.
Dan (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 16:28:18 GMT):
in hw costs I think we've spent ~$20k/month supporting the integration test networks for sawtooth
That said, one of the main things with a testnet is we'd want multiple entities hosting. Shouldn't be all funded and hosted by HL.
rjones (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 16:46:13 GMT):
I have head-nod approval from @bbehlendorf to set up a couple nodes so we can have multiple test nets but LF doesn’t have the staff to manage them at all.
rjones (Thu, 18 Oct 2018 16:47:26 GMT):
anything beyond spawning them in AWS somewhere and adding some SSH keys is too much
bobsummerwill (Fri, 19 Oct 2018 01:12:15 GMT):
Well, as Dan says, the testnet should NOT be solely LF hosted.
Doing so would actually be counter-productive and not representative of a real mainnet.
To be really useful, a testnet should consist of nodes run by different companies.
And be paid for by the companies who see value in that.
And if nobody wants to pay then it isn't good enough value to be worth doing.
Of course, all HL members would love there to be magic testnets which just appear for free.
bobsummerwill (Fri, 19 Oct 2018 01:12:48 GMT):
But you want to have the ability for members who see value to spin up a node and join in.
hurf (Fri, 19 Oct 2018 10:01:30 GMT):
@silasdavis
hurf (Fri, 19 Oct 2018 10:05:09 GMT):
I think @panyu 2 can help getting involved. Thanks letting marmot getting out for fresh air.
SaraG (Wed, 24 Oct 2018 15:31:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
SaraG (Wed, 24 Oct 2018 15:33:06 GMT):
Hello! Could you please help me with the timing for the call on 25th of October (on which the updates of Iroha should be presented)? Link will also be highly appreciated :)
rjones (Wed, 24 Oct 2018 15:39:39 GMT):
@bobsummerwill @dhuseby is working on budgeting for this. It wouldn't be LF hosted. My feeling is that we could make use of the CNCF infrastructure in the short term - it is available for uses like this via a pull request - and use k8s at AWS in the long term.
kelly_ (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:02:10 GMT):
~~~~~ Begin call ~~~~~
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:06:32 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/iroha-2018-oct
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:21:31 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/technical-wg-china-2018-oct
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:22:31 GMT):
@baohua did the sawtooth contact I pointed to the TWGC end up presenting?
silasdavis (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:24:23 GMT):
This blockly: http://www.dwengo.org/blockly?
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:25:51 GMT):
ok, I assume the sawtooth talk Jay just mentioned was that same individual.
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:30:02 GMT):
@hartm you are on deck
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:30:55 GMT):
@Dan OK!
nage (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:32:30 GMT):
The public instance of Indy, Sovrin, could be used for that type of verifiable credential issued by the TWGC without needed a test net (that use case is more or less what it does)
nage (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:32:30 GMT):
The public instance of Indy, Sovrin, could be used for that type of verifiable credential issued by the TWGC without needing a test net (that use case is more or less what it does)
baohua (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:32:43 GMT):
Welcome for suggestions on how to resolve the existing issues :)
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:35:41 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JtFT5L-82egj6shgGXzTsNAg6_UHuMheKfsst6NS_Xo/edit?usp=sharing
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:36:53 GMT):
A finite field of cryptographers
bbehlendorf (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:41:19 GMT):
Who from Fabric has been involved in the crypto lib work? I would have thought they'd be a driver of it
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:41:54 GMT):
There were some who have moved on to a different project.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:42:31 GMT):
looking at the proposal co-sponsors, I see Binh and Angelo there
bbehlendorf (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:42:50 GMT):
I do think the projects should go out of their way to support this, even if there's a non-zero cost to it
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:43:07 GMT):
Binh regularly attends the calls. Not sure if he is on the call today.
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:55:39 GMT):
Clearly not enough time to talk about testnets this meeting.
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:55:53 GMT):
Going to use the remainder of our time on this crypto proposal.
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:58:30 GMT):
This "2 + 2" approach is exactly what I had in mind.
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:59:35 GMT):
Dave put it well--at least that's basically what we intended.
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:59:56 GMT):
I guess it was too formalized in the document?
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:00:10 GMT):
The initial sponsors have expressed a commitment to fulfilling this role. New sponsors could be added based on contributing on the reviews and having established their expertise through longterm review contributions.
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:00:34 GMT):
gah ...
:%s/sponsors/stewards/g
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:00:40 GMT):
I'm not an open source veteran like some of you guys--so if you have a better way to write the governance structure, please comment!
nage (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:01:20 GMT):
I don't think we are picky about the formal mechanics as long as we get effective expectations and reviews, that plan is articulated here in the proposal. I don't think it is a problem for the TSC to view them all as "Maintainers" in the way proposed
bbehlendorf (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:01:20 GMT):
ran out of time, but wanted to say: to a large degree the internal governance structure can be details the project works out, and can be informal. The most important thing to avoid in anything that encourages segmentation is that it doesn't lead to fragmentation - that when a zero day is reported against a 13th subproject and the one guy who had been working on that isn't available, that the project as a whole realizes it has a collective responsibility to respond and fix et al. So segmentation shouldn't be a way of avoiding responsibility.
KellyCooper (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:02:06 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:02:07 GMT):
can we nominate people for the dunk tank ?
KellyCooper (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:02:58 GMT):
This is Kelly from the T&E Working Group. I was to report out today, per the agenda. Here is the T&E Working Group Update: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/training-and-education-wg-2018-oct
bobsummerwill (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:04:17 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=CNdxirpv7bx8mPQ4s) @bbehlendorf Right. I would agree that there is probably no degree for any formal definition on this score. Maintainers always find their own balance. There is always somebody who is better at DevOps, at testing, at documentation, at whatever. This cryptographic specialism can probably just emerge during the code review process (ie. you should have have X, Y and Z look at that).
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:04:24 GMT):
All I really wanted to do with this is make sure that code updates (at least ones that use cryptography in a non-black box way) are reviewed by people who have both 1) an extensive background in cryptography and the math behind it and 2) people who are very experienced in practical security matters (i.e. finding zero days, like Dave pointed out). I think it's important that both of these groups have veto power over the code in the project. If someone can suggest a better way to codify this rule in the governance, I'd love to hear it!
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:04:57 GMT):
@mwagner Care to join Mic?
bobsummerwill (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:07:57 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=fFZKu46TpHGDZR9BT) @hartm So perhaps that can be a simple as a section in your README with a list of "blessed" maintainers who are cryptographers / security folk, and say that 1 or N of these people need to be involved in every code review? And the other maintainers just enforce that in their normal workflow. The maintainers can add and remove people from that list.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:10:33 GMT):
Well - not every code review, even.
Just anything which affects API or the cryptography itself.
No doubt, like every project, many commits will be very minor and safe.
But this is where maintainers need to be very careful.
Another additional option would be to have periodic audits by those cryptographers / security people all all edits made that week / month / whatever. And/or heavy audit of everything which has happened PRIOR to any releases.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:12:50 GMT):
Trying to lockstep every single commit might be too heavyweight and a real drag on productivity, especially if your timezone spread means that you are waiting on people in Europe to review changes made in North America or Asia, etc. Ultimately you want to ensure that each release is good. One way of doing that is to have a very high standard for each and every commit, in all dimensions. Another is to have high standards, but not require full cryptography / security "extra pass" per commit, but to batch those.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:13:51 GMT):
On cpp-ethereum, we had a team split across Vancouver, Colorado and Berlin, and that stretch to Berlin was a huge pain for us in North America if we were waiting for review and then had this one-day latency on every little thing.
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:14:59 GMT):
@bobsummerwill I wanted the "steward" responsibilities to essentially be "make sure that everything is secure from an algorithmic standpoint." This would generally involve doing most of the things you mention.
hartm (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:15:39 GMT):
No one had any intention of requiring every commit to be signed off by a cryptographer--many commits are going to not directly involve cryptographic algorithms, and these certainly don't need heavy oversight.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:20:36 GMT):
So maybe just do that, but just don't have any title?
It is the title which makes people wary, I think.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:20:54 GMT):
Pick a workflow and see how it goes.
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:35:32 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=ipsLmpJgNbAzTGPeq) @mwagner yes... please... i'm tired of getting wet
Dan (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:48:28 GMT):
@KellyCooper Sorry for the miscommunication on your agenda item. Yes the T&E workgroup was originally scheduled for this slot, but we moved that discussion out 1 week. I'm very sorry that we didn't communicate that well and that you spent the hour unnecessarily (though hopefully there was some silver lining in exposure to the other updates which have some loose correlation with your working group's charter).
KellyCooper (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 17:12:10 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=spv4ZhKinFr8MYhAk) @Dan Okay. I have an email that it was 25 Oct and it was still on today's agenda onscreen. Thanks for the update. Not a problem at all.
KellyCooper (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 17:12:10 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=spv4ZhKinFr8MYhAk) @Dan Okay. I have an email that it was 25 Oct and it was still on today's agenda onscreen. Thanks for the update.
KellyCooper (Thu, 25 Oct 2018 17:12:10 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=spv4ZhKinFr8MYhAk) @Dan Okay. I have an email that it was 25 Oct and it was still on today's agenda onscreen. Thanks for the update. No biggie.
tkuhrt (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:00:32 GMT):
Reminder...TSC meeting at https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
rjones (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:02:58 GMT):
~~~~~~ BEGIN TSC CALL 01-NOV-2018 ~~~~~~
cbf (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:05:15 GMT):
@tbenzies my calendar update seems to still reflect the old zoom - any chance I could get uninvited and reinvited? I will delete my current calendar entry
mwagner (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:05:24 GMT):
6223336701
rjones (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:06:30 GMT):
@cbf there is an invite that I sent out to the TSC list
rjones (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:07:39 GMT):
@cbf https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/1809
hartm (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:08:25 GMT):
+1 to changing the name. What Tracy suggests sounds good.
lehors (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:09:28 GMT):
@cbf I received the new invite, are you sure you don't have it in your mailbox?
hartm (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:10:35 GMT):
The new zoom is on the wiki as well.
lehors (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:11:16 GMT):
Let's just change the name as proposed - I think it's much better
lehors (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:11:48 GMT):
I know we all love to argue over names but maybe we can expedite that one? ;-)
lehors (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:13:17 GMT):
I also feel that the point Mark made about WGs not being listed on the website ought to be addressed
lehors (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:13:25 GMT):
this is a shortcoming
mwagner (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:13:43 GMT):
Dan is open to a name change, what new name should we give him ?
lehors (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:14:14 GMT):
:-)
baohua (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:14:16 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=PCJgYDkSLgqWP8tpg) @lehors +1!
baohua (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:14:52 GMT):
@mwagner besides, congrats to become IBMer!
hartm (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:17:00 GMT):
@mwagner We should clearly rename him Blocky McChainface!
mwagner (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:18:39 GMT):
hartm +34 billion!
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:31:07 GMT):
does someone have the link handy?
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:32:13 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JtFT5L-82egj6shgGXzTsNAg6_UHuMheKfsst6NS_Xo/edit?usp=sharing
silasdavis (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:34:18 GMT):
Name: Ersa, Ursa?
mwagner (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:34:28 GMT):
I propose "Crunch and Munch" !
rjones (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:37:51 GMT):
@hartm the most important part is the stickers
baohua (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:39:04 GMT):
+1 to the stickers!
hartm (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:39:33 GMT):
Haha, our planned maintainer list really likes Ursa, and they want a "scary bear in the dark" logo. I think that would make pretty good stickers!
mwagner (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:39:34 GMT):
of course the stickers must be encrypted
baohua (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:40:24 GMT):
Must be signed with EdDSA!
baohua (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:41:31 GMT):
and certainly it can be zero-knowledge
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:43:26 GMT):
maybe we should resurrect planetlab
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:43:43 GMT):
groups contribute some set of nodes...
MicBowman (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:43:51 GMT):
but as chris pointed out mgmt is expensive
lehors (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:48:35 GMT):
we need a queue system...
Dan (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:54:28 GMT):
are you trying to get a word in Arnaud?
rjones (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:54:30 GMT):
sorry, @lehors I tried to hand it off to you
rjones (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:54:30 GMT):
sorry, @lehors I tried to hand it off to ou
rjones (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:54:40 GMT):
yes he has had his hand up for ten minutes or so
lehors (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:54:44 GMT):
I know, I appreciate the effort :)
Dan (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:55:18 GMT):
oh I missed the hand icon. sorry about that.
mwagner (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:56:20 GMT):
:raised_hand:
dhuseby (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 14:59:59 GMT):
I guess my next todo item is to capture all of this into a proposal doc and float it on the tsc
rjones (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 15:03:21 GMT):
~~~~~~ END TSC CALL 01-NOV-2018 ~~~~~~
silasdavis (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 15:06:13 GMT):
it sounds like there are a somewhat diverse set of wants - but it also sounds like there might be fixed core requirement we could come up with. Something like a multi-master kubernetes cluster with a small pool of workers/physical volumes spread across at least availability zones and maybe clouds. Some utility metrics stuff like promethesus/kibana, elastic stack for logs, a local docker registry for pre-release builds, and namespaces used to separate out resources. That would be enough to experiment with small testnets. If there are going to be more formal benchmarking, long-running fuzz tests, or bug reproductions from the field then they could all be prototyped on the entry level network. Spinning up a new namespace for a formal benchmark with bigger hardware, or integrating long running tests into CI could happen after that.
silasdavis (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 15:06:13 GMT):
it sounds like there are a somewhat diverse set of wants - but it also sounds like there might be fixed core requirement we could come up with. Something like a multi-master kubernetes cluster with a small pool of workers/physical volumes spread across at least availability zones and maybe clouds. Some utility metrics stuff like promethesus/kibana, elastic stack for logs, a local docker registry for pre-release builds, and namespaces used to separate out resources. That would be enough to experiment with small exploratory testnets. If there are going to be more formal benchmarking, long-running fuzz tests, or bug reproductions from the field then they could all be prototyped on the entry level network. Spinning up a new namespace for a formal benchmark with bigger hardware, or integrating long running tests into CI could happen after that.
IngoRammer (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 16:56:04 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Isaiah_Kim (Thu, 01 Nov 2018 17:15:04 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Marine (Fri, 02 Nov 2018 10:04:22 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Marine (Fri, 02 Nov 2018 10:08:19 GMT):
Hello everyone, I'm looking for return of exeperiences on agile projects organization on hyperledger subject. That is to say : how do you choose the Product Owner of the project when you have several stakeholder involved? I mean on a project where you have around the table stakeholders that have clients/suppliers relationship and that are conducting a blockchain initiative together? Thank you
hurf (Wed, 07 Nov 2018 08:10:59 GMT):
Hi all, Caliper has had it's website online, please check https://hyperledger.github.io/caliper/, thanks @nkl199 @winslet and many others helped on the work.
nkl199 (Wed, 07 Nov 2018 08:10:59 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
winslet (Wed, 07 Nov 2018 08:10:59 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Wed, 07 Nov 2018 20:45:54 GMT):
looks great!
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 14:55:52 GMT):
@Marine this could be beyond the scope of just the tsc or blockchain projects in general. What do people do when a projects touch upon multiple lines of business in a normal agile project. If the project is sufficiently small then it is easier; however for a project that touches upon a whole vertical technical stack and potentially affects multiple lines of business and affects multiple enterprises. It has to be through the formation of some committees and nomination of people to represent product owner/scrum master etc. Who would then take part in daily scrums. Then periodic status reports and actual working software to be distributed to the committees/actual business owners, mediated through the product owner/scrum master- the developers and the work itself being timeboxed in sprints.
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:00:32 GMT):
zoom crash here...
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:01:09 GMT):
ok resolved.
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:02:32 GMT):
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
kelly_ (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:02:38 GMT):
This is the new TSC call link ^
hartm (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:03:01 GMT):
Note this is NOT the standard hyperledger.community meeting!
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:10:21 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/indy-2018-nov
nicolapaoli (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:10:48 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:13:28 GMT):
_I'll try to keep an eye out for the :wave: icon in zoom._
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:14:36 GMT):
Last quarter's issues list here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/indy-2018-aug
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:24:34 GMT):
Would the test setup help in surfacing the interface points.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:24:49 GMT):
and problems with them...
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:28:25 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b6ES0bKUK30E2iZizy3vjVEhPn7IvsW5buDo7nFXBE0/edit
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:33:10 GMT):
Draw parallels to Indy, whose Wallets/Agents/VON etc. may seem to be in the "application" space
mwagner (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:47:09 GMT):
sounds like a horn that a clown would use...
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:47:33 GMT):
no lack of clowns here :)
hartm (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:51:39 GMT):
But are we sad clowns, funny clowns, or scary clowns?
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:52:14 GMT):
all clowns are scary and sad
mwagner (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:57:21 GMT):
@hartm you have control over exactly like type of clown you want to be!
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:58:50 GMT):
that was well put Mic
mwagner (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:59:12 GMT):
+1
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:59:18 GMT):
sorry if I threw in a bunch of different issues into the discussion :)
MicBowman (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:59:20 GMT):
so if i raise my hand and lower it and raise it and lower it and raise it... then does it look like i'm waving?
hartm (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:59:25 GMT):
Yeah, I agree with Mic. I'd love to see more specificity in the proposal document.
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:59:54 GMT):
I do think that we should become more conservative about our expectations regarding the cross platform aspect
hartm (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:59:55 GMT):
(Something in between the rfcs and what is currently in the document).
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:00:21 GMT):
evidence shows that we've been overly optimistic and I don't think he does anybody any good
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:00:51 GMT):
Composer would have been better off a Fabric project
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:00:51 GMT):
Composer would have been better off a Fabric project for instance
mwagner (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:02:01 GMT):
I think if a project proposal does not aim to cross platform it should be a subproject of the existing project
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:02:36 GMT):
if something starts within the context of a particular platform and it becomes useful to other projects we can always promote it then
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:02:51 GMT):
By that token, explorer, composer, etc. should be sub projects of Fabric
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:02:54 GMT):
I think that's a better approach than the other way around - which is what we've been doing
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:02:57 GMT):
~~~ End of verbal discussion ~~~~
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:03:06 GMT):
My point is that the charter has already been violated
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:03:39 GMT):
And it is the signs of maturity that leads us further up the stack
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:04:02 GMT):
and btw Vipin, I think Caliper is cross platform because the very people who wanted to develop Caliper were themselves interested in supporting several platforms
MicBowman (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:04:24 GMT):
@lehors likewise with the crypto lib
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:04:31 GMT):
which was my point: unless we have committed resources to supporting several platforms we can't expect it to happen
jsmitchell (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:04:40 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:04:46 GMT):
I was distinctly under the impression that Fabric had interest in wasm.
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:05:19 GMT):
as I said Dan, this is by no means sufficient
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:05:36 GMT):
I would hate that fabric would want to block a project that might not support it after so many that came before this one.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:05:47 GMT):
Maybe it will help to drill down from the supply chain totality into the individual sub projects and into where they could be used, either on a use case level or where there could be challenges or uses on a multi-platform level
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:05:49 GMT):
it's not like you can throw any go code to the fabric chaincode container and hope for it to work, right?
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:06:00 GMT):
it still needs to use the right API
jsmitchell (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:06:11 GMT):
this "cross-platform by fiat" rather than "cross-platform by contribution" argument seems contrary to IBM's behavior to date with respect to project proposals
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:06:48 GMT):
Caliper by nature has to support multiple projects since it is about measurement to compare, and Haowei committed resources
amundson (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:06:58 GMT):
I think the message there is basically "if it doesn't support Fabric, it shouldn't be a top-level project"
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:07:09 GMT):
+1 Amundsen
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:07:24 GMT):
no, I would say the same of Composer today
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:07:38 GMT):
so, you're misinterpreting my position
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:07:44 GMT):
What about Cello, Explorer and others
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:07:58 GMT):
just because we've done it wrong in the past doesn't mean we should keep doing it wrong
jsmitchell (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:08:06 GMT):
the principle to date seems to have been "these are open projects, and if you want to see support, show up with development resources"
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:08:10 GMT):
it's an awfully convenient time to take that position
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:08:12 GMT):
I feel the same Vipin
amundson (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:08:15 GMT):
how convenient for IBM?
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:08:20 GMT):
pfff
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:08:30 GMT):
There is no wrong and right here, there are evolving interpretations
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:08:34 GMT):
that's very disappointing to get that kind of argument
lehors (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:08:54 GMT):
I would have hoped to be seen as less partisan but oh well
jsmitchell (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:08:58 GMT):
lots of things about this are disappointing
amundson (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:09:05 GMT):
it's disappointing that we were not discussing the merits of the project, and instead whether it supports Fabric
jsmitchell (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:09:23 GMT):
and also the elephant in the room which is the protectionism of commercial interests in the app space
jsmitchell (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:09:35 GMT):
rather than a commitment to open source
mwagner (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:09:40 GMT):
wow this is really gone off of the tracks
amundson (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:10:13 GMT):
to be clear, I very much want Fabric+Sabre integration, and am strongly advocating for it to happen, which is what gives this project Fabric integration. but that's not the point, is it?
jsmitchell (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:10:25 GMT):
i don't think it's off the tracks -- it's the heart of the issue we have been dancing around
mwagner (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:10:25 GMT):
lets all take a step away from the keyboard and regain our professional composer
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:10:52 GMT):
send in the clowns? :)
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:10:57 GMT):
:clown:
silasdavis (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:11:43 GMT):
If this project is able to produce artefacts that target the WASM ecosystem I would find that sufficiently unbiased an output to support cross-project work. In Burrow's case we would like to integrate a WASM interpretter callable from solidity - this project could provide additional impetus for doing so
jsmitchell (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:11:47 GMT):
why wouldn't interested fabric developers sign up to improve Hyperledger Supply Chain?
mwagner (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:12:16 GMT):
I have no favorite in this fight, the proposal appears to be very sawtooth centric to me and I was going to ask if it was going to cross platform
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:13:56 GMT):
Look it is very simple: the supplychain project will address a vast swathe of use cases, with it many elements of data representation, function representation etc. If done right and designed properly, this will contribute to the interoperability tooling, also maye provide feedstock to multiple other use caes; it is time to support this effort. I can try to help bring together the two viewpoints
silasdavis (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:14:28 GMT):
(BTW if Burrow did support WASM it would probably be via golang's https://github.com/go-interpreter/wagon - such a harness would run as chaincode - possibly even under the existing fabric-EVM integration if we built it like that)
seanyoung (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:15:52 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:16:17 GMT):
@mwagner then intent is to be behind the wasm interface. that's kind of like how solidity contracts are deployable over any evm.
amundson (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:17:53 GMT):
the intent behind using Sabre is compatibility within the project, not as a mechanism for supporting all the frameworks. it has the attribute that we think it will make that fairly easy.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:18:17 GMT):
Some of them include: Provenance tracking (IOT, Oracles for DO), Trade finance (payments, commitments, cash or tokens on ledger), Factoring(Privacy on ledger), demand forecasting etc.
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:19:16 GMT):
@hartm could you clarify your specificity request. Are the RFCs too specific? Is there an example in a prior proposal that serves as a good example of the level of specificity you are seeking?
mwagner (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:19:34 GMT):
I am in favor of working to make sure that things can be shared across the different platforms. If this helps get us there then lets do it.
silasdavis (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:19:35 GMT):
Higher level outputs may also be possible, I reference WebIDL having read this: https://github.com/rustwasm/wasm-bindgen/issues/42
amundson (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:19:40 GMT):
I think it's also important to recognize that Sawtooth and Fabric are not at feature parity (despite being close), and the problems we use Sawtooth to solve, Fabric may not have the right feature set for; or we may have to wait for it to catch up.
jsmitchell (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:20:56 GMT):
sounds like great opportunities for motivated developers to make improvements across the board
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:21:03 GMT):
The long term though, is that fabric may provide a deployment model which is better suited to a certain consortia. If supply chain can deploy over a variety of platforms then those decisions are decoupled.
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:21:29 GMT):
you can choose which domain you are developing for and then which blockchain platform you are deploying for.
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:22:10 GMT):
This project helps reach that future.
amundson (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:24:12 GMT):
again, I want to drive toward Fabric support for Sabre, I'm very passionate about that, but that's different (lower-level) than mandating a higher-level platform support all frameworks.
hartm (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:33:59 GMT):
@Dan For instance, this is a supply chain proposal. Why would this framework not work for, say, finance, fintech, or trading applications? If it would work for these, why is it supply-chain focused? I think clarifying some of these issues will make people much more comfortable with the proposal. Again, it's possible to go through the RFCs and draw your own conclusions, but that takes a decent amount of time.
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:34:47 GMT):
hmmm the rfcs and the gs1 spec are the things that make it specific.
Dan (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:35:31 GMT):
Do you want me to summarize the RFCs and GS1 spec?
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:35:54 GMT):
@hartm supply chain has a larger superset of user functions than the ones you mention
hartm (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:36:52 GMT):
That would probably be really helpful. The TSC would have been pretty upset with me if I just linked to eprint papers in the crypto-lib proposal and suggested that they read them ;) A little guidance would probably go a long way.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:38:15 GMT):
supply chain has the most use cases currently being worked on. According to an informal analysis that I did, it outranks every other use case by a large factor, so if you had to choose one, supply chain would be it.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:38:54 GMT):
to get the maximum bang for the buck
hartm (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:39:32 GMT):
@VipinB I agree. But there is nothing right now *in the proposal itself* that seems to be specific only to supply chain (the RFCs tell a different story). I'm just asking for clarification about this in the document.
cecchi (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:42:18 GMT):
we are working on supply chain use cases - we are willing to contribute back components from those initiatives to the OSS community. if someone else is working on a finance use case and wants to contribute finance components, then maybe the TSC can get together and decide how to manage those various libraries of reusable components? (one project, multiple projects, subprojects, whatever...)
hartm (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:45:15 GMT):
@cecchi I understand that, and I'm really happy you all want to contribute back to the OSS community. I'm not knocking the project itself--just the proposal document! I think I understand what you all are trying to do, but it would be nice if the proposal clarified this.
cecchi (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:52:18 GMT):
feels like the project itself gets knocked (gotta make sure it's not an app), then the impl gets knocked (gotta be fully interoperable), then the proposal gets knocked (not specific enough to supply chains). bit of a goose chase here. i mean we don't know every possible "noun" that we'll run into as part of our work, and it seems weird to expect that level of specificity in a proposal. Nor do i think "GS1" is the *only* spec that will ever get implemented.
cecchi (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:53:30 GMT):
so we're gonna build some nouns that other people can use, we'll build them in ways that run in Sabre and hopefully there are other hyperledger level conversations going on to align on WASM, we'll build some other stuff that would help people build apps more efficiently and effectively, etc
cecchi (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:53:55 GMT):
i feel like RFC within the project could manage governance of noun submission if that's really a sticking point
cecchi (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 16:55:05 GMT):
and candidly these calls don't "feel" like this group is happy we are willing to contribute back
VipinB (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 17:02:59 GMT):
@cecchi there is great level of support in the community; it is often the dissenting or the skeptical voices that are the loudest. I can collaborate on the document itself (at least in the beginning).
ltseeley (Thu, 08 Nov 2018 19:45:32 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Mon, 12 Nov 2018 18:03:20 GMT):
@cecchi @Dan @amundson @jsmitchell it is because you are pushing the boundaries that there is such a brouhaha. So it is a good thing. Willing to share some findings and previous work that I had done in the space. We used the supply chain to develop the Privacy & Confidentiality (offshoot of Architectural Working Group) argument. Here is the writeup for that: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-WVtWEh5HKX9Lmbl7PMl5axHrd2uXwIPVZkeGfsHY3E/edit?usp=sharing. The interesting features are in the description of the various documents etc. that are standardized, some of that may rely on the GS1 stuff that you mention, I can dig up some more standards on those documents. This may of course cause people to say that you are skating too close to an application. However, it may be interesting to create a narrative about re-usable primitives and show how it can be used (for example) in a Bill of Materials in Manufacturing or show how the components of the Bill of Lading plus some other items can be mapped to some other applications. I believe @MicBowman had already shared this document with you when you started the provenance app. Even if the bid to be an incubated project fails; I urge you to bring this to Hyperledger labs, where the community can collaborate. After extracting many of the useful primitives and demonstrating their use or mappability to other projects we can then ask for this project to be incubated. My support (for what it is worth) is behind this project. Also similar efforts are afoot in some other areas, please look at the Common Data Model (CDM) created by ISDA (International Swaps and Derivatives Association)- although their primitives apply to a totally different product (swaps and derivatives); I can see a parallel, especially in the payments side of things.
VipinB (Mon, 12 Nov 2018 18:03:20 GMT):
@cecchi @Dan @amundson @jsmitchell it is because you are pushing the boundaries that there is such a brouhaha. So it is a good thing. Willing to share some findings and previous work that I had done in the space. We used the supply chain to develop the Privacy & Confidentiality (offshoot of Architectural Working Group) argument. Here is the writeup for that: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-WVtWEh5HKX9Lmbl7PMl5axHrd2uXwIPVZkeGfsHY3E/edit?usp=sharing. The interesting features are in the description of the various documents etc. that are standardized, some of that may rely on the GS1 stuff that you mention, I can dig up some more standards on those documents. This may of course cause people to say that you are skating too close to an application. However, it may be interesting to create a narrative about re-usable primitives and show how it can be used (for example) in a Bill of Materials in Manufacturing or show how the components of the Bill of Lading plus some other items can be mapped to a BOM. I believe @MicBowman had already shared this document with you when you started the provenance app. Even if the bid to be first class project fails; I urge you to bring this to Hyperledger labs, where the community can collaborate. After extracting many of the useful primitives and demonstrating their use or mappability to other projects we can then ask for this project to be incubated. My support (for what it is worth) is behind this project.
VipinB (Mon, 12 Nov 2018 18:03:20 GMT):
@cecchi @Dan @amundson @jsmitchell it is because you are pushing the boundaries that there is such a brouhaha. So it is a good thing. Willing to share some findings and previous work that I had done in the space. We used the supply chain to develop the Privacy & Confidentiality (offshoot of Architectural Working Group) argument. Here is the writeup for that: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-WVtWEh5HKX9Lmbl7PMl5axHrd2uXwIPVZkeGfsHY3E/edit?usp=sharing. The interesting features are in the description of the various documents etc. that are standardized, some of that may rely on the GS1 stuff that you mention, I can dig up some more standards on those documents. This may of course cause people to say that you are skating too close to an application. However, it may be interesting to create a narrative about re-usable primitives and show how it can be used (for example) in a Bill of Materials in Manufacturing or show how the components of the Bill of Lading plus some other items can be mapped to some other applications. I believe @MicBowman had already shared this document with you when you started the provenance app. Even if the bid to be first class project fails; I urge you to bring this to Hyperledger labs, where the community can collaborate. After extracting many of the useful primitives and demonstrating their use or mappability to other projects we can then ask for this project to be incubated. My support (for what it is worth) is behind this project. Also similar efforts are afoot in some other areas, please look at the Common Data Model (CDM) created by ISDA (International Swaps and Derivatives Association)- although their primitives apply to a totally different product (swaps and derivatives); I can see a parallel, especially in the payments side of things.
Dan (Mon, 12 Nov 2018 21:26:31 GMT):
Thanks for the doc, @VipinB I will study it as i update the proposal with last week's feedback.
cecchi (Mon, 12 Nov 2018 23:12:05 GMT):
If TSC gavels down the idea of a top level supply chain project on the grounds that it's not "appropriate" in some way, feels like putting it in Labs is just a dead end, right? I'm maybe missing something, tho. Like there'd be no promotion path... Either way, if HL rejects it, I'm guessing we'd be wise to explore other communities before re-proposing via 2nd class citizen status in HL.
cecchi (Mon, 12 Nov 2018 23:13:47 GMT):
and for sure there are plenty of consortium / standards driven data models, any/all of which could be impl'd and submitted as 'frameworks' or 'includes' or what have you. Open Data Initiative just launched, for example. Someone could impl that and contribute. they could build that model using true primatives (string/bool/int) as defined by HL SC.
cecchi (Mon, 12 Nov 2018 23:19:06 GMT):
looking forward to the continued conversation - really believe HL is the right place for this
VipinB (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 13:11:29 GMT):
@cecchi cryptolib came out of labs into full incubation (as Ursa). So there is a promotion path. There is no need to think of labs as a second class venue, it is a different kind of venue where exploration can be done more freely.
nage (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:30:08 GMT):
I think the concern here is that if there are reasons that prevent promoting the code to project in incubation status today, what is the reason to believe those circumstances will change? My feedback here is most of the hesitation is the uncertainty about how the project will be cross-framework compatible if it is to be governed as a tool, and conversely how it will be "application agnostic" if it is going to be governed more like a SIG/Industry-specific interest group. Because it is a little bit of both, the TSC isn't sure which concerns dominate its governance, and that has caused some hesitation. For my part, I think getting going in a lab will help us get a feel for how much interest and support there is for the Tools vs SIG side of the project, and help us make whatever room is best for the useful things the community is interested in supporting.
Dan (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:40:28 GMT):
This is definitely not a SIG. It is explicitly a coding project. We should have governance questions clarified in the coming weeks. I think it will be best to revisit the proposal at that time.
@VipinB as I look at the doc you sent I think one of the first links (SCM) might be busted (or maybe my connection is just flakey).
Dan (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:41:09 GMT):
Also curious was this produced with the assistance of the old reqt's group? or was it wholely through the privates WG?
nage (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:53:25 GMT):
@Dan I agree that it isn't a SIG, but the charter does state it is pursuing Supply Chain concerns, which feels "SIG-like". Whether that sub-domain can exist as a tool without stepping on application consortiums and application-specific concerns is one of the lines of questioning where some seem uncomfortable. (I believe it is against our best interest to decline project status to a group of motivated, active contributors on those grounds, but I am also newer to the concerns at Hyperledger that motivate us to avoid "application specific" projects, so I defer to TSC members who raised those concerns).
Dan (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:54:50 GMT):
Understood. I'm hoping we will have clarity on that in a few weeks.
VipinB (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:55:16 GMT):
@Dan it was written wholly by me, with some reviews by others. As far as I am concerned with supply chain, I was on a PoC as well as governance of Marco Polo Project and early involvement in Voltron (first trade was announced this week)
VipinB (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:56:20 GMT):
Since I am not with BNPP anymore, I am not involved in those projects
Dan (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:57:57 GMT):
Ok, Voltron is a cool project name.
Dan (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:58:02 GMT):
:robot:
VipinB (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:59:33 GMT):
And the paper I wrote was contributed to the privacy working group as an example to look at the privacy concerns from a use case perspective. Here is a case where the supply chain informed a generic problem..i.e. privacy & confidentiality
VipinB (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 17:04:52 GMT):
This is why the Supplychain project is a great vehicle for generic problem solving
VipinB (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 17:05:38 GMT):
I think if you fix the proposal to reflect this, we will have a lot more take up
VipinB (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 17:05:48 GMT):
and support
Dan (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 17:05:48 GMT):
will do
VipinB (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 17:06:12 GMT):
You need any help, please let me know
nickgaski (Tue, 13 Nov 2018 21:25:27 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
KOttoni (Thu, 15 Nov 2018 01:12:40 GMT):
Hello, I am on the Ecosystem team at Hyperledger and I'm reaching out because I'm gathering information on what is being done in the Hyperledger community in terms of connecting Hyperledger frameworks with tokens and tokenization in a Hyperledger business network. If you know of any projects/organizations/examples of this please let me know, thanks!
mwagner (Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:11:56 GMT):
so what should be doing with this hour of "free time" that I have been granted from @Dan ?
Dan (Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:16:48 GMT):
Make a gift basket for your neighbor? Paint a picture? Learn a new language? ;)
Actually, I think you've already initiated a good topic on the mail list. When the desktop project does come in for discussion, I would like those contributors not to have to sit through a dialog on what we want HL to look like, but instead hear review of their specific proposal. If everyone could please take some time to think about what HL looks like 2 years from now with more and bigger projects, where the lines of what a ledger and an app have evolved from our current assumptions... i think that will help us move more thoughtfully and efficiently towards better guidance.
Dan (Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:17:55 GMT):
Maybe consider poking around inside a project you haven't looked in before. Broaden / deepen your understanding of the elements we do have.
mwagner (Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:36:47 GMT):
I was thinking of going out for some doughnuts.....
Dan (Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:50:31 GMT):
ok, that is also acceptable.
rjones (Fri, 16 Nov 2018 04:07:29 GMT):
As a non-TSC member, I don't feel the TSC has much to say about top level projects (Fabric, Sawtooth) gaining sub-projects. Sawtooth has certainly spawned a ton of what I would call sub-projects without any say-so or reportage to the TSC. Provided the license is correct and the DCO is in shape, what purview is it of the TSCs if Fabric wants to have a desktop client?
Dan (Fri, 16 Nov 2018 14:22:44 GMT):
But what if Fabric doesn't want to have a desktop client? I'm hoping to see some response on the mail list whether this specific desktop proposal is desired by Fabric maintainers. I don't have the proposal in front of me but I think the contributors are not fabric maintainers?
hartm (Fri, 16 Nov 2018 17:32:35 GMT):
Have any Fabric maintainers commented on the proposal?
VipinB (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:03:13 GMT):
Good morning!
hartm (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:03:56 GMT):
Good morning Vipin!
VipinB (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:06:03 GMT):
There are many zoom links. Today is hyperledger.community.backup as Tracy noted
baohua (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:08:36 GMT):
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
mwagner (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:10:28 GMT):
Dan where are you?
silasdavis (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:12:33 GMT):
---------- TSC meeting started- ----
silasdavis (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:12:45 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/burrow-2018-nov
mwagner (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:23:32 GMT):
do we need a Treadstone project if we are going to have a Blackstone project
baohua (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:31:45 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/cello-2018-nov
silasdavis (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:36:26 GMT):
For reference, blackstone: https://github.com/agreements-network/blackstone
silasdavis (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:36:26 GMT):
For reference, blackstone: https://github.com/agreements-network/blackstone - BPM engine
baohua (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:37:35 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Dw6cEKaul6FenORNkDcxvPDDKwpl0A5EmcJBlqAWJoU/edit
silasdavis (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:43:43 GMT):
are labs projects still gated by the TSC?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:44:35 GMT):
@silasdavis no. they just need a sponsor.
richzhao (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:44:51 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
silasdavis (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:45:10 GMT):
is there a mechanism for sunsetting/becoming inactive/becoming archived?
silasdavis (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:45:10 GMT):
is there a mechanism for labs projects sunsetting/becoming inactive/becoming archived?
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:45:53 GMT):
what i recall from the original discussion was that we wanted the least possible responsibility for the sponsors to avoid overhead?
VipinB (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:49:12 GMT):
Yes Mic. Hwever just being a name!
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:49:42 GMT):
do we have a way of searching for the discussion in the meeting minutes?
hartm (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:49:53 GMT):
This seems to me, more generally, to be a discussion on ensuring quality of labs projects. If this is the case, maybe we consider things beyond sponsors as well?
VipinB (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:51:38 GMT):
There's the tension between no gating and detailed reporting.
dustinhelland (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:53:29 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
baohua (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:55:16 GMT):
Good tradeoff is always difficult
hartm (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:56:12 GMT):
I had always viewed sponsors as something akin to technical reviewers who were just there to assess the initial validity of the project, and that it was the labs stewards' role to enforce the quality of the projects going forward.
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:56:36 GMT):
@hartm that was my understanding as well... an initial sanity check
nage (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:56:56 GMT):
I like the idea of saying they have a "mentorship obligation" but then leaving that mostly up to them and the lab developer to decide what that means
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:57:08 GMT):
github makes it possible to see quickly what level of activity is with a project
VipinB (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:57:17 GMT):
+1 @nage
Dan (Thu, 29 Nov 2018 17:34:27 GMT):
iirc we modeled a bit off the asf labs. They required maintainer or contributor status to open a lab. We didn't have whatever that mechanism was and decided to use sponsors as a close facsimile. I bet a search of the mail list might pop that up. Maybe.
baohua (Wed, 05 Dec 2018 01:12:47 GMT):
https://www.hyperledger.org/blog/2018/12/04/welcome-hyperledger-ursa
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 14:59:14 GMT):
How about moving the supplychain discussion to the end, as this may not be resolved today (unless the board has some very definite directions to us)?
cbf (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:01:10 GMT):
can someone please paste the link to the zoom meeting
cbf (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:01:21 GMT):
my calendar invite seems to have gone missing
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:01:39 GMT):
Location: https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
Reminders
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:04:41 GMT):
Dan, thanks for your blog post welcoming everybody
mwagner (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:05:40 GMT):
for those who like numbers....622-333-6701
Dan (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:05:42 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b6ES0bKUK30E2iZizy3vjVEhPn7IvsW5buDo7nFXBE0/edit
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:18:12 GMT):
I dont see Arnaud Lehors
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:18:57 GMT):
Glosup! is my suggestion
silasdavis (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:20:42 GMT):
Girdle ?
MicBowman (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:22:03 GMT):
need some bizarre fish
MicBowman (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:22:14 GMT):
back to the fish roots for some of the ideas
MicBowman (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:22:21 GMT):
pikeminnow
mwagner (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:22:31 GMT):
"parts and pieces"
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:29:49 GMT):
This was my take: The output of HL Grid(the supplychain project) is meant to be (according to my understanding)
1. A Reference implementation- generalized through WASM
2. Reference Implementation contains a library of shared code and domain models complaint with GS1 which can be reused in other use case implementations (not just supply chain)
3. A launchpad to port this to other DLTs (Fabric, Burrow, Iroha, Quilt?) and using Indy: Helped by WASM integration as well as shared code for GS1 (industry spec)
and as I have stated before, this is the right time to embark on such a project in terms of platform maturity. Users want an easier path toward adoption
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:31:57 GMT):
We discussed using this through PSWG for driving a use case based metric framework
cecchi (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:32:07 GMT):
i wouldn't constrain to GS1, that's just an example - the Gridlibs could include all sorts of impl for various specs/standards. At the end of the proposal we list a bunch of potential things.
silasdavis (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:34:54 GMT):
Yeah that's what I was driving
silasdavis (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:34:54 GMT):
Yeah that's what I was driving at - it sounds like we could provide some reserved WASM function addresses for a get/set over byte slices
silasdavis (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:34:54 GMT):
Yeah that's what I was driving at - it sounds like we could provide some reserved WASM function addresses for a get/set over byte slices against a WASM interpreter
MicBowman (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:35:39 GMT):
the focus on WASM artifacts would define the "interoperability layer"?
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:36:33 GMT):
Sure in terms of standards if we could support some of the existing standards for Hague-Visby or UPC600
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:37:20 GMT):
Congrats!
mwagner (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:38:28 GMT):
the perf and scale group is looking at supply chain / track and trace as our first use case. so looking forward to working with this effort to gain more access subject matter experts
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:38:33 GMT):
Where's Amol?
Dan (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:39:21 GMT):
Bangalore
Dan (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:40:13 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/1876
Dan (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:40:34 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sAaxW6QOSOqqnYsXQZfvOEziCwMiivu0X2HFetfv7WQ/edit#
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:44:01 GMT):
I have put my name in as an interested party in the India Working Group and hope to support this process even from a different timezone -10.5 hrs from IST.
hartm (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:44:34 GMT):
Thanks @VipinB ! That would be helpful.
VipinB (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:46:36 GMT):
My name "Bharathan" means "Indian" :grinning:
Dan (Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:48:23 GMT):
That's cool :)
Abhinavgrg074 (Fri, 14 Dec 2018 07:22:30 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
raccoonrat (Mon, 24 Dec 2018 04:24:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Wed, 09 Jan 2019 20:48:14 GMT):
is there a TSC call this week ? I haven't seen any of the project updates or the agenda come through yet
rjones (Wed, 09 Jan 2019 22:57:36 GMT):
@mwagner I just sent the cancellation email
baohua (Thu, 10 Jan 2019 01:24:53 GMT):
Got!
DmitriPlakhov (Thu, 10 Jan 2019 12:27:20 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
cbf (Thu, 10 Jan 2019 15:02:28 GMT):
I gather that the call is canceled?
hartm (Thu, 10 Jan 2019 15:25:12 GMT):
@cbf Yep, email went out late last night.
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 14:44:27 GMT):
Who is giving the confluence update?
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 14:46:23 GMT):
@Dan I think Tracy or Silona
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 14:54:58 GMT):
Who is delivering Caliper's update? and who is delivering Explorer's update?
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 14:57:48 GMT):
Begin TSC Meeting https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
baohua (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:01:26 GMT):
Quite a while!
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:05:52 GMT):
Anyone on from the Explorer project?
hartm (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:23 GMT):
Where is this located on the wiki? Thanks!
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:15:50 GMT):
Maybe "contributors" summit.
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:16:04 GMT):
https://wiki2.hyperledger.org/display/events/Bootcamps
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:17:13 GMT):
https://wiki2.hyperledger.org/display/events/Maintainers+Summits
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:17:14 GMT):
Governance by involving tsc in these decisions! The bootcamp idea was never discussed!
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:18:40 GMT):
Explorer Bueller? Has anyone seen Explorer Bueller? ;)
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:19:47 GMT):
A rose by any other name smells as sweet
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:19:55 GMT):
Or rank
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:20:30 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=uNSmwKTHG4Lekeur7) @Dan Ferris?
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:20:54 GMT):
Looking for the Explorer presenter for their update :)
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:21:41 GMT):
Not much time left until March!
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:24:59 GMT):
Can there be an advanced topics at the bootcamp?
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:25:49 GMT):
@VipinB yes
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:29:54 GMT):
Had said that the proposal template be beefed up with guidelines, so that we can send everyone to that doc for further guidance on new project proposals.
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:34:06 GMT):
speaking of which... i'm pretty sure @rjagadee posted the arch wg update, but @rjones listed it is missing in the agenda last night... was there an expectation of emailing it to the list?
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:34:27 GMT):
or did i misread?
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:35:57 GMT):
Caliper: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/caliper-2018-dec
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:36:05 GMT):
and i cannot find the labs update on the wiki anywhere?
rjagadee (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:36:23 GMT):
Yes we can do the Arch-WG update today: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/architecture-wg-2019-jan
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:36:50 GMT):
@MicBowman I missed it, sorry.
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:37:07 GMT):
specifically... i'm looking here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates and here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:37:21 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/1879
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:37:33 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/labs/2018-q4-update
mwagner (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:38:39 GMT):
need to step away for a minute
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:39:35 GMT):
so @Dan we have multiple ways to publish again? sigh...
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:40:17 GMT):
Great work by Caliper! The only truly multi-framework project in Hyperledger!!!
VipinB (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:40:17 GMT):
Great work by Caliper! The only truly multi-framework project in production in Hyperledger!!!
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:40:20 GMT):
You thought a wiki was navigable @MicBowman ? ;)
mwagner (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:41:39 GMT):
and I am back
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:41:55 GMT):
well... at least i figured out *one* way to find them... i though... :-/
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:41:55 GMT):
well... at least i figured out *one* way to find them... i thought... :-/
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:43:33 GMT):
can you post a link tracy... no wiki link i can find :-)
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:44:20 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/labs/2018-q4-update
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:44:27 GMT):
It was in the agenda email I sent
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:45:17 GMT):
agenda email --> phone, reading --> ~phone... sorry
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:45:26 GMT):
no worries
MicBowman (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:45:49 GMT):
(that by the way... is precisely why i'm looking forward to confluence!)
cliveb (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:45:59 GMT):
I having a hard time following today's meeting. The slide deck in Zoom does not have clickable links.
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:46:17 GMT):
the agenda email has clickable links
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:47:05 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/1935
cliveb (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:49:00 GMT):
Thanks for the link. My flow is avoid email, use wiki.
rjones (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:58:13 GMT):
~~~~ end call ~~~~
Silona (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 17:16:04 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Silona (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 17:19:44 GMT):
@cliveb you not only get a heart but a heart with sprakles
Silona (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 17:19:44 GMT):
@cliveb you not only get a heart but a heart with sparkles
Dan (Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:33:29 GMT):
Does everyone who doesn't read your emails get a heart with sparkles? ;)
rjones (Fri, 18 Jan 2019 21:41:31 GMT):
@Dan sure?
Silona (Tue, 22 Jan 2019 20:24:48 GMT):
@dan only if they are willing to go to the wiki page and start commenting there :-P or at least check out the what's new section regularly.
rjones (Wed, 23 Jan 2019 01:33:57 GMT):
@Dan please see above
neewy (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:10:24 GMT):
What is a video session? Silona mentioned that for Hong Kong bootcamp if we can't afford going there
kelly_ (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:10:46 GMT):
*TSC 1/24 Meeting Start*
richzhao (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:14:58 GMT):
have good day, this is Rich
kelly_ (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:15:10 GMT):
Thats for the info on the location Rich
mwagner (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:15:17 GMT):
what a back-off algorithm :)
rjones (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:30:02 GMT):
could I ask (and I realize @lehors just said), the complaints I've heard were "too much yakking, not enough hacking". How would you propose we solve this?
silasdavis (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:30:17 GMT):
@neewy I was thinking of doing a condense version of workshop as HGF one burrow over video conference, Nikolay
silasdavis (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:30:56 GMT):
@rjones feels like architecture summit will not be that much hacking ?
silasdavis (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:31:05 GMT):
probably a gap here
lehors (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:31:11 GMT):
I think it's really a matter of setting expectations right
lehors (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:32:10 GMT):
if we announce a meeting for contributors and state that this is meant to be about deep technical discussions and is NOT intended for newbies that ought to filter out attendees, just via self selection
amundson (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:32:31 GMT):
coding at the event is not necessarily the point - getting alignment from everyone to work together and gain an understanding of the diverse approaches is far more important. but, I'm concerned with the idea of having very strutured conversation trying to design/architect something an limiting developer discussion.
rjones (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:32:35 GMT):
At one end, I imagine something like "for one solid week, three times a year, the core committers get together to advance interop"
lehors (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:33:54 GMT):
I agree coding isn't necessarily the goal
lehors (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:34:12 GMT):
what we really want to avoid is the general info sessions for newbies
lehors (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:34:55 GMT):
so we can focus on technical discussions
silasdavis (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:36:09 GMT):
I would like for there to be some pure hacking on pre-arranged stuff in small groups thing, don't know where that would best be slotted in
Silona (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:36:10 GMT):
https://wiki2.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Project+Proposals
kelly_ (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:36:42 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates/sawtooth-2019-jan
amundson (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:37:06 GMT):
I think that would be good -- to limit newbie/getting-started discussion, but there is also benefit in meeting the community, and it sounds like the current goal is to squash the non-contributor part of that or shift to the bootcamps (which I admit don't make complete sense yet to me).
lehors (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:37:11 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=nSmqSitFmnxWuuRzy) @silasdavis history shows this doesn't get improvised, it only happens if it's planned ahead of time
lehors (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:37:36 GMT):
but I would say this is definitely in scope for that meeting
silasdavis (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:37:39 GMT):
yeah def agree
silasdavis (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:38:14 GMT):
... Poet Simulator... quoth the raven nevermore
silasdavis (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:40:21 GMT):
nice docs: https://sawtooth.hyperledger.org/docs/pbft/nightly/master/technical-information.html#initialization
kelly_ (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:43:25 GMT):
https://sawtooth.hyperledger.org/users/
silasdavis (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:46:41 GMT):
may as well collected anecdotes about usage, but unless the projects have active bizdev not really easily knowable
kelly_ (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:49:38 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/wg-updates/identity-wg-2019-jan
amundson (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:49:41 GMT):
if anyone wants to help code review the PBFT repo, that would be very welcome
amundson (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:50:05 GMT):
and/or helping review our testing plan
mwagner (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:52:27 GMT):
how do we know that is really Vipin ?
rjones (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:53:00 GMT):
An insoluble problem
tkuhrt (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:53:07 GMT):
@Silona : I think you were looking for this regarding ODPi email https://wiki2.hyperledger.org/x/ooAk
nage (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:53:25 GMT):
We have an established web of trust 😇
jsmitchell (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:53:26 GMT):
If that’s not him, it’s a world class impression
nage (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:56:44 GMT):
Among all the other outreach work, Vipin is doing great work helping develop the ideas around a ledger-independent edge Protocol & wallet proposal (the shared wallet project idea). I hope to bring it forward after we have migrated Indy to Ursa.
nage (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:56:44 GMT):
Among all the other outreach work, Vipin is doing great work helping develop the ideas around a ledger-independent edge Protocol & wallet proposal (the shared wallet project idea). I hope to bring it forward after we have migrated Indy to use Ursa.
silasdavis (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 16:00:21 GMT):
@amundson time always the enemy, but I would like to
Silona (Thu, 24 Jan 2019 17:06:49 GMT):
@tkuhrt I just sent a link to them about the process for submitting a WG proposal
VipinB (Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:06:50 GMT):
@mwagner had given feedback on ID WG paper and couple of others from IDWG. Mr Wagner's input included the suggestion that for community building we can have widespread adoption of the welcome volunteer concept. Apologies for omitting this in my report and conclusions of yesterday.
Silona (Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:47:18 GMT):
Also I have the notes in the wiki now https://wiki2.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/TSC+Meeting+Minutes
Silona (Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:47:41 GMT):
So @VipinB if you want to attach a note, please do so.
Silona (Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:48:00 GMT):
Also i'm know my note taking isn't perfect - so people can add additional points too!
Silona (Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:48:50 GMT):
to add comments - don't click edit! just highlight and a comment button will hover and you can easily add an inline comment!
VipinB (Fri, 25 Jan 2019 19:29:07 GMT):
@Silona when are we going to cut over wiki2 to wiki?
Silona (Fri, 25 Jan 2019 22:38:00 GMT):
It is supposed to happen at the end of the month... but I haven't gotten confirmation from LFIT yet.
VipinB (Sun, 27 Jan 2019 00:07:48 GMT):
https://medium.com/@vipinsun/real-world-crypto-2019-b011922858d1 Real world crypto 2019, a summary report by yours truly
cbf (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 15:54:00 GMT):
@rjones @Silona @tkuhrt I cannot find the previous project updates - seems as if the content was not migrated
cbf (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 15:54:22 GMT):
recreating from scratch is a pain in the butt
rjones (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 16:15:53 GMT):
@cbf there is a wiki outage for the dokuwiki instances, the archive should be available soon. there is also a template for updates, but the old data is not lost.
rjones (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 16:16:17 GMT):
https://status.linuxfoundation.org/incidents/1wrjbvy4s7cl
tkuhrt (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 17:04:35 GMT):
@cbf : create new project update here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/TSC+Project+Updates
tkuhrt (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 17:05:37 GMT):
Previous updates here: https://wiki-archive.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/project-updates
cbf (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 17:34:53 GMT):
thx
cbf (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 17:35:49 GMT):
@dave.enyeart will give fabric update tomorrow... I have a conflict
dave.enyeart (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 17:35:49 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 20:13:51 GMT):
Should we hold off a week?
cbf (Wed, 30 Jan 2019 20:31:59 GMT):
nope, I won't be on next week either - sorry Dave will do great
satoshima (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:01:57 GMT):
Could you give me a link to connect TSC online conference? I am lost in new Hyperledger wiki.
kelly_ (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:02:33 GMT):
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
tkuhrt (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:03:38 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q1+Hypereledger+Fabric
tkuhrt (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:03:38 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q1+Hyperledger+Fabric
kelly_ (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:06:53 GMT):
*Begin 1/31 TSC Call*
silasdavis (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:08:11 GMT):
@kelly_
rjones (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:09:24 GMT):
https://wiki-archive.hyperledger.org/
binhn (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:10:53 GMT):
@kelly_ re Quilt, please include me
VipinB (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:10:56 GMT):
Did this come from the quilt team
rjones (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:12:00 GMT):
@VipinB good question
kelly_ (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:12:15 GMT):
@Silona please include @binhn in the Quilt meetings
kelly_ (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:12:37 GMT):
@binhn they should also be on the community in the next couple of days
kelly_ (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:12:44 GMT):
community calendar*
VipinB (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:14:07 GMT):
I signed up with no fee
VipinB (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:14:52 GMT):
Will be proposing some sessions
VipinB (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:17:29 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=weuFqKm6SeRwcdZRr) @Silona ^^^^
kelly_ (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:19:40 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/events/Contributors+Summits
VipinB (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:25:12 GMT):
@Silona comments are disabled on some pages
kelly_ (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:25:51 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Smart+Contracts
MicBowman (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:47:35 GMT):
congratulations, sofia!
kelly_ (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:48:40 GMT):
Congratulations!
silasdavis (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:50:37 GMT):
made comment on https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/events/Contributors+Summits on the who should attend thingy
kelly_ (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:52:21 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q1+Hyperledger+Iroha
tkuhrt (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:57:03 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=6jgRbwKuEexE9aXgn) @VipinB Which pages, Vipin? Remember that you have to be logged in to leave comments.
tkuhrt (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:57:27 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=PNRiMvbDdxyjrzj5a) @silasdavis Thanks, Silas. I have updated the wording.
Silona (Thu, 31 Jan 2019 16:07:52 GMT):
Yes we are talking with the Quilt team and they are receptive.
SaraG (Wed, 06 Feb 2019 11:33:54 GMT):
Hello! I'm preparing diversity plan for Iroha. Are there any reference examples from other projects? I couldn't find much in the wiki, unfortunately
tkuhrt (Wed, 06 Feb 2019 19:03:02 GMT):
@SaraG : I am not aware of any references for you to look at.
jsmitchell (Wed, 06 Feb 2019 19:24:39 GMT):
https://www.hyperledger.org/blog/2018/12/03/all-are-welcome-here
jsmitchell (Wed, 06 Feb 2019 19:24:56 GMT):
incidentally, the "code of conduct" link on that post is broken @tkuhrt
tkuhrt (Wed, 06 Feb 2019 19:26:28 GMT):
Yes, looks like a few links are broken due to the Wiki migration. I will see if our team can update those links.
tkuhrt (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 00:24:21 GMT):
Links fixed
SaraG (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 13:10:11 GMT):
Thank you! It is just that I was not sure about the format of the plan in case there are some special requirements for that.
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 14:57:20 GMT):
hello there
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 14:57:38 GMT):
did I miss them or were no minutes from last week's TSC call sent out?
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 14:59:46 GMT):
Now on wiki @lehors
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 14:59:57 GMT):
ah!...
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:02:38 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+01+31+TSC+Minutes although it says Jan 17 on top
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:05:07 GMT):
thanks
mwagner (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:05:32 GMT):
apologies for not having the PSWG quarterly ready, I am on vacation
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:05:33 GMT):
Tracy was involved across the whole spectrum
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:08:10 GMT):
Also this: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.00910.pdf
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:08:35 GMT):
Univ of Waterloo,
kelly_ (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:10:18 GMT):
Was that just my audio that cut out?
kelly_ (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:10:23 GMT):
It sounds like it back now
kelly_ (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:10:56 GMT):
I had the Zoom meeting dial my cell phone..
mwagner (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:11:09 GMT):
thanks Vipin!
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:13:03 GMT):
Also @cbf's' article on performance with more to come https://www.ibm.com/blogs/blockchain/2019/01/answering-your-questions-on-hyperledger-fabric-performance-and-scale/
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:13:03 GMT):
Also @cbf's' article on fabric performance with more to come https://www.ibm.com/blogs/blockchain/2019/01/answering-your-questions-on-hyperledger-fabric-performance-and-scale/
mwagner (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:14:34 GMT):
hint hint
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:14:42 GMT):
I assume that LTS means continuity even beyond 2.0
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:16:09 GMT):
even though we are crossing a major version threshold
kelly_ (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:16:42 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q1+Hyperledger+Indy
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:17:37 GMT):
We had a great presentation on this edge protocol on Indy WG
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:17:37 GMT):
We had a great presentation on this edge protocol on Identity WG yesterday
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:19:34 GMT):
Congrats on 2 Million
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:19:43 GMT):
Egalite....
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:20:24 GMT):
Listen to the audio of yesterday's ID WG for details on Egalite
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:22:20 GMT):
égalité for you Francophiles out there (looking at you @lehors)
MicBowman (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:22:58 GMT):
great update, nathan!
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:24:43 GMT):
@MicBowman did you see I responded to your question on Fabric PBF?
MicBowman (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:25:10 GMT):
yes, thanks! (i'll ping you offline for more information)
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:25:24 GMT):
ok
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:26:05 GMT):
% differs for people I am sure @nage is a great evangelist
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:29:23 GMT):
Also communication spurring adoption of DiDs and a new way of looking at things in this climate of bad news around surveillance capitalism. Especially shouting out the virtues of a solution built with privacy by design!
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:30:32 GMT):
We spoke about this need for technologists to get involved in this communication work as well.
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:30:32 GMT):
We spoke about the need for technologists to get involved in this communication work as well.
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:32:22 GMT):
Congratulations to Indy
nage (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:32:43 GMT):
Vipin++
There is a lot more evangelism work to be done, we tend to stay heads down on specific project issues, and need to do more to spread the word about the bigger picture.
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:35:45 GMT):
-1
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:35:56 GMT):
You whould do -1
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:35:56 GMT):
You should do -1
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:35:56 GMT):
You should do -1 where you have problems with the progress of the project!
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:35:56 GMT):
You should do -1 where you have problems with the progress of the project with comments. +1 can also have comments
rjones (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:36:04 GMT):
Do Confluence updates bring you joy?
MicBowman (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:36:54 GMT):
moving all the architecture working group recordings... >100 emails? hmm...
MicBowman (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:37:08 GMT):
as i said... thank you gmail filters
hartm (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:38:49 GMT):
Streamlining the updates will be good, +1 to this suggestion.
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:39:26 GMT):
if checkbox means +1 ot
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:39:26 GMT):
if checkbox means +1 it's the same, isn't it?
rjones (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:40:29 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=rFBweNGTayauuvYZ2) @lehors we need a full Likert scale
mwagner (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:44:43 GMT):
+0.82167
hartm (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:48:55 GMT):
So when are we having the "contributor summits" this year?
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:50:18 GMT):
the current proposal is sep/oct
hartm (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:50:45 GMT):
+1 to Kelly.
hartm (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:51:06 GMT):
Attach the contributor summits to the member summit/global forum when possible.
lehors (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 15:52:37 GMT):
come on, the bus was great! ;-)
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 16:05:26 GMT):
End of call! As a long term observer let me commend the tsc on getting more efficient and getting through Agenda items in a timely manner
VipinB (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 16:05:26 GMT):
End of call! As a long term observer let me commend the tsc on becoming more efficient and getting through Agenda items in a timely manner
jsmitchell (Thu, 07 Feb 2019 18:34:19 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=8hmNRGeoAJEK3cxJ5) Interesting read. The approaches that the authors take to loosening some of the guarantees that these systems ostensibly provide are surprising.
binhn (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 14:52:19 GMT):
hi folks, i can't make the meeting today due to a conflict
kelly_ (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 14:53:06 GMT):
thanks @binhn
kelly_ (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:02:13 GMT):
*Begin TSC meeting*
kelly_ (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:07:20 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q1+Hyperledger+Burrow
cbf (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:13:05 GMT):
Aren’t we a bit into the weeds here? Not that this isn’t interesting, but not really what updates are supposed to cover
rjones (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:13:26 GMT):
agreed
cbf (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:13:28 GMT):
We should be focused on health of the project, not the project roadmap
rjones (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:14:10 GMT):
@kelly_ ?
cbf (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:14:18 GMT):
And since ppl are supposed to prepare and read the updates, should be more ‘are there any issues?’
kelly_ (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:14:57 GMT):
in last weeks meeting it was discussed that we should continue to have the projects give a 'short update'
kelly_ (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:15:08 GMT):
but yes agreed we should keep it short
kelly_ (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:15:19 GMT):
I had proposed that myself
kelly_ (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:15:25 GMT):
in terms of just going to issues
cbf (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:15:35 GMT):
Yes, but should be about the health of the project, diversity, maintainers added new contributors etc
rjones (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:21:00 GMT):
from the other chat: Solidity to WASM compiler: https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/solang
hartm (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:48:59 GMT):
If we're already travelling to Japan, it makes sense to spend the whole week there and fill up the week with other meetings
hartm (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:49:14 GMT):
(even if it isn't the formal contributor summit).
hartm (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:53:24 GMT):
Do we have a date for the member summit (sorry if this has been posted somewhere)?
rjones (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:54:20 GMT):
last week of July IIRC
kelly_ (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:56:33 GMT):
@hartm fujitsu got some space :) ?
hartm (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:57:03 GMT):
@kelly_ Not sure, but if I have a date I can ask.
kelly_ (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:57:19 GMT):
@Silona could we get the exact dates for the members summit?
Silona (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:01:22 GMT):
July 30-31
Silona (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:01:59 GMT):
Though I dont know if contract has been signed.
danacr (Thu, 14 Feb 2019 20:06:26 GMT):
Has left the channel.
VipinB (Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:44:42 GMT):
Here is my first take on Stable coins thru the lens of JPM Coin https://medium.com/@vipinsun/new-horse-in-the-stable-4c07d4ec10a
knagware9 (Mon, 18 Feb 2019 07:05:27 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=rPsyP683AbWmA75Nt) @VipinB Thanks Its interesting
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:03:55 GMT):
*TSC MEETING START 21 FEB 2019*
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:06:40 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+02+21+TSC+Agenda
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:07:00 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/INTERN/Hyperledger+Internship+Program
bbehlendorf (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:22:27 GMT):
geo specific channels seem interesting, but it's really hard to overstate how central WeChat usage is to teams in China.
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:26:22 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:26:28 GMT):
Not from Cello, and can’t speak, as in a communal space, but we are working on a library for deploying HLF to K8S: https://nephos.readthedocs.io
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:27:15 GMT):
100% test coverage and documentation and several working examples, still working on some features. Perhaps Cello can use this as backend, if some of it is useful?
kelly_ (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:27:22 GMT):
@bbehlendorf agreed, was thinking maybe a rocketchat/wechat bridge if wechat is already split into project specific channels
kelly_ (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:27:28 GMT):
if not, may not be particularly useful
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:28:29 GMT):
we did explore this in the past, and it looked like the API to wechat involved using a rooted android phone. This was a year ago or so, perhaps it is better now
VipinB (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:28:44 GMT):
https://rocket.chat/docs/administrator-guides/google-cloud/auto-translate/ about $20/1 million characters
VipinB (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:28:54 GMT):
Not clear if this is per user
VipinB (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:29:40 GMT):
Can only be done by administrators
bbehlendorf (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:31:44 GMT):
@alexvicegrab is it aligned with this? https://www.hyperledger.org/blog/2018/11/08/deploying-hyperledger-fabric-on-kubernetes
hartm (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:31:56 GMT):
@kelly_ I'm on the call!
hartm (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:32:05 GMT):
Just forgot to rename the enterprise zoom account...
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:32:46 GMT):
@bbehlendorf, yes, I'm the author of that
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:33:21 GMT):
Also did this workshop at HGF: https://hgf18.sched.com/event/b76c86de07c3bcaa094a8b149470e0e7
bbehlendorf (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:33:52 GMT):
yay!
bbehlendorf (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:34:17 GMT):
we should have given you full credit on that blog, not sure why we didn't
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:35:03 GMT):
No hard feelings :) Eventually we'd like to move Nephos to become a Hyperledger project, but wanted it to have some basic documentation and solid testing in place.
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:35:26 GMT):
You mentioned at DevCon that we should start with Hyperledger Labs
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:39:16 GMT):
Labs is a good starting ground, yes
amundson (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:39:17 GMT):
@bbehlendorf same issue w/credit has happened a few times, like the first grid post. (usually though the blogs have been going pretty smoothly)
MicBowman (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:39:29 GMT):
+1 on the change
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:45:54 GMT):
GitHub, GitLab, BitBucket? Don't mean to be rude, but Gerrit is very unwieldy and hard to use (having done several successful contributions to several different repos).
bbehlendorf (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:48:05 GMT):
I like the full realtime firehose of confluence commits though! Shows aliveness.
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:48:18 GMT):
Gerrit has other benefits
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:48:36 GMT):
DCO enforcement for one
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:50:18 GMT):
@rjones The helm project enforces DCO on GitHub: https://github.com/helm/charts/pull/11616 (Helm also being linked to Linux Foundation)
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:50:41 GMT):
The GitHub DCO enforcement is not very good.
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:52:31 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/tools/Community+Health+Committee https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/tools/Meeting+notes
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:53:22 GMT):
@rjones How so? Perhaps you can elaborate what are the issues with the GitHub DCO enforcement?
Gerrit on the other hand makes it much more difficult to contribute. I have dozens of contributions on Helm, most quickly tested with CI/CD, reviewed, etc. When I look at working with Gerrit I am very reluctant to use it, given poor documentation, unwieldy GUI and difficult to use CLI tools. IMHO.
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:54:30 GMT):
Again, I don't mind whether we use GitHub, GitLab, BitBucket or anything else, but Gerrit is horrendous and turns contributions away.
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:55:19 GMT):
Apologies for my brutality, but I feel quite strongly about it, and am probably not the only one. Would be good to do a poll on this.
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:56:44 GMT):
*TSC MEETING END 21 FEB 2019*
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:58:56 GMT):
I don't think you're being "brutal". The projects using Gerrit are all Fabric based. If you want to move them to GitHub, agitate with those maintainers to do so.
lehors (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:00:25 GMT):
for what it's worth, I like Gerrit better than Github - there is always going to be someone with a different opinion ;-)
jsmitchell (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:00:55 GMT):
@alexvicegrab all the hyperledger sawtooth stuff is on github
jsmitchell (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:01:12 GMT):
there is no mandate to use gerrit
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:01:15 GMT):
Thanks @rjones, you are right, I should and will encourage the maintainers to do this.
@lehors, fair enough. Hence the poll :D
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:01:28 GMT):
github isn't all rainbows and uniorns
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:01:52 GMT):
my biggest gripe is that we can't use github issues because they don't support confidential bug reporting and handling
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:02:41 GMT):
Composer was also on GitHub, but we are currently working on Fabric, its CA, etc. I'm not a GitHub fanboy by any means, and would be happy to use other SVC hosting solutions (again, GitLab, BitBucket, etc.)
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:02:42 GMT):
so if you move to github, you have to turn off issues
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:03:10 GMT):
I only like github because that's where the largest crowd of potential contributors is
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:04:29 GMT):
if you made me the dictator, I'd have us all using just git and git format-patch and git send-patch with an old school email list. Like how the Git project and Linux kernel projects collaborate. I'd also make you all use Mutt and Vim.
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:04:32 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=Wb985RxJPkSXFeZWD) Regarding confidential bug reporting, this is mainly critical for security bugs, and we may continue using JIRA for issue tracking/reporting, if that supports private bug reports.
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:04:37 GMT):
This is why I'm not the dictator.
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:05:15 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=zrZ7HdBmc49RXdDGW) I like vim, and the git command line, so I'm 50% there :)
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:05:29 GMT):
@alexvicegrab the Hyperledger JIRA has been customized to support security bugs and our confidential bug handling process
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:06:09 GMT):
when you submit a bug on jira.hyperledger.org, you'll see a field labeled "security issue". If you set that to "is a security issue", the bug will be handled confidentially by the volunteer security team
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:06:50 GMT):
Yes, I don't mind using JIRA, only Gerrit.
alexvicegrab (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:07:18 GMT):
JIRA is fairly easy to navigate/filter, etc. if not perfect.
cbf (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:23:59 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=YwhhMJff2S3GKbrNP) @dhuseby when I spoke to GH devs yesterday, I noted that as a limitation that we needed for doing responsible disclosure
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:01:52 GMT):
@cbf I have had multiple discussions with GH's technical product manager about the same thing. He assures me it is in their feature road map but just not a very high priority.
rjones (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:02:34 GMT):
@cbf you should already be getting security alerts for fabric from github
cbf (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:02:56 GMT):
hmmm
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:03:24 GMT):
and for the record, now that we have confluence, I am much more in favor of using JIRA for everything and making sure that all of our projects turn off github issues
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:03:37 GMT):
the JIRA+Confluence integrations we have already are really nice
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:04:03 GMT):
and hopefully we can get all of the other whizbang cool stuff that we saw last year in the Praecipio demo
dhuseby (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:04:42 GMT):
@cbf expect an email from me on that ^^^ today. I have a few more things I'd like to pick your brain about too
amundson (Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:23:13 GMT):
@dhuseby too bad there aren't open source tools for wikis and issue management. with this dictator proposal, do we send these patches to you? :)
dhuseby (Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:56:20 GMT):
@amundson go ahead and send me a patch that makes me dictator. ; )
dhuseby (Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:56:44 GMT):
I have worked in both the kernel and git communities many times in the past. I just love the simplicity
dhuseby (Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:56:56 GMT):
I love how they divide up ownership along module lines
dhuseby (Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:57:01 GMT):
they delegate in a tree structure
dhuseby (Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:57:38 GMT):
you change the virtual fs layer in the kernel, the patch gets sent to the kernel mailing list and cc'd to the maintainer in charge of that part of the code
dhuseby (Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:58:05 GMT):
patches accumulate and flow up the maintainer tree until Linux decides it's time to land them all and tag a new release
dhuseby (Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:58:30 GMT):
I love using guilt (quilt for git) to manage trees of patches
dhuseby (Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:58:50 GMT):
If I could go my whole day without touching a mouse, I would.
dhuseby (Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:59:44 GMT):
if you want to see how we should be doing mailing lists, do yourself a favor and ssh sdf.org, set up a free account, and when it drops you to the shell, type "bboard"
Silona (Mon, 25 Feb 2019 21:24:31 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=e5LpRjNg4sNDXmwyo) @dhuseby Also Iroha is working on a bot that makes sure people don't use github issues for security
mwagner (Wed, 27 Feb 2019 18:28:11 GMT):
is there a TSC meeting tomorrow ?
Silona (Wed, 27 Feb 2019 22:24:58 GMT):
The agenda is light. And I won't be able to attend. @dhuseby is the only Community Architect that won't be flying to Hong Kong yet.
Silona (Wed, 27 Feb 2019 22:25:20 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+02+28+TSC+Agenda
rjones (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 00:53:26 GMT):
@here TSC call Thursday is cancelled.
lehors (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 00:54:00 GMT):
ok, noted
baohua (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 01:12:40 GMT):
OK, got, thanks for the notification! @rjones
mwagner (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 12:19:17 GMT):
safe travels everyone
rjones (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 15:34:18 GMT):
Thanks. Any TSC members coming to Hong Kong?
mwagner (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 15:54:34 GMT):
I am not, cant speak for any others.
mwagner (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 15:55:07 GMT):
Will there be a TSC meeting next week or are folks traveling then too
hartm (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 16:59:01 GMT):
@rjones I wanted to go but my shoulder isn't in good enough shape yet to make the trip (shoulder surgery last month). I have been told @nage is going, but I obviously cannot speak for him.
VipinB (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 20:07:09 GMT):
@baohua is probably going as well
VipinB (Thu, 28 Feb 2019 20:07:25 GMT):
He told me that we will meet in HK
baohua (Fri, 01 Mar 2019 02:01:41 GMT):
yes, i will attend the HK bootcamp, see you guys there if you can come ;-)
baohua (Wed, 06 Mar 2019 10:05:19 GMT):
Got from bootcamp!
baohua (Wed, 06 Mar 2019 10:06:20 GMT):
back side
toddinpal (Wed, 06 Mar 2019 13:43:43 GMT):
Can you use them at a casino? ;-)
baohua (Wed, 06 Mar 2019 15:43:33 GMT):
Not think so, this was said the first time of hyperledger official chips!
baohua (Wed, 06 Mar 2019 15:43:44 GMT):
Besides, i am in HK bootcamp these 2 days, feel free to find me if you're here 🙂
mwagner (Wed, 06 Mar 2019 18:51:05 GMT):
Is there a TSC call this week ?
Silona (Wed, 06 Mar 2019 23:37:57 GMT):
No there isn't
rjones (Thu, 07 Mar 2019 01:03:20 GMT):
no TSC call this week
rjones (Thu, 07 Mar 2019 01:03:20 GMT):
no TSC call this week
rjones (Thu, 07 Mar 2019 01:03:24 GMT):
baohua (Thu, 07 Mar 2019 01:49:16 GMT):
OK!
rjones (Thu, 07 Mar 2019 04:39:52 GMT):
For your consideration: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/2054
mwagner (Fri, 08 Mar 2019 12:01:59 GMT):
the US switched to daylight savings time this weekend. meeting times may be different forthose not switching ?
mwagner (Fri, 08 Mar 2019 13:12:38 GMT):
s/switched/swithes/
hartm (Fri, 08 Mar 2019 18:47:15 GMT):
@mwagner Yep, it always causes problems the first week....
Rajatsharma (Tue, 12 Mar 2019 07:21:36 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Tue, 12 Mar 2019 16:40:49 GMT):
TSC, please read & contribute to the Iroha production release thread - if possible, before thursday: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/2055
mwagner (Tue, 12 Mar 2019 19:12:50 GMT):
He's baaaaack....
jsmitchell (Tue, 12 Mar 2019 19:20:07 GMT):
The reports of his return have been greatly exaggerated
Dan (Tue, 12 Mar 2019 21:12:41 GMT):
I'm just lurking in a slightly more aggressive manner.
MicBowman (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:04:35 GMT):
g'morning all
baohua (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:05:29 GMT):
Dan disappears again!
mwagner (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:23:29 GMT):
Mic is rolling today!
mwagner (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:23:53 GMT):
Mic for President in 2020
satoshima (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:35:51 GMT):
Hitachi is waiting for the requirement for contributor's summit format or conference hall requirement.
satoshima (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:36:24 GMT):
Will Contributor's summit be 1 day or 2 day?
satoshima (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:36:49 GMT):
How big room need to be prepared?
satoshima (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:37:59 GMT):
If the summit is 2-day format, is it possible to hold different location for 1st day and 2nd day?
satoshima (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:38:35 GMT):
I try to speak up via phone, but my voice seems not to reach you
nage (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:39:37 GMT):
Are the commit sign off issues internal to Soromitsu or from other external contributions?
rjones (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:45:54 GMT):
@MicBowman @Silona please see comment by @satoshima above
rjones (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:46:17 GMT):
@MicBowman see comment from @nage above
silasdavis (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:48:41 GMT):
Bosco: https://www.cs.cornell.edu/projects/Quicksilver/public_pdfs/52180438.pdf
MicBowman (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:53:14 GMT):
@satoshima i believe @silona has sent email with answers to your questions
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:56:27 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/iroha/commit/623aae3c7f24033c578bd7d330549b9974ac99bc
Silona (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:57:14 GMT):
2 days before the event, 150 people, one big area where we can break out into smaller areas and tables
Silona (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 14:57:21 GMT):
also sent email
rjones (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:02:36 GMT):
we need to end the meeting.
alexvicegrab (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:02:54 GMT):
Argh, timezones
alexvicegrab (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:02:54 GMT):
Argh, timezones, exactly an hour late to the meeting.
Quick question, do I need to do anything further with the Labs application?
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-labs.github.io/pull/71
Silona (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:02:57 GMT):
my audio just dropped out completely
cbf (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:03:31 GMT):
I just used an open source tool that derives contribution stats
cbf (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:03:36 GMT):
called gitdm
cbf (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:03:53 GMT):
I know that Tracy had #s
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:05:40 GMT):
If anyone may have questions why Iroha is in active state here are meeting minutes from this meeting: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/811
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:06:40 GMT):
I recall that there were a CLA hub used previously. If we can consider this a valid tool for DCO then the project has no problem with it, I guess
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:06:40 GMT):
I recall that there were a CLA hub tool used previously. If we can consider this a valid tool for DCO then the project has no problem with it, I guess
nage (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:13:14 GMT):
The Apache 2.0 LICENSE file came in commit #20 in Sep 25, 2016 and MizukiSonoko (aka SonokoMizuki) and takemiyamakoto are the only committers prior to this change. Provided that employment and contractor relationships are all in order I don't expect there is a practical problem, we just need to be sure.
rjones (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:13:22 GMT):
@alexvicegrab the TSC has delegated that to lab stewards
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:14:34 GMT):
@nage awesome! Thanks. Can we double-check that with the legal team? we need to make sure that we comply with https://www.hyperledger.org/about/charter
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:18:09 GMT):
It is specifically said that All contributions shall be accompanied by a Developer Certificate of Origin sign-off (http://developercertificate.org) that is submitted through a Governing Board and LF-approved contribution process
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:18:23 GMT):
Now we need to clarify what is a "Governing Board and LF-approved contribution process". Is this a -s option? Was there any decision made and documented?
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:18:23 GMT):
Now we need to clarify what is a "Governing Board and LF-approved contribution process". Is this a -s Git option? Was there any decision made and documented?
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:18:23 GMT):
Now we need to clarify what is a "Governing Board and LF-approved contribution process". Is this a -s Git option? Or maybe CLA hub tool? Was there any decision made and documented?
neewy (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:30:52 GMT):
@Silona I would be extremely grateful if you can help us and direct this question to a person who can answer it :) otherwise we are not sure if there is a problem at all
rjones (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 17:15:57 GMT):
@neewy some time ago you and I discussed a squash commit. I think that is something to consider.
rjones (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 18:41:42 GMT):
Even disregarding commits with several signed-off-by lines, there is a big gap:
rjones (Thu, 14 Mar 2019 18:41:45 GMT):
```mbp:iroha ry$ git status
On branch master
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/master'.
nothing to commit, working tree clean
mbp:iroha ry$ git log|grep ^Author: |wc -l
6665
mbp:iroha ry$ git log|grep ^commit |wc -l
6665
mbp:iroha ry$ git log|grep "Signed-off-by" |wc -l
3002
```
neewy (Fri, 15 Mar 2019 07:46:42 GMT):
We have time to fix the commits I guess :) It is really important to have valid git blame
rjones (Fri, 15 Mar 2019 20:18:06 GMT):
@hartm am I misunderstanding the project you're discussing?
rjones (Fri, 15 Mar 2019 20:18:06 GMT):
@hartm am I misunderstanding the project you'
hartm (Fri, 15 Mar 2019 22:17:17 GMT):
@rjones I've responded on the email list.
rjones (Fri, 15 Mar 2019 22:23:16 GMT):
thank you
rjones (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:07:15 GMT):
call begins
rjones (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:07:32 GMT):
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-WGVRGZ5MV/
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:16:35 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+03+21+TSC+Agenda
MicBowman (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:18:35 GMT):
do we have link to "old" meeting minutes on the wiki?
MicBowman (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:19:15 GMT):
i think the discussion we had on this the last time was pre-wiki for minutes so i'm guessing they are only on the mailing lists
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:21:51 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/TSC+Meeting+Minutes
lehors (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:22:04 GMT):
"While it is expected that most projects will have reached an Active status by the time their maintainers seek to announce a first major release, the TSC may approve such requests also in cases where the project is still in Incubation status, should the TSC believe that the project's code is sufficiently mature." https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Project+Lifecycle#ProjectLifecycle-first_major_release
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:22:53 GMT):
So what happens if a project tells all of its contributors to make each commit using a fresh, pseudonymous LF account. Would this help them meet the diversity metric? ;)
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:22:55 GMT):
old old ones https://wiki-archive.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/technical-steering-committee
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:23:25 GMT):
Iroha had a VERY GOOD showing at Hong Kong Bootcamp they onboarded around 50 people
MicBowman (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:24:19 GMT):
from last year https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/1456
MicBowman (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:24:32 GMT):
same discussion around composer
baohua (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:26:46 GMT):
We'd better separate code quality from eco-system. Difficult to get conclusion if mix them together in the discussions.
baohua (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:26:46 GMT):
We'd better separate code quality (technical points) from eco-system. Difficult to get conclusion if mix them together in the discussions.
lehors (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:27:33 GMT):
+1 to documenting the criteria for first major release
lehors (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:28:09 GMT):
it seems that this effort is getting bogged down with the issue of whether this ought to include diversity
MicBowman (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:28:15 GMT):
did we do any more documentation for the composer decision last year? the meeting minutes are a little thin from that time
silasdavis (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:29:24 GMT):
We need to chaos monkey contributors and see if bugs still get fixed...
lehors (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:29:31 GMT):
side note: it seems to me that the messages attributed to Nikolai in the agenda are really from Sara
lehors (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:30:02 GMT):
and it's Nikolay :)
lehors (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:30:02 GMT):
and it's Nikolay or Nikolai? :)
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:31:53 GMT):
Composer itself shows their are many kinds of diversity. Chat is super supportive of the community even today. It is also our biggest draw on social media.
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:31:53 GMT):
Composer itself shows there are many kinds of diversity. Chat is super supportive of the community even today. It is also our biggest draw on social media.
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:32:54 GMT):
i asked Iroha to show all the types of diversity for a full community that goes beyond just core maintainers.
silasdavis (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:33:37 GMT):
Reading @dhuseby 's mail on this I think I agree. Allowing 1.0.0 progression and possibly taking back to 'community incubation'
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:33:54 GMT):
this is a VERY common topic in D&I in a true meritocracy - we need to acknowledge all the volunteers.
silasdavis (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:34:26 GMT):
(which is not to say I have an opinion on the true diversity / community health level)
silasdavis (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:34:26 GMT):
(which is not to say I have an opinion on the true diversity / community health level of Iroha )
baohua (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:34:42 GMT):
Diversity is even very different in various cultures.
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:36:44 GMT):
Breaking out metrics maybe the solution here. technical vs vendor Diversity. and community health because the other numbers on community health - we are just now figuring out how to measure.
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:37:27 GMT):
I don't really think people outside Hyperledger notice active vs incubation status very much, and it's not clear what changes even within Hyperledger when you go from incubation to active (maybe some marketing benefits, but that's about it).
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:37:58 GMT):
I worry we are spending a lot of time discussing something that is essentially meaningless.
baohua (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:38:10 GMT):
similar feeling...
nage (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:40:00 GMT):
I agree with Mic here, the code looks good, but I think we need closure on the DCO issue
takemiyamakoto (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:40:44 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
silasdavis (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:40:46 GMT):
Agreed. Feel like incubation _ought_ to mean something though
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:40:49 GMT):
I am inclined to separate technical criteria from diversity metrics. If we want to emphasize diversity/contributors, we can just emphasize this on the project page. When people are looking at a project to use/work on/join/contribute to, they can see these metrics for themselves and make an informed decision on the future of hte project.
takemiyamakoto (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:41:10 GMT):
Blockchain hype cycle also has a big impact on community health too. 2017 was a much easier time to get a lot of people excited about contributing
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:41:27 GMT):
@silasdavis We are discussing incubation vs active status. I'm struggling to find a practical separation.
Dan (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:41:52 GMT):
what we will be voting on is essentially should Hyperledger /Linux Foundation fund marketing in support of a major release.
Dan (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:42:17 GMT):
Does that release reflect the HL goals.
takemiyamakoto (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:42:20 GMT):
Iroha codebase prior to HL were all done by Soramitsu employees. Once we entered HL, all commits used CLAhub until CLAhub was no longer used and each commit was signed
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:42:49 GMT):
We have already spent the "big money" on a security and scanning audits to check their technical readiness
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:43:23 GMT):
@Dan Doesn't this sound fundamentally like a marketing/governing board issue, then?
Dan (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:43:48 GMT):
They will want to know from us, does this project reflect HL culture/quality.
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:44:12 GMT):
True.
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:44:36 GMT):
I am working with the Marketing Committee to create that vocabulary and will be running all drafts by the TSC.
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:44:39 GMT):
But this, then, becomes a technical assessment?
mwagner (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:44:54 GMT):
hyperledger is exceptional in *many* ways
Dan (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:44:55 GMT):
An assessment of code and community
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:44:58 GMT):
Out of curiousity, what happens if someone does the squash commit anonymously over Tor? Who is liable?
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:45:19 GMT):
two assessments - one technical / one health
Dan (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:45:49 GMT):
CII is a good example of something that bridges whether the community and its processes are healthy and whether the code is objectively healthy.
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:45:54 GMT):
marketing is concerned on the health and D&I aspects and is very involved on the new tools we are proposing for this
takemiyamakoto (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:46:37 GMT):
I know how to get ahold of at least a few of the people who need to sign off still
takemiyamakoto (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:46:52 GMT):
Some of them are in Tokyo, but work for other companies
nage (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:47:06 GMT):
@takemiyamakoto++
hartm (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:49:39 GMT):
Just a general comment: the DCO interface is pretty annoying. Is it possible to do a non-per commit sign off? In other words, when I create an LF account, I sign some statement saying that I agree to follow the DCO when I commit. Is this possible?
MicBowman (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:53:07 GMT):
the DCO isn't all that onerous for command line commits but i recall having another challenges with the desktop client... and... a little extra work to make sure you think about IP/license implications of a commit is not a horrible thing
nage (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:53:40 GMT):
I am hoping the work on git signing with DIDs will open up use of Verifiable Credentials to make better tools for that space. Signed-off-by:
VipinB (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:55:52 GMT):
Motion carries
VipinB (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:55:58 GMT):
Congrats!
nage (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:56:02 GMT):
Good work @takemiyamakoto and team!
takemiyamakoto (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:56:06 GMT):
Thanks!
neewy (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:58:24 GMT):
We are really grateful to TSC for their support and trust. That being said, we will continue investing our best effort into bringing codebase maintainers diversity.
Dan (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:58:28 GMT):
Congrats Iroha team!
neewy (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:58:30 GMT):
Thanks a lot
Silona (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:58:42 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=vHnqWuWYEYbeNLj3E) @neewy another Bootcamp!
takemiyamakoto (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:59:44 GMT):
I should also mention that we started monthly meetups in Tokyo (study group) and in Phnom Penh.
Dan (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:59:54 GMT):
Thanks, @neewy I believe that you will find the project will grow even stronger with a broader stakeholder base. It will be to Iroha's benefit not just the TSC's interests.
VipinB (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 15:08:12 GMT):
Colors are fragrant, but they
Will eventually scatter
Who in our world
Is unchanging?
The deep mountains of karma—
We cross them today
And we shall not have superficial dreams
Nor be deluded.
VipinB (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 15:08:12 GMT):
Fragrant colors,
Scatter
Who in our world
Is unchanging?
Deep mountains of karma
cross today
Shimmering dreams
without intoxication
VipinB (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 15:08:35 GMT):
Iro ha nihoheto
Chirinuru wo
Wa ka yo tare so
Tsune naramu
Uwi no okuyama
Kefu koete
Asaki yume mishi
Wehi mo sesu
VipinB (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 15:08:35 GMT):
*Iro ha* nihoheto
Chirinuru wo
Wa ka yo tare so
Tsune naramu
Uwi no okuyama
Kefu koete
Asaki yume mishi
Wehi mo sesu
VipinB (Thu, 21 Mar 2019 15:08:48 GMT):
From wikipedia!
dhuseby (Wed, 27 Mar 2019 16:33:17 GMT):
@silasdavis I have changed my mind on incubation/active of Iroha
dhuseby (Wed, 27 Mar 2019 16:34:12 GMT):
I think Dan made a good point that Iroha has a long history with Hyperledger and we should give them some leeway
dhuseby (Wed, 27 Mar 2019 16:34:25 GMT):
but new projects should follow whatever it is we define now
Silona (Wed, 27 Mar 2019 17:21:13 GMT):
Please note we have a Vote on Indy tomorrow for moving from incubation to active!
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:06:10 GMT):
I'm in the meeting twice, you can't say I'm not doing all I could to reach quorum
mwagner (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:10:23 GMT):
vote early, vote often!
mwagner (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:10:52 GMT):
so we aren't calling it "Indentured Servant" anymore ?
VipinB (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:22:41 GMT):
Why only $150K?
VipinB (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:23:17 GMT):
Aren't we rolling in it according to membership numbers.
VipinB (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:24:40 GMT):
+1 on moving Indy forward!
VipinB (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:26:11 GMT):
Congrats on Active Status Indy!
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:27:14 GMT):
well deserved
mwagner (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:27:21 GMT):
Congrats! take Sat morning off to celebrate!
silasdavis (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:27:36 GMT):
Almost like the British parliament...
rjones (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:29:10 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Software+Delivery
baohua (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:29:41 GMT):
Besides, can we have the member summit and contributors summit together as a hyperledger summit in 2 or 3 days?
silasdavis (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:29:46 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Software+Delivery
rjones (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:31:08 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/topic/30805185#2133
VipinB (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:38:55 GMT):
Looks like we need more discussion on this...
VipinB (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:40:28 GMT):
Looks like the Fabric team has the most lifting and shifting to do.
baohua (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:41:15 GMT):
If that's to force all projects to use the same system, it would not be a small change.
rjones (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:41:51 GMT):
Not all costs are financial
baohua (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:42:19 GMT):
i think the major reason is to save the monthly cost by hosting jenkins/gerrit VMs?
baohua (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:42:19 GMT):
i think the major reason is to save the monthly cost of hosting jenkins/gerrit VMs?
rjones (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:43:05 GMT):
@dhuseby ^^
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:43:37 GMT):
I think this is seriously lacking some additional info on the motivation
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:44:03 GMT):
I may have missed it but all there is in Dave's proposal is a solution
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:44:16 GMT):
it falls short of explaining what problem it is meant to solve
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:44:34 GMT):
until we have agreement on the problem to solve it's going to be hard to agree on a solution - whatever it is
baohua (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:48:14 GMT):
TSC should spend more time on technology discussions.
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:49:45 GMT):
well, admittedly this is more technical than discussing events ;-)
VipinB (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:50:34 GMT):
Definitely technical- with links to budget, daily technical work etc.
kelly_ (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:51:36 GMT):
It may make sense for the TSC to outline priorities to the board
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:51:40 GMT):
that's clearly not something the board will take on, so I don't know who else would tackle it
kelly_ (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:51:56 GMT):
not enough funding for CI/CD or contributors summit seems like a miss vs. a booth at event xyz
kelly_ (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:52:12 GMT):
obviously there needs to be outreach to get sponsors but not sure exactly how that allocation is decided
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:52:26 GMT):
agreed
kelly_ (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:54:04 GMT):
maybe the TSC could create a list and we could send a short survey to the top x maintainers at each project about where they could use additional help
kelly_ (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:54:31 GMT):
it seems like technical resources is something the TSC shoudl take on
kelly_ (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:54:35 GMT):
and a prioritization of those resources
VipinB (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:54:36 GMT):
How about letting more controlled access from projects to admin
kelly_ (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:55:00 GMT):
if this wasn't an either/or question (due to budget) it sounds like we could service both fabric and the other projects
silasdavis (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:56:36 GMT):
To transition Burrow's CI Monax will still be bearing the majority of the cost because we need a cluster to be available to run validators
nage (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:56:46 GMT):
The Indy community has very different needs than Fabric in terms of client code builds and the nature of how pools get setup and tested (customers are identity owners holding credentials more than administrators standing up their own pools). Even with additional resources and admin access, the Jenkins approach would not be sustainable for us (running an equivalent Jenkins system at the Sovrin Foundation for Continuous Delivery builds on secure infrastructure was more expensive than doing the equivalent with that @dhuseby is proposing).
nage (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:56:46 GMT):
The Indy community has very different needs than Fabric in terms of client code builds and the nature of how pools get setup and tested (customers are identity owners holding credentials more than administrators standing up their own pools). Even with additional resources and admin access, the Jenkins approach would not be sustainable for us (running an equivalent Jenkins system at the Sovrin Foundation for Continuous Delivery builds on secure infrastructure was more expensive than doing the equivalent with what @dhuseby is proposing).
silasdavis (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:56:53 GMT):
We can expose pipeline results via a public gitlab instance
silasdavis (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:57:15 GMT):
for unit/integration tests we use circleci for free so that is already public
silasdavis (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:58:04 GMT):
also: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/community-relations/opensource-program/
silasdavis (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:58:13 GMT):
we could use public gitlab
nage (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:58:31 GMT):
I can't speak to the cluster coordination issues, we usually manage that differently than what I'm hearing here on the call
silasdavis (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:00:52 GMT):
GitLab is a good project for sure
lehors (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:02:00 GMT):
gotta go guys
VipinB (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:09:19 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=uZTfgbZ3gbK4ai3pY) @nage So maybe the one size fits all approach to CI/CD may not be what we need!
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:43:32 GMT):
@nage thanks for the feedback
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:43:36 GMT):
ok, I'm online in here
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:43:53 GMT):
@here I'm here to answer any questions and talk about stuff.
nage (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:44:42 GMT):
User User_1 added by nage.
hartm (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:51:07 GMT):
@dhuseby I hate to ask you to do work, but I think a table comparing, contrasting, and going over all of the projects' CI/CD and other testing stuff might make sense. It would at least give us some of the information we need to move forward. One of the big issues with the discussion seemed to be that no one knew other projects' CI/CD tooling or approach--just their own. Some education here might be useful.
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:12:51 GMT):
@hartm that's a very good suggestion
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:12:57 GMT):
I had similar thoughts
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:13:04 GMT):
and don't feel back about asking me to do work
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:13:19 GMT):
it's uh, my job to serve the community in that way
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:13:20 GMT):
: )
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:14:00 GMT):
I'll put up a wiki page today with all of the projects in a table and make notes for each one based on what I can remember about each team's setup
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:14:10 GMT):
then I'll email out to the TSC list and ask for teams to fill it in
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:14:17 GMT):
and/or update what I've written
dhuseby (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:14:30 GMT):
it will just be some notes from each team on what they are doing for CI/CD
amundson (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:38:42 GMT):
@Silona someone mentioned you are working on a new project taxonomy approach. is there more information available?
Silona (Thu, 28 Mar 2019 16:57:38 GMT):
I'm working on a glossary for the marketing committee.
Silona (Tue, 02 Apr 2019 14:39:05 GMT):
The Ursa Update is up https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q1+Hyperledger+Ursa
mwagner (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 14:18:30 GMT):
@dhuseby I found your rust email very interesting. Do we want to discuss it here while talking about ursa ?
VipinB (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 14:22:44 GMT):
let output = unsafe { double_input(input) };
VipinB (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 14:23:02 GMT):
mark it unsafe when going out...
VipinB (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 14:23:50 GMT):
From Dave's https://blog.rust-lang.org/2015/04/24/Rust-Once-Run-Everywhere.html
mwagner (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 14:26:06 GMT):
sign me up for testing 2.0 alpha!
cbf (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 14:32:02 GMT):
thx!
VipinB (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 15:56:06 GMT):
https://hub.digitalasset.com/hubfs/Press%20Releases/DAML_Open_Source_Press_Release_4.4.19.pdf?utm_campaign=DAML%20Open%20Source%20Announcement&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=71450514&_hsenc=p2ANqtz--jg2VG6yeJtj4osvI_PzEQMoGHpLl9iGl2YPOqtHghofA64VvNskC7PqorHQELdveaL5zwBhihQlu85-ZW4HXshupAHg&_hsmi=71450514 Now that DA has open sourced DAML under Apache 2.0, will we see a natural way back into HL for DA, since we did start HL hackathon by putting together the front end of DA with Open Blockchain; this will close the circle and bring a valuable tool that can be integrated into any of the DLTs in HL.
VipinB (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 15:56:06 GMT):
https://hub.digitalasset.com/hubfs/Press%20Releases/DAML_Open_Source_Press_Release_4.4.19.pdf Now that DA has open sourced DAML under Apache 2.0, will we see a natural way back into HL for DA, since we did start HL hackathon by putting together the front end of DA with Open Blockchain; this will close the circle and bring a valuable tool that can be integrated into any of the DLTs in HL.
VipinB (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 15:56:06 GMT):
https://hub.digitalasset.com/hubfs/Press%20Releases/DAML_Open_Source_Press_Release_4.4.19.pdf Now that DA has open sourced DAML under Apache 2.0, will we see a natural way back into HL codebase for DA? We did start HL at a hackathon by putting together the front end of DA with Open Blockchain using grpc; this will close the circle and bring a valuable tool that can be integrated into any of the DLTs in HL. This will spur adoption...
rbuysse (Thu, 04 Apr 2019 19:54:05 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
dhuseby (Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:23:33 GMT):
@VipinB that Rust-Once-Run-Everywhere blog post was from 2015.
dhuseby (Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:23:49 GMT):
The more apropos post is the one about the ffi-support crate out of Mozilla's security team
dhuseby (Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:24:07 GMT):
this one: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/04/crossing-the-rust-ffi-frontier-with-protocol-buffers/
dhuseby (Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:24:28 GMT):
it was published this passed Monday so I'm willing to bet it is the latest and greatest thinking out of my old group at Mozilla
dhuseby (Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:25:06 GMT):
If you dig into the ffi-support crate you'll see that they adopted a "handle" based approach that avoids passing pointers across the FFI boundary altogether
dhuseby (Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:25:34 GMT):
I had just finished telling @MALodder about that design pattern when this blog post hit my inbox.
VipinB (Fri, 05 Apr 2019 13:41:09 GMT):
@dhuseby As you know, in both approaches the type safety of the data transmitted over the boundary is what should be preserved. With protobufs the type safety is ostensibly preserved (as well as speed). I say ostensibly because the article shows that the .proto file needs to be aligned across the boundary. Another comment they make is that since they ship the components on both sides of the divide, they are better protected against misalignment of the .proto file. We need to be aware of this when writing clients of Ursa or wrapping lower level functions to be surfaced through Ursa. Indeed, the vulnerability surface is much diminished; but it remains and developers need to be vigilant.
dhuseby (Mon, 08 Apr 2019 18:43:15 GMT):
@VipinB but if Ursa provides SDK's in languages that call Ursa and uses the protobufs method, then the developers wanting to use Ursa won't have to worry about anything. We could provide Python/Go/JS/Java/C++ classes that use code generated from the protofiles that Ursa would understand.
dhuseby (Mon, 08 Apr 2019 18:44:00 GMT):
but it looks like we won't need to go that far. We're looking at the ffi-support crate. The protobufs method is very tempting though, and it may be how we go.
dhuseby (Mon, 08 Apr 2019 18:44:35 GMT):
but I don't like protobufs. Cap'n Proto seems to be better.
dhuseby (Mon, 08 Apr 2019 18:44:50 GMT):
https://capnproto.org/
dhuseby (Mon, 08 Apr 2019 18:45:09 GMT):
has native Rust support as well as native C++/C/etc support
jsmitchell (Mon, 08 Apr 2019 19:08:08 GMT):
http://google.github.io/flatbuffers/
aviralwal (Tue, 09 Apr 2019 07:45:22 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
agunde (Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:08:30 GMT):
The Sawtooth Quarterly update has been posted https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Hyperledger+Sawtooth
Dan (Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:04:35 GMT):
I believe Iroha has been using flatbuffers for some time now.
rjones (Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:50:22 GMT):
Please review https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Hyperledger+Fabric as well
rjones (Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:52:21 GMT):
please review https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q1+Architecture+WG
rjones (Wed, 10 Apr 2019 16:39:01 GMT):
Here is the TSC Update calendar. You can subscribe to see the future: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/ics/2164075/1638998944/feed.ics
Dan (Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:46:54 GMT):
I've always wanted to see the future! :rainbow: :unicorn:
mwagner (Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:57:01 GMT):
any good stock tips ?
Dan (Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:03:04 GMT):
hodl pswg-coin
Dan (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:00:21 GMT):
Starting TSC meeting momentarily
Dan (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:02:40 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/topic/30894026#2145
agunde (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:03:58 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/sawtooth-core/pull/2059/files
agunde (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:04:21 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Hyperledger+Sawtooth
hartm (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:04:53 GMT):
I read it as well.
Dan (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:11:21 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Hyperledger+Fabric
rjagadee (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:17:27 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Architecture+WG
tkuhrt (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:29:17 GMT):
I could not get myself off mute this morning (zoom should really let dial in folks know they have been muted by the system and how to unmute). Anyway, there are two separate scripts in the hyperledger-community-management lab. (1) the get contributors scripts that are used for TSC elections. These scripts use git log and mailmap to get contributors for the specified repos. (2) the project report scripts written in Python that use git apis to get details. The latter is probably what James was talking about with regards to permissions.
tkuhrt (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:30:38 GMT):
I don't know that the permissions issue was resolved. I was running these scripts regularly and uploading the reports to the wiki before I left.
tkuhrt (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:33:14 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/CAT/Project+Reports
Dan (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:39:14 GMT):
thanks, Tracy!
rjones (Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:28:44 GMT):
@tkuhrt sorry about the mute problem :(
houqinghui (Mon, 15 Apr 2019 08:17:42 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Wed, 17 Apr 2019 23:08:26 GMT):
are we not scheduled to meet tomorrow? I don't see that anyone has submitted agenda items.
rjones (Wed, 17 Apr 2019 23:24:04 GMT):
unless hell is flooded, we're not gonna cancel again
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 00:00:35 GMT):
Pretty rainy here
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 00:09:53 GMT):
we do have some status reports to possible ask questions. I haven't looked to see if they were filed or not
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 00:53:02 GMT):
I see updates from iroha and identity that are not widely read.
VipinB (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 01:02:31 GMT):
Identity is due only next week
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:40:25 GMT):
Thanks for getting it in early!
baohua (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:48:20 GMT):
Do we have meeting today? Not see the agenda email till now.
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:06:52 GMT):
Yes, we need to get more prepared for future meetings. I'm looking to the other TSC Members to actively build the agenda. Next week should probably be quite full though.
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:07:14 GMT):
Today is very light. If there are any opens please think of them quickly.
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:16:02 GMT):
+1 @cbf to async comm
mwagner (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:18:23 GMT):
btw, I will not be to attend the 9-May meeting, will be at Red Hat Summit
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:18:46 GMT):
disappointing priorities Mr. Wagner :(
mwagner (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:18:54 GMT):
the pswg update is due that week, can we push it out a week ?
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:19:06 GMT):
yes
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:20:41 GMT):
if people in Zoom can use the "raise my hand" thing I will try to call on people so they don't get missed
mwagner (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:20:42 GMT):
thank you kind sir
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:22:01 GMT):
@cbf I'm trying a new strategy for async collaboration based on the wiki+jira integrations for the CI/CD committee
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:26:31 GMT):
@cbf participation in the committee was and still is open
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:27:05 GMT):
so if you want to see what we're working on, volunteer for the committee : )
cbf (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:27:09 GMT):
think that my point was maybe missed - it is not linked from the main page
MicBowman (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:28:00 GMT):
@dhuseby i'm not sure i'f i'd rather be a chicken or a pig?
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:29:06 GMT):
@cbf what was your point? what am I missing
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:29:06 GMT):
?
cbf (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:29:48 GMT):
if you missed the email, then this is basically not happening
cbf (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:30:05 GMT):
I don't understand the need for secrecy
MicBowman (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:30:22 GMT):
i think the point is that without access to the docs... no one can follow... and that makes it harder to decide if we want to participate
cbf (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:30:54 GMT):
and there are some of us who don't have the time to actively participate but would like to follow
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:31:00 GMT):
one document in particular has confidential dollar figures.
cbf (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:31:49 GMT):
then that should be restricted to staff and board members or their delegates
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:33:01 GMT):
@cbf did you email to volunteer and I missed it? or was it in the announcement thread on the TSC mailing list?
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:33:26 GMT):
and @cbf I've been doing open source for a very long time and my reflex is always to be open and transparent
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:33:39 GMT):
and it took a lot for me to think about this committee differently
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:34:26 GMT):
i ultimately went the private route after all of the contentious discussions I've had privately with people concerned with our current setup and direction and my desire to get the actual numbers that everybody in the HL community is spending on CI/CD
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:34:38 GMT):
I wanted to know what the actual total was per month
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:34:56 GMT):
I think this week's call is the last call, right?
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:34:58 GMT):
now that I know, i can keep that private and open up the rest of the committee space
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:35:00 GMT):
on Friday?
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:35:20 GMT):
this week's call? the last call for the CI/CD committee?
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:35:26 GMT):
no, the deadline is mid-June
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:35:39 GMT):
we have 8 more calls
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:35:47 GMT):
oh OK. I'm obviously mistaken
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:36:40 GMT):
like I said, if there are concerns with the lack of transparency, I'll open up the committee, I have no problems with that. I was able to get the numbers I was seeking.
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:36:58 GMT):
I made the dollar figure document private, I'll open the space
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:37:28 GMT):
Sorry. @dhuseby : I made the dollar figure document private, open the space if you wish :)
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:42:58 GMT):
It sounds appropriate to keep the dollar figures private.
I understand from all previous communications that the committee is open and multiple invitations have been made and continue to be made.
Dan (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:43:47 GMT):
That committee will be most productive if it is attended by HL Project maintainers actively involved in their respective CI/CD flows.
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:52:00 GMT):
The committee is open to anybody who wants to participate.
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:52:12 GMT):
I will send out an invite again
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:52:57 GMT):
So far there are people from Sawtooth, Burrow, and one from the India PSWG I think that just wanted to help.
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:53:19 GMT):
I have actively reached out to people from Fabric and Indy and Iroha to participate but haven't heard back yet
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:53:32 GMT):
I represent the Ursa team as well as organizer
cbf (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:59:37 GMT):
Actually, @sykesm reached out to Silona multiple times and has not had a response. He is on holiday this week for spring break but I sent him your email
sykesm (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:59:37 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:24:01 GMT):
please reach out to community-architects@hyperledger.org in the future since it goes to all three of us ( @Silona @dhuseby and me )
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:25:33 GMT):
I've sent @sykesm an email and will wait for him to get back
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:25:58 GMT):
please cc c-a. I try to do that on all external stuff
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:26:04 GMT):
@here if anybody else would like to join the CI/CD committee, just ping me here or email me at dhuseby@linuxfoundation.org
rjones (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:26:26 GMT):
please email c-a, not any one of us directly
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:26:30 GMT):
@rjones thanks!
MALodder (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:31:22 GMT):
@dhuseby me
Silona (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:32:12 GMT):
Sorry I was sick. I got one email from Matt while I was ill. And yes it is best to email the team. Or Dave who is the lead on this.
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:54:41 GMT):
@MALodder added
VipinB (Tue, 23 Apr 2019 18:48:53 GMT):
My take on zkproof standards workshop. There are some links to some of the talks and other resources. https://medium.com/@vipinsun/zkproof-standards-workshop-ii-1b1b1568eb14
Dan (Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:05:25 GMT):
anyone have a high-level diff on idemix and anon-creds2.0?
Silona (Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:30:44 GMT):
New agenda is up but still missing a few links. I have pinged everyone about adding them. https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+04+25+TSC+Agenda
Silona (Wed, 24 Apr 2019 02:09:26 GMT):
Hey devs, anything exciting going on? please consider submitting a blog post! http://bit.ly/HLEDSubmission
rossth (Wed, 24 Apr 2019 20:29:58 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 13:59:03 GMT):
Not every tsc meeting that we get to debate 2 incubation proposals
Dan (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:00:19 GMT):
I will be joining in a minute or two
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:00:37 GMT):
You are missing all the fun @Dan
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:01:57 GMT):
The only ones missing are the rest of the TSC
kelly_ (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:02:42 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+04+25+TSC+Agenda
kelly_ (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:02:48 GMT):
There you go @Dan
hartm (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:03:18 GMT):
Google does not do a good job of finding it, surprisingly.
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:06:07 GMT):
We will help! Do not make it too complicated @dhuseby
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:08:08 GMT):
More difficult to condense and make it simpler. Mark Twain as quoted by @MicBowman "I did not have time to write you a brief letter so I am sending you a long letter"
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:10:37 GMT):
Let us get on with the new incubation requests please!
Dan (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:14:09 GMT):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/13d0cMReGOhK13BbdgMOFZy_prUzqWBXWc4nlI7mehpY/edit
Silona (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:16:06 GMT):
Any reason the proposal form was not used? https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Project+Proposals
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:16:06 GMT):
Great proposal @amundson and gang. Especially like the possible parallelism and pluggability. Especially the scaling the execution across multiple machines!
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:16:06 GMT):
Great proposal @amundson and gang. Especially like the possible parallelism and pluggability. Especially the possibility of scaling the execution across multiple machines!
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:17:20 GMT):
Only question is about State, is this a parallel store (another ledger) or just an interface and how it interacts with consensus
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:17:20 GMT):
Only question is about State, is this a parallel store (another ledger) or just an interface and how Transact interacts with consensus
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:18:51 GMT):
We had a discussion about this in Arch WG. ... More on the meta level
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:20:19 GMT):
Ursa is also a library
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:20:58 GMT):
TM- Transcendental meditation (Transaction Manager)
rjones (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:21:40 GMT):
TSC members: feel free to raise your hand in Zoom
rjones (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:21:40 GMT):
TSC members: feel free to raise your hand in Zoom as you have comments
Silona (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:21:49 GMT):
For the name - we need to engage with marketing - I look for the proposal in the wiki as when the group is ready to discuss...
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:23:10 GMT):
State + Consensus is very important to disambiguate.
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:26:29 GMT):
According to @rjagadee Arch WG will welcome a presentation of a clean interface to the TM-
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:26:56 GMT):
By Senor @amundson himself
dhuseby (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:30:05 GMT):
Name ideas, looking at the thesaurus:
Hyperledger Summit
Hyperledger Compact
Hyperledger Pact
Hyperledger Handshake
Hyperledger Clambake (😂)
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:31:26 GMT):
@hartm you got to run it yourself
dhuseby (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:31:39 GMT):
I personally like Hyperledger Summit because it has multiple meanings and leads to obvious marketing themes.
dhuseby (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:31:53 GMT):
Same with Hyperledger Handshake.
Silona (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:36:36 GMT):
Names need to engage with marketing
Dan (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:39:29 GMT):
Few more minutes here and then we'll need to move to the next proposal.
Dan (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:40:07 GMT):
TSC members please give me some indication how much further discussion you need or whether you are satisfied.
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:40:28 GMT):
Second that @Dan
nage (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:41:42 GMT):
It soundsto me like we have moved into technical implementation discussion rather that oversight issues. I think we are ready to vote.
nage (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:41:42 GMT):
It soundsto me like we have moved into technical implementation discussion rather than oversight issues. I think we are ready to vote.
nage (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:41:42 GMT):
It sounds to me like we have moved into technical implementation discussion rather than oversight issues. I think we are ready to vote.
jljordan_bcgov (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:42:37 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:44:18 GMT):
Semver
Dan (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:47:17 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Hyperledger+Aries+Proposal
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:48:13 GMT):
Glad to be a sponsor of #ARIES, Nathan had presented on Identity WG and you can listen to the audio recording from that meeting
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:50:27 GMT):
Great proposal, not every day that we get two excellent proposals on the same day
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:52:13 GMT):
DiF and Identity Warriors- VCG -IIW etc... @nage great work, bridges to ursa etc are very powerful
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:53:40 GMT):
We will have presentation on IIW at the next Identity WG on May 1st. Focus on HL Aries and others
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:53:52 GMT):
So please show up
mwagner (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:54:45 GMT):
I am really happy to see so much cross project participation and co-operation
Dan (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:54:47 GMT):
all prime numbers are "good"
rjones (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:56:25 GMT):
They're all good numbers, Dent
Bobbijn (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:05:41 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:18:40 GMT):
The Identity WG Notes (as the minutes are called) are https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/IWG/2019-02-06-Notes. The audio links are in the notes. Nathan's presentation on "Envoy" as Aries was called then are from 02:25 or so to around 40:00, the rest is on Sovrin Connectathon which is a related event held to check out "Envoy" work which attracted a whole bunch of folks to Utah. ...
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:18:40 GMT):
As requested by @Dan reference to the Identity WG Notes for @nage's talk are https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/IWG/2019-02-06-Notes. The audio links are in the notes. Nathan's presentation on "Envoy" as Aries was called then are from 02:25 or so to around 40:00, the rest is on Sovrin Connectathon which was a related event held to check out "Envoy" work which attracted a whole bunch of folks to Utah. ...
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:23:03 GMT):
Also some general comments on privacy and the amplification and socialization of our work in the current context from 40:00 on- which may or may not be of interest to the rest of the folks. All in all, this is a call to please attend Identity WG where we feature the cutting edge in Identity thought in the Hyperledger community and attempt to publicize and build bridges. Next meeting on May 1st will feature IIW report by Drummond and hopefully Nathan- India Stack consent layer talk by Ajay Jadhav (to be confirmed).
VipinB (Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:23:03 GMT):
Also some general comments on privacy and the amplification and socialization of our work in the current context from 40:00 on- which may or may not be of interest to the rest of the folks. All in all, this is a call to please attend Identity WG where we feature the cutting edge in Identity thought in the Hyperledger community and attempt to publicize and build bridges. Next meeting on May 1st will feature IIW report by @drummondreed and hopefully @nage -* India Stack consent layer* talk by @ajayjadhav (to be confirmed).
stone-ch (Fri, 26 Apr 2019 07:30:02 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Mon, 29 Apr 2019 16:59:02 GMT):
TSC Members please add your votes to the mail thread:
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/topic/31354108#2188
Dan (Mon, 29 Apr 2019 17:00:28 GMT):
All: please review the Aries proposal providing feedback if required. https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Hyperledger+Aries+Proposal
Dan (Tue, 30 Apr 2019 01:42:51 GMT):
In case this is news to anyone else, you can highlight text on the wiki in e.g. the Aries proposal and a little context widget will let you add an in-line comment.
Dan (Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:16:50 GMT):
All: Please review the Project Readiness draft. https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Project+Readiness
After a quick read my take is we have some ambiguity on the lifecycle and that may need more specificity. The first take in that draft covers these areas. The second, I think, just reflects a poorly formed request to Dave.
We should just be clearer on what we need to solve which I take to be the first point on lifecycle entrance/exit criteria.
Dan (Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:16:50 GMT):
All: Please review the Project Readiness draft. https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Project+Readiness
After a quick read my take is we have some ambiguity on the lifecycle and that may need more specificity. The first take in that draft covers these areas. The second, I think, just reflects poorly formed question to Dave.
We should just be clearer on what we need to solve which I take to be the first point on lifecycle entrance/exit criteria.
Dan (Thu, 02 May 2019 13:46:52 GMT):
I note with concern that fewer than half of the TSC Members have indicated reading the Aries proposal.
mwagner (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:14:59 GMT):
I have read it but not fully processed it...
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:35:48 GMT):
Carving out the scope of the project outside attracts more contributors with different needs and abilities.
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:36:42 GMT):
In most of those projects that were supposed to be independent mostly were led by single organisations
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:36:42 GMT):
Most of those projects that were supposed to be independent mostly were led by single organisations
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:36:42 GMT):
Most of those projects that were supposed to be independent were led by single organisations
Silona (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:36:49 GMT):
It is marketing to the community
hartm (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:40:21 GMT):
Are we going to "clean up" and officially roll the projects that are not independent into the parent projects at some point?
Dan (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:41:22 GMT):
Are we ready to move into a vote?
silasdavis (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:41:29 GMT):
https://github.com/uport-project/ethr-did-resolver
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:41:48 GMT):
Will increase community where they NEED this. Will increase overall participation
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:42:21 GMT):
in Hyperledger...
nage (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:42:49 GMT):
DID registries https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-method-registry/
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:43:54 GMT):
@MicBowman this means that we need the template changed
MicBowman (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:45:04 GMT):
agreed
MicBowman (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:45:30 GMT):
its just becoming the central point of our discussions... having proposers think through & articulate that in the proposal would be helpful
MicBowman (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:46:26 GMT):
completely agree @lehors
silasdavis (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:46:27 GMT):
@lehors ++
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:50:55 GMT):
In particular Aries vote is yes by Arnaud, Silas, Chris so far
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:52:50 GMT):
Congrats Aries!
VipinB (Thu, 02 May 2019 14:53:53 GMT):
Passes but with a lot of hemming and hawing
mwagner (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:02:38 GMT):
@hartm yes we should have a discussion (and policy?) around pushing projects under the parents as needed
silasdavis (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:02:45 GMT):
regarding lifecycle, I would like it to be possible for a project to go -> incubate-in-parent-project/labs -> incubation -> sunset from incubation (not because inactive but because unable to deliver on cross-project goals within some timeframe) -> return to incubation (by finding a way to meet those) goals. This might not be a common path, but incubation feels like a one-way ratchet now because since it is seen as a significant demerit to be removed from incubation. I'm inclined to support start-ups that feel they need the incubation status to deliver on some of their goals, but the incubation graveyard problem is that Chris/Arnaud raise are valid. FWIW I think the Aries project is very interesting and the wallet rust code I have seen before in Indy looks great - just hard to judge the cross-project applicability before it ramps up, partly because the footprint of the project is quite large - p2p message, ordering services, atomic key rotation, etc is tricky to get a good intuition for with a few hours reading.
silasdavis (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:02:45 GMT):
regarding lifecycle, I would like it to be possible for a project to go -> incubate-in-parent-project/labs -> incubation -> sunset from incubation (not because inactive but because unable to deliver on cross-project goals within some timeframe) -> return to incubation (by finding a way to meet those goals). This might not be a common path, but incubation feels like a one-way ratchet now because since it is seen as a significant demerit to be removed from incubation. I'm inclined to support start-ups that feel they need the incubation status to deliver on some of their goals, but the incubation graveyard problem is that Chris/Arnaud raise are valid. FWIW I think the Aries project is very interesting and the wallet rust code I have seen before in Indy looks great - just hard to judge the cross-project applicability before it ramps up, partly because the footprint of the project is quite large - p2p message, ordering services, atomic key rotation, etc is tricky to get a good intuition for with a few hours reading.
silasdavis (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:02:45 GMT):
regarding lifecycle, I would like it to be possible for a project to go -> incubate-in-parent-project/labs -> incubation -> sunset from incubation (not because inactive but because unable to deliver on cross-project goals within some timeframe) -> return to incubation (by finding a way to meet those goals). This might not be a common path, but incubation feels like a one-way ratchet now because since it is seen as a significant demerit to be removed from incubation. I'm inclined to support start-ups that feel they need the incubation status to deliver on some of their goals, but the incubation graveyard problems that Chris/Arnaud raise are valid. FWIW I think the Aries project is very interesting and the wallet rust code I have seen before in Indy looks great - just hard to judge the cross-project applicability before it ramps up, partly because the footprint of the project is quite large - p2p message, ordering services, atomic key rotation, etc is tricky to get a good intuition for with a few hours reading.
Silona (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:07:13 GMT):
I do think we need something like subprojects... where they still get marketing and branding support but still expresses the architectural aspect - basically not full project until interop
hartm (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:07:19 GMT):
@mwagner I proposed a notion of sub-project maybe 2 or 3 years ago. It got shot down then, but I think the time might be right to reviv eit.
hartm (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:07:39 GMT):
You can look at the old TSC emails for this discussion.
Dan (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:07:40 GMT):
I'm getting out my gun.
Silona (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:07:42 GMT):
I just hate the name "sub-project" but then I'm not thrilled with project either
Dan (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:07:43 GMT):
;0
Silona (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:07:56 GMT):
i'm new - thats my excuse
Silona (Thu, 02 May 2019 15:21:05 GMT):
I would rather be more accurate on our labels - libraries, frameworks, platforms, tools etc
Silona (Thu, 02 May 2019 16:26:40 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=g7F9Xu2NAzeCZ2MdQ) @hartm I would like to talk about the architecture of HL. Marketing also has problems framing and explaining this... And I believe it hurts recruiting contributors
hartm (Thu, 02 May 2019 17:12:51 GMT):
@Silona I just sent out a pretty long email about this. Let me know what you think! Thanks!
mwagner (Thu, 02 May 2019 17:21:55 GMT):
_buys some kevlar...._
hartm (Thu, 02 May 2019 17:25:06 GMT):
I hope it wasn't that bad...
mwagner (Thu, 02 May 2019 17:33:08 GMT):
@Dan was arming himself
Dan (Thu, 02 May 2019 17:34:33 GMT):
Per Mark's reference to subprojects getting shot down before ;)
gregdhill (Fri, 03 May 2019 10:46:55 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
baohua (Mon, 06 May 2019 08:40:23 GMT):
Openstack also has sub-projects, but seems very clearly defined.
rjones (Tue, 07 May 2019 17:11:03 GMT):
Welcome back!
seanyoung (Thu, 09 May 2019 11:16:57 GMT):
The Burrow Quarterly Update: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Hyperledger+Burrow
Dan (Thu, 09 May 2019 12:22:11 GMT):
I will miss TSC call. Flight that was supposed to get me home last night cancelled. Rebooked this morning on top of TSC mtg.
Silona (Thu, 09 May 2019 15:41:05 GMT):
Next week the CA team will be at an All Hands workshop. Can anyone here volunteer to do count for quorum, make and post the recording, take notes, and walk thru the agenda? normally we spread this across the team. Ry counts and records, Dave takes notes, and I do the agenda. I know some of you are already familiar with the recordings from your WG meetings?
Dan (Thu, 09 May 2019 20:44:46 GMT):
@silona with several people traveling next week maybe you can take a quick poll and see who is planning to be available for the call? (I plan to be available)
Dan (Tue, 14 May 2019 13:57:56 GMT):
TSC Members: Please +1 this post if you will be in attendance thursday. If we don't have quorum responding by let's say mid-day tomorrow, I will cancel thursday's meeting.
hartm (Tue, 14 May 2019 14:00:40 GMT):
@Dan I'm not sure everyone will see this.
Dan (Tue, 14 May 2019 14:01:22 GMT):
Yeah, I can't "at" here this channel and polling over email seems like worse of a mess.
rjones (Tue, 14 May 2019 14:04:07 GMT):
@all TSC members: please see above
rjones (Tue, 14 May 2019 14:04:07 GMT):
@all TSC members: please see above: https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=k7iQ4fRd74enbapTn
Dan (Tue, 14 May 2019 14:07:12 GMT):
thanks, Ry
mwagner (Tue, 14 May 2019 14:08:30 GMT):
+1 - I plan to be there
lehors (Tue, 14 May 2019 18:37:09 GMT):
+1
hartm (Tue, 14 May 2019 19:49:36 GMT):
+1 from me. I'm planning on coming.
rjones (Wed, 15 May 2019 14:44:28 GMT):
Someone from the community will need to record the call, upload it to the wiki, and add the attendance to https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+05+16+TSC+Minutes
rjones (Wed, 15 May 2019 14:56:07 GMT):
_someone named @Dan probably_
Dan (Wed, 15 May 2019 14:56:36 GMT):
_someone named Dan takes another step towards cancelling the 4 person meeting tomorrow_
rjones (Wed, 15 May 2019 14:57:05 GMT):
_someone named @rjones got a lot of heat for that but you do you_
Dan (Wed, 15 May 2019 14:58:19 GMT):
_someone named Dan lives in a cold place_
rjones (Wed, 15 May 2019 15:01:40 GMT):
I will give you a custom title for that
Dan (Wed, 15 May 2019 15:40:38 GMT):
Ok, we're 23hrs out with only 4 of 11 responding. I'm cancelling this week's TSC call.
@rjones can you @ the channel for me?
rjones (Wed, 15 May 2019 15:41:22 GMT):
@all TSC call cancelled: https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=Yac9MvFbLaDoAo9dM
rjones (Wed, 15 May 2019 15:41:39 GMT):
@Dan could you please let the mailing list know? thanks
Dan (Wed, 15 May 2019 15:42:09 GMT):
done
mwagner (Wed, 15 May 2019 17:31:07 GMT):
hmm, guess its -1 now ...
Dan (Wed, 15 May 2019 18:25:04 GMT):
No you are still obligated to be there. Sit quietly in the corner.
mwagner (Thu, 16 May 2019 15:12:34 GMT):
ok, I can speak again
ynamiki (Tue, 21 May 2019 03:43:44 GMT):
Has left the channel.
baohua (Wed, 22 May 2019 02:07:51 GMT):
* TWGC quarterly report: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Technical+Working+Group+China
baohua (Wed, 22 May 2019 02:08:31 GMT):
* Project Cello quarterly report: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Hyperledger+Cello
baohua (Wed, 22 May 2019 02:08:31 GMT):
* TWGC quarterly report: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Technical+Working+Group+China
* Project Cello quarterly report: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Hyperledger+Cello
mwagner (Wed, 22 May 2019 22:28:26 GMT):
* PSWG quarterly report: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Performance+and+Scale+WG
tongli (Thu, 23 May 2019 13:48:52 GMT):
TSC call will be at which room? Thanks
Dan (Thu, 23 May 2019 13:53:00 GMT):
There are several project updates on the agenda today. If representatives of those updates could please message here with their name / project that will help us.
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 13:54:02 GMT):
@tongli https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fmy%2Fhyperledger.community.backup&sa=D&ust=1559051627734000&usg=AFQjCNFRAyP6LLBZmmdRUY0Mcq14xKYdNA
tongli (Thu, 23 May 2019 13:54:32 GMT):
yeah. just found it from the calendar. thanks @rjones
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:19:35 GMT):
Convector: https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/convector
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:20:19 GMT):
```Convector Smart Contracts - JavaScript-based Development Framework for Enterprise Smart Contract Systems
Hurley - the easiest way to quickly setup your Hyperledger development environment. Instead of learning all the config files required and navigating tons of yaml files, just do hurl new and focus on your smart contract.
Convector CLI - the fastest and easiest way to build a new Convector Smart Contracts project. It is fully integrated with Hurley as well.````
MicBowman (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:20:20 GMT):
thanks @rjones
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:24:40 GMT):
```Are you looking for an option to Hyperledger Composer?
Yes, we are also aware that Composer's development has experienced some changes and a lot of people are facing uncertainty. If you are one of the devs looking for a way to create smart contract systems with native chaincodes in JavaScript, you are in the right place. You may find this resource valuable on how to Migrate from Composer to Convector.```
MicBowman (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:29:54 GMT):
what was the name of the labs project (solidity --> wasm)?
Dan (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:30:09 GMT):
cello on deck
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:31:51 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/solang
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:31:51 GMT):
@MicBowman https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/solang
MicBowman (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:32:33 GMT):
thanks!
Dan (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:39:28 GMT):
Explorer on deck
Dan (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:43:34 GMT):
TWGC on deck
mwagner (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:46:10 GMT):
14 hours is just over half a day....
Dan (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:47:31 GMT):
Standard working day is based on Centaurian time
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 14:51:24 GMT):
https://www.transifex.com
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 15:23:56 GMT):
I want to make explicit my understanding of @tkuhrt 's comment and see if I understand correctly: the end result of the https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/fabric-docs-cn lab should end up here: https://gerrit.hyperledger.org/r/admin/repos/fabric-docs which would make it available here: https://hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io/en/release-1.4/ ... correct?
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 15:25:28 GMT):
it looks like RTD only supports this for Sphinx: https://docs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/localization.html
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 15:25:28 GMT):
it looks like RTD only supports this for Sphinx: https://docs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/localization.html#project-with-multiple-translations
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 15:27:07 GMT):
https://docs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/guides/manage-translations.html
rjones (Thu, 23 May 2019 15:27:22 GMT):
there is an example for Transifex there
binhn (Thu, 23 May 2019 15:48:11 GMT):
fabric has a doc working group meeting regularly that @baohua might want to dial in to get the doc process
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 May 2019 15:57:20 GMT):
@rjones : yes. I know that Baohua was working with the Fabric fokks before I left, and he and I were having a hard time getting traction to make that happen. As you mentioned, readthedocs allows for user yo choose the language they want to view the docs in (assuming the translation is available). It would be great to have https://hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io/cn available with all the great work that the TWGC has done.
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 May 2019 15:57:20 GMT):
@rjones : yes. I know that Baohua was working with the Fabric folks before I left, and we were having a hard time getting traction to make that happen. As you mentioned, readthedocs allows for user to choose the language they want to view the docs in (assuming the translation is available). It would be great to have https://hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io/cn available with all the great work that the TWGC has done.
Dan (Thu, 23 May 2019 16:06:00 GMT):
On a separate but related note, we also need to make sure that all the doc commits have clear DCO.
mwagner (Wed, 29 May 2019 14:07:26 GMT):
is there a TSC call tomorrow ?
rjones (Wed, 29 May 2019 14:29:56 GMT):
Yes, I haven't heard any rumblings about cancelling - @Dan ?
mwagner (Wed, 29 May 2019 15:01:15 GMT):
cool, hoping we can discuss the PSWG on the call
rjones (Wed, 29 May 2019 15:08:16 GMT):
@dhuseby is the agenda posted?
Dan (Wed, 29 May 2019 16:20:08 GMT):
No rumblings have reached me. I think with the US holiday we are all probably a little behind in getting agenda thoughts together. Clearly we have at least @mwagner 's item to discuss. That's reason enough to keep the meeting.
mwagner (Wed, 29 May 2019 16:21:03 GMT):
thanks!
Silona (Wed, 29 May 2019 16:39:36 GMT):
yea sorry it's my job and I just got back yesterday. Workin on it right now. Doesn't help that I missed the last one :-)
SeanBohan (Wed, 29 May 2019 17:51:49 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Wed, 29 May 2019 19:15:27 GMT):
@Dan @Silona can we add a line in the TSC agenda to call out a discussion on the Perf and Scale WG ?
mwagner (Wed, 29 May 2019 19:15:30 GMT):
thanks
Silona (Wed, 29 May 2019 19:15:38 GMT):
Go for it!
Silona (Wed, 29 May 2019 19:15:59 GMT):
I'm waiting for dave to finish the notes but Not sure what was and wasn't covered yet from last week
dhuseby (Wed, 29 May 2019 23:08:12 GMT):
I'm almost done
dhuseby (Wed, 29 May 2019 23:08:30 GMT):
y'all are so long-winded
dhuseby (Wed, 29 May 2019 23:08:32 GMT):
sheesh
dhuseby (Wed, 29 May 2019 23:08:37 GMT):
:rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 00:25:13 GMT):
The art of minutes is to condense...@dhuseby- that is why they are called minutes not hours!
rjones (Thu, 30 May 2019 00:28:04 GMT):
I like the more in depth summaries, though. I would have written "a robust discussion followed" a lot of times
Dan (Thu, 30 May 2019 13:33:51 GMT):
Yeah, @dhuseby don't kill yourself flexing the stenographer skills. :writing_hand: Summaries are more useful. People can listen to the recordings for the full detail if they want to dig further.
Dan (Thu, 30 May 2019 13:40:54 GMT):
@Silona is the project Chairs topic yours? Just asking because it doesn't have a name next to it.
Silona (Thu, 30 May 2019 13:59:23 GMT):
yes and dave's
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:08:43 GMT):
@Silona as we discussed, I will be interested in Cloud Interop
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:08:43 GMT):
@Silona as we discussed, I will be interested in being part of Cloud Interop
Silona (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:15:25 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Project+Lifecycle+Task+Force
mwagner (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:20:04 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q2+Performance+and+Scale+WG
cbf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:28:24 GMT):
by design, the blockchain frameworks we have are permissioned (though a couple may be capable of being run in permissionless mode)
cbf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:28:37 GMT):
this makes a "public" test net problematic
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:33:43 GMT):
@silasdavis that is what a provenance use case discussion would have provided, a sample workload.
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:34:00 GMT):
Synthetic causes gaming
mwagner (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:34:05 GMT):
@lehors I agree on participation. People vote with their feet. One of the reasons I brought this up to the TSC is to get a gauge of the areas of interest. Then people would gravitate to the effort
cbf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:38:01 GMT):
+1 @MicBowman
baohua (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:41:06 GMT):
Even not wp or technical report, blog posts like this would be perfect for the hyperledger: https://dave.cheney.net/high-performance-go-workshop/dotgo-paris.html
baohua (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:41:22 GMT):
people follows their interests
baohua (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:41:22 GMT):
people follow their interests
silasdavis (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:42:13 GMT):
@VipinB I do agree, but I think that's fine if it leads to adverserial implementations and additional problems. Not against a more realslistic workload but higher bar to implement and to implement consistently
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:42:15 GMT):
@baohua agree... but there also has to be a sense of "satisfaction"... and given that we all have other jobs, what do we get from a working group that spends a year writing a paper that just describes what everybody is already doing?
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:42:58 GMT):
the best part of the arch groups has been the constructive periods we have...
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:43:07 GMT):
but those are hard to achieve
silasdavis (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:43:08 GMT):
Also personally I have much more interest in benchmarks that serve a diagnostic purpose rather than a comparative one (which are often misused)
jsmitchell (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:43:21 GMT):
There is lots of work to do on code projects, documentation, performance testing etc. There is nothing that prevents people from working on multiple projects...
Dan (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:43:43 GMT):
I appreciated @lehors observation that a focused objective is key to the participation issue.
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:44:07 GMT):
@Dan that is *one* key
hartm (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:44:50 GMT):
@Dan I'm not sure a focused objective is key to participation. I've generally found that it's just very hard to get people to do work, and that interesting discussions are more likely to spur participation than a focused objective.
silasdavis (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:44:56 GMT):
For reference: https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:45:16 GMT):
@jsmitchell what prevents multiple project participation is limited time
jsmitchell (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:45:35 GMT):
@MicBowman my point is that people working on the code projects are productive
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:45:38 GMT):
all of us prioritize... why would i make working group participation a priority?
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:45:54 GMT):
they are productive
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:46:06 GMT):
just at a pace that is "painful" at times
jsmitchell (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:47:54 GMT):
My observation from participating in both at various times is that the projects are "task oriented" and the WGs (that I've participated in) are "discussion oriented"
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:48:22 GMT):
we are definitely task oriented
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:48:28 GMT):
yes... the format is often discussion
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:48:44 GMT):
but the tasks are "define interoperability issues & capture in a white paper"
hartm (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:48:48 GMT):
@jsmitchell It's very difficult to get people to complete tasks for working groups.
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:48:55 GMT):
So to condense 1. There is need (according to what is being said) 2. There is not enough participation 3. Reasons for not enough participation (no clear goals-lehors) 4. Influence , we need cross-cutting and cohesive 5. As to working groups, they are meant to be technical. 6. Identity has had a reboot due to discussions rather than focus on paper or specific deliverable. We have had more participation. 7. Asynchronous engagement is good (email lists, articles etc.)
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:49:01 GMT):
or "capture a framework that can be used to evaluate privacy"
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:49:50 GMT):
Also reducing frequency is good...
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:49:52 GMT):
but with an every two week meeting cadence... if the only time we "work" on it is during the meeting, then we don't get enough accomplished to feel like we're moving forward
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:50:05 GMT):
hence... we try to do periodic F2F which are much more effective
jsmitchell (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:50:14 GMT):
I guess we are using different definitions of "task oriented"
jsmitchell (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:50:50 GMT):
sawtooth, for example, has daily standups where the folks that have signed up to accomplish something report on their status and whether they need help or have blockers
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:50:51 GMT):
if you mean we don't have scrums... sure
baohua (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:51:07 GMT):
We can not force people to do anything, but the interests will drive always!
cbf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:51:09 GMT):
To Mic's point, most of the projects are working round the clock delivering on their requirements etc... groups that are only meeting bi-weekly etc can get pretty far out of synch
hartm (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:51:27 GMT):
My experience with working groups is that 90% of the work across *all* working groups is done by about a dozen people (or maybe less), most of whom are participating in this chat. If we want to increase work that's done and focus on tasks, we need to increase this very, very small number of serious contributors rather than focus on general participation.
amundson (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:51:31 GMT):
@MicBowman re:Architecture WG - I think it would be far more interesting to participate if it was trying to define the "best way" to do particular things, rather than just summarizing the projects. And "best way" project-agnostic, as in almost a spec or idea that projects could implement. So for example, picking up the consensus API ideas from sawtooth and then refining/rewriting them into a non-Sawtooth-specific "the ultimate consensus API - please implement" document. That would define something we could work together on, instead of defining our differences. (Consensus is just one idea, there are lots of areas we could do this.)
cbf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:51:41 GMT):
and that may be part of the issue we face with getting participation
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:51:42 GMT):
@MicBowman that is why we need engagement on channel, articles, other thought and cohesive activities- or drawing attention to work in the field
jsmitchell (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:51:44 GMT):
There is plenty of room inside the project delivery model to contribute meaningfully to an arch doc, for example.
cbf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:51:56 GMT):
@amundson +1
jsmitchell (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:51:57 GMT):
As a task on the fabric project, as a task on the sawtooth project, etc.
jsmitchell (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:52:14 GMT):
Then, pulling that together into an overall hyperledger view becomes much more manageable
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:52:33 GMT):
@amundson that's exactly what Ram wants from the group... but the wg has no "teeth" so it would be a largely irrelevant task
hartm (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:52:46 GMT):
@Mic +1.
mwagner (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:52:58 GMT):
btw, we can always change the time of the PSWG meeting if it would help participation
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:53:02 GMT):
@MicBowman do we want WG's with teeth? Do any of us have teeth?
hartm (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:53:27 GMT):
@amundson, I love the idea--it's research--but it's very hard to get people to actually implement these things.
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:53:35 GMT):
@bbehlendorf that would be one change
cbf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:53:39 GMT):
but maybe it could be more contextually relevant? eg maybe something like Transact could be the driving motivation for coming up with a consistent transaction API (and possibly runtime) that could be shared across projects
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:54:11 GMT):
Getting more of the project maintainers active on the WGs so they have skin in the game and are motivated to implement the changes discussed would be preferable to an enforcement-style approach e.g. "the WG decided so you must implement", which is how I interpret teeth
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:54:18 GMT):
@amundson do you want the arch wg to give you guidelines on what architecture features you need to implement in order to conform with some standards? that's the reason why we've never had "teeth" in that group
hartm (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:54:18 GMT):
@cbf That's project work though, and that sort of thing is being tackled by cross-platform projects (Ursa is essentially doing that in the crypto space).
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:54:35 GMT):
they should not be research groups... that's a bad path... there is plenty of research in other places
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:55:00 GMT):
Ursa, Transact, similar component-style projects are what I'd imagine coming out of an active WG cross-project discussion. Oh look, common needs, common code -> project proposal
hartm (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:55:02 GMT):
@MicBowman The academics seem to only care about public blockchains.
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:55:13 GMT):
true
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:55:29 GMT):
but there are several groups in industry labs that are doing more
jsmitchell (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:55:52 GMT):
are the people who are actually driving the architecture for the code projects participating in the Architecture WG? Are the people who care about performance on the projects participating in the Performance WG?
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:56:25 GMT):
Are they delivering the right requirements? Shouldn't the WGs be drawing attention to what is "out there" so that projects can change their priorities if needed. I have been on engineering teams that have had "death marches" towards the wrong goal.
cbf (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:57:53 GMT):
"right" as defined by whom? One would assume they aren't just doing stuff, but are driven by client or user input - I know that is the case for Fabric
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:59:01 GMT):
i guess if we made the working groups more prescriptive we would likely get more participation from the projects... and maybe to brian's point, if HL has matured to the point where cross-project features are the critical development objective, then it might be a good idea...
Dan (Thu, 30 May 2019 14:59:56 GMT):
A boring observation, but getting completion in a workgroup or a coding project can be related to the same way you would manage other work. Is the task well defined and sized and is it owned? I don't know that I've seen a lot of working group activity that would map into a sprint the same way that I do in coding projects.
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:00:00 GMT):
originally, yes. there are definitely people who know & understand that architectures who are working there
hartm (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:00:36 GMT):
@Dan That's a good start, but people seem to be allergic to doing working group work.
Dan (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:00:44 GMT):
At a higher level I really like @amundson 's comment about consensus. and @cbf 's comment about transact and transact-ish things.
Dan (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:01:11 GMT):
These seem like relevant topics that are cross-project.
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:03:59 GMT):
I agree that in the "short term" that is the way to go. But hard questions need to be asked; i.e. if we do this short term client requirement will it change us in a way that is detrimental to the longer term. I know that is a hard question. Also driven by feature sets that clients suggest only may not yield ground breaking solutions. So yes, "right" is a tough question.
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:09:01 GMT):
@Dan @rjones can we add an item into the backlog for the TSC to discussion the working group structure? I think it can wait until we've made progress on the PLC, but you can put my name by it
amundson (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:16:19 GMT):
@MicBowman No, absolutely don't want mandates from a WG on what to implement. But, 100% want documented good ideas or descriptions on how stuff works and why to do it a certain way, and the trade-offs of different approaches. In Sawtooth for example, that could flow into its RFC process. Continuing with the consensus example - it's completely non-trivial to support both non-forking and forking consensus at the same time. It's a super advanced topic. Putting together a paper on how to create a good API/pattern to support both and also all other consensus requirements we can think of seems very worthwhile. (By API here, I don't literally mean an API spec per-se, but enough description to understand how one would implement the patterns.) And it goes beyond API specs, because (continuing with this example) there are impacts on the rest of the system in features like forking consensus that need to be considered/mitigated. Even if projects deviate from what the arch wg produced, they would likely be able to better articulate _why_ they did it differently (probably for some real benefit that wasn't a priority in the arch wg discussions, which might then hint at doing a revision to the doc).
Silona (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:16:50 GMT):
Anyone can add an item to the backlog on the wiki at any time - please add your name and a preferred date and as @Dan requested kick it off with an email a week before
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:17:41 GMT):
@amundson are you signing up to write those sections in the arch docs? cause we already have the high level descriptions in the white papers that have been produced
hartm (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:18:29 GMT):
Question: how do we assure people that do this kind of work that it will be implemented? I don't think we want WGs to have strong mandates for projects, but it seems like a hard sell to ask people to spend a lot of time working on something like this if they have no guarantees of it being used.
Dan (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:18:50 GMT):
@rjones @MicBowman do you agree that this Working Group Structure topic subsumes this dated item "Overall Engagement in Projects (Mark Wagner, Ry Jones, mid-April)"
Or does @rjones and @mwagner want to keep that topic separate?
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:19:14 GMT):
back to... lovely idea, but there is no particular reason for an individual to choose to put in the kind of time necessary for that task without some form "recompense" (influence, notoriety, business value)
Silona (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:19:35 GMT):
Ry is going to the doctor and will be out today and tomorrow FYI
mwagner (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:20:07 GMT):
@dan @MicBowman They should be joined and Mic acn lead :)
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:20:20 GMT):
the problem is that for many of these activities... the formative stages are past & its hard to justify the amount of work that would be necessary.. .especially since the project teams don't deem it important enough to contribute resources
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:22:39 GMT):
thanks, mark :)
amundson (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:22:58 GMT):
@MicBowman yeah, I can help and have others help if we are doing more targeted papers
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:23:02 GMT):
(and yes thats fine)
Dan (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:24:29 GMT):
@Silona we don't let @MicBowman touch important things like wiki pages. ;)
I've initialized the page for next week with the updated backlog - including Mic's item.
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:25:39 GMT):
thanks... i do have a habit of breaking things, i can add a task force page if that makes sense... its a little early, but it might be good to start pulling some of the ideas out of this chat
dhuseby (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:32:00 GMT):
@Dan message received. I'll summarize better with less detail.
Silona (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:34:12 GMT):
I have versioning - I can roll it back :-)
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:34:36 GMT):
publishing the task force page right now
Silona (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:34:41 GMT):
@MicBowman I am thinking the wiki needs a task force section to gather these all together
Silona (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:34:53 GMT):
probably under community
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:34:54 GMT):
do we have a future agenda template or just put it into today's?
Silona (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:35:12 GMT):
i keep editing today's because we have the minutes
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:35:27 GMT):
ok... i'll update in a minute
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:36:50 GMT):
just pushed a "task force" page on working groups, please add yourself to the participants & any notes you want
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:36:50 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Working+Group+Task+Force
MicBowman (Thu, 30 May 2019 15:39:14 GMT):
done
VipinB (Thu, 30 May 2019 19:21:50 GMT):
Added myself to the list and added some items in the notes.
rjones (Mon, 03 Jun 2019 19:59:03 GMT):
I just did a quick survey - of our ~400 members, ~1/2 are using TFA.
VipinB (Tue, 04 Jun 2019 05:11:33 GMT):
There are reports that OTC using the phone for TFA is vulnerable to attack, per NIST and some others in the cryptographic community.
VipinB (Tue, 04 Jun 2019 05:11:33 GMT):
There are reports that OTP using the phone for TFA is vulnerable to attack, per NIST and some others in the cryptographic community.
rjones (Tue, 04 Jun 2019 14:19:56 GMT):
Nobody should use SMS 2FA, if that's the work flow you mean
mwagner (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 13:35:30 GMT):
Is there a TSC call today ?
mwagner (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 13:42:48 GMT):
nevermind, found the agenda
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 13:56:11 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+06+06+TSC+Agenda
mwagner (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:19:41 GMT):
50 ?
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:20:48 GMT):
@mwagner I missed the context for 50
mwagner (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:21:14 GMT):
wrong window, sorry
lehors (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:26:24 GMT):
@mwagner I say no to 50
silasdavis (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:26:55 GMT):
http://wordsafety.com/ ...
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:27:52 GMT):
ooh nice
Dan (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:41:04 GMT):
I have never been more in support of 50! :rage:
amundson (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:41:25 GMT):
another thought - identify a maintainer from each project to make an attempt to notify the other maintainers and contributors, in addition to mailing list and other notifications, and see if the number goes up
baohua (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:41:55 GMT):
Bet the boss asked @Dan to arrive at office earlier today!
baohua (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:42:58 GMT):
IMHO, it's OK to have the very general `hyperledger` org, and we can have other labels certainly like a more strict `hyperledger-contributors`
Dan (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:43:49 GMT):
Meetings are like carp. They will grow to fill the space allocated for them whether you want them to or not.
Dan (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:43:53 GMT):
;)
lehors (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:43:54 GMT):
but, hey, while we talk about 2FA, have you guys seen this story? https://medium.com/coinmonks/the-most-expensive-lesson-of-my-life-details-of-sim-port-hack-35de11517124?sk=4c29b27bacb2eff038ec8fe4d40cd615
hartm (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:43:58 GMT):
Does anyone work for an organization that *doesn't* require 2FA?
baohua (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:45:21 GMT):
Maybe we can set some fixed interval for each agenda item next time. No overtime.
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:49:07 GMT):
@hartm if they do they should not raise a hand :)
tkuhrt (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:50:08 GMT):
@rjones : so git log only returns email (as in get_contributers.sh) and the git api only returns username as in the project reports. Not sure if between the two there is something to link by.
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 14:51:05 GMT):
what I would like the projects that use GitHub to do is make better use of the CODEOWNERs files.
amundson (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 15:01:28 GMT):
we love the CODEOWNERS file - way less fiddling with reviewer assignment
amundson (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 15:01:57 GMT):
it's just github ids though
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 15:03:23 GMT):
yes, CODEOWNERS is orthogonal to the GitHub ID<->email address mapping
amundson (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 15:40:28 GMT):
We are trying to figure out where to put a couple of projects that solidly land in the realm of apps. I'm very familiar with the thoughts on HL apps projects ("no way"). But, how about a hyperledger-apps github org that operates like labs, where apps have a place to land but can't use the HL name and HL provides only very minimal support of the github org.
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 15:53:07 GMT):
I've been thinking about a mirror org for other reasons
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 16:14:08 GMT):
I found an org auditing tool written by someone I trust, so I'll have plenty of data for next week.
amundson (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 17:04:13 GMT):
How does the election process for SIG leadership work?
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 17:40:12 GMT):
SIGs operate outside the purview of the TSC
amundson (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 19:30:30 GMT):
right, but how does it work?
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 20:08:14 GMT):
show up? https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Special+Interest+Group+%28SIG%29+Process
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 20:08:41 GMT):
```Chair Term
The Chair of the SIG will serve for as long as they still want to lead the SIG. At which point, they will inform Hyperledger Point of Contact of their desire to step down from the position. Hyperledger Point of Contact will then appoint another chair with input from the community and existing chair. NOTE: in most cases, we strongly suggest only a single chair. Hyperledger does not encourage co-chairing.```
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 20:09:07 GMT):
so they're appointed by the Ecosystem team (Daniella, Marta, David)
rjones (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 20:09:07 GMT):
so they're appointed by the Ecosystem team (Daniella, Marta, David, Karen)
Silona (Thu, 06 Jun 2019 21:59:12 GMT):
The Workgroups decide for themselves in their charters what the process is
amundson (Fri, 07 Jun 2019 03:54:02 GMT):
So how is the Ecosystem team established? Are they elected by members?
rjones (Fri, 07 Jun 2019 04:14:05 GMT):
They're Linux Foundation employees. They report to Daniella, then to @bbehlendorf
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:04:59 GMT):
@lehors We're down to four people with commit bits on GitHub that do not have 2FA enabled.
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:05:46 GMT):
oh wow, great progress!
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:06:12 GMT):
It is! Of course, that doesn't address the ~200 non-committers without 2FA.
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:06:28 GMT):
right...
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:06:38 GMT):
how do you answer the question: why??
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:06:57 GMT):
why what?
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:07:19 GMT):
why do we want to enforce 2FA
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:07:35 GMT):
security best practice is the glib answer
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:08:02 GMT):
I understand...
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:08:12 GMT):
@dhuseby has thoughts I'm sure
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:08:12 GMT):
but some people don't seem to be willing to accept that
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:08:52 GMT):
because if people lose control of accounts, bad things could happen. someone could delete any issue that person has filed, for instance.
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:09:42 GMT):
there are destructive things people can do that I don't have a way to undo.
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:10:47 GMT):
that's a good point, I think that's the kind of argument we need to pull out
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:11:07 GMT):
it's more concrete than just "best practice"
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:11:22 GMT):
even if it is people don't necessarily appreciate the necessity of it
lehors (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:11:22 GMT):
even if it is, people don't necessarily appreciate the necessity of it
Silona (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:24:50 GMT):
interesting - my last two corporate jobs required 2FA
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:44:39 GMT):
I'm trying to imagine a scenario where not having 2FA is a bonus
hartm (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:27:21 GMT):
I'm pretty sure almost all corporate jobs require 2FA these days. Even academic institutions do--I know Stanford has 2FA enabled, for instance. Do we really need to spend time justifying it? Who isn't willing to accept it?
MALodder (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:29:54 GMT):
I would say its a bonus as much as limitation. 2FA for automated processes is hard to implement. Google doesn't even do it and instead uses auth tokens
MALodder (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:30:15 GMT):
So if you want automated processes then 2FA AFAIK doesn't work
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:32:28 GMT):
I know we use tokens, and share 2FA seeds for machine accounts via Authy and lastpass.
rjones (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 20:32:39 GMT):
by we I mean the Linux Foundation
dhuseby (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 22:13:30 GMT):
@lehors the end goal is to have air-tight provenance on every byte of code that goes into a Hyperledger project
dhuseby (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 22:14:00 GMT):
we as a community have decided to delegate the write bit to spread out the burden and to increase our velocity
dhuseby (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 22:14:48 GMT):
for us to keep confidence that the only way bytes get merged is through those delegated with that power, we need to have them use 2FA.
dhuseby (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 22:15:37 GMT):
the merge is the only point that new code should get in
dhuseby (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 22:17:30 GMT):
so yes, "security best practice"
dhuseby (Tue, 11 Jun 2019 22:18:21 GMT):
but the longer answer is that the write bit people have a responsibility to protect their access/privileges. if they don't feel up to that responsibility, we can find other people.
lehors (Wed, 12 Jun 2019 18:49:12 GMT):
thanks @dhuseby
lehors (Wed, 12 Jun 2019 18:50:32 GMT):
the immediate next question is: "what about gerrit (i.e. LF login)?"
lehors (Wed, 12 Jun 2019 18:50:54 GMT):
asking for a friend :-D
rjones (Wed, 12 Jun 2019 19:00:07 GMT):
@lehors all I can say is changes are coming once the new Auth0 system rolls out
pschwarz (Wed, 12 Jun 2019 20:28:05 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
JonathanLevi (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 13:56:19 GMT):
Shalom ;-)
MicBowman (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:17:07 GMT):
who is the "decider" on the use of the graphic?
MicBowman (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:17:23 GMT):
are we giving feedback to the marketing committee or are they giving it to the TSC?
Dan (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:17:34 GMT):
Feels like Marketing turf to me.
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:17:35 GMT):
"input" as Dan said
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:20:00 GMT):
Loose portfolio, with some links. The slide is important as it is on the landing page of the wiki; not just the talks
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:20:33 GMT):
That is the first page people see when they get to the web page
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:23:02 GMT):
Has to be "live", the web-page- Do not think of this as a slide only
hartm (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:25:15 GMT):
I agree with Dan here--this is a marketing thing. We're not the core audience for this, so I'm not sure we need to be deciding on this stuff.
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:32:40 GMT):
With Arnaud on this one, it is a double edged sword. Marketing has to align with TSC
dhuseby (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:33:50 GMT):
we don't have an "official formal process" other than emailing the TSC list and asking for a review and putting it on the TSC agenda for a future meeting
MicBowman (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:40:41 GMT):
FYI... wiki page to capture future issues for working group structures... https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Working+Group+Task+Force
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:46:05 GMT):
Just to restate: Have the landing graphic be simple, with drill-downs and other means to explore more in depth. This can be reproduced in slides with animations if needed.
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:47:12 GMT):
keep in mind people working in booths need to stand in front of the graphic and explain it :)
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:49:20 GMT):
"meta" documentation? @cbf
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:52:51 GMT):
Maybe the Learning & Documentation WG can be a collector of information; as well as "meta" documentation.
Dan (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:53:23 GMT):
@lehors how is next week to come back to the TSC with an update on the lifecycle committee. I'm less concerned with an update on progress and more interested in an idea of whether this looks like a 2 week or 2 month effort.
Dan (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:53:23 GMT):
@lehors how is next week to come back to the TSC with an update on the lifecycle committee? I'm less concerned with an update on progress and more interested in an idea of whether this looks like a 2 week or 2 month effort.
lehors (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:54:48 GMT):
well, progress has been very slow so I can already say 2 months much more likely than 2 weeks
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:55:15 GMT):
@lehors have there been meetings?
Dan (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:55:40 GMT):
:) Ok, can you make a short update next week?
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:57:02 GMT):
Programmers are not the best documenters
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:57:15 GMT):
:grinning:
Dan (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:58:10 GMT):
The code is the documentation. ;)
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:58:27 GMT):
I have heard that before
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:58:35 GMT):
some of us cant even smell
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:58:38 GMT):
err spell
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:58:43 GMT):
the projects have extensive documentation
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:59:00 GMT):
Not all of them
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:59:30 GMT):
Many with expensive manpower and teams have very good docs
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:59:30 GMT):
Many with extensive manpower and teams have very good docs
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:59:37 GMT):
extensive
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:59:38 GMT):
seems like that's a project issue, rather than a "if we just had one more working group" issue
Dan (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:59:55 GMT):
END TSC MEETING
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:00:26 GMT):
@lehors you can use "soon" as measure of time, so maybe more like "not soon" vs "soon" ;)
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:00:48 GMT):
True, there can be a good set of technical writers text wranglers who can function as a resource maybe?
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:05:10 GMT):
Do such people exist? We pay a full time technical writer to contribute to the projects we work on. We aren't going to pay her to write Iroha docs.
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:06:24 GMT):
I'm all for the idea of interested people contributing their labor to projects rather than working groups
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:07:37 GMT):
So let us dissolve all working groups?
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:08:24 GMT):
If the shoe fits...
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:20:23 GMT):
@jsmitchell Red Hat pays a lot of people to only work upstream, its one of the foundations of Open Source. You contribute where you can and help the community grow. Everyone wins
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:20:53 GMT):
each company says "only paying for directly helps me" and the community dies
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:21:06 GMT):
absolutely. nobody is compelling redhat to work on specific projects though.
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:21:24 GMT):
nor are they compelling them to participate in specific working groups
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:21:58 GMT):
my point is: where there is overlap, this work is already being done in a more expert and more productive fashion on the projects
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:22:19 GMT):
it's hard to talk about this without hurting people's feelings, so I will use an example instead
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:22:35 GMT):
let's say we had a 'consensus working group'
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:23:27 GMT):
if that working group is composed of people who are not the expert developers on the projects who are implementing consensus, then there is an approximately zero percent chance that the project developers are going to find value in the work output of the working group
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:23:54 GMT):
because in order to build the thing, those developers needed to become serious experts in the topic, probably substantially more expert than the participants in the working group
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:24:36 GMT):
so, we can talk about "how do we get those expert developers involved in the working group", but that starts from the presumption that the working group is a thing that should exist
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:24:59 GMT):
exactly, thats why you would want experts from the different projects to collaborate together for the betterment of the community
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:25:10 GMT):
nothing stops projects from collaborating
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:25:41 GMT):
see: ursa, transact, etc.
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:26:06 GMT):
those are attempts to try to coalesce development across hyperledger
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:27:17 GMT):
so you are only thinking code, its the other areas where we need to also collaborate
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:27:29 GMT):
projects aren't only code
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:27:41 GMT):
the working groups don't produce code as their main output
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:27:49 GMT):
what do they produce?
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:28:55 GMT):
well is trying to produce docs and training material, one is focused on architecture, the perf and scale group focuses on performance benchmarks, etc
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:31:40 GMT):
my observation is that they are struggling to produce those things, and if things get produced they are not highly relevant. When compared to the productivity of the coding projects, they don't register. I think we've got a lot of people looking for ways to contribute, and we should do a better job of driving them to productive contributions in the context of projects (whether specific-solutions or cross-hyperledger)
MicBowman (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:46:54 GMT):
(just to spur discussion with a contrary position) on the other hand... maybe the discussion about the graphic this morning is a symptom of a concern that hyperledger is too "project" focused and needs to be more aligned to more general goals. the working groups represent the needs of *hyperledger* not of the specific projects
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:43:39 GMT):
@MicBowman From hyperledger.org: ```Hyperledger is an open source collaborative effort created to advance cross-industry blockchain technologies.```
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:44:09 GMT):
perhaps use that as a framing device, instead of the project oriented frame we use now?
MicBowman (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:48:55 GMT):
@rjones that statement is still pretty ambiguous (which is a good thing because it gives us a lot of flexibility to "figure it out"). how do you think that would impact the role of working groups?
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:51:21 GMT):
I think to @jsmitchell 's earlier point, we're too reticent to shut them down. For working groups, right now we have what could be broad coverage - but they're also hard nuts to crack.
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:51:44 GMT):
net net: if a WG isn't actually doing the cross-industry blockchain advancement, pull the plug?
MicBowman (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:53:10 GMT):
that works as long as you give the WG some authority to guide projects
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:54:17 GMT):
I don't want to pick on a specific group, let me state it a different way. Has a requirement or use case developed by one of our working groups driven the development of a single feature in any codebase we have?
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:55:44 GMT):
I assert work groups are orthogonal to the development process.
hartm (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:56:28 GMT):
@rjones I can think of one example. The architecture discussions in the architecture working group helped drive forward the creation of Ursa. The working group realized (and, importantly, managed to convince others) that modular functionality was ideal, and that some things were easier to modularize than others. Cryptographic code, of course, is one of the easiest things to modularize in a blockchain. This line of thinking and work on this at least led indirectly to the creation of Ursa.
hartm (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:56:43 GMT):
In other words, I don't think Ursa would've existed without the architecture working gorup.
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:56:44 GMT):
excellent
hartm (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:57:15 GMT):
On the other hand, I don't think any code has been created due to the *outputs* of working groups.
hartm (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:57:53 GMT):
The important factor for me, at least, has been the (very technical) discussions.
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 16:59:07 GMT):
would it be fair to say the architecture working group discovered a requirement for a shared crypto library as a side effect? I'm not saying that's bad.
jsmitchell (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:00:09 GMT):
I think that is a good example. It addresses a specific need -- looking for opportunities to converge development and bring projects together. That outcome is a fundamentally different animal than "Here are some semi-informed thoughts about consensus interfaces"
hartm (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:03:07 GMT):
I am also of the opinion that our focus on working group outputs has caused some of the participation decline. People seem very interested in coming together to find areas for collaboration. They are less interested in writing relatively introductory documents about topics that don't seem to get read by a ton of people. If we do a working group overhaul, I hope that we can redefine the working group outputs to not be things like the papers that are currently coming out of them and more like reports to the projects and the TSC on technical recommendations and suggestions for collaboration.
hartm (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:03:55 GMT):
I think the TSC and the project maintainers should be the audience for the working group outputs, not necessarily the general public (unless, of course, a working group wants to focus on this).
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:05:15 GMT):
are quarterly reports too frequent?
mwagner (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:06:05 GMT):
I think Caliper was heavily influenced by the Perf and Scale WG
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:06:08 GMT):
If we did an overhaul, could working groups send an email to the TSC or project leads saying "here is what we're on about right now" as they desire?
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:08:16 GMT):
let me ask a different question. How should I tell non-technical users they can get involved and have the time engaging with the community be well spent?
hartm (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:25:28 GMT):
The issue is not quarterly reports. The issue is that the quarterly reports are more about working group participation and how the outputs are going (which, probably, are not read very widely) and less about recommendations to the TSC. I would much rather have quarterly reports be on the issues. To continue the example from @jsmitchell , rather than update the TSC on their progress on a paper on "semi-informed thoughts about consensus interfaces," a consensus working group could essentially use their time in front of the TSC to pitch cross-project (or, just general) suggestions about consensus to the group, i.e. "We have studied XYZ in consensus. After a lot of deliberation with various stakeholders, we think that we can modularize ABC components with UVW." Or, "After looking at the interface problem for a while, we think ABC is the right interface. It wouldn't be too much work for projects Alpha, Beta, and Gamma to switch." Even if the projects ultimately ignored or disregarded this advice, I think it would still be useful (at least moreso than the current working group outputs).
VipinB (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:46:33 GMT):
Identity WG helped launch Indy and Aries. We have some focused discussions on Identity solutions and regulations in other locales like Europe and India and general presentations on eKYC and AML through FATF, GDPR, CCPA etc. If you are interested in creating a Blockchain solution these concerns have to be addressed even beyond a framework like Indy. This seems to be more in line with providing a forum for Identity in Blockchain discussions which I do not think is available elsewhere. We are not as focused on the paper. I have also taken part in Architecture and PSWG quite heavily. The discussion tends to get pretty technical or specific to a domain of knowledge. Our attendance has picked up...
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 19:52:22 GMT):
This is the way I've always thought about it and described it to others: Hyperledger is more than some mere aggregation of similar projects. Pick your metaphor - greenhouse, portfolio, wolfpack - a project comes to Hyperledger, and is accepted, to be integrated into a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. We don't impose architecture or roadmaps top-down - project teams still have the freedom to decide what to work on and when to ship. But there are some common standards we require: Apache 2.0 license, use of Github or Gerrit, public discussions, etc, so as to help people new to Hyperledger come up to speed on a project and how we work, as well as to more easily jump from one project to another. There are many other, opportunistic, bottoms-up opportunities for convergence and collaboration between projects, but sometimes it's hard to lift your head from your own Jira dashboard and check out what others working on that may be similar, what lessons they've learned that might apply to your work, what standards may be relevant to consider, and how to reduce further any zero-value differences between projects that end up being barriers. For those needs, we use Working Groups focused around these common needs, to bring developers and other contributors from across the different projects together to look at these thematic areas of common interest, and for that to be a good use of everyone's time. Working Group participants should not view their time there as a charity, but as an obligation; but that obligation should be compensated for in the form of reduced duplication of effort, better designs before coding has begun, better documentation approaches, and so on.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 19:54:05 GMT):
So the WG"s must not be thought of as "those groups that do the boring work so I, as a developer, don't have to", nor as an academic pursuit abstracted from what projects are doing, or as a talk shop. Each WG has to be thinking about how their topic is reflected upon and alive for the different projects, and make it vital for them. It should earn its "teeth" not by TSC fiat but because that's where all the smart people are.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 19:54:26 GMT):
hartm (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 22:06:31 GMT):
@bbehlendorf I agree with this. The question is how to get the momentum started. How do we "obligate" people to join in the beginning, when any benefits (in the form of things like reduced duplication, as you put it) are likely only to be seen in the long term?
MicBowman (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 22:07:56 GMT):
@rjones is there an easy way to reference these discussions (rocket chat) from the wiki? I can cut & paste the content... but this discussion should be saved (and we should be able to reference it later)
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 22:10:50 GMT):
You can get a permanent link to the start of it
rjones (Thu, 13 Jun 2019 22:13:17 GMT):
@MicBowman what's your email address? pm is OK
mwagner (Fri, 14 Jun 2019 13:29:46 GMT):
@bbehlendorf very well articulated and I fully agree
cliveb (Sat, 15 Jun 2019 16:58:18 GMT):
Twice a year for a WG better in my opinion or even a one of project completion report update.
cliveb (Sat, 15 Jun 2019 17:26:40 GMT):
As previous chair of the Requirements WG ended now some observations to this weeks TSC discussion. The ReqWG produced some excellent quality docs that pin-pointed why the Wall Street banks were reluctant to adopt Fabric (link seems to have gone AWOL on new wiki). Another good report was on next gen MRP. The Orlicky BOM processor algorithm contributed by IBM about 45 years ago is focused on client server. It is ripe for a hl_blockchain approach as it is core to nextgen SAP/Oracle distributed systems (link also AWOL). This brings up my main point contributors to ReqWGs were more solution architects building applications. The carrot to get quality documented and expert input toward hl_ community project adoption is their ability to get feedback that features that they need to move PoCs into production is have a feedback channel from HL overall.
cliveb (Sat, 15 Jun 2019 17:26:40 GMT):
As previous chair of the Requirements WG ended now some observations to this weeks TSC discussion. The ReqWG produced some excellent quality docs that pin-pointed why the Wall Street banks were reluctant to adopt Fabric (link seems to have gone AWOL on new wiki). Another good report was on next gen MRP. The Orlicky BOM processor algorithm contributed by IBM about 45 years ago is focused on client server. It is ripe for a hl_blockchain approach as it is core to nextgen SAP/Oracle distributed systems (link also AWOL). This brings up my main point contributors to ReqWGs were more solution architects building applications. The carrot to get quality documented and expert input toward hl_ community project adoption is their ability to get feedback that features that they need to move PoCs into production is have a feedback channel.
cliveb (Sat, 15 Jun 2019 17:55:09 GMT):
Btw, I am now a minor contributor to ArchWG P&C track. IMO w/o any doubt the other regular participants are top researchers and recognized experts motivated to help guide hl_projects overall toward modularity. The most recent proposals on hl_grid and hl_transact invite multiple project contributors. Salesforce seems to have picked up @hl_sawtooth and combined with a declarative web UI based on Agoric SES. Somewhat covered in WSJ (more on Grid channel). I feel a blockchain builder for noncoders will drive adoption of underlying hl projects spurring use case working groups (https://www.wsj.com/articles/salesforce-rolls-out-blockchain-builder-for-noncoders-11559167641).
cliveb (Sat, 15 Jun 2019 17:55:09 GMT):
Btw, I am now a minor contributor to ArchWG P&C track. IMO w/o any doubt the other regular participants are top researchers and recognized experts motivated to help guide hl_projects overall toward modularity. The most recent proposals on hl_grid and hl_transact invite multiple project contributors. Salesforce seems to have picked up @hl_sawtooth and combined with a declarative web UI with Agoric SES. Somewhat covered in WSJ (more on Grid channel). I feel a blockchain builder for noncoders will drive adoption of underlying hl projects spurring use case working groups (https://www.wsj.com/articles/salesforce-rolls-out-blockchain-builder-for-noncoders-11559167641).
cliveb (Sat, 15 Jun 2019 17:55:09 GMT):
Btw, I am now a minor contributor to ArchWG P&C track. IMO w/o any doubt the other regular participants are top researchers and recognized experts motivated to help guide hl_projects overall toward modularity. The most recent proposals on hl_grid and hl_transact invite multiple project contributors. Salesforce seems to have picked up @hl_sawtooth and combined with a declarative web UI using @Agoric SES. Somewhat covered in WSJ (more on Grid channel). I feel a blockchain builder for noncoders will drive adoption of underlying hl projects spurring use case working groups (https://www.wsj.com/articles/salesforce-rolls-out-blockchain-builder-for-noncoders-11559167641).
Dan (Mon, 17 Jun 2019 16:06:31 GMT):
I think reducing reporting will further stall forward progress.
cliveb (Mon, 17 Jun 2019 19:38:19 GMT):
Yes stall on long running WG projects. I was thinking try and run smaller WG projects. So that there is an opportunity to publish and gain feedback.
Silona (Mon, 17 Jun 2019 22:22:22 GMT):
Confluence will experience a short outage on Friday at 9am eastern NYC time zone as we do a hard rebuild of Confluence's indexes to fix a bug.
We apologize for the outage. We understand that the timing is not ideal but we prefer to do this when full staff is available. We expect the outage to only be about 15 minutes total. We will keep everyone posted on chat.hyperledger.org #wiki and #infra-support.
mwagner (Tue, 18 Jun 2019 13:43:20 GMT):
I think the quarterly reports are the proper cadence. something longer will make it harder for the TSC to identify issues
lehors (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:10:59 GMT):
I plan to be on the call today but will be driving so I hope the connection actually allows me to participate
lehors (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:11:21 GMT):
if I'm MIA you know why...
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:14:13 GMT):
Some people expect immediate answers to questions, I have had many people contact me personally on rocketchat for Fabric questions for example...I always steer them back to the appropriate channel
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:17:39 GMT):
yes, and to be clear we're not asking POCs to become tech support
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:21:09 GMT):
I also answer them if I know the answer, but for deeper digs always send them to documentation.
Silona (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:24:25 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Project+Lifecycle+Task+Force
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:26:07 GMT):
Yeah, wikis are not discussion tools
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:26:29 GMT):
I still think that we have to condense the issues, not sprawl...@llehors
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:26:44 GMT):
We lost him
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:26:56 GMT):
for a minute...
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:30:07 GMT):
They are related... the top page can be a glue as well
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:31:46 GMT):
At least one person from Caliper shows up on PSWG
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:32:48 GMT):
What happened to quilt reboot
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:33:51 GMT):
Rebooting has taken many moons- maybe it should be called rebuild
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:34:28 GMT):
Creative destruction, anyone
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:36:57 GMT):
@Dan you're comments would be a great contribution to @lehors project lifecycle discussion on the wiki : )
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:36:57 GMT):
@Dan your comments would be a great contribution to @lehors project lifecycle discussion on the wiki : )
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:37:18 GMT):
He has already commented there
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:37:34 GMT):
roger
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:37:40 GMT):
Audio from Brian is breaking up
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:38:21 GMT):
Gah I'm sorry
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:38:21 GMT):
I'll repeat it in chat here but it can wait til after the call
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:38:28 GMT):
if a project goes end-of-life, I think the lifecycle should also address making it possible for a project to get resurrected
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:38:45 GMT):
I'll write up what I was trying to say in an email, actually
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:38:48 GMT):
dont
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:38:50 GMT):
Necessary in the beginning to promote incubation
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:38:54 GMT):
don't need to take up time right now
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:38:58 GMT):
so end-of-life should include keeping everything online as a static display with language around "if you want to bring this back, let us know"
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:39:21 GMT):
not trying to avoid process or "lift and shift", this is a complement to quilt
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:39:33 GMT):
much as say a new piece for Fabric wouldmake sense to bring into Fabric
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:39:36 GMT):
@bbehlendorf right...
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:39:40 GMT):
I agree
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:40:06 GMT):
"deferred" would be better than eol
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:40:34 GMT):
for resurrection
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:41:16 GMT):
there was also hope that these new parts of Quilet would bring attention to the Java-ILP work currently in Quilt. The current Quilt folks want this.
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:41:20 GMT):
or maybe "inactive" since we have "active"
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:42:39 GMT):
telecom SIG
cbf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:43:08 GMT):
why? that is rather rare in open source
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:43:54 GMT):
I also saw that there was a pushback from telecom SIG on the template
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:44:12 GMT):
I agree with you, just wanted to be thorough.
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:45:14 GMT):
To set expectations? If a project is not being developed, setting the repo to archived would stop people from filing issues with no hope of resolution
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:45:33 GMT):
telecom SIG does want to create code
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:46:02 GMT):
In fact that is in the paper
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:46:21 GMT):
I agree an actual EOL is rare in open source
cbf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:47:42 GMT):
i was saying that a resurrection is rare... usually a fork with a new name
cbf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:48:11 GMT):
forking to *keep* the name is exceedingly rare
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:48:39 GMT):
Ah I misunderstood. Apologies. I’m not on the call
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:48:39 GMT):
@cbf you're right...forks are usually what happens
Silona (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:49:00 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/LMDWG/Whitepaper+Standards
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:49:24 GMT):
occasionally a project maintainer will hand off control, but usually projects go away because people change job or have life changes.
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:49:34 GMT):
and the only option is to fork
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:49:51 GMT):
We need to review whitepaper standards
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:50:53 GMT):
Do composer and quilt have such strong brands that a new core base would benefit from reusing the names?
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:50:53 GMT):
Do composer and quilt have such strong brands that a new code base would benefit from reusing the names?
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:51:30 GMT):
@rjones my 2p is: yes
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:51:34 GMT):
but maybe not
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:52:03 GMT):
Many items will join the backlog of the tsc
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:52:38 GMT):
Is the potential confusion worth it? I don’t have an opinion on this. I’d be ok either way
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:54:34 GMT):
rjones: as someone who's been out there explaining this stuff to the world, I'd say yes.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:55:05 GMT):
but only if the newer code is very aligned with the old stuff, within the original scope, and welcomed by the existing devs
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:55:13 GMT):
Gotcha
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:55:19 GMT):
and not imposed on them by TSC, HL staff, etc
Silona (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:57:40 GMT):
Remember you can add things to the TSC backlog
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:59:25 GMT):
I mean if you start reviewing the outputs of the SIGs
Silona (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:00:17 GMT):
true and if we have a had time getting turn around on blog posts and other technical reviews...
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:46:58 GMT):
2FA enabled. ~180-190 users removed
MALodder (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:23:58 GMT):
@rjones can you add back in sovbot. 2FA enabled
jsmitchell (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:29:49 GMT):
@MALodder how are you managing 2FA for systems (not user) accounts?
MALodder (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:30:14 GMT):
@jsmitchell we have two people that have authenticator codes
MALodder (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:30:20 GMT):
myself being one of them
MALodder (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:30:27 GMT):
and a devops team member has the other
MALodder (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:30:30 GMT):
they are in sync
Dan (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:30:50 GMT):
Can you both travel on the same flight?
jsmitchell (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:30:52 GMT):
so, human intervention is required when the sessions prompt for re-auth?
MALodder (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:31:08 GMT):
haven't tried that yet
MALodder (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:31:21 GMT):
the other team member never travels with me @Dan
jsmitchell (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:31:23 GMT):
i.e. build hooks break and then someone has to go in and fix it?
MALodder (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:31:49 GMT):
it was that way already
jsmitchell (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:32:06 GMT):
ok, thanks. We were talking through what to do about this earlier as well
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:50:47 GMT):
Composer has a strong brand. Many people are using it to develop apps still. I heard that it was being used even now. I heard that it was going to be restarted and many of its shortcomings addressed.
Dan (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:56:42 GMT):
there was talk about replacing composer with something i think called convector. however, i would strongly prefer to see a project proposal from that team rather than swapping out the code or swapping over the 'brand'.
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:58:13 GMT):
Convector is in labs
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:58:55 GMT):
I was not talking about that, there seemed to be people wanting to continue working on composer
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:59:00 GMT):
@MALodder what is the user name? On GitHub?
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:59:19 GMT):
Sovbot?
Dan (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:00:25 GMT):
That should go through the composer maintainers.
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:02:09 GMT):
Done.
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:02:34 GMT):
I agree, I think @rjones was bringing them (quilt+composer) as projects slated for eol. Since they do not have activity
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:02:34 GMT):
I agree, I think @rjones was invoking them (quilt+composer) as projects slated for eol. Since they do not have activity and dont seem to be submitting quarterly reports
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:04:13 GMT):
Not quite? I was trying to tease out what is more important. The brand or the set of maintainers or the code?
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:05:53 GMT):
Anyway, this was all about introducing another status "inactive" and making it easier to revive than just killing them dead
VipinB (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:07:08 GMT):
Or the possibility of a resurrection....especially if code is reused. Chris seemed to think a fork and a new project is what is needed. There are more ways to skin this cat
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:11:06 GMT):
We have hyperledger-archives as well
rjones (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 19:15:27 GMT):
If, for instance, we renamed Quilt Quilt-java-ilp or something, then brought in a new code base as Quilt-xxx-yyy, how is that different from what Fabric and Sawtooth do today?
MALodder (Thu, 20 Jun 2019 21:08:13 GMT):
yes
bbehlendorf (Fri, 21 Jun 2019 00:16:05 GMT):
"Completed" may be a better term than even Archived, if there are still users out there who should get security updates in the rare chance they emerge, but otherwise don't expect to see active dev. Or "Done", as in a steak.
rjones (Wed, 26 Jun 2019 11:21:18 GMT):
for projects that use GitHub, I asked to join the Packages beta. You might be able to see this tab: https://github.com/orgs/hyperledger/packages it says: ```There aren’t any packages here
Packages allow releases to be distributed by RubyGems, NPM, Docker, etc.```
rjones (Wed, 26 Jun 2019 11:21:38 GMT):
I'm not sure how it works, we're on the waitlist, but it might make lives easier
baohua (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 00:59:03 GMT):
@rjones do you know how to let people activating 2FA recently to rejoin the hyperledger org?
baohua (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 00:59:23 GMT):
@david_dornseifer
david_dornseifer (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 00:59:23 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 07:12:16 GMT):
No TSC meeting this week.
Dan (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 07:12:16 GMT):
No TSC meeting this week.
Dan (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 07:12:16 GMT):
No TSC meeting this week.
rjones (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 07:26:55 GMT):
have them contact me here
rjones (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:20:04 GMT):
https://help.github.com/en/articles/about-github-package-registry
rjones (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:20:45 GMT):
@baohua @david_dornseifer
rjones (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:22:21 GMT):
https://help.github.com/en/articles/about-github-package-registry
rjones (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:23:46 GMT):
rjones (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:24:45 GMT):
There is no TSC call today (27 JUNE 2019) or next week (04 JULY 2019)
rjones (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:24:45 GMT):
There is no TSC call today (27 JUNE 2019) or next week (04 JULY 2019)
rjones (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:24:53 GMT):
mwagner (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:34:29 GMT):
damn, there goes my excuse for missing my other meeting.....
mwagner (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:34:47 GMT):
maybe I will just put on my headphones and nod occasionally
rjones (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 12:10:50 GMT):
I wear my AirPods with dead batteries just to get people to leave me alone
mwagner (Thu, 27 Jun 2019 13:51:38 GMT):
:thumbsup:
mfford (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 18:40:28 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mfford (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 20:52:26 GMT):
2019 Q3 Hyperledger Sawtooth update is available: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q3+Hyperledger+Sawtooth
Silona (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 23:12:36 GMT):
Please add to the agenda page on the wiki
Silona (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 23:12:55 GMT):
@mfford
Dan (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 23:15:59 GMT):
I already got it :l
Dan (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 23:15:59 GMT):
I already got it :)
MicBowman (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 23:28:49 GMT):
ram sent the AWG update earlier... i didn't see it in the agenda?
mwagner (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 23:31:08 GMT):
@dan is assigning homework now....
mwagner (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 23:31:26 GMT):
:apple:
MicBowman (Tue, 09 Jul 2019 23:39:38 GMT):
was missing an "h" on the link, fixed :-)
klenik (Wed, 10 Jul 2019 06:05:26 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 07:53:38 GMT):
unfortunately I'll be traveling at the time of the call today so I have to send regrets
lehors (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 07:54:17 GMT):
I might try to call in while on the road but that seems rather compromised at this point
Dan (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 12:31:35 GMT):
Np, thx for the heads up
mwagner (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 13:30:49 GMT):
I will need to drop from todays call after the first 30 mins - lots of meetings this week here at Red Hat
silasdavis (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 13:58:45 GMT):
being extra careful to put on some clothes for this week's zoom-based TSC meeting...
silasdavis (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 13:59:55 GMT):
being dressed at all time I guess
mwagner (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:01:31 GMT):
@silasdavis why start now ?
mwagner (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:01:39 GMT):
;)
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:05:39 GMT):
If I had a way to disable video, I would.
hartm (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:06:10 GMT):
+1 to the TSC documenting its decisions better. We have forgotten projects!
silasdavis (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:06:38 GMT):
++ sounds good re decision record, suggest more lightweight than RFC but yeah
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:09:37 GMT):
Will there be a budget developed for CI/CD
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:10:30 GMT):
@VipinB There is a budget today.
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:11:28 GMT):
@rjones Will there a projected budget for the new CI/CD?
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:12:00 GMT):
Yes, but.
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:12:22 GMT):
Shouldnt the CDI be incorporated into all Working Groups, SIGs and projects
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:12:50 GMT):
DCI
nage (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:16:23 GMT):
would DCI recommendations constitute policy or just best practices or guidelines?
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:16:42 GMT):
At first, we would just like to characterize where we are
nage (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:16:53 GMT):
I ask, because if the intent is to make policy, it might be better to categorize it as more than a WG
nage (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:17:08 GMT):
like a steering committee council or special task force
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:17:20 GMT):
https://github.com/chaoss/metrics take a look here
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:18:21 GMT):
Concrete action points!
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:18:21 GMT):
Concrete action points should be the result!
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:22:11 GMT):
@nage could you ask that on the call?
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:22:36 GMT):
There is a participation issue from the ground level on gender diversity in tech. I mean from elementary/middle/high school education to college and beyond
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:22:58 GMT):
We cannot hope to fix that in Hyperledger alone!
nage (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:23:18 GMT):
yes
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:23:20 GMT):
so we should not try?
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:26:04 GMT):
@rjones That is not what I mean. How about engaging at lower level-
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:26:27 GMT):
Education targeted at gender diversity etc.
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:29:32 GMT):
If you want to talk on the call, please raise your hand
Silona (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:29:53 GMT):
The point of working group is about deliverables. This has deliverables.
mwagner (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:31:05 GMT):
I need to drop
nage (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:31:46 GMT):
My experience with Sovrin is that deliverables to the general community vs policy deliverables to the governing body are about as different as our distinction between WGs and Projects. That said I'm fine starting with a WG and evolving it from there (but we should be clear in reports that there is more at stake than just a whitepaper and participation should reflect that)
silasdavis (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:31:47 GMT):
Thanks @tkuhrt clear example
Silona (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:31:58 GMT):
It also helps to centralize. like architecture WG
Silona (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:34:18 GMT):
I had problems at first with it being a WG. we did a committee and a task force etc etc. the WG structure is the closest thing we have to what we want to do.
hartm (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:35:24 GMT):
Dan, can you tell us what you might *guess* the end state might be?
Silona (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:35:26 GMT):
"Diversity is also a technical consideration
we make better technical decisions when we are a more diverse group" Karsten in xoom chat
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:35:59 GMT):
@hartm I'll guess that one would be having a woman run for TSC, since that was the sand that started this
hartm (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:36:43 GMT):
@rjones We can't legislate that. I was asking more on policies.
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:38:35 GMT):
It is not just gender diversity that is missing on the tsc
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:38:54 GMT):
So where do we start?
hartm (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:39:06 GMT):
@rjones I think that's what were asking!
hartm (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:39:06 GMT):
@rjones I think that's what we're asking!
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:39:41 GMT):
Check out the metrics proposed here: https://github.com/chaoss/metrics
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:40:17 GMT):
These are very basic questions.
baohua (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:40:40 GMT):
Metrics and goal definition, as a good start.
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:40:51 GMT):
I think if you look at the DCI metrics on that page, that gives some idea on stuff other than TSC membership as goals
hartm (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:40:51 GMT):
Can we have some of the experts comment on the kinds of programs that might work? It would be nice to have the experts (i.e. Mandy) provide suggestions rather than engineers.
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:41:54 GMT):
@hartm agreed
MicBowman (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:42:36 GMT):
+1 @hartm
mwagner (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:42:48 GMT):
and I am back if you are checking for quorum
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:48:02 GMT):
Just spot checking the participants on the call: 5 women (or those I Identity as women) out of 27 callers
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:48:35 GMT):
Out of which two are participating as staffers
baohua (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:50:16 GMT):
16%
mwagner (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:54:19 GMT):
@Silona free, as in beer ?
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:55:11 GMT):
Quoting chairman Mao @rjones
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:55:36 GMT):
Didn't know that
VipinB (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:59:20 GMT):
@rjones It started with 100 flowers- You have a million. You have outdone Mao :wink:
jsmitchell (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:01:27 GMT):
Do we have a list of the maintainers for each project?
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:01:50 GMT):
Not really.
jsmitchell (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:01:53 GMT):
and where they are located (if they are willing to share that info)?
Dan (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:02:05 GMT):
that list was a topic of discussion a few weeks ago
Dan (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:02:27 GMT):
each (most?) project has a maintainers file, and then there is a global maintainers mail list.
Dan (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:02:49 GMT):
the maintainers files can be confusing because of the number of repos
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:03:06 GMT):
One of my goals in using automation for github is to get to where we have these lists for github.
jsmitchell (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:03:09 GMT):
just need a `uniq` list from those files (if they are the source of record)
Dan (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:03:22 GMT):
and they have uniformity in format
rjones (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:03:38 GMT):
so as people are added to codeowners or maintainers files, they get the right permissions automagically
bbehlendorf (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:06:53 GMT):
FWIW, Hyperledger staff will step back from the planning of this summit and leave it to volunteers from the TSC, unless you want us to help in specific ways. In particular we know that picking a location and date will be difficult, and don't want to receive flak for being a part of that decision. Running a survey of maintainers regarding location and date sounds like a good idea though.
hartm (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:14:53 GMT):
@bbehlendorf I don't think anyone wants the HL staff to not be part of decision-making. Complaints about this in the past have mostly been related to transparency--people didn't have any insight into why dates and locations were chosen and got frustrated because of this. Just keeping the technical community informed of the process would probably solve this problem.
jsmitchell (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:15:22 GMT):
If the goal is face-to-face discussion and decision making amongst maintainers on key projects, then an event which doesn't meet that critical mass of key project maintainers will fail. We shouldn't assume that "if we host it, they will come". Rather, we should identify the parties, and determine what can work for them. For example, we have around a dozen maintainers here at Bitwise IO across projects. We don't have the travel budget of HL or Intel, and probably can't justify sending a dozen people across the country, but those are the very people who would make those conversations a success. I'd imagine the same is true for Burrow, Indy, Iroha, and Fabric.
binhn (Thu, 11 Jul 2019 16:03:03 GMT):
agreed with @jsmitchell -- I would suggest we create a confluence page listing all cross-project proposals and have contributors put their names on the proposals if they can attend. It would allow us to 1) learn critical mass for a topic 2) total attendees.
Silona (Sat, 13 Jul 2019 02:54:03 GMT):
I can create a blank space for Contributor Summit planning.
Dan (Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:10:04 GMT):
@rjones does this poll look ok for resolving the F2F in Tokyo question you posted? https://wiki.hyperledger.org/polls/viewpoll.action?guid=24fa3f09824d4d698423ba1e50350d31
rjones (Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:11:47 GMT):
looks good to me
Dan (Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:13:10 GMT):
cool. does it let you vote? I created it in my 'space' and I can't tell what it looks like for other people. I tried opening it with an incognito page but it just won't come up if I don't log in.
Dan (Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:13:51 GMT):
oh, i see your vote now, so i guess that's a yes
rjones (Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:21:37 GMT):
It could be that I'm an admin and I can invade your space? dunno
rjones (Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:22:07 GMT):
there is the GB meeting on Thursday; we might need to change days as well, no?
rjones (Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:23:12 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/polls/viewpollreport.action?guid=24fa3f09824d4d698423ba1e50350d31 neat
Dan (Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:04:02 GMT):
Hi Silona, did you get a chance to do this? If not I think one thing we wanted was some sort of survey to see if we could get critical mass on maintainers for Portland Oct 1-2.
Silona (Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:07:32 GMT):
Sorry, yes you want me to create a space or you want me to participate in the poll?
Silona (Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:09:16 GMT):
You can also take over the contributors summit page under events
Dan (Wed, 17 Jul 2019 21:20:48 GMT):
Yeah if you could create a page or space specifically for the proposed Oct 1-2 event that would be cool. I see the bootcamps page has `upcoming` and `previous` list. Not sure how to incorporate that but it's not critical. Just so long as we have a page or space to start making headway on Oct 1-2.
Silona (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 02:07:20 GMT):
You can edit this https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/events/Contributors+Summits
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:06:35 GMT):
GM/GE/GN
guoger (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:06:51 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:08:31 GMT):
"Formed itself"
Dan (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:09:25 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Project+Lifecycle+Task+Force
mwagner (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:09:31 GMT):
people get vacations ?
Dan (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:10:51 GMT):
Not you. Don't get any ideas.
hartm (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:17:15 GMT):
@lehors @Dan I like this plan. Let's vote on the noncontroversial items next week.
Silona (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:27:10 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/events/Contributors+Summits
Silona (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:30:14 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/events/Maintainer+Summit+October
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:31:13 GMT):
we ran two bootcamps in parallel before
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:31:32 GMT):
the vancouver one for Indy happened in parallel to the Hong Kong one
Silona (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:32:43 GMT):
They were not in parallet
Silona (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:32:51 GMT):
it was two weeks after
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:33:00 GMT):
roger
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:33:23 GMT):
You cannot avoid conflicts
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:33:42 GMT):
rught
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:33:43 GMT):
right
nage (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:34:22 GMT):
no one from Indy or Aries will attend Oct 1-3, we will encourage this event instead https://internetidentityworkshop.com/
nage (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:34:30 GMT):
it is our major community collaboration event
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:34:35 GMT):
The SLC space looked nice. I checked it out while driving through SLC last month
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:34:56 GMT):
It's a ways south of the city but it appeared that there was a commuter rail train from the airport there
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:35:08 GMT):
and there were restaurants nearby but not next door
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:35:33 GMT):
@nage I will be at IIW.
mwagner (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:36:00 GMT):
maybe SLC in the winter, bring your ski boots
nage (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:36:24 GMT):
That means a large percentage of our Ursa community will be mostly at IIW as well
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:36:34 GMT):
yup
Silona (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:42:24 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/RU/BootCamp+Russia
Silona (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:42:54 GMT):
perhaps one can be end of sept week and the other can be october
Silona (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:43:45 GMT):
no one from Indy or Aries will attend Oct 1-3, we will encourage this event instead https://internetidentityworkshop.com/
hartm (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:49:56 GMT):
Yeah, let's cancel the meeting.
baohua (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:51:08 GMT):
+1
Dan (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:52:26 GMT):
Aug 1 meeting is cancelled
Dan (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:52:35 GMT):
I will email list.
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:52:40 GMT):
I made note of it in the meeting minutes for today
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:53:04 GMT):
As mentioned CMSIG open for business see wiki page on how to collaborate and contribute. https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/CMSIG/Capital+Markets+SIG
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:53:45 GMT):
@VipinB I just added that link to the meeting minutes as well. thanks
VipinB (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:53:55 GMT):
Danke
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:55:08 GMT):
I also created the meeting minutes page for 2019/08/01 and marked it "CANCELED"
dhuseby (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:55:21 GMT):
we should announce it on the TSC mailing list
Dan (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 15:02:05 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=5AswMyrkcg8CkcFgB) Done
Silona (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 18:48:42 GMT):
So in case so of you wonder about what the CA"s do when you are waiting for your SIG or project or WG to go live - the open checklists are on the wiki. For example DCIWG https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/tools/DCI+Working+Group+Checklist
Dan (Thu, 18 Jul 2019 19:53:03 GMT):
cool :D
VipinB (Tue, 23 Jul 2019 18:30:24 GMT):
Hello members of tsc, if you have not reviewed - please review IDWG Quarterly report https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q3+Identity+WG
mwagner (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 03:11:32 GMT):
fellow tsc members and Hyperledger staff, it is highly doubtful that I will be to attend this weeks TSC call.
cbf (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:20:00 GMT):
it's baaaaa-ck
VipinB (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:21:05 GMT):
https://www.openchainproject.org/resources/faq
hartm (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:50:04 GMT):
*Millenial Falcon*, lol.
cbf (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:52:52 GMT):
mea culpa
Dan (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:54:14 GMT):
I want to add support for Generation-Xml
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:54:16 GMT):
i don't have a particular issue with new top level platforms *IF* they solve a new problem. or address a particular "optimization point" that has not been addressed previously
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:54:49 GMT):
but a new way to do an old thing is interesting only if it represents a generational advancement
hartm (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:55:55 GMT):
I agree with @MicBowman. If the new frameworks do something new or solve a problem much better than old frameworks, there is merit in bringing them in.
MicBowman (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 14:56:59 GMT):
and the TSC evaluation of a new platform proposal should focus on those properties (among the other basic properties)
nage (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:00:07 GMT):
A note that the Indy WG call, where we did most of the cross-project coordination on identity implementations, is now the Identity WG Implementers call. If you have a sub-team or group in your project interested in coding identity use cases and interoperability, please join us after this call in #identity-wg and on the zoom call.
Silona (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 18:09:46 GMT):
Asked LFIT for a pretty new URL https://support.hyperledger.org
Silona (Thu, 25 Jul 2019 18:10:04 GMT):
in case y'all wanna file a ticket that rocketchat has gone down
silasdavis (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 10:20:32 GMT):
Burrow Q3 update, due tomorrow, is now up: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q3+Hyperledger+Burrow
MicBowman (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 15:36:32 GMT):
is there an agenda for tomorrow's meeting?
Dan (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 15:41:21 GMT):
working on it right now as a matter of fact
Dan (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 15:41:40 GMT):
but tldr we need to finalize the project lifecycle resolutions
Dan (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 15:43:41 GMT):
Really need the minutes from ~last week~ 7-25 to get posted (the 7-25 link is mostly copy/paste from 7-18). The recordings are also copy/paste from 7-18 so that's also no help in checking where we left off on some of the votes.
Dan (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 15:43:41 GMT):
Really need the minutes from last week to get posted. The recordings are also cut/paste from 7-18 so that's also no help in checking where we left off on some of the votes.
mwagner (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 17:15:28 GMT):
we didn't have a TSC meeting last week due to Tokyo trip.
mwagner (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 17:15:43 GMT):
minutes are in /dev/null
rjones (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 17:36:04 GMT):
@mwagner the minutes from the previous meeting, though, are missing
mwagner (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 17:44:00 GMT):
@rjones well I don't have them!
rjones (Wed, 07 Aug 2019 18:03:13 GMT):
I uh don't know what's up
huxd (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 02:35:47 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:00:57 GMT):
me neither
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:10:19 GMT):
+1 to Chris
hartm (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:10:41 GMT):
@cbf This seems like a good idea--what do you think is the right size?
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:10:44 GMT):
what was the number you have in mind @cbf
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:10:52 GMT):
15?
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:10:59 GMT):
17?
rjones (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:12:54 GMT):
Or TAB - technical advisory board
rjones (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:16:32 GMT):
Vipin - I saw your hand was up, was your point covered?
cbf (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:17:07 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Project+Lifecycle+Task+Force
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:17:10 GMT):
No @rjones
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:17:56 GMT):
My suggestion is that SIG members should vote as well, since they are members of the community as well and contributors
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:18:56 GMT):
Many SIGs are very technical, telecomm SIG, Supply Chain SIG come to mind
lehors (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:21:28 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Project+Lifecycle#ProjectLifecycle-end_of_life
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:21:30 GMT):
Another is that results should be fully exposed as they are in other elections: % of people who voted, % of votes that were won by all candidates
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:22:42 GMT):
Archived is read only
mwagner (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:22:43 GMT):
In the beginning, Ry created the repos and the archives ...
rjones (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:22:54 GMT):
It was a wild and wooly time
Dan (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:23:14 GMT):
... and git was good.
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:23:39 GMT):
and he saw that git was good
rjones (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:24:18 GMT):
I made a lot of decisions without a lot of guidance so don't look at the way things _are_ as the way they _need to be_
Dan (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:29:07 GMT):
well done arnaud :D
silasdavis (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:29:08 GMT):
Hi all... sorry I'm late, completely engrossed in a peg grammar. Not sure if Greg may have said anything on Burrow update, of if it is yet to come, but I can give it whenever
Dan (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:29:19 GMT):
yet to come
silasdavis (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:29:31 GMT):
jolly good
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:33:23 GMT):
Main point is that there will not be a stipulated waiting perios
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:33:23 GMT):
Main point is that there will not be a stipulated waiting period
Dan (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:39:39 GMT):
hart, trying to get in a word?
Dan (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:39:39 GMT):
@hartm , trying to get in a word?
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:40:33 GMT):
There should not be too many...requirements-for first major release- Security Audit, CII badging and some others, main idea is that a small team should be able to do a major release without too much bureaucracy
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:42:54 GMT):
Pipelines are implemented in Indy and demoed in ID WG implementers call https://gitlab.com/stevegoob/indy-sdk/pipelines/74195354
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:43:00 GMT):
@dhuseby
bbehlendorf (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:49:11 GMT):
Love the idea of Burrata
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:49:15 GMT):
The vision thing is important @silasdavis
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:50:13 GMT):
@VipinB thanks...
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:50:46 GMT):
as for the small team doing a first major release, a lot of the technical hoops are driven by me and Ry
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:51:02 GMT):
the security audits I handle and only require maintainers to address any issues that are found
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:51:12 GMT):
the CII badge process I help teams get through
VipinB (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:51:18 GMT):
Tooling is important in this
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:51:28 GMT):
setting up bug databases, chat, mailing list, etc are all me and Ry
rjones (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:51:29 GMT):
CII is basically an audit with a punchlist
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:51:34 GMT):
yup
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:51:39 GMT):
what Ry said
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:51:53 GMT):
it's a forcing function to ensure we've dotted I's and crossed T's
rjones (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:52:13 GMT):
oh so it's naval warfare now is it
rjones (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:52:13 GMT):
oh so it's naval warfare now is it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_T
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:54:32 GMT):
yup
dhuseby (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:54:32 GMT):
warfare at least
mwagner (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 14:57:59 GMT):
@Dan does the TSC need to accept these updates or is that a thing from the past ?
Dan (Thu, 08 Aug 2019 15:15:05 GMT):
_I answered verbally in the call, but to close the loop here, No, we do not vote on updates. TSC members acknowledge reviewing the report._
tkuhrt (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:22:27 GMT):
Also, need to consider license scanning as a requirement for first major release.
VipinB (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:23:42 GMT):
Is license scanning part of the DCO checks or is this separate
tkuhrt (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:24:27 GMT):
Separate. License scanning checks that code is appropriately licensed via the charter, and if not requires exception from legal committee if it is to stay part of the code.
tkuhrt (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:25:07 GMT):
Not sure what status of this process is today. We were doing license scans on a monthly basis previously.
tkuhrt (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:25:45 GMT):
And then making sure that everything was good before a major release
VipinB (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:26:40 GMT):
So this scan is automated... are the results shared with the team if you find that this does not pass..
tkuhrt (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:27:03 GMT):
Partially automated. Shared with team any exceptions.
tkuhrt (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:27:39 GMT):
I used to do this by opening up a bug. Then I think I moved to emailing the maintainers.
VipinB (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:28:57 GMT):
We just have to put this as part of the lifecycle and make people aware that such exceptions can stop release in its tracks
tkuhrt (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:29:12 GMT):
Yes...completely agree
VipinB (Fri, 09 Aug 2019 20:31:00 GMT):
Transparency and help with possible roadblocks will help a lot...
amundson (Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:46:25 GMT):
I realized too late that the Transact status is due this week (traveling now)—I’ll need another week to pull that together.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:03:59 GMT):
Is this a contributors summit or maintainers summit?
mwagner (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:06:29 GMT):
_wonders how much snow will be on the ground in Minneapolis in Oct...._
mwagner (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:06:47 GMT):
will pack snowshoes just in case...
rjones (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:07:51 GMT):
bring a snowmobile!
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:12:15 GMT):
No way to look at all updates on confluence. We need to use labels? And filter based on labels.
dhuseby (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:14:46 GMT):
+1 for @VipinB
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:15:01 GMT):
Consistent usage of labels for discoverability
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:15:10 GMT):
Maybe something like tsc
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:15:16 GMT):
"tsc"
dhuseby (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:15:18 GMT):
I tag meeting notes pages. But if we had a tag structure it would be easy to know which tags to use for what.
dhuseby (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:16:11 GMT):
My main problem with tags is that I can figure out how to make the “click to create” template things for pages to include the right tags. AFICT, you can’t add tags to a template that get copied over.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:16:29 GMT):
Convergence means different things for different people...
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:17:18 GMT):
Not one dlt that is a frankendlt
rjones (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:17:26 GMT):
@cbf I muted you - I was getting a lot of noise on your line
bbehlendorf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:17:34 GMT):
Apologies to @cbf, Russia bootcamp was not explicitly on the agenda of prior TSCs, but I know it had been mentioned on TSC calls. We now have a place and location.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:17:34 GMT):
Apologies to @cbf, Russia bootcamp was not explicitly on the agenda of prior TSCs, but I know it had been mentioned on TSC calls. We now have a date and location.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:18:28 GMT):
No "Frankendlt" ... sorry Mark
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:19:03 GMT):
You mean like the real world
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:19:51 GMT):
REST, Webapis etc...
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:21:34 GMT):
What is convergence?
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:21:50 GMT):
Answer that question first...
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:22:08 GMT):
There may be more than one answer
cbf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:22:18 GMT):
@rjones thanks, I was chatting and I guess my keyboard can generate feedback
mwagner (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:23:01 GMT):
@VipinB that was the first part of my statement, we need to define convergence.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:24:05 GMT):
Unfortunately @mwagner we all latched on to the second part
mwagner (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:24:28 GMT):
@MicBowman I actually agree that one DLT will not be the proper solution everywhere. Just wanted to get the discussion going...
hartm (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:25:15 GMT):
@mwagner I think the "convergence" solution is the componetized dream we have all been talking about: where Hyperledger consists of lots and lots of interoperable modules that can be swapped in and out in a plug-and-play style.
hartm (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:25:29 GMT):
But I'm not sure how easy it is to do that.
MicBowman (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:26:30 GMT):
(just to start a discussion) we should focus on components and then focus on the DLT we can build from those components... one of the problems with convergence is that because we have business and emotional investment in existing platforms that we don't want to give up.
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:29:39 GMT):
@nage that is what we have tried to build a town square, a standing conference in Identity WG- a sort of convergence looking at common problems, even if they are being solved in different ways
hartm (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:30:28 GMT):
That's a nice summary Mic. I think I'm in favor of the "approve all of the oracles" approach. If we approve, say, one of the three oracle projects, it's not like the other two are going to go away. They are probably not going to give up and join the one project in Hyperledger. They are most likely to continue to work, outside of Hyperledger, and the same community fragmentation that we are worried about will still happen--it just won't entirely be within Hyperledger.
silasdavis (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:30:40 GMT):
I agree with Mic on the idea of having project per niche. How do we describe such niches? For people approaching projects it would be useful to have a negotiated form of words that describe the tradeoffs made by different projects. This ought to also help with identifying gaps.
Convergence can take place in a few places that don't require one DLT to rule them all:
- p2p layer (e.g. dev p2p, lib p2p)
- keys / identity format
- smart contract layer
- Some types of tooling like monitoring, contract deployment,
MicBowman (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:32:13 GMT):
just to be clear... i'm relatively neutral to "all flower bloom" and "manicured garden"... this is really about what our "culture" is (of course the board has a say in this)... there are advantages to both approaches... i just feel like we need to pick one culture and be clear on it
hartm (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:33:11 GMT):
@MicBowman There's a continuum here, obviously--you don't have to be entirely on one side or the other. Only a sith thinks in absolutes!
cbf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:33:28 GMT):
I do think that we need to have more coherence... I keep hearing from Brian that it is difficult for staff to present the project landscape because of the need to try to distinguish and differentiate the projects from one another
cbf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:34:01 GMT):
and I hear from people in the comunity that they are also confused about what we're trying to accomplish with ostensibly competing projects
kelly_ (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:34:11 GMT):
We should also be clear about why we want convergence. Clearly things like code re-use are not providing enough value to motivate convergence. Is it to make marketing Hyperledger as a platform easier and more competitive vs. other frameworks in the industry.
kelly_ (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:34:30 GMT):
Is convergence a goal because Brian's staff has limited bandwidth
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:35:22 GMT):
HL is unique that way, no other has multiple dlts
cbf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:35:22 GMT):
well, part of the problem is that code reuse is complicated by virtue of a lack of clearly defined APIs as Mic suggested, and you can't effectively link the code from one project into another with a different language and build env etc
silasdavis (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:35:39 GMT):
Are frameworks willing to describe which use cases they are _not_ good at?
Silona (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:35:53 GMT):
the overwhelmingly positive feedback we get back from the bootcamps from the developer community - loves the greenhouse once they understand it is there.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:36:10 GMT):
Apache markets their projects.
kelly_ (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:37:00 GMT):
It seems like we can have many projects and try to grow the community and drive convergence naturally while at the same time not having to scale staff and marketing linearly with the number of projects under Hyperledger
bbehlendorf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:37:19 GMT):
Sally Khudiari is their full-time, paid PR and marketing maven. They do press releases, blog posts, run conferences, many of the same things we do. But I agree, we can and should be more focused.
silasdavis (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:37:43 GMT):
The variance of quality with apache projects is pretty large
hartm (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:38:18 GMT):
@cbf brings up a good point. If we do have lots of projects in the "let the flowers bloom" approach, we need to have a more well-defined marketing strategy.
kelly_ (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:38:22 GMT):
It seems like we are trying to solve a marketing problem at the expense of growing the HL developer community
bbehlendorf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:38:38 GMT):
+1 to improving our marketing of the greenhouse.
nage (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:38:44 GMT):
Quality of community does seem like the better metric
Silona (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:41:02 GMT):
the developer feedback has been overwhelmingly positive for having the projects being open and diverse in that they get to choose. they just need to know that they are there.
kelly_ (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:41:33 GMT):
Driving to convergence assumes we have the answers about the appropriate architectures now. There are dozens of new blockchain architectures coming out so while convergence would be great from a developer unity and marketing perspective it still seems too early overall in the blockchain ecosystem and in HL in particular
Silona (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:45:56 GMT):
Quilt's proposal was too large in scope this is a tighter definition of it.
Silona (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:46:55 GMT):
"An interoperability solution for blockchains, DLTs and other types of ledgers"
mwagner (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:55:24 GMT):
@kelly_ I think one of the questions is that we need to decide if we want to be a technology leader or a follower
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:57:34 GMT):
Convergence is happening in #performance-and-scale-wg
cbf (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:58:17 GMT):
Nick is a maintainer of Caliper
lehors (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:00:18 GMT):
I invite people to have a look at issue 2 and 3 of the project lifecycle task force
lehors (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:00:18 GMT):
I invite people to have a look at issues 2 and 3 of the project lifecycle task force
lehors (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:00:26 GMT):
I think we're about ready to close on these
lehors (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:01:19 GMT):
so, it's a good time to propose any amendments if you'd like
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:01:20 GMT):
For the provenance paper in #performance-and-scale-wg we are seeking to include a. Grid, b. Caliper c. Smart Contracts WG d. Supply chain SIG
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:01:20 GMT):
For the implementation of provenance paper in #performance-and-scale-wg we are seeking to include a. Grid, b. Caliper c. Smart Contracts WG d. Supply chain SIG
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:01:20 GMT):
For the implementation of provenance paper in #performance-and-scale-wg we are seeking to include a. Grid, b. Caliper c. Smart Contracts WG d. Supply chain SIG maybe even d. Transact .... we will see
Silona (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:02:15 GMT):
There were 6 Corda devs that work for Cuba itau (a major bank that sponsored our location) came to the bootcamp in Brazil. They were thrilled with the roadmaps posted for Caliper, Cello and Explorer and really wanted to figure out how to better work with those teams. They were VERY thrilled with Indy and Corda-Indy project. They started grumpy because work made them come and ended up being very glad they came.
binhn (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:04:17 GMT):
I like Nathan's analogy Town Square
VipinB (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:05:48 GMT):
Real greenhouses have multiple areas, like Tropical plants, Marshland, Desert, Temperate plants etc. These exist as different areas, but there are narratives that unite these areas while keeping them separate...
binhn (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:06:11 GMT):
@lehors every time I look, I can't find it. Have a link handy?
binhn (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:11:19 GMT):
@lehors nm - found it https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Project+Lifecycle+Task+Force
lehors (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:12:49 GMT):
it's linked from every TSC agenda :)
Silona (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:13:28 GMT):
This is where I mentioned a Russia BC in both in the meeting and in chat because of Date finalization issues with other events.
hartm (Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:32:49 GMT):
:thumbsup:
tkuhrt (Fri, 16 Aug 2019 19:17:20 GMT):
If you add labels to the template, it will create pages with those labels (tags). I did that for some of the templates I created. See the "Internship Projects/Mentors" template for an example.
Silona (Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:02:48 GMT):
the new greenhouse is an attempt to convey that better...
mfford (Tue, 20 Aug 2019 13:02:10 GMT):
The 2019 Q3 Hyperledger Grid quarterly update is now available for review.
Here is the link: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q3+Hyperledger+Grid
Dan (Tue, 20 Aug 2019 16:53:27 GMT):
If it's not already linked on the TSC could you please update that item? Thanks in advance.
agunde (Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:09:41 GMT):
@Dan do you mean link it from the agenda?
agunde (Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:15:20 GMT):
Added
binhn (Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:41:45 GMT):
@VipinB talking like a farmer ;- )
ajsutton (Wed, 21 Aug 2019 23:51:31 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:41:21 GMT):
@binhn like to get my hands dirty
mwklein (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:16:52 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwklein (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:16:53 GMT):
In relation to Hyperledger Gardener discussion on TSC today, the name Gardener may be a bit confusing with the rise of https://github.com/gardener/gardener in Kubernetes. As these technologies interact, it may become confusing which “gardener” we are referring to.
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:19:48 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/trusted-compute-framework
bbehlendorf (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:22:47 GMT):
One option would be to start Gardener as a lab, see if TCF gets approved, then figure out whether to promote Gardener to a full project or integrate direct into TCF
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:23:13 GMT):
+1 @bbehlendorf
hartm (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:25:21 GMT):
One question on Gardener: Hyperledger has been burned before by one-company projects when the company in question decides to change focus (and the project is essentially abandoned). Gardener seems to have contributors only from one company. Are there any plans to recruit outside contributors, and, if so, how?
mwagner (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:28:14 GMT):
wow, 50 participants on the call atm
silasdavis (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:29:23 GMT):
I don't think there is direct support for this yet - but I think it could be realised by a set of gardener-servers fetching values and then voting.
silasdavis (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:31:05 GMT):
the receiving contract https://github.com/EspeoBlockchain/gardener-smart-contracts/blob/master/contracts/Oracle.sol#L60 can callback any function
silasdavis (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:31:26 GMT):
so if that callback registers a vote then I think you have a simple decentralised oracle
JonGeater (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:34:25 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
JonGeater (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:34:26 GMT):
@mwagner I suspect a lot of people were inspired by the Gardner and Besu items. I expect we'll be similarly heavy for the TCF next week - all significant and serious topics
mwagner (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:35:16 GMT):
yeah, excited to see such interest!
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:35:23 GMT):
Audio is choppy
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:36:09 GMT):
It looks like all TSC members have reviewed the proposal
JonGeater (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:38:32 GMT):
I'm trying to write useful comments on the TCF wiki page but it's so huge! As an industry we've been through many of these hoops before (OASIS, IEEE, TCG, GlobalPlatform, the payments industry,...) and there's a lot of security nuance involved in making a 'system' vs a 'set of protocols'. I'm glad we have another week to formulate thoughts :-)
Silona (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:40:35 GMT):
JimJag https://www.linkedin.com/in/jimjag/ Long time OSS person if y'all haven't met him yet
Dan (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:48:45 GMT):
do we have anyone on from TWGC?
guoger (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:50:43 GMT):
yup
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:50:44 GMT):
I see a hand up
guoger (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:50:52 GMT):
This is Jay Guo from TWGC
baohua (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:50:54 GMT):
jay will be there
Dan (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:51:02 GMT):
thanks @guoger
guoger (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:51:39 GMT):
do we do update today or reschedule to next tsc meeting?
guoger (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:52:03 GMT):
(i could do a quick one in several minutes :)
amundson (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:52:36 GMT):
WASM is just the lower-level interpreter, and Sabre does not implement an ethereum-like smart contract model; from a Transact perspective, integration with Besu would look more like Seth (the integration with Burrow)
amundson (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:55:24 GMT):
We might also explore within Transact different ways to integrate.
baohua (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:55:33 GMT):
TWGC report: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q3+Technical+Working+Group+China, FYI.
Dan (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:55:44 GMT):
@JonathanLevi I see your hand. sorry we ran out of time there.
mwagner (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:59:09 GMT):
@mwagner likes the idea of online meetups!
shemnon (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:20:50 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
nage (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:13:16 GMT):
@rjones has the TSC elections list been finalized yet? In the past staff members reachec out to maintainers to review the list to be make sure we could fix any noreply@ emails and double check for significant contributors who were missing.
nage (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:13:16 GMT):
@rjones has the TSC elections list been finalized yet? In the past staff members reached out to maintainers to review the list to be make sure we could fix any noreply@ emails and double check for significant contributors who were missing.
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:14:13 GMT):
The voter list is pretty much done, yes.
nage (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:16:35 GMT):
do we have any idea what percentage we have on "non-contactable" contributors (we don't want to leave anyone out if can prevent it)?
nage (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:16:35 GMT):
do we have any idea what percentage we have on "non-contactable" contributors (we don't want to leave anyone out if we can prevent it)?
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:17:48 GMT):
we had about 600 contributors, and we had about 20-ish with invalid/no email. As we're doing the GOTV email campaign, we've found some that bounce
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:19:01 GMT):
There are 394 emails in the GOTV list (people that are not on the email list for contributors). There are 180 members of the mailing list, less some obvious test accounts and staff.
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:21:15 GMT):
https://github.com/ryjones/tsc-2019-contributors contains the starting point from GitHub and Gerrit.
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:22:22 GMT):
RIght now there are 18 distinct nominations
nage (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:23:09 GMT):
Hmmm...I see a number of contributors who have changed companies, so the email address we have for them is bad, but they are still active in the community. Are there ways to update the list or provide tips for contacting people?
nage (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:23:09 GMT):
Hmmm...I see a number of contributors who have changed companies, so the email address we have for them are bad, but they are still active in the community. Are there ways to update the list or provide tips for contacting people?
nage (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:23:09 GMT):
Hmmm...I see a number of contributors who have changed companies, so the email addresses we have for them are bad, but they are still active in the community. Are there ways to update the list or provide tips for contacting people?
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:23:39 GMT):
sec
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:38:39 GMT):
I sent you a link to the GOTV spreadsheet
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:54:14 GMT):
OK. All WG leads and TSC members should have a link to the spreadsheet that has the roll
rjones (Thu, 22 Aug 2019 19:10:24 GMT):
There is some discussion here: #tsc-2019-election , a now read-only channel where we were discussing logistics. We should have had that discussion in here; my fault.
binhn (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 13:49:16 GMT):
@rjones i got an email from you, subject "TSC 2019-2020 election need contact - Invitation to edit". I assume that I should enter those contributors that I know who are not yet on the list. Right?
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:02:42 GMT):
@binhn yes
binhn (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 17:51:01 GMT):
ok, there're a lot of developers, who contributed code, that are not on the list. How did this list come about? I wasn't on the list either
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 17:54:59 GMT):
I used this tool: https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/tree/master/get_contributors to generate these files: https://github.com/ryjones/tsc-2019-contributors
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 17:55:15 GMT):
I had marked that repo private because it has a list of all the emails in the project
binhn (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 17:58:04 GMT):
hmm bugs?
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 17:59:08 GMT):
I'm open to pull requests - maybe I missed some repos?
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 17:59:30 GMT):
here is the repo list: https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/blob/master/common/repositories.sh
binhn (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:03:39 GMT):
the repos are there, so idk why, maybe something with github. For example, Srinivasan Muralidharan is not on the file but he's been committing changes on Fabric.
jsmitchell (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:09:46 GMT):
@rjones additional data point - a bunch of us that are on that all_contributors.csv did not get the 8/21 "2019-2020 TSC elections" email which starts "Hey! We saw that you contributed to Hyperledger this last year! Thank you so much."
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:10:56 GMT):
@jsmitchell those are being sent manually. If you look here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XdSsnFB3fdpdL8FtpHexBYbhS_4UJWRVg4zAnyOoAn8/edit?userstoinvite=sweedcocco@gmail.com&ts=5d600532&actionButton=1#gid=663978220 you will see in column 1 who on staff has reached out to who
jsmitchell (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:14:43 GMT):
I am not on that spreadsheet for some reason
jsmitchell (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:15:26 GMT):
just checked another couple of names and they aren't either
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:15:33 GMT):
check page 3
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:16:00 GMT):
page 1 is the list of people we need to contact to get them on page 3. everyone should be on either page 1 or 3
binhn (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:17:09 GMT):
Ah, @rjones I didn’t notice there are multiple pages. Will look there
jsmitchell (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:17:30 GMT):
ok, the two people i checked are on page three, but nether of us have received an email
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:17:40 GMT):
it's fine - this was an internal spreadsheet for a GOTV mail campaign
jsmitchell (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:18:04 GMT):
oh, i see - the intention is that email comes from the contributors mailing list
jsmitchell (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:19:38 GMT):
and I did get the 8/19 "[hyperledger-contributors] Hyperledger TSC election 2019: Call for nominations" email
mwagner (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 19:16:50 GMT):
@binhn did you find them on one of the other tabs ?
binhn (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 19:44:01 GMT):
@mwagner yes i found most on page 3; i added those missing on page 1
mwagner (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 19:44:20 GMT):
ok thanks
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 20:52:23 GMT):
Vipin asked: https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc-2019-election?msg=JTXSyS2JmNzGBRYgm
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 20:53:10 GMT):
This is our team doing a GOTV campaign for the TSC election. The first page are people that did not sign up for the contributor's mailing list, who will contact them, if they have been contacted and the like.
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 20:53:26 GMT):
page 3 are people that are members of the mailing list.
rjones (Fri, 23 Aug 2019 20:54:05 GMT):
This spreadsheet is a proxy for the voting rolls for next Monday's election. You do not have to be a member of the mailing list to vote.
VipinB (Sat, 24 Aug 2019 13:41:54 GMT):
@rjones Get Out The Vote (GOTV) campaign is great.Transparency will truly benefit only if we can track the participation rate (i.e. what percentage of eligible voters actually voted). Having yet another opt-in list for voting will suppress this rate if the list is strictly used to test eligibility. It seems that this is not the case (reading the above exchanges closely). Clean choice architecture, as well as making participation easy is key to bigger participation rates and hence true democracy. This has been seen in many studies.
rjones (Sat, 24 Aug 2019 15:03:01 GMT):
@VipinB the GOTV spreadsheet was never meant for non-LF-staff consumption. It was to help us get valid addresses for contributors. I regret ever making that sheet public - I would prefer to do this work in Salesforce, tbh, so people could self-manage
VipinB (Sat, 24 Aug 2019 18:07:20 GMT):
I understand @rjones. It is not the spreadsheet and the contents that I am interested in. It is the mechanics of running an election with the maximum participation, which is fair and follows the charter etc.
VipinB (Sat, 24 Aug 2019 18:07:43 GMT):
I myself did register for the mailing list....
VipinB (Sat, 24 Aug 2019 18:10:27 GMT):
Getting email addresses for working group participants who are technical contributors and regulars is difficult. We never require email addresses for participation...
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:11:04 GMT):
2019-2020 Election is underway! https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Nomination+Statements
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:11:37 GMT):
2019-2020 TSC election is underway! https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Nomination+Statements
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:11:37 GMT):
2019-2020 TSC election is underway! https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Nomination+Statements
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:11:40 GMT):
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:19:14 GMT):
On the election timeline: there was not a specific time of day that nominations were supposed to end and the elections were supposed to start.
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:20:06 GMT):
It appears that I ended the nomination period earlier than people expected, and opened voting earlier than people expected.
mwagner (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:20:31 GMT):
surprise! ;)
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:20:54 GMT):
I thought I was late end starting, because it was already 09:30 GMT Monday
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:20:54 GMT):
I thought I was late starting, because it was already 09:30 GMT Monday
mwagner (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:21:50 GMT):
I had someone contact me because they tried to nominate someone on Sun, 25 Aug but it was closed
mwagner (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:22:17 GMT):
a learning experience to apply for the next elections...
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:30:58 GMT):
I have a lot of "first orders of business" for the next TSC about next year's election.
mwagner (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:32:21 GMT):
take good notes now... :)
dhuseby (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:33:30 GMT):
me too.
dhuseby (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:33:47 GMT):
we have a bunch of unresolved issues that need to be addressed directly by the next TSC.
dhuseby (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:34:26 GMT):
not just election related.
dhuseby (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:34:48 GMT):
fundamental questions about policy and where the lines are on certain issues.
dhuseby (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:35:13 GMT):
I have too many days where I stare at my computer and think, "you know, I don't have to ask, I have admin and I can just force this to happen."
dhuseby (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:35:20 GMT):
but I don't. because I believe in the process.
dhuseby (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:35:36 GMT):
so those things need the TSC to weigh in on.
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:11:52 GMT):
@mwagner the question is: do we restart the election?
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:12:09 GMT):
@bbehlendorf asked how hard it was - not very
mwagner (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:13:07 GMT):
would we give that last person a chance to submit their candidate ?
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:13:07 GMT):
I know one person reached out that was unable to nominate themselves, so there is at least one more person that wants to stand for election
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:13:25 GMT):
yes, and I thought you had someone as well from the members list?
mwagner (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:13:46 GMT):
yes, there was someone from the members list
mwagner (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:16:00 GMT):
I would be not be opposed to it as several nominations that were within the time window were not able to submit, but its not my call, I will leave that to the Hyperledger staff or the GB
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:17:23 GMT):
I've provisionally turned https://forms.gle/Bmjzde7gVs39ML7c6 back on
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:59:18 GMT):
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:00:02 GMT):
@all The current running election has been cancelled. A new one will start Wednesday. Nominations are re-opened.
nage (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:05:45 GMT):
Any other update on what is going on and why?
nage (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:06:10 GMT):
its just the missing nomination then?
nage (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:06:10 GMT):
its just the missing nominations then or have other issues surfaced? (I support going slow and getting it right and making things transparent, which is why I ask)
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:09:40 GMT):
@nage the issues are there was no common understanding of the end of the nomination period ended and when voting began. at least two people wish to be nominated that aren't on the wiki page above
MicBowman (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:15:52 GMT):
are the meeting minutes from 8/22 captured anywhere? can't find them on the wiki
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:19:46 GMT):
@dhuseby ?
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:21:19 GMT):
@MicBowman I recorded it and uploaded the recordings, but I didn't type up the minutes.
bbehlendorf (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:34:03 GMT):
I just sent a note to TSC list to clarify.
mwagner (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:36:34 GMT):
rjones so those two people will be included (assuming they fill the nomination form out) correct ?
mwagner (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:37:44 GMT):
@rjones never mind just saw the email.
rjones (Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:37:47 GMT):
All of the valid nominations will be added, yes.
Dan (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 13:49:30 GMT):
@dhuseby do you have the minutes from the last tsc meeting?
arsulegai (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 14:09:03 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 15:55:21 GMT):
Current TSC slate: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Nomination+Statements
rjones (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 15:55:21 GMT):
Current TSC slate: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Nomination+Statements
rjones (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 15:55:26 GMT):
rjones (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 15:55:34 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Nomination+Statements
dhuseby (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:54:20 GMT):
@Dan converting now
dhuseby (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:54:30 GMT):
I'm just wrapping up the 7/25 one that I missed a few weeks back.
dhuseby (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:54:38 GMT):
then going to do last week's minutes
rjones (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:59:06 GMT):
Here is a list of people that have asked to be removed from consideration:
rjones (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:59:09 GMT):
```Mohan Venkatamaran
Sharon Coco
Drummond Reed
jiannan guo
Saptarshi Choudhury
```
rjones (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:59:09 GMT):
```
Sharon Coco
Drummond Reed
jiannan guo
Saptarshi Choudhury
```
Dan (Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:33:45 GMT):
The DCI WG is working on a community survey. We intend to cover demographics to inform our DCI baseline. if we can kill two birds with one survey we would also like to ask some developer questions. I would like feedback from the TSC on what would be helpful. In the past we asked questions about language preference, git familiarity, and virtualization preferences (e.g. docker v vagrant).
Shorter is better so we want to limit questions to only a few topics.
dhuseby (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 04:37:35 GMT):
@Dan TSC minutes are all caught up. I just finished the minutes from last week's meeting.
mwagner (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:14:16 GMT):
@Dan we will of course need a question on emacs vs vim....
Dan (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:52:22 GMT):
thanks @dhuseby
rjones (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 15:01:07 GMT):
I fixed the permissions on the TSC minutes - I see only two TSC members asked to be able to read them :)
rjones (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 15:26:12 GMT):
@all the TSC election is underway. If you did not get a ballot, and you think you should have, please reach out
rjones (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 15:26:12 GMT):
@all the TSC election is underway _again_. If you did not get a ballot, and you think you should have, please reach out
lehors (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 15:26:45 GMT):
thanks @rjones !
MicBowman (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:15:18 GMT):
@Dan i can do a quick update on the working group discussions at tomorrow's meeting
JonGeater (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:51:05 GMT):
Mohan is still on the list
rjones (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 18:26:53 GMT):
awesome, I hate life
rjones (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 18:27:37 GMT):
@JonGeater I was wrong: he resubmitted
JonGeater (Wed, 28 Aug 2019 18:29:56 GMT):
Ah, good!
JonGeater (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:03:39 GMT):
Only 31 today, in the end. Slightly surprising
rjones (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:04:19 GMT):
35 now.
dhuseby (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:04:19 GMT):
Good morning
mwagner (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:04:35 GMT):
its early still
mwagner (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:05:07 GMT):
good day Dave!
dhuseby (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:09:19 GMT):
What about APAC?
dhuseby (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:09:54 GMT):
Aren’t there composer users in China?
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:16:37 GMT):
As @JonGeater points out in his wiki page post attestation verification has a lot of diverse requirements and it would help to know more about how this does or doesn't turn into a reusable component relative to Transact.
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:16:37 GMT):
As @JonGeater points out in his wiki page post, attestation verification has a lot of diverse requirements and it would help to know more about how this does or doesn't turn into a reusable component relative to Transact.
hartm (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:19:03 GMT):
Will this be connected at all with the new Confidential Computing Consortium?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:20:55 GMT):
Naming - TCF is a bit awkward. It wouldn't be a "framework" as we've used the term, AIUI, more of a library? Can we give it an abstract name? Marketing Committee hasn't been asked to approve
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:21:08 GMT):
Transact may have interactions with TCF as an oracle
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:22:37 GMT):
I can see it in general ways, given the overlap in the employers of contributors to both.
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:24:27 GMT):
i certainly hope there is a relationship between them at some point but CCC is very new & figuring out what that means is very TBD
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:25:00 GMT):
When we think of this in terms of verifiable credentials flows, we try to term it as "who are we trusting and why", and these projects seem to overlap a lot more in these terms
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:26:43 GMT):
Off-chain on-chain blurs, especially when you think of Endorsers in Fabric
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:30:13 GMT):
JonGeater++ this is the core of the "chain of trust" question (I know how I trust my TEE, how do I trust yours?)
Dan (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:30:39 GMT):
I think mostly A & B choose to trust C.
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:30:44 GMT):
so ultimately consensus
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:31:26 GMT):
Attestations should be checkable by anybody
Hence interoperable
Even though the attestations are created by different methods
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:31:41 GMT):
Attestations are abstract
hartm (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:31:54 GMT):
@nage, Yes, this does not obliviate the need for trust and consensus--it just puts it into the hardware.
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:32:24 GMT):
no it proxies it through the hardware
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:32:28 GMT):
Can we presume there will be a discussion about name?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:32:36 GMT):
I don't think TCF should be the name
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:33:11 GMT):
Veracity
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:33:49 GMT):
Congrats to the Veracity team
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:34:12 GMT):
we have found that vera* is full of trademark landmines
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:34:35 GMT):
Especially after approving another project which speaks for expansion
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:35:40 GMT):
Expansion of the number of projects AND convergence can happen at the same time
lehors (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:36:06 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=2cQWcFnuaAD2mG3TY) speaking of names, I hope this wasn't overlooked, it sounds like a good point:
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:36:09 GMT):
(not actually true re Apache marketing)
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:36:19 GMT):
(but Apache Way stuff is important)
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:39:13 GMT):
We (staff, and the marketing team around HL) recognize the challenge of marketing the portfolio - both the overall, and being a champion of individual projects, and we're up for it.
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:39:50 GMT):
ASF and HL are at different places on the growth curve, we need not map strictly into this model.
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:41:33 GMT):
They do market themselves independently today
hartm (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:43:55 GMT):
Not including projects in Hyperledger might result in less fragmentation and more convergence *in Hyperledger* but isn't going to decrease fragmentation and lack of convergence in *the overall blockchain space*. In fact, including more stuff in Hyperledger probably would actually decrease fragmentation and incompatibility in the overall space. So I'm not sure that it's a compelling argument that we should not accept projects because we're afraid of fragmentation in Hyperledger--the projects aren't going to go away because we don't accept them, and we would still compete for contributors, users, etc.
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:44:10 GMT):
I don't think this addresses the product marketing or promotion concern Chris raises, but my belief is that how we collaborate and who is here doing that collaboration makes a bigger impact on our future (what code will happen next) than which code projects we are working on or marketing as "ready" today. When we stopped doing the old-style hackfests we lost some of that intellectual co-mingling, and it seems like trying to get the right people to come to Hyperledger to collaborate makes a bigger impact that whether there is duplication or overlap in the code we're doing it in right now (there will never be convergence if the communities lack constructive overlap or consideration of each other). I like Besu because it helps us have more excellent collaborators at the table, I worry about how it overlaps with Burrow (but Silas addressed most of this for me).
kelly_ (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:45:20 GMT):
+1 @hartm
VijayMichalik (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:45:25 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:00 GMT):
My various posts reflect +1 on @hartm and @nage @binhn
Dan (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:13 GMT):
@mwagner is on deck
hartm (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:19 GMT):
@binhn Love the quote!
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:22 GMT):
Our first godfather reference
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:27 GMT):
binh thank you for s/enemies/competitors/g. :)
rjones (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:41 GMT):
first _public_ reference
JonGeater (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:56 GMT):
Doesn't it come back to the same question/issue that many of us have raised several times recently: that collaboration is great, accepting people is great, and having Hyperledger lead that is great.
But just saying 'convergence' doesn't mean anything: you need guidelines and targets and specific areas where we want to converge, and leave everything else explicitly open-season.
Even with the will to converge, per Brian's comments, it won't happen if we don't actively push and shape it
JonGeater (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:56 GMT):
Doesn't it come back to the same question/issue that many of us have raised several times recently: that collaboration is great, accepting people is great, and having Hyperledger lead that is great.
But just saying 'convergence' doesn't mean anything: you need guidelines and targets and specific areas where we want to converge, and leave everything else explicitly open-season.
Even with the will to converge, per Brian's comments, it won't happen if we don't actively push and shape it
ie: 'what is the Hyperledger Architecture', that we are supposed to ensure conformance with?
jimjag (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:58 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
jimjag (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:46:59 GMT):
Think of what would have happened if there was NOT competition in the BigData space... if, for example, ONLY Hadoop had been promoted.
Dan (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:47:02 GMT):
I keep trying to get out of this discussion but they keep pulling me back in.
rjones (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:47:03 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/2624
kelly_ (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:47:12 GMT):
sounds like Binh is saying Besu is making us an offer that we can't refuse ;)
jimjag (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:47:28 GMT):
You can't converge w/o options to use to converge towards ;)
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:47:34 GMT):
The vectors of convergence will be Working Groups, meetups, etc.
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:47:57 GMT):
JonGeater: agreed, we are trying to create opportunity for convergence, you can't (and I believe shouldn't) force convergence
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:48:35 GMT):
more a "have you considered" and less "we need convergence in ______"
JonGeater (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:49:40 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=uZZaPCHTSrEp9dekz) Indeed. Forcing a rigid agenda is basically impossible, but constantly reminding people where we collectively see importance and value is essential.
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:51:26 GMT):
+1 @JonGeater
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:52:01 GMT):
@lehors please read my latest comment in WG task force
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:52:21 GMT):
the only way to have a managed garden is to have some vision for what we are managing to...
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:52:40 GMT):
Manicured or a natural garden
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:52:42 GMT):
and that means having a body that is more "prescriptive"
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:52:46 GMT):
and that is kind of scary
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:53:18 GMT):
The greenhouse metaphor was an attempt to imply that sometimes you don't know what the results are when you start, and that's OK
nage (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:53:47 GMT):
Think of gardening less like a glass house and more like open range land.
JonGeater (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:55:09 GMT):
No, just a vision. We can be leaders without being managers.
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:56:08 GMT):
vision is still prescriptive... just less honorous
MicBowman (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:56:08 GMT):
vision is still prescriptive... just less onorous
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:56:09 GMT):
Congrats to Besu
jimjag (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:56:16 GMT):
thank you all!
Dan (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:56:37 GMT):
Congrats to Besu
jimjag (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:56:49 GMT):
looking greatly forward to working closer w/ all of you
hartm (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:58:13 GMT):
Thanks for proposing, Besu team, and we are looking forward to working with you.
rjones (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:58:25 GMT):
There will be one more meeting, Dan :)
binhn (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:58:35 GMT):
Thanks Dan!
VipinB (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:58:41 GMT):
He did not read Brian's last email
Bobbijn (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:58:46 GMT):
Congratulation.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:00:10 GMT):
TSC winners will be announced the night of the 4th, after polling closes.
Dan (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:00:12 GMT):
haha, oh yeah? I missed one?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:00:22 GMT):
The TSC meeting is on the 5th
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:00:37 GMT):
it won't have a new chair yet at that point
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:00:45 GMT):
but I will give Dan a pass, I thought this was the last one.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:01:13 GMT):
probably best to give anyone new to the TSC more than a few hours notice to attend their first TSC meeting
rjones (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:01:45 GMT):
and elect a chair so the meeting can happen
bbehlendorf (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:06:40 GMT):
OK, so my mistake, current TSC and chair should meet next week. This group deserves second kudos anyways :)
mwagner (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:24:15 GMT):
@bbehlendorf do we get paid 2X for overtime ? ;)
Dan (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:30:02 GMT):
Ok, that sounds like a smoother transition. In most elections there's some session(s) between the election and the installment.
rjones (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 21:40:14 GMT):
I need help finding new addresses for people from the following domains. If you can help for a specific domain, please look here: (PRs welcome)
rjones (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 21:40:15 GMT):
https://github.com/ryjones/tsc-missing/blob/master/missing.csv
rjones (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 21:41:10 GMT):
```482.solutions
bitwise.io
blockchaintp.com
chainnova.com
evernym.com
hitachi.com
ibm.com
intel.com
us.ibm.com
vocalocity.com
windriver.com```
rjones (Thu, 29 Aug 2019 21:41:10 GMT):
```482.solutions
blockchaintp.com
chainnova.com
evernym.com
hitachi.com
ibm.com
intel.com
us.ibm.com
vocalocity.com
windriver.com```
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 16:03:24 GMT):
Right now, 171 of 572 eligible votes have voted
VipinB (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 17:49:30 GMT):
30%
arsulegai (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 17:49:59 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=47gYndYkKWMfFbecQ) I can for intel.com, but do not have Mithun's latest information
Dan (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 17:50:11 GMT):
New Hampshire exit polls put Boaty in the lead.
JonGeater (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 18:03:04 GMT):
Buttigieg McButtigieg Face?
toddinpal (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 18:51:26 GMT):
Rats, I missed voting for Boaty! Maybe next year.
VipinB (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:00:03 GMT):
How about just plain Vera
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:45:45 GMT):
I have a sneaking suspicion that a very minor PR in Ursa (maybe just a small typo fix) would get approved very quickly by the maintainers if the LF ID were BoatyMcBoatFace. Start now and make it happen next year!
Dan (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:46:38 GMT):
I think I looked before and that github ID was taken :(
I didn't look at LFID though.
toddinpal (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:48:40 GMT):
There is now... lol
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:53:00 GMT):
yes, please make my life harder. I super appreciate that.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:53:13 GMT):
Getting a list of valid voters is a lot of work, please add more
toddinpal (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:53:33 GMT):
I don't envy that task
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:54:12 GMT):
Is a valid voter a valid LFID or an actual person? I don't think the rules are clear.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:54:32 GMT):
Neither
toddinpal (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:54:39 GMT):
is it just LFID or do they have to have participated in some way?
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:55:03 GMT):
This is up for debate and it is literally the first question I'm going to hit the new TSC with.
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:55:12 GMT):
Either way, contributors can technically remain anonymous, so one person could in theory utilize this to vote indefinitely (until we made a rule that only human-known contributors can vote).
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:55:17 GMT):
Thanks for all the hard work on this Ry!
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:55:35 GMT):
Yeah, I've asked this question myself before and people have just said it wasn't a problem we should worry about.
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:57:18 GMT):
I still would love the hilarity of announcing, "we had one new contributor, Blocky McChainFace, from CompanyMcCorp."
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:58:42 GMT):
Considering we had < 700 or so possible voters, looking the list over was pretty easy
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 19:59:40 GMT):
But how do you know that someone didn't create a bunch of fake names and emails? Easily possible, although I doubt there was a coordinated attack.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:00:23 GMT):
I can't prove a negative.
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:00:51 GMT):
Well, you just need to prove that each email is connected to a real human. Perhaps we need an Indy solution.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:01:17 GMT):
Yes - I would like to dogfood Indy for this.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:01:58 GMT):
"Who can vote" is a meaty issue that has never been decided once and for all.
Dan (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:02:24 GMT):
That implies that there is some authority that acts as a central arbiter of this person is a human.
Clayton Sims (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:02:37 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:02:40 GMT):
@tkuhrt pointed out to me that there was no TSC vote on if people from working groups, only, can vote.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:03:35 GMT):
It isn't a decided issue of wiki changes are good enough to get to vote. It isn't decided if SIG activity is.
Clayton Sims (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:04:56 GMT):
#rjones sanchezl@us.ibm.com should not be sanchezl@redhat.com
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:14:20 GMT):
You can automate an attack pretty simply. Just generate a PR of the form "commit X, uncommit X" so that the overall PR does nothing to the actual files (but does modify the commit history). This is really easy to script. Then you can need a repo where you can script acceptance of these PRs (the whitepaper repo would have worked perfectly until recently, as I (and others) had permissions to individually accept PRs. The hardest part would be automating the process of getting the github and LF IDs, since they have captchas. You'd have to get someone to give you captcha-breaking software (they might not lend you it if they know you're using it nefariously) or, probably more easily, use mechanical Turk under the guise of a "UI Study" or "Password Study."
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:16:24 GMT):
Not really. There are attacks that are much easier.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:16:33 GMT):
You are seriously overthinking this
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:17:50 GMT):
That one follows the letter of the law, though. Under our current rules, all of those IDs would be "contributors." They would have every right under the rules to vote, and couldn't be banned without a rule change.
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:18:34 GMT):
But yes, please bring this point to the TSC and get some clarification on rules.
toddinpal (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:19:00 GMT):
It's right up Hart's ally
toddinpal (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:19:00 GMT):
It's right up Hart's alley
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:19:32 GMT):
Hart, you are still seriously overthinking this.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:20:18 GMT):
You can forge all of those email addresses as contributors to one commit. You don't need multiple hundreds of commits.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:20:32 GMT):
or hundreds of LFIDs or github accounts.
toddinpal (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:21:29 GMT):
@Dan know any non-human persons? ;-)
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:24:33 GMT):
@rjones Oh, I didn't realize that.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:24:51 GMT):
git lets you do fun things!
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:25:42 GMT):
and, since qq.com is both a source of committers, and just uses strings of digits, that attack may already be happening.
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:27:09 GMT):
By the way, I hate asking you to do more work, but do you think it would be possible to make some aggregate statistics on contributors public? For instance, it'd be interesting to see, and I think listing contributors per company might encourage more participation by companies that don't contribute a ton right now (like mine).
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:28:09 GMT):
yes, but. Many of our most prolific contributors do not use identifiable domains
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:28:19 GMT):
so gmail and qq.com will dominate
Dan (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:33:55 GMT):
Yeah let's hold off on suggesting more random assignments for Ry.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:34:03 GMT):
https://gist.github.com/ryjones/66735a3844259bf21faef6c748959652
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:34:26 GMT):
gmail.com has over 10x the domain in second place.
Dan (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:34:40 GMT):
I mean unless he's got the data instantly available.
hartm (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:34:43 GMT):
Gotcha, thanks for that! That's cool.
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:35:23 GMT):
@Dan - it was. copy, `pbpaste | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr | pbcopy`
rjones (Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:35:23 GMT):
@Dan - it was. copy, pbpaste | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr | pbcopy
rjones (Mon, 02 Sep 2019 03:15:16 GMT):
ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ
VipinB (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:11:22 GMT):
@rjones what was that?
rjones (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:11:38 GMT):
someone walking to work
VipinB (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:33:22 GMT):
@rjones The 31% turnout figure with 36 hours to go is quite low... "Nudges" could compare the turnout to voter turnout in other elections and could be sent with 24 and 12 hours to go.
From IDEA paper https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/voter-turnout-trends-around-the-world.pdf and according to them "Higher voter turnout is in most cases a sign of the vitality of democracy, while lower turnout is usually associated with voter apathy and mistrust of the political process"
If you look at figure 4 , you will see that the trends are for lower turnout, however the global average is 60%. This is for legislative elections, where the stakes are higher. However 30% turnout from a highly educated (compared to many) and supposedly engaged electorate for the TSC is quite low.
rjones (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:34:19 GMT):
We don't have that data
VipinB (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:34:34 GMT):
We have the turnout
VipinB (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:35:00 GMT):
185/585
VipinB (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:36:00 GMT):
31.623 %
VipinB (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:38:01 GMT):
We may yet be surprised with a spike in turnout in the last few hours
rjones (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:38:58 GMT):
I don't understand your position. Could you be more explicit?
VipinB (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:43:15 GMT):
After all the only thing you (as the election officer) can do is to send out reminder emails. But the wording and timing of the emails matter. I am suggesting an email 24 and then 12 hours before the election, stating how our turnout compares with global averages. Also a hint on how to search for your polling email. Might improve the turnout.
VipinB (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:43:15 GMT):
After all the only thing you (as the election officer) can do is to send out reminder emails. But the wording and timing of the emails matter. I am suggesting an email 24 and then 12 hours before the end of the election, stating how our turnout compares with global averages. Also a hint on how to search for your polling email. Might improve the turnout.
VipinB (Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:43:56 GMT):
Obviously this is only a suggestion.
cbf (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:18:26 GMT):
@rjones when does the voting officially close? and when will the results be published?
cbf (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:19:19 GMT):
thinking that the date and time should be published in the future to avoid any confusion or concern
rjones (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:19:51 GMT):
it is listed on the ballot, I thought? ```Announced end of poll: 04 SEP 2019 17:00 Pacific
Email load: 13.67
Write-in choices are not allowed.
Detailed ballot reporting is enabled.
Voter identities will be kept anonymous ```
rjones (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:20:10 GMT):
it should have been part of the email you got.
cbf (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:20:27 GMT):
ah, I didn't recall that, was looking for the info in the wiki
rjones (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:20:49 GMT):
I should have updated that. I apologize, an oversight on my part - it's been a little turbulent :)
cbf (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:21:02 GMT):
yeah no worries
cbf (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:21:15 GMT):
was a little turbulent here;-)
rjones (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:22:21 GMT):
I hope your interloper treated you as well as possible. I updated the wiki page. I planned on reaching out to the winners directly via email tonight to ask who wants to self-nominate for chair
rjones (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:23:07 GMT):
Since there will only be 11 voters, I'm not sure it will take an entire week to conclude the election for chair
cbf (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:37:56 GMT):
we were spared the worst to be sure... just a little tropical wind and mucho rain
cbf (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:38:06 GMT):
it was more stress than I needed though
JonGeater (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:54:06 GMT):
I chaired the Ursa meeting today so I reminded everyone to vote :)
VipinB (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 20:48:42 GMT):
Just sent out an email on the IDWG mailing list reminding people to vote.
VipinB (Wed, 04 Sep 2019 20:48:57 GMT):
And that the polls are closing soon
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 03:30:18 GMT):
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:05:35 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?spaceKey=HYP&title=TSC+election+2019-2020+results
mwagner (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:09:21 GMT):
@rjones can you share how many people voted ?
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:10:06 GMT):
204 of 589
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:10:39 GMT):
34%
mwagner (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:10:55 GMT):
thanks!
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:13:55 GMT):
The turnout is low. The whole electoral process needs to be better to stimulate participation.
lehors (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:14:05 GMT):
Traveling in the mix of communiting through airports and the likes, only peeping while I can
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:14:38 GMT):
5 from IBM, 6 if you count Mark
lehors (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:14:52 GMT):
Expect to drop off anytime
mwagner (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:16:14 GMT):
@VipinB Don't count me with IBM, Red Hat is still Red Hat. We treat IBM like any other partner
binhn (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:16:29 GMT):
many congrats to the new TSC members!
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:17:04 GMT):
Congrats, especially to the new members!
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:18:00 GMT):
I am confident about your independence, also of all the other IBM members
baohua (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:18:39 GMT):
Congrats too!
lehors (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:19:24 GMT):
Sorry, erratic environment, I can't talk now
MALodder (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:19:56 GMT):
the ranking system is a pain to use for voting. I'm sure there is a reason for it, but can we consider more advanced methods that calculate rankings but don't require the participant to rank directly like MaxDiff
lehors (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:20:17 GMT):
On the results, we got more gender diversity with Swetha and Tracy but lost on companies and projects diversity, I'm in favor of expanding the TSC ASAP
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:20:40 GMT):
@MALodder you can put all of the people you want to win ranked "1" and everyone else "31" or whatever
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:22:57 GMT):
I'm not going to paste the results, but for my amusement I diffed the results using each of the ranking methods. Each of the different methods only ended up in one person that won using IRV not making the cut, and one other person being on.
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:26:24 GMT):
Community is mature? Is a light switch?
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:26:28 GMT):
1.
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:27:45 GMT):
BTC is 0.14
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:28:02 GMT):
Or something like that
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:28:56 GMT):
so does it have to be v1.0 for a first major release? no.
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:29:12 GMT):
Look at Besu for instance. They are doing their 1.3 release in September
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:29:36 GMT):
I think what we mean by "first major release" is that this is the first full cycle of applying the "Hyperledger way" to the release cycle
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:30:04 GMT):
that includes all of the reviews and the general consensus that it meets our quality metrics and deserves the marketing and community support
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:34:56 GMT):
@VipinB sorry, you're right, #1 isn't a lightswitch, but 1. a. is. CII compliance is strictly objective.
Silona (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:35:19 GMT):
"First Major Release
A project’s maintainers seeking to publish a project’s first major release (see semver) must seek approval of the TSC whether in Active or Incubation status as defined above. While it is expected that most projects will have reached an Active status by the time their maintainers seek to announce a first major release, the TSC may approve such requests also in cases where the project is still in Incubation status, should the TSC believe that the project's code is sufficiently mature."
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:35:49 GMT):
I am with arnaud on this one!
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:43:51 GMT):
not if you win in the next election or expansion @silasdavis
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:45:33 GMT):
@dhuseby needs auditing at more points
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:48:37 GMT):
Discovery of security vulnerabilities at any stage even those that have passed a security audit will be bad for the project. Are there continuous automatic security probes that can happen?
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:50:04 GMT):
@VipinB GitHub, for example, publishes automatic alerts.
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:50:21 GMT):
I was going to show an example, but I didn't want to pick on a specific project.
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:50:38 GMT):
Maybe we need to discover a cheaper security auditing process... There must be some thought shed on this @dhuseby because falling back on budget/time etc. not to do security audit has bit many pieces of software
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:51:59 GMT):
Version 1.3 or 1.4
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:54:05 GMT):
Be at least 1.0
silasdavis (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:54:16 GMT):
I don't think they are planning to do Besu then merge to Pantheon. I think pantheon will go away.
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:54:21 GMT):
+1 @lehors
Dan (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:55:08 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=16321788
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:55:09 GMT):
@cbf https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=16321788
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:55:45 GMT):
don't make decisions, put a process in place and follow the process
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:58:30 GMT):
Not just cheaper, but more frequently
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:59:00 GMT):
I agree @dhuseby
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:59:04 GMT):
DockerHub and NPM do the same thing.
swetha (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:59:06 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:59:12 GMT):
Many steps that increases security
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:59:12 GMT):
Many steps that increase security
VipinB (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 14:59:22 GMT):
defense in depth
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 15:01:12 GMT):
@here minutes are up: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+09+05+TSC+minutes
rjones (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 15:01:26 GMT):
recordings will be up _soon_
Dan (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 15:02:45 GMT):
instant minutes! cool
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Sep 2019 15:04:14 GMT):
@Dan it's just so much easier if I take notes as the discussion happens rather than after the fact. Some times, I am unable to do that, but I'm trying to do it as often as possible.
VipinB (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:09:03 GMT):
Congrats @lehors
VipinB (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:09:23 GMT):
New TSC chair!!!!
lehors (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:24:48 GMT):
Thank you, I'm honored and will do my best!
shemnon (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:46:35 GMT):
PegaSys is cutting a 1.3 release from the Pantheon codeline tonight, finishing up our current development sprint. We are going to be renaming everything then and moving the codebase over to the HLP next week IIRC.
shemnon (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:46:56 GMT):
So 1.3 looks to be our last Pantheon release. It isn't using the HL Besu name yet.
shemnon (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:47:17 GMT):
(tenative plans, don't quote me)
mwagner (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:54:57 GMT):
@shemnon Congrats and welcome to Hyperledger
ajsutton (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:56:26 GMT):
1.3 will be our first Besu release. Unless something has changed we'll be releasing Pantheon 1.2.3 tonight.
ajsutton (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:59:51 GMT):
Plan is to rename and move the codebase over to HLF github Monday the 16th (Australian time so hopefully all done by the time most of the world wakes up).
shemnon (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:05:19 GMT):
Doh, got the numbers wrong. Like I said don't quote me.
shemnon (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:06:03 GMT):
but tonights release looks to be the last Pantheon release.
baohua (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 18:27:41 GMT):
Congrats to @lehors and thanks for the past year's work @Dan !
lehors (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 18:28:04 GMT):
thanks baohua
lehors (Wed, 11 Sep 2019 18:28:17 GMT):
between Chris and Dan I have big shoes to fill :)
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:01:29 GMT):
gday
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:02:54 GMT):
Dont do ss!
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:16:17 GMT):
apologies, I have to drop. thanks again all
mwagner (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:21:23 GMT):
he is human!
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:24:31 GMT):
@lehors this is natural... LF projects are quite disconnected
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:24:55 GMT):
Whereas HL is breaking new ground
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:27:27 GMT):
So it is natural to have these topics of governance being looked at ... as we observe how the current system works- especially the emergent effects
Dan (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:27:30 GMT):
Does @mastersingh24 know the rule that if you miss your first meeting you lose your seat?
mastersingh24 (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:27:30 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:29:47 GMT):
So cross project collaboration have any lace for working groups
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:29:47 GMT):
So cross project collaboration have any place for working groups and SIGs?
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:32:08 GMT):
I'd like us to also focus on making it easier for new people to contribute.
nage (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:35:52 GMT):
Along with that we should be discussing tools, policies and process that help innovation happen and make Hyperledger the best place it can be to collaborate on our mission
nage (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:36:15 GMT):
whether that be build tools, in-person meeting structure, or common frameworks
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:36:48 GMT):
I'm fine with discussing procedural stuff if that's the stuff we need to deal with. If we need to handle procedures so that technical innovation can happen, that's great, and it's the responsibility of the TSC to do that.
cbf (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:36:49 GMT):
joined
mwagner (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:36:58 GMT):
Hi Chris!
cbf (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:37:18 GMT):
still taxiing
mpiekarska (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:39:57 GMT):
I would like the TSC to help guiding the projects to have consistent easy to use releases. Today we are getting reports from the community that some projects are not stable, there is no simple way to download images and some of the elements are pulled from private repos
cbf (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:44:53 GMT):
that’s a bit vague... is the feedback specific to one or more projects?
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:47:52 GMT):
What if the survey responses are poor? Any way to improve these? I liked the IBM way (just one question answered systematically)
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:47:52 GMT):
What if the survey responses are poor? Any way to improve these? I liked the IBM way (just one question answered frictionessly)
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:49:46 GMT):
Integration between wiki and github has been a topic that has come up
mpiekarska (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:50:08 GMT):
Not all projects, but many. I guess having clear requirements on new release: a set of common tests that ensure functionality and documentation.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:51:23 GMT):
Gary is here and not here
Dan (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:53:06 GMT):
Schrodinger's Gary
mwagner (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:53:06 GMT):
Does Dave still that flux Capacitor ?
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:57:18 GMT):
We don't even have the right to expand the TSC--it's the governing board that has to approve.
Dan (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:58:04 GMT):
We can make a recommendation to the board which they can approve.
tkuhrt (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:01:14 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Decision+Log - added to backlog. When I return from my vacation I will locate the template/plugin that I have used to include as an option for us to look at.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:42:21 GMT):
@hartm What do you think is preventing new people from contributing?
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:45:04 GMT):
@toddinpal people don't know how to get down the happy path to getting something running.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:45:15 GMT):
Regarding the role of the TSC/Hyperledger and convergence vs divergence, what benefit does Hyperledger get from having a set of disjoint projects that significantly overlap in features/capabilities but share virtually no technology.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:46:41 GMT):
@rjones Is that a unique problem to potential contributors or to anyone trying to use one of the projects? My guess is the latter, but wanted to be clear.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:47:00 GMT):
IMHO anyone.
mwagner (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:47:44 GMT):
@toddinpal the other issue is that there is no consistent tooling, processes, etc across projects. So you can't move easily between them
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:47:51 GMT):
For code-a-thons or hackfests or whatever, Composer used to be that onramp.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:48:27 GMT):
Well Composer might have been that for users of the projects, but I doubt it was for potential contributors to a project.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:48:41 GMT):
it was, though?
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:49:19 GMT):
Like I said, at the Google blockchain awakens event last year, the majority of teams trying to build solutions were building on composer, and they were coders.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:49:27 GMT):
as an example.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:49:58 GMT):
I understand, but were any of them potential contributors to whichever HL platform they ran their BNA?
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:50:19 GMT):
We're likely to have far more users than contributors
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:50:31 GMT):
Ah, I understand your point.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:50:41 GMT):
Although contributors probably start out as users. :-)
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:51:13 GMT):
right. There is a funnel, or a layer cake, or whatever analogy you want to use as people progress\
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:51:13 GMT):
right. There is a funnel, or a layer cake, or whatever analogy you want to use as people progress.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:51:36 GMT):
@mwagner I thought there was an effort to move the projects to a consistent CI/CD pipeline?
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:54:29 GMT):
@toddinpal I think it's hard (at least in many of the projects) to learn the process for contributing code. I've seen people who have excellent (fully working and tested) code additions struggle to get it added to various projects because they don't know the proper channels. I've also seen a lot of people get discouraged from contributing because they issue a PR and no one addresses it. There are tons of steps in the process of contributing, many of which are obtuse and not clearly laid out. These often discourage contributors, who will get frustrated and quit.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:57:35 GMT):
@hartm Is this related to Mark's issue? Also, I have to ask, is this a technical issue that the TSC should focus on, or a community issue that should be addressed by some new WG or SIG focused on community process issues?
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:59:17 GMT):
@toddinpal I wouldn't be opposed to having a task force dedicated to this problem. Are you volunteering to lead :wink: ? That being said, it is definitely a TSC issue, at least in terms of what we've considered historically.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:02:00 GMT):
I understand the history (at least to some extent), which is why I raise the question. Should these process issues be a TSC concern or at least direct concern? And while I'd be happy to volunteer, as an architect I'm probably the least qualified to lead a group addressing project process definition.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:17:31 GMT):
@rjones So are you suggesting that since it is hard to get started using a project fewer potential contributors will show up?
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:18:43 GMT):
Yes. It is quite hard to get a development environment set up. With the deprecation of Jenkins/Gerrit, at least code contribution will happen on one platform
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:22:30 GMT):
The whole concept of Business Process Modeling software is to make the journey from functional design to deployment and operations easier. Composer was targeting this. However, it was focused purely on Fabric, and was not really suitable for production quality deployments. There are other single dlt solutions out there
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:24:02 GMT):
One for Burrow, some others that I have heard of, but have not used. The whole BPM movement has been around for a while, but has not really lived upto the hype.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:25:33 GMT):
Anyway, Composer has been deprecated, people have spoken about wanting to take this forward. Accord has taken some of the ideas into the Clause project.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:25:45 GMT):
@rjones Is ease of setting up a development environment a project requirement to become a HL project or to exit incubation?
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:30:35 GMT):
It is not.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:44:11 GMT):
@toddinpal I think beyond the issues already discussed, a larger more general one is we don't have a happy path of discovery. There are a million chat channels, a million mailing lists, it's hard for a new person to know how to engage.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:45:00 GMT):
We have this page: https://www.hyperledger.org/community which as far as I can tell, nobody lands before they end up in chat
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:48:10 GMT):
Although it is useful, that page still doesn't have a linear guide to getting started.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:48:53 GMT):
Presumably we will have soon (or have already had) an influx of people joining for Besu who are both 1) new and 2) technically skilled. Maybe we could ask them what the pain points are with regards to joining the org, getting on the communication tools, etc.?
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:49:15 GMT):
FYI... here's the list of proposals for working group changes: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Working+Group+Task+Force
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 19:31:25 GMT):
Sorry to poke the hornet nest again, but I'd like to understand the thinking that was in place when the TSC was formed. According to the Hyperledger Project Charter (https://www.hyperledger.org/about/charter), when the TSC was initially formed, there was a limit of 3 participants from any corporation and its affiliates. Specifically it says "i. Startup Period: During the first six (6) months after project launch, the TSC voting members shall consist of one (1) appointed representative from each Premier Member and each Top Level Project Maintainer, provided that no company (including related companies or affiliates under common control) shall have more than three (3) votes on the TSC."
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 19:33:04 GMT):
So why was that diversity requirement present at the initial forming of the TSC, but not in subsequent TSC forming? Was it an oversight? Intentional? I realize that subsequent TSC members were decided by election, but how does that change the concern around diversity?
minollo (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 19:45:34 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:21:31 GMT):
@toddinpal You'd have to ask the people who wrote the charter. I'm not sure how many of those people who participated are left, and I'm not sure how much the TSC participated in writing the charter. Based on my records, maybe Chris, Mic, Satoshi (Oshima), and Stan were on the TSC when that happened (I joined about a month after the charter passed).
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:22:16 GMT):
Actually, I'm wrong.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:22:22 GMT):
@hartm That's why I'm asking here.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:22:27 GMT):
Wrong? never!
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:22:41 GMT):
We discussed it during the meeting on June 23rd, 2016.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:22:42 GMT):
LOL.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:23:20 GMT):
But it seems like it was previously set in the charter, and we didn't change it.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:23:28 GMT):
Seriously? Are there meeting notes to see what was discussed? Seems more like a governing board issue than a TSC issue unless the TSC governs itself.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:23:50 GMT):
Definitely a governing board issue.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:24:03 GMT):
Yeah, you ought to be able to find the meeting notes in the archive.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:24:06 GMT):
it does. the charter allows the TSC a lot of latitude in governance.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:24:14 GMT):
How does one approach the governing board to get their take on this?
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:24:15 GMT):
If not, I can forward you the email with the meeting summary.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:24:41 GMT):
@rjones Really? The TSC gets to decide who can be on the TSC?
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:24:58 GMT):
Read the charter carefully.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:25:44 GMT):
```After the Startup Period, there shall be a nomination and election period for electing Contributors or Maintainers to the TSC. The TSC voting members shall consist of eleven (11) elected Contributors or Maintainers chosen by the Active Contributors. An Active Contributor is defined as any Contributor who has had a contribution accepted into the codebase during the prior twelve (12) months.```
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:25:58 GMT):
I've read it and it seems as though the governing board established the policies for TSC membership.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:26:03 GMT):
@rjones I don't see where the charter mentions the TSC can change the number of people on it.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:26:12 GMT):
Right, that is a governing board policy
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:27:02 GMT):
@hartm the number of seats is a board policy. Who may or may not serve is clearly laid out.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:27:12 GMT):
The set of people that can vote it slightly wider
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:27:13 GMT):
As well, we've clearly extended the definition of an Active Contributor as it included WG participation which doesn't contribute to the codebase.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:29:03 GMT):
The TSC did last year, but there was no vote this year.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:29:31 GMT):
OK, so I guess we could add diversity restrictions without board approval, but couldn't change the number of seats. Is this right @rjones ?
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:30:03 GMT):
I would need to defer to Dolan
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:30:27 GMT):
I'd still like to know the reasoning behind the initial diversity requirement and why it wasn't extended past the Startup Period
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:30:48 GMT):
Can we figure this out? I guess we'll probably want board approval anyway since the consensus seems to be to change the number of seats.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:32:10 GMT):
you have as much information as I have about the reasoning.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:35:03 GMT):
@toddinpal I don't think it was discussed too thoroughly by the TSC. I don't recall much about the discussion, but it has been three and a half years, so it could just be a lost memory.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:36:01 GMT):
I certainly don't think there was any malicious non-inclusion of that clause.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:36:42 GMT):
In the meeting minutes there was an action item to establish a process. Was that ever done? It also seems a bit weird that the TSC gets to decide the process, timeline, and criteria for electing the steady state TSC.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:38:27 GMT):
@hartm So it would seem the charter basically says the TSC can decide however it wants who can be on the TSC?
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:40:04 GMT):
@toddinpal Yep, that's basically correct.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:41:12 GMT):
@rjones The voting this year AFAIK included not only "Active Contributors", at least as defined in the charter, but others that contributed to WG? Isn't that in contradiction to the charter?
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:42:17 GMT):
Not all voters are eligible to run for the TSC
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:42:40 GMT):
No--article 4,c,iii states that the TSC can redefine contributor.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:43:49 GMT):
@hartm interesting. Sorry for not going through all the TSC minutes, but was that done?
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:44:47 GMT):
If I recall correctly: at the first election, the (existing) TSC mandated that working group members count as contributors.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:44:59 GMT):
https://wiki-archive.hyperledger.org/groups/tsc/technical-steering-committee
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:46:08 GMT):
that has links back to 11 FEB 2016, the oldest I can find
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:47:19 GMT):
@toddinpal By the way, if you're interested in this process, the best thing to do is write a proposal or summarize your ideas and post here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Pending+topics+for+the+TSC.
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:47:21 GMT):
the initial TSC only has a few familiar names: ```
Emmanuel Viale Accenture
Kireeti Reddy CME Group
Shaul Kfir DAH
Stefan Teis Deutsche Boerse Group
Pardha Vishnumolakala DTCC
Kei Taniuchi Fujitsu
TBD Hitachi
Chris Ferris IBM
Mic Bowman Intel
David Voell J.P. Morgan
Richard G. Brown R3
```
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:58:50 GMT):
Kireeti Reddy->Stan Shaul Kfir->Tamas Blummer Kei Taniuchi->Hart Montgomery this happened pretty much at the first meeting (I was present)
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:59:10 GMT):
Or soon thereafter
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:00:06 GMT):
Where did I read about technical contributions (not specific to the codebase)- Brian had sent it around
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:02:18 GMT):
We did agitate for votes from Working Groups, not just a roundup of all people whose contributions made it to github (since that could be just a spelling correction); in fact I had people telling me to make a spelling correction to get on the voter list
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:03:35 GMT):
We got votes for the WG in the first election; we had to rejoin that struggle in the second as well when it was memorialized...
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:04:27 GMT):
The first TSC was not elected...
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:07:06 GMT):
Steady State: After the Startup Period, there shall be a nomination and election period for electing Contributors or Maintainers to the TSC. The TSC voting members shall consist of eleven (11) elected Contributors or Maintainers chosen by the Active Contributors. An Active Contributor is defined as any Contributor who has had a contribution accepted into the codebase during the prior twelve (12) months. The TSC shall approve the process and timing for nominations and elections held on an annual basis.
Maintainers: Contributors who have the ability to commit code and contributions to a project’s main branch on an HLP project. A Contributor may become a Maintainer by a majority approval of the existing Maintainers.
Contributors: Anyone in the technical community that contributes code, documentation or other technical artifacts to the HLP codebase.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:07:06 GMT):
This is the full section §4.a.ii (@rjones only quoted a part)
Steady State: After the Startup Period, there shall be a nomination and election period for electing Contributors or Maintainers to the TSC. The TSC voting members shall consist of eleven (11) elected Contributors or Maintainers chosen by the Active Contributors. An Active Contributor is defined as any Contributor who has had a contribution accepted into the codebase during the prior twelve (12) months. The TSC shall approve the process and timing for nominations and elections held on an annual basis.
Maintainers: Contributors who have the ability to commit code and contributions to a project’s main branch on an HLP project. A Contributor may become a Maintainer by a majority approval of the existing Maintainers.
Contributors: Anyone in the technical community that contributes code, documentation or other technical artifacts to the HLP codebase.This
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:07:06 GMT):
This is the full section §4.a.ii (@rjones only quoted a part)
Steady State: After the Startup Period, there shall be a nomination and election period for electing Contributors or Maintainers to the TSC. The TSC voting members shall consist of eleven (11) elected Contributors or Maintainers chosen by the Active Contributors. An Active Contributor is defined as any Contributor who has had a contribution accepted into the codebase during the prior twelve (12) months. The TSC shall approve the process and timing for nominations and elections held on an annual basis.
Maintainers: Contributors who have the ability to commit code and contributions to a project’s main branch on an HLP project. A Contributor may become a Maintainer by a majority approval of the existing Maintainers.
Contributors: Anyone in the technical community that contributes code, documentation or other technical artifacts to the HLP codebase.
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:08:12 GMT):
@hartm That's the process? Edit a wiki page?
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:08:44 GMT):
So HLP Codebase is the key term here... By having docs and tech artifacts in Googledocs and not github the WGs were excluded.
hartm (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:08:50 GMT):
@toddinpal It's obviously not the whole process, but it's the best way to start.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:09:14 GMT):
Now with the addition of wiki, the net is even spread wider
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:11:06 GMT):
However, the main difference here is the fact that github is gated through the maintainers, whereas anyone can contribute through googledocs, wikis etc.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:15:31 GMT):
The spirit of the charter is technical contributors; if you say only code in github is technical contribution that is a narrow interpretation IMHO
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:16:26 GMT):
And the tools dont even measure that, even if you change an RFC or comments in code you are in.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:17:27 GMT):
I also support @toddinpal 's interpretation of limits of an org
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:17:28 GMT):
@VipinB Agreed...
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:17:53 GMT):
Agreed that is about what constitutes technical contribution that is
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:18:51 GMT):
If working groups are under the TSC, then why wouldn't working group participants, regardless of whether they write something, be considered technical contributors?
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:19:36 GMT):
I think you're confusing those who can run for the TSC, and those who can vote.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:20:07 GMT):
Not at all, they are the same Active Contributors
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:20:42 GMT):
Contributor is defined later, but active contributors can all vote and run
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:21:03 GMT):
active being a contributor in the last 12 months
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:21:46 GMT):
@rjones not sure I understand why there was or should be a distinction. If you contribute, it seems you should be able to vote, run, or both.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:22:09 GMT):
In fact @toddinpal that is true- no confusion there
toddinpal (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:22:09 GMT):
Were all the current TSC members Active Contributors?
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:22:36 GMT):
IANAL. I am attempting a good faith reading of the charter. I disagree with your reading of it.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:23:19 GMT):
What do you disagree with? the electoral body can both vote and run, there is no confusion there
rjones (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:23:47 GMT):
You assert that.
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:24:21 GMT):
The charter asserts that
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:24:30 GMT):
Anyone who can vote can run
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:25:55 GMT):
It is only the word "codebase" that has been interpreted to mean git hub
VipinB (Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:27:28 GMT):
Even though the charter talks about technical artifacts and documentation
hartm (Fri, 13 Sep 2019 00:48:32 GMT):
Instead of going over the current text at the level of a Supreme Court case, it might be more productive if we wrote a new one. We will have to update the document if we want to change the size of the TSC anyway...
toddinpal (Fri, 13 Sep 2019 00:57:45 GMT):
@hartm I like the idea and it's probably something that will have to get approved by the governing board if the number of members are to change. Care to take a whack at how things should read? Personally I'd like to see: 1) TSC membership should be limited to those that have contributed to Hyperledger in some technical capacity. This could be code contribution, white paper contributions, working group contributions, or other contributions that help the technical HL community. 2) TSC eligibility and voting eligibility should be the same, i.e., someone that has contributed to the technical advancement of HL. 3) No more than 25% of the TSC membership can be from one organization or their affiliated organization as was stipulated in the Startup Period, 4) the TSC should should be expanded to 15 members. Thoughts?
hartm (Fri, 13 Sep 2019 00:59:43 GMT):
@toddinpal Can you put this in the wiki discussion page rather than the chat? That way it's easier for others to comment.
hartm (Fri, 13 Sep 2019 01:00:21 GMT):
Ideally, follow from the example from Arnaud and Mic and do a line-by-line itemization.
hartm (Fri, 13 Sep 2019 01:02:04 GMT):
Some of your proposals have broad consensus (i.e. expanding the TSC) while others may not (the company diversity metric). It will be good if people can state their opinion of each of these.
toddinpal (Fri, 13 Sep 2019 01:03:03 GMT):
So just to be clear, edit the wiki and add a new child page?
hartm (Fri, 13 Sep 2019 01:06:37 GMT):
Yep! I would add it in the task force work: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Pending+topics+for+the+TSC
toddinpal (Fri, 13 Sep 2019 01:12:36 GMT):
Comment away!
grace.hartley (Mon, 16 Sep 2019 18:09:25 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Thu, 19 Sep 2019 04:01:52 GMT):
TSC call for 19-SEP-2019 is cancelled: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/2667
rjones (Thu, 19 Sep 2019 04:01:52 GMT):
TSC call for 19-SEP-2019 is cancelled: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/2667
rjones (Thu, 19 Sep 2019 04:01:52 GMT):
TSC call for 19-SEP-2019 is cancelled: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/2667
rjones (Thu, 19 Sep 2019 04:01:57 GMT):
dtomczyk (Sat, 21 Sep 2019 12:39:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
klenik (Mon, 23 Sep 2019 07:29:13 GMT):
Dear All. The Caliper project update is published, and I'll present it on Thursday :caliper:
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q3+Hyperledger+Caliper
mwagner (Mon, 23 Sep 2019 12:03:22 GMT):
thanks Attila!
rjones (Mon, 23 Sep 2019 19:20:49 GMT):
@klenik we don't really do presentations any more - it's more of a forum for you to express needs or wants from the project to the TSC
klenik (Mon, 23 Sep 2019 20:38:17 GMT):
@rjones Ah, okay. Then the reminder email's text is out of date :) In that case, everything is in the project update, no TSC-level help is needed right now for Caliper :thumbsup:
Dan (Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:12:17 GMT):
Hi @klenik The idea is the TSC members should read the report beforehand and respond using the comments fields. During the TSC meeting a project representative can handle clarifications or highlight some need.
Some days we have more time in the agenda for discussion and other times we might not have any and need to rely on the comments section of the update.
klenik (Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:17:07 GMT):
Thanks for the clarification @Dan. I will address any questions you have in the comments, and I'll also be on the call just in case :ok_hand:
lehors (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:48:08 GMT):
@rjones is there a way for you to update the calendar invites so that the message no longer reads "is available to present it to the TSC" but instead says something like "is available to discuss it with the TSC"?
lehors (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:48:36 GMT):
I fear this probably means for you to update every single calendar entry though...
lehors (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:48:48 GMT):
if it's too much of a pain just say so
rjones (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 13:17:02 GMT):
so
rjones (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 13:17:02 GMT):
It's manual. I can run through and edit them, though
Dan (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:01:57 GMT):
lost my audio.. back in a bit
hartm (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:24:49 GMT):
Sorry I'm late--just made it.
lehors (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:25:00 GMT):
welcome, we're talking about Ursa
hartm (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:25:08 GMT):
Perfect timing.
lehors (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:25:41 GMT):
I highlighted the point you wanted to bring up to the TSC
lehors (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:25:56 GMT):
Dan gave a bit more background
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:27:12 GMT):
@mastersingh24 give me access to a z machine and I’ll make rust work on it well. I was the guy who bootstrapped rust on several different ISA’s and all of the BSD variants a few years ago.
rjones (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:28:07 GMT):
@dhuseby we have some Z machines for CI, I think?
silasdavis (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:29:31 GMT):
You can get _very_ low overhead calling Rust from Go if you want... https://blog.filippo.io/rustgo/
silasdavis (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:29:38 GMT):
still CGO obviously
silasdavis (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:29:38 GMT):
still C lib dependent
hartm (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:30:25 GMT):
My audio isn't working. We definitely thought about this multiple implementation vs single implementation problem.
Silona (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:30:39 GMT):
More of this technical discussion on the wiki please!!!
mastersingh24 (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:31:21 GMT):
it might work now ... I know we had issues with Indy in 2017 / early 2018
mastersingh24 (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:32:13 GMT):
which part of the wiki? lol
hartm (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:32:18 GMT):
One of the reasons why we started Ursa was that the "everyone write their own implementation" paradigm wasn't working for us. Projects were getting their implementations wrong--we didn't have enough cryptographers and cryptographic engineers to review and implement everything, and mistakes were made.
Silona (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:33:27 GMT):
Well you can start on the report... but th project teams can add the same feature the TSC is using on adding topics for discussion...HINT HINT
Silona (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:34:41 GMT):
@Bobbijn and her WG has been talking about best practices for wiki pages and I think this is a really good one to add. beyond getting started etc. I think people are just unaware of all the wiki functionality.
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:39:39 GMT):
I know personally all of the core rust maintainers and could establish a direct relationship between IBM engineers and the rust maintainers.
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:40:14 GMT):
If that would help get issues resolved.
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:40:32 GMT):
Rust is an easy toolchain to hack on.
mastersingh24 (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:40:35 GMT):
cool ... will check into this and let you know
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:43:13 GMT):
Maybe @mastersingh24 concerns could be met by making Ursa compilable as a stand-alone network service? That would also make my concerns about removing pointer passing across the API by settling on a standard serialization/deserialization system.
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:45:19 GMT):
Apologies - I dropped. Back again.
mwagner (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:47:11 GMT):
@troyronda apology accepted ;)
Dan (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:55:38 GMT):
I thought this was an easy one. :)
Dan (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:56:11 GMT):
Just a reminder that what this says is that the TSC doesn't micromanage this.
hartm (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:56:18 GMT):
It can be useful to have different maintainer lists due to area of expertise. For instance, if you're reviewing cryptographic code, you want to have both people who understand the math and people who are very good implementers review the code. Lists of different maintainers can be used to make sure this happens.
nage (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:56:50 GMT):
I think we are reading too much into this. We expect from a decision process perspective all maintainers have a maintainer vote and they need to work out between themselves who maintains which pieces and how they resolve conflict
Dan (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:57:01 GMT):
+1 nage
nage (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:57:49 GMT):
If one maintainer knows more stuff then the others usually naturally defer to them on those issues (in Aries, for example, Tomislav knows way more about dot net, so we listen to him on those issues)
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:05:09 GMT):
The Mozilla model for Firefox and the Linux kernel model and the Git model all work very well. I suggest we just copy one of those and force all projects to use the same model for organizing and maintaining the source code. Because 1) we would be adopting one of the time-tested and familiar models and 2) if all of our projects were managed the same way it would drastically reduce the befuddlement of newcomers that we hear about all of the time.
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:07:15 GMT):
And while I’m at it, let’s pick one CI system and force all project to use it. Because consistency will be unified metrics, security procedures and massive amounts of automation that will give us reproducible builds, automated release management, automated maintenance (e.g. contributors and who can vote for the TSC)
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:07:42 GMT):
I am now fully behind the philosophy of pick one and force all projects to adopt.
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:09:09 GMT):
There is simply too much friction in the way we are doing...uh...everything. And for what? So everybody has happy feelings?
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:09:34 GMT):
We’re not even achieving that.
rjones (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:09:56 GMT):
_makes grumpy noises_
rjones (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:11:40 GMT):
https://dev.azure.com/Hyperledger/
rjones (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:13:12 GMT):
please join us in #cicd to discuss
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:16:41 GMT):
@Dan - I am attempting to better formulate my concern (and why I am not so convinced on the simplicity). I think there great benefits to working on code in the Hyperledger community. (among them: collaboration, interop, common code contribution process, visibility). I also think we can experience issues if there isn't enough oxygen to allow for "related/sub/minor" projects to operate under the Hyperledger processes. I have not thought that the "labs" concept is a sufficient solution - this word has the connotation of a PoC. I also am wary if we have "code owners" working diligently at their components if they end up with a "2nd tier" role/voice in the overall project.
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:17:45 GMT):
I am not trying to say that the TSC should micro-manage (it should not), but rather we should have a common set of role guidelines and ensure their is oxygen for innovation and interoperability in the larger community.
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:17:45 GMT):
I am not trying to say that the TSC should micro-manage (it should not), but rather we should have a base set of role/process guidelines and ensure their is oxygen for innovation and interoperability in the larger community.
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:17:45 GMT):
I am not trying to say that the TSC should micro-manage (it should not), but rather we should have a base set of role/process guidelines and ensure there is oxygen for innovation and interoperability in the larger community.
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:20:00 GMT):
(the "larger" projects have their priorities and interesting projects might not fit into those current priorities - I didn't really understand what should happen to them... again, I don't think "labs" is the answer).
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:20:00 GMT):
(the "larger" projects have their priorities and interesting projects might not fit into those current priorities - I didn't really understand what should happen to those interesting projects... again, I don't think "labs" is the answer and I don't think the TSC shutting them down is either).
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:20:00 GMT):
(the "larger" projects have their priorities and interesting "related" projects might not fit into those current priorities - I didn't really understand what should happen to those "related" projects... again, I don't think "labs" is the answer and I don't think the TSC shutting them down is either).
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:20:00 GMT):
(the "larger" projects have their priorities and interesting "related" projects might not fit into those current priorities - I didn't really understand what should happen to those "related" projects... again, I don't think "labs" is the answer and I don't think the TSC simply shutting them down is either).
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:20:00 GMT):
(the "larger" projects have their priorities and interesting "related" projects might not fit into those current priorities - I didn't really understand what should happen to those "related" projects... again, I don't think "labs" is the answer and I don't necessarily think the TSC simply shutting them down is either).
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:20:00 GMT):
(the "larger" projects have their priorities and interesting "related" projects might not fit into those current priorities - I didn't really understand what should happen to those "related" projects... again, I don't think "labs" is the answer and I don't necessarily think the TSC simply turning them away is either).
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:26:32 GMT):
(by default, those "related" projects probably end up in their own GitHub organizations somewhere else.)
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:26:32 GMT):
(I wouldn't be surprised to see those "related" projects that fall between "labs" and "project" end up in their own GitHub organizations somewhere else and lose out on some of the community benefits...)
rjones (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:49:11 GMT):
please no more github orgs
troyronda (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:49:56 GMT):
@rjones by that comment, I meant the projects living externally to Hyperledger in their own orgs :).
amundson (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:19:08 GMT):
Has left the channel.
mastersingh24 (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:38:26 GMT):
My interpretation of the proposal / opinion is the following:
- There will only be projects and labs
- If some entity wants to bring their wares to Hyperledger as a project, they will need to meet the criteria for a project and they will need to follow the project lifecycle
- If a project proposal comes to Hyperledger which is related to another project, that project can choose / offer to bring the proposed project under it's umbrella (but this means it is considered part of that project)
- Projects under an umbrella should share the same prefix (e.g. sawtooth-, fabric-, indy-, besu-,burrow-)
- If an entity proposes a related project and that project does not want it under it's umbrella or the proposed project does not want to be under the umbrella, then it must not use the related project's name as a "prefix"
mastersingh24 (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:38:26 GMT):
My interpretation of the proposal / opinion is the following:
- There will only be projects and labs
- If some entity wants to bring their wares to Hyperledger as a project, they will need to meet the criteria for a project and they will need to follow the project lifecycle
- If a project proposal comes to Hyperledger which is related to another project, that project can choose / offer to bring the proposed project under it's umbrella (but this means it is considered part of that project)
- Projects under an umbrella should share the same prefix (e.g. sawtooth-, fabric-, indy-, besu-,burrow-)
- If an entity proposes a related project and that project does not want it under its umbrella or the proposed project does not want to be under the umbrella, then it must not use the related project's name as a "prefix"
mastersingh24 (Thu, 26 Sep 2019 17:39:46 GMT):
Personally I think if the code does not already exist outside of Hyperledger then it likely should not meet project entry criteria. Of course labs are an exception.
Dan (Fri, 27 Sep 2019 05:58:14 GMT):
@troyronda I hear you, and that's part of the history of this proposal that some second tier projects would get forced under higher tier projects. I think that what's gotten confusing is instead of just voting `no` to that proposal we tried to rephrase a negative proposal to vote `yes` on. I think @mastersingh24 has captured the end goal well and this is effectively the status quo (but for maybe formalizing things like the naming).
rjones (Fri, 27 Sep 2019 06:04:59 GMT):
Going over the past TSC minutes, this is a problem the TSC has been tussling with since the first TSC meeting.
Dan (Fri, 27 Sep 2019 06:19:17 GMT):
It goes along with what we want to be when we grow up.... a converged architecture with tools, a collection of everything blockchain, ... my vote is a firefighter :fire_engine:
baohua (Fri, 27 Sep 2019 18:38:10 GMT):
Would like to see there will spend more time on technical issues.
dplumb (Fri, 27 Sep 2019 20:07:44 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Tue, 01 Oct 2019 17:16:42 GMT):
@Dan I want to be very, very old when I grow up....
mwagner (Tue, 01 Oct 2019 17:17:21 GMT):
@mwagner fears that day is coming soon
JonGeater (Tue, 01 Oct 2019 20:28:38 GMT):
I struggle to see the point of an organization which is just “a collection of everything blockchain”, complete with multiple overlapping competing work and incompatible tool and deployment sets. There’s definitely no need (indeed there is an anti-need) for a TSC in that case.
And if anyone says “Apache”, I’m going to claim Godwin’s Law ;-)
rjones (Tue, 01 Oct 2019 20:30:13 GMT):
we should forge new ground - not apply practices which have worked elsewhere
hartm (Tue, 01 Oct 2019 21:32:40 GMT):
The question is whether or not we think there is a natural drift or movement towards convergence. I'd say yes, but that's open to debate.
VipinB (Tue, 01 Oct 2019 22:30:03 GMT):
Frankly, I would think that cross platform and convergence work should be done in Working Groups. This is also the reason we have the TSC. Agree with @JonGeater there.This is the natural place for it. there are episodes where there is collaboration between projects for narrow purposes. Code alone isl not enough as we have seen from many examples in the real world.
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:02:09 GMT):
@nage may be at IIW
nage (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:02:17 GMT):
I am on the call
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:02:29 GMT):
So why did they not notice you!
nage (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:02:33 GMT):
(And at IIW)
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:02:53 GMT):
Expect a report from you in Identity WG
rjones (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:02:56 GMT):
@nage I see you now
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:05:00 GMT):
@nage hope you are having a great time at IIW
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:06:06 GMT):
@silasdavis main differentiator from Besu/others
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:06:13 GMT):
Will be a good thing
mwagner (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:06:48 GMT):
Hyperledger Burrow - The Born Again Project
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:07:20 GMT):
Whay was the extension done?
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:07:22 GMT):
Why?
silasdavis (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:10:58 GMT):
@VipinB I did actually have a matrix for that in an earlier draft, but it was getting quite long and I was wary of misrepresenting other projects. Perhaps I could add a paragraph specific to Besu?
nage (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:11:38 GMT):
IIW is going very well. The Aries related meetings are all standing room only, and a lot of progress is being made.
rjones (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:12:10 GMT):
thanks, @lehors
Silona (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:14:44 GMT):
the big change in creating a space for the TSC - it is will be easy for people to add a watcher notification to the entire TSC space
hartm (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:15:58 GMT):
If you read the charter, it's not clear whether some of these things need governing board approval or not.
hartm (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:16:08 GMT):
The charter is really ambiguous in a lot of places.
hartm (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:21:51 GMT):
It's probably best just to get everything approved by the board.
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:33:46 GMT):
+1 nage
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:34:02 GMT):
Solving problems that may not exist
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:36:54 GMT):
The observers should be trusted
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:37:09 GMT):
Same as we trust the HL staff
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:49:03 GMT):
Is not a co-chair
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:49:43 GMT):
Just a vice-chair
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:50:59 GMT):
ratholes everywhere
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:53:03 GMT):
Condorcet only publishes ranking
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:53:35 GMT):
Can the chair run as vice-chair (heh heh)
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:54:03 GMT):
Vice-chair not co-chair
Silona (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:58:37 GMT):
yes people might want to be vice and not full chair
Silona (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 14:59:00 GMT):
we should take the adding TSC members offline to wiki
VipinB (Thu, 03 Oct 2019 15:01:37 GMT):
Thanks- TSC!
hartm (Sun, 06 Oct 2019 20:27:13 GMT):
Are we planning on having a TSC meeting this coming week? There are a lot of events.
JonGeater (Sun, 06 Oct 2019 20:50:21 GMT):
Maybe you could nominate a vice-Hart to cover you
rjones (Mon, 07 Oct 2019 00:48:10 GMT):
@hartm I was planning on running one - I think it's up to the TSC to make that decision?
lehors (Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:40:19 GMT):
I'm for having the call
lehors (Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:40:27 GMT):
I already started an agenda
lehors (Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:41:15 GMT):
even though several of us are at the maintainers summit I think we could do the call for 1h
lehors (Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:41:24 GMT):
I would like to kill a few more issues
lehors (Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:41:39 GMT):
but I'll ask others how they feel and we'll see
lehors (Tue, 08 Oct 2019 18:20:23 GMT):
so, I confirm: we will have the TSC call this week as scheduled
lehors (Tue, 08 Oct 2019 18:20:41 GMT):
those of us at the maintainers summit will call in from the meeting room
rjones (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:51:04 GMT):
@lehors if those of you in the meeting room could check yourselves off here that would be awesome: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2019+10+10+TSC+Minutes
lehors (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:58:16 GMT):
hi guys
lehors (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:58:33 GMT):
we are trying to get unmuted
lehors (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:59:07 GMT):
@rjones can you please unmute us??
lehors (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:59:26 GMT):
I think we're the only ones connected via phone
Dan (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 13:59:53 GMT):
We're all here!
rjones (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:34:04 GMT):
@mwagner did you object?
mwagner (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:34:25 GMT):
yes
rjones (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:34:32 GMT):
OK, thanks, I thought you did
Dan (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:54:24 GMT):
+1 @swetha
hartm (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:58:14 GMT):
The TSC will not have quotas or restrictions on membership.
cbf (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:58:20 GMT):
Motion: the TSC affirms that there should be no limits or quotas on TSC membership diversity
cbf (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:58:37 GMT):
seconded by Mark
cbf (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:58:55 GMT):
approved
mwagner (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:02:23 GMT):
@lehors perhaps next meeting we could have a readout of the maintainers meeting. Seems like you folks are making great progress
lehors (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:02:59 GMT):
yes, that sounds like a good idea
lehors (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:05:31 GMT):
fyi, we're now talking about how to gather the notes
lehors (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:05:49 GMT):
so people who weren't here can go through them
rjones (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:24:47 GMT):
the wiki, maybe?
Dan (Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:28:47 GMT):
Yes, we asked people to add notes to the event's wiki. Some have already dumped notes to respective :rocket: chat channel or lists. We will also pull together a summary.
MHBauer (Fri, 11 Oct 2019 22:12:54 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
MHBauer (Fri, 11 Oct 2019 22:13:56 GMT):
Are any of these videos uploaded to youtube? Nicer way to browse with a subscription rather than a thousand wiki pages.
MHBauer (Fri, 11 Oct 2019 22:14:15 GMT):
(suggesting in addition, not repalcement)
MHBauer (Fri, 11 Oct 2019 23:02:17 GMT):
and if it's zoom to have the participant window visible so we know who is talking.
rjones (Sat, 12 Oct 2019 01:17:45 GMT):
they aren't. I agree they should be on YouTube.
shemnon (Sat, 12 Oct 2019 04:12:44 GMT):
So if we uploaded contributor calls for other projects do we need TSC approval or is it just a "go and do" thing?
shemnon (Sat, 12 Oct 2019 04:12:44 GMT):
So if we uploaded contributor calls to youtube for other projects do we need TSC approval or is it just a "go and do" thing?
rjones (Sat, 12 Oct 2019 09:20:26 GMT):
it's up to each WG to decide how to handle meeting reports. YouTube is blocked in some places.
rjones (Sat, 12 Oct 2019 09:20:33 GMT):
WG/project/etc.
baohua (Sun, 13 Oct 2019 04:37:41 GMT):
And minutes seems more efficient in searching and reviewing.
rjones (Sun, 13 Oct 2019 06:02:32 GMT):
agreed. Since we now have all of the minutes in the wiki, they should be easier to search
Silona (Mon, 14 Oct 2019 02:40:44 GMT):
So if we uploaded contributor calls to youtube for other projects do we need TSC approval or is it just a "go and do" thing?
Silona (Mon, 14 Oct 2019 02:43:45 GMT):
it is about permanence and anti-trust. We ask that you centralize in the wiki and we are going to begin automating checking it.
bbehlendorf (Tue, 22 Oct 2019 20:00:50 GMT):
Hi all. Is anyone aware of any telemetry recording done by any Hyperledger project? Where any of our code phones-home to third party services to report on usage, etc? I don't mean things like Dockerhub etc.
silasdavis (Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:22:43 GMT):
I assume you mean reporting to a project-controlled account like crashlytics, but Burrow reports to Prometheus electively, but not any account/instance we control.
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:03:58 GMT):
Any questions on IDWG report
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:06:02 GMT):
No teeth
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:06:17 GMT):
in any working group
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:06:43 GMT):
@mwagner +1
cbf (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:24:18 GMT):
call them TSIGs
mwagner (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:28:59 GMT):
Cake ! There is cake?
mwagner (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:32:23 GMT):
TRex!
mwagner (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:32:48 GMT):
Technical Research / Engineering Exchange!
rjones (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:33:06 GMT):
```$ echo "TSig" | md5
cda6ffea05eef299b2509c8c75363b23
```
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:35:56 GMT):
Salt the hash @rjones! plus use another hashing algorithm
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:36:32 GMT):
+1 @lehors
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:39:05 GMT):
@author should be clear on all files
mwagner (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:39:46 GMT):
sounds like we need a task force!
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:40:14 GMT):
Who do you call?
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:40:32 GMT):
Taskbusters
hartm (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:40:33 GMT):
MD5?
mwagner (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:41:37 GMT):
is Gari playing in the road again ?
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:41:53 GMT):
What happens when there is no timely review
mwagner (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:42:07 GMT):
@mwagner is still waiting for cake
cbf (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:44:49 GMT):
yes, but it also creates parochialism in project
VipinB (Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:47:56 GMT):
Ordnung ordnung
Silona (Wed, 30 Oct 2019 19:05:52 GMT):
Question: once policy is created like https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=16321784 how is it reflected in the documentation?
hartm (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:11:35 GMT):
For a state proof, is a threshold signature (from the blockchain) on a transaction sufficient?
hartm (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:14:01 GMT):
@nage I guess I should show up to the consensus call if I want this question answered, but is the bottleneck communication or computation?
hartm (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:16:19 GMT):
BFT --> finality but finality -/-> BFT
cbf (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:20:14 GMT):
in fact, in many BFT consensus mechanisms you don't have finality
cbf (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:20:20 GMT):
because you can always FORK
Dan (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:20:30 GMT):
Sawtooth could provide BFT & Finality but would need to add state proofs.
or likewise, Fabric could add BFT and state proofs.
Dan (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:20:48 GMT):
Something for the Indy folks to consider.
cbf (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:20:49 GMT):
right
hartm (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:21:12 GMT):
OK, *traditional* BFT algorithms --> finality.
hartm (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:21:20 GMT):
Thanks for pointing that out Chris.
Dan (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:21:31 GMT):
_practical_ BFT algorithms ;)
Dan (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:31:42 GMT):
@tkuhrt is a wizard!
hartm (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:32:46 GMT):
Very nice work Tracy!
nage (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:35:15 GMT):
Right now with the RBFT implementation it is the Python GIL, more so than computation or communication.
hartm (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:44:40 GMT):
Maybe the vice chair should manage the decision log?
cbf (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:46:42 GMT):
I created a TF page for the repo structure TF https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Repository+Structure+Task+Force
tkuhrt (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:52:20 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/tree/master/get_contributors is how we pull from the repositories today for the TSC election list
dhuseby (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:53:49 GMT):
the problem with that script is that we have to maintain the "mailmap" file
dhuseby (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:53:53 GMT):
and how is that version controlled?
troyronda (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:57:26 GMT):
It would be good to have a simple rule that can be automated (other than the email address mapping on top). E.g., directly derived from git commit.
dhuseby (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:57:48 GMT):
Tracy's scripts pull all of the authors of each git commit and remaps using a mailmap file and removes any commits created by tools
troyronda (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:58:07 GMT):
If it's a simple rule then hopefully we can reduce how many times this topic needs to be discussed.
troyronda (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:58:07 GMT):
If it's a simple automated rule then hopefully we can reduce how many times this topic needs to be discussed.
troyronda (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:58:07 GMT):
If it's a simple automated rule then everyone can easily understand the process and hopefully we can reduce how many times this topic needs to be discussed :).
troyronda (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:58:07 GMT):
If it's a simple automated rule then hopefully everyone can easily understand the process and perhaps we can reduce how many times this topic needs to be discussed :).
troyronda (Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:58:07 GMT):
If it's a simple automated rule then hopefully everyone can easily understand the process.
esplinr (Fri, 01 Nov 2019 21:29:37 GMT):
Our latest benchmarks show that we are CPU bound on the processing of messages by each RBFT replica. The Python GIL complicates removing that bottleneck.
VipinB (Sun, 03 Nov 2019 11:23:56 GMT):
Is there technical material on the scaling of replicas with your RBFT implementation
nage (Sun, 03 Nov 2019 15:31:00 GMT):
Not as much as I would like, but some. #indy-ledger-next is the right place to ask.
hartm (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:20:09 GMT):
Yes, the TSIGs should ideally spawn task forces.
hartm (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:20:39 GMT):
Example: some architecture working group talks get people interested in a particular topic. Some group forms a task force to consider the feasibility of building a lab on that topic.
Silona (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:33:25 GMT):
thank you Tracy! for thinking of the amt of work for your old team that a renaming will create!
Silona (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:35:02 GMT):
I would advise wiki and chat for Task forces
troyronda (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:35:11 GMT):
I had the impression that task forces would be for work product (rather than working groups).
Silona (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:35:19 GMT):
mailing lists get more awkward
troyronda (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:35:25 GMT):
I am perhaps a bit confused on the difference now.
rjones (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:38:22 GMT):
I only marked A-D as resolved, not A-F
MicBowman (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:41:13 GMT):
@troyronda task forces can come from many places, many of the recent task forces have been operational and created as a result of requests from the TSC
MicBowman (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:41:43 GMT):
e.g. project lifecycle, working groups, dci, ...
dhuseby (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:43:33 GMT):
I like formal sub projects because that is our list of candidates for new interop too-level projects.
dhuseby (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:43:33 GMT):
I like formal sub projects because that is our list of candidates for new interop top-level projects.
dhuseby (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:44:13 GMT):
For instance, Indy-Crypto was a “sub project” of Indy. It became Hyperledger Ursa and now has Hyperledger-wide scope.
dhuseby (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:45:48 GMT):
Encouraging encapsulation of large, original sub-projects is a good thing. It will encourage more interop. I think having formal sub-projects may encourage that.
Silona (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:46:12 GMT):
also releases x.0 reviews
Silona (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:47:28 GMT):
TSC reviews the initial proposal, the active status, and then the X.0 releases (currently)
tkuhrt (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:52:13 GMT):
Speaking of x.0 releases I noticed Quilt had a 1.0 release that was not brought to the TSC.
Silona (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:53:02 GMT):
yes that was a miscommunication. a 1.0 release to them is not a production release. they only do whole numbers at ILP...
hartm (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:54:13 GMT):
It closes the issue for now, until a year down the road, when we forget we discussed it and go over it again... ;)
Silona (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:54:18 GMT):
Also the change was not reflected in the Product lifecycle pages.
hartm (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:57:24 GMT):
Would it change the discussion on this if I landed a PR with everyone in my email contacts on the commit list?
mpiekarska (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:57:49 GMT):
Shouldn’t we just say that if someone inputs invalid email they opt out from voting? If they don’t want to be associated with Hyperledger they might not want to vote anyway?
rjones (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:58:19 GMT):
Besu project also needs a vote on active status
Silona (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:58:36 GMT):
no because having a public email on github sucks because anyone can harvest it
dhuseby (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:59:13 GMT):
All of this will go away when we’re all landing our own DID docs in the repos we’re associated with. Decentralized identity for the win.
rjones (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:59:32 GMT):
`git commit -s ...` publishes your email, anyway
dhuseby (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 15:59:40 GMT):
In-band identity management is the only way this gets “clean” and “easy”
Dan (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 16:00:55 GMT):
We are at time
troyronda (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 16:02:25 GMT):
Yes I was also going to ask about DCO with fake emails that havent been registered with Hyperledger.
troyronda (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 16:02:32 GMT):
seems like a related issue.
rjones (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 16:03:20 GMT):
it is an issue. We know we have people using `fake names` - the person typing this comment does not use his real name in this very forum.
Dan (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 16:03:50 GMT):
Satoshi? Is that you?
rjones (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 16:05:07 GMT):
My passport says one thing, my credit cards say another, and the name I use here is yet another
Dan (Thu, 07 Nov 2019 20:31:01 GMT):
https://xkcd.com/2225/
hartm (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:17:08 GMT):
Should we discuss the Besu status before we jump into the black hole of TSC elections?
Dan (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:31:03 GMT):
Zoom is enforcing expediency!
hartm (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:32:08 GMT):
I think Chris's approach is fine as long as we make task force approval very lightweight. If people can get fast (maybe even via email without discussion in a meeting) approval of a task force, then all of these issues are moot. If people have to wait a month before the task force approval to get discussed in a meeting, then it's a problem.
Dan (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:32:41 GMT):
I think there's no point to forcing an existing structured group to create a bunch of other overhead.
Dan (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:33:45 GMT):
The proposal was to not require WGs to deliver because they still had value in discussions.
TF's were an outlet for when we have issues that arise with no team to address them.
hartm (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:35:04 GMT):
@Dan I'm more OK with it if it is in the form of "we are approving your deliverable." I hope it's less of existing overhead and more "TSC, you must read my deliverable" (which is a good thing, in my opinion). I generally agree with you but I don't think it's the majority opinion.
VipinB (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:14 GMT):
WGs have had outputs- like Arch WG, PSWG etc.
lehors (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:18 GMT):
ouch
MicBowman (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:20 GMT):
well... now we know
lehors (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:26 GMT):
zoom kicked us out
dhuseby (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:28 GMT):
aaaaaand...there it goes!
VipinB (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:30 GMT):
The Gods must be crazy
dhuseby (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:33 GMT):
fuck I love zoom
dhuseby (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:38 GMT):
my favorite
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:57 GMT):
Hey everyone! Just coping some notes which I made on the Zoom chat and was asked to redirect to here.
The ETC support in Besu is working
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:36:57 GMT):
Hey everyone! Just coping some notes which I made on the Zoom chat and was asked to redirect to here.
The ETC support in Besu is pretty much done. https://github.com/ChainSafe/besu syncs to head successfully.
Perhaps 3/4 or more of the code has already been upstreamed:
"ETC Configuration, classic fork peer validator"
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/176
"ETC DieHard fork support"
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/177
"ETC Gotham Fork"
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/178
Pending is "ETC Atlantis fork" which then gets vanilla HL Besu nodes live on the ETC mainnet.
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/179
lehors (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:37:09 GMT):
so, what now?
VipinB (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:37:20 GMT):
Rejoin?
dhuseby (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:37:21 GMT):
try to re-join I guess
troyronda (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:37:26 GMT):
Rejoined.
nage (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:38:20 GMT):
And we’re back
cbf (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:38:41 GMT):
and of course I said all that and the meeting had ended
cbf (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:38:43 GMT):
sigh
mwagner (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:38:58 GMT):
but do you feel better ?
Dan (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:39:31 GMT):
So to recap. Change in WGs is because _some_ WGs were unable to fulfill chartered deliverables yet could still offer value from discussions. The goal in making a change was never to prevent delivery or create new obstacles..
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:41:34 GMT):
Hey everyone! Just coping some notes which I made on the Zoom chat and was asked to redirect to here.
The ETC support in Besu is pretty much done. https://github.com/ChainSafe/besu syncs to head successfully.
Perhaps 3/4 or more of the code has already been upstreamed:
"ETC Configuration, classic fork peer validator"
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/176
"ETC DieHard fork support"
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/177
"ETC Gotham Fork"
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/178
Pending is "ETC Atlantis fork" which then gets vanilla HL Besu nodes live on the ETC mainnet.
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/179
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:41:34 GMT):
Hey everyone! Just copying some notes which I made on the Zoom chat and was asked to redirect to here.
The ETC support in Besu is pretty much done. https://github.com/ChainSafe/besu syncs to head successfully.
Perhaps 3/4 or more of the code has already been upstreamed:
"ETC Configuration, classic fork peer validator"
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/176
"ETC DieHard fork support"
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/177
"ETC Gotham Fork"
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/178
Pending is "ETC Atlantis fork" which then gets vanilla HL Besu nodes live on the ETC mainnet.
https://github.com/hyperledger/besu/pull/179
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:43:30 GMT):
That support will be a point-release very soon. Not sure of release schedule off-hand.
hartm (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:46:01 GMT):
Can we talk about Besu instead of this?
hartm (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:46:22 GMT):
I really wish we would push this to the back of the discussion since we get stuck on it seemingly every week.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:50:21 GMT):
ETC Cooperative are committed to supporting Besu indefinitely.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:51:25 GMT):
Whatever PegaSys does in the future.
So we have at least "two legs".
But your point is fair.
It is still early.
Dan (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:51:35 GMT):
Did Gari rejoin us? I think he had something he wanted to discuss on this agenda item (Besu).
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:52:20 GMT):
What other companies are supporting Besu, @grace.hartley?
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:52:20 GMT):
I am here representing ETC Cooperative, who were today announced as the latest members of Hyperledger.
hartm (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:52:53 GMT):
What's the percentage of Consensys contributors on Besu versus the percentage of Soramitsu contributors when we approved Iroha for active status?
Dan (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:53:33 GMT):
And what did we learn from that?
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:54:18 GMT):
What is the diversity NOW for Iroha?
bobsummerwill (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:55:40 GMT):
Because I would agree that "blessing" prematurely would be a mistake.
grace.hartley (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:58:06 GMT):
@hartm There are approximately 20 contributors from Besu in the last 6 weeks (give or take). There were about 7 or 8 contributors outside of PegaSys over the last 6 weeks. I can follow up with the exact numbers shortly after this meeting.
hartm (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:58:48 GMT):
@grace.hartley Awesome! Emailing out that to the TSC list (and posting on the wiki page for this discussion) would be really helpful.
grace.hartley (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 16:00:14 GMT):
You got it!
dhuseby (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 18:06:08 GMT):
@lehors what exactly was voted on today related to the WGs?
lehors (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 20:26:28 GMT):
@dhuseby the answer is in the decision log :-)
lehors (Thu, 14 Nov 2019 20:28:04 GMT):
but it was no on a &b, and yes on c
shemnon (Tue, 19 Nov 2019 19:17:17 GMT):
Where do we submit discussion items for future consideration in the agenda backlog? Here? Directly to Arnaud (as the TSC chair)?
hartm (Tue, 19 Nov 2019 19:19:52 GMT):
@shemnon I suspect either will work. You may also be able to modify or comment on the agenda directly, depending on how permissions are set.
Silona (Tue, 19 Nov 2019 19:22:22 GMT):
add to decision log
Silona (Tue, 19 Nov 2019 19:22:35 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/TSC+Decision+Log
mwagner (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:02:55 GMT):
where are we meeting at today ?
mwagner (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:03:16 GMT):
my calendar says 317239767
mwagner (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:03:24 GMT):
for the zoom number
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:04:43 GMT):
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:05:06 GMT):
I also have 4 calendar invites for this meeting.....
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:05:27 GMT):
```Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/6223336701
Meeting ID: 622 333 6701
One tap mobile
+16699006833,,6223336701# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,6223336701# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
877 369 0926 US Toll-free
855 880 1246 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 622 333 6701
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/acTtmm3MX4
```
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:05:27 GMT):
```Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/6223336701
Meeting ID: 622 333 6701
One tap mobile
+16699006833,,6223336701# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,6223336701# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
877 369 0926 US Toll-free
855 880 1246 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 622 333 6701
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/acTtmm3MX4
```
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:09:16 GMT):
@nfrunza has an announcement
nfrunza (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:09:16 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
nfrunza (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:09:48 GMT):
I would like to bring to attention HL Explorer major release and going forward to move to active status from the incubation , thank you
grace.hartley (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:12:11 GMT):
Clipboard - November 21, 2019 10:12 AM
grace.hartley (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:12:13 GMT):
For the group's reference, I did answer Arnaud's question about the governance in my comments here:
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:13:40 GMT):
The Besu maintainer google doc appears to be all one company plus one maintainer from Web3Labs.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:13:40 GMT):
The Besu maintainer google doc appears to be all one company (PegaSys) plus one maintainer from Web3Labs.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:13:44 GMT):
Is this still accurate?
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:13:46 GMT):
I think @grace.hartley had the floor.
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:14:03 GMT):
I also think it's pretty rude to just take it away from her.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:16:23 GMT):
"The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project)"
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:17:32 GMT):
This is true of Sawtooth
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:17:48 GMT):
In the Google Doc, I count 19/20 maintainers from PegaSys.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:17:48 GMT):
In the Google Doc, I count 19 out of 20 maintainers from PegaSys.
cliveb (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:18:34 GMT):
Unsaid on lack of diversity in contributors and maintainers in Hyperledger projects is near complete focus on backend technologies. That goes hand in glove with lack of adoption of HLP in prod. Posit addressing resilient secure front-end app technologies will change the diversity.
cliveb (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:18:34 GMT):
Unsaid on lack of diversity in contributors and maintainers in Hyperledger projects is near complete focus on backend technologies. That goes hand in glove with lack of adoption of HLPs in prod. Posit addressing resilient secure front-end app technologies will change the diversity. s
cliveb (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:18:34 GMT):
Unsaid on lack of diversity in contributors and maintainers in Hyperledger projects is near complete focus on backend technologies. That goes hand in glove with lack of adoption of HLPs in prod. Posit addressing resilient secure front-end app technologies will change the diversity.
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:18:43 GMT):
Maybe we should fully define "The project must have an active and diverse set of contributing members representing various constituencies."
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:19:09 GMT):
I can reconfirm this
grace.hartley (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:19:14 GMT):
Sorry for the slow response, @troyronda! Yes, you are correct about the maintainer list. that is still correct with the 19 of 20.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:19:28 GMT):
ETC Cooperative are committed to maintaining Besu
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:19:42 GMT):
Whatever happens with PegaSys
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:19:45 GMT):
There is no one from ETC Cooperative currently in the maintainer list?
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:19:56 GMT):
No.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:20:21 GMT):
But the reason for this is that ChainSafe have done most of the work on behalf of ETC Cooperative.
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:20:39 GMT):
This feels like goalpost moving.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:20:47 GMT):
I understand that Greg Koufou of ChainSafe is going through the process of becoming an official maintainer.
nage (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:21:28 GMT):
These are all good progress points. In our experience in Indy and Aries, making the build system work for folks outside the majority contributor's company also took a lot of work. Perhaps status build/test/release process and its community friendliness would support the story?
grace.hartley (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:21:35 GMT):
@troyronda here is more information on our maintainer process. https://www.hyperledger.org/blog/2019/11/07/best-practices-and-lessons-learned-from-hyperledger-besu-establishing-a-maintainer-process
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:22:08 GMT):
ETC Cooperative have funding and we have engineers, but those engineers would usually NOT be the ones doing ETC work on Besu.
Instead we are likely to fund that work. Usually through ChainSafe. But maybe from other vendors. Or maybe ourselves.
But usually through contractors.
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:22:59 GMT):
I asked Nik to join this call because he need to apply for status but was UNCLEAR on what is required
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:23:18 GMT):
@nfrunza ^^
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:23:41 GMT):
maintainers or percentage of code?
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:23:58 GMT):
what about past projects?
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:24:31 GMT):
We need to update the documentation for sure.....
nfrunza (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:24:42 GMT):
@Silona thank you, Yes indeed we want to move forward to active status. We have contributors from DTCC, Fujitsu, Tecnalia, Altoros, and some other companies
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:24:46 GMT):
I have a 23-year career as a professional software engineer.
My colleague, Yaz Khoury, is also an engineer.
But on Besu in particular, it is likely that we would contract that work, because it is specialist, and because we have other projects which we are "hands-on" ourselves.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:25:27 GMT):
Yaz and I *could* do that work, but practically it makes no sense for the two of us to be maintainers.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:25:27 GMT):
Ed would be great as a maintainer, yes.
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:25:54 GMT):
@nfrunza do you understand the differences btn number of Maintainers and % code contributed? ecause I think that impacts you greatly
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:27:05 GMT):
Thanks for the link Grace!
nfrunza (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:27:37 GMT):
@Silona there are statistics provided by the GitHub, but they rely on the master branch, and contributors usually contribute to brances
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:29:31 GMT):
It's this line again: "The project must have an active and diverse set of contributing members representing various constituencies."
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:29:41 GMT):
It doesn't say anything formal, and is seemingly up for interpretation.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:30:11 GMT):
I usually think of the term committer as referring to someone with write access to a repo (aka a maintainer).
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:31:36 GMT):
This project was open source before it came to Hyperledger, no, @grace.hartley ?
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:31:36 GMT):
This project was open source before it came to Hyperledger, yes, @grace.hartley ?
grace.hartley (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:31:47 GMT):
Yes, it was open source before Hyperledger.
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:31:57 GMT):
And I have to admit - I took that as meaning %contributed code
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:32:15 GMT):
@mwagner ^^
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:32:28 GMT):
For example IBM has a high percentage of contributed code not in regards to maintainers
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:33:14 GMT):
I've said before that I don't really love the binary active/incubation status--it's just a bit that seemingly depends on what the TSC is thinking on any particular day. It doesn't really matter much except for marketing and informing potential users about the long-term viability of projects. But wouldn't just displaying useful contribution statistics (i.e. maintainers/contributors/code by company) accomplish the same thing?
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:34:18 GMT):
contributors like bob are significant but not really a maintainer because of the modularity of the code they are submitting
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:34:20 GMT):
If it were possible to determine company affiliations from github, this might be totally moot.
grace.hartley (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:34:26 GMT):
Besu's quarterly report is scheduled for December 5th
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:35:22 GMT):
workin on it...
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:35:23 GMT):
Yeah, we have had this style of discussion for all projects that have made it to active status, and they all have involved pretty heavy discussion. I wouldn't say this is unique for Besu--some have been much more contentious.
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:35:41 GMT):
:thumbsup:
nage (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:35:42 GMT):
For my feeling, I think the Besu team is acting in good faith and doing good work towards growing their community. I have some questions about where they are from a tools and community support perspective, not on whether they have them, but whether they are PegaSys team independent.
lehors (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:36:06 GMT):
very good, thanks!
cliveb (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:36:25 GMT):
As Google has shown with ML and tensorflow adoption. The diversity is in a community of app developers with backend core technologies contributed and mostly maintained by Goog. https://developers.google.com/community
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:37:05 GMT):
The docs they are creating for the community are really good. and with their class you can get besu up and running quickly (i took it)
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:37:30 GMT):
Why is Besu being punished for the sins of other projects?
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:37:51 GMT):
To be fair, the diversity aspect can also be gamed. I can work for whoever I want to when I announce my identity on github!
lehors (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:38:12 GMT):
yes, like many other things
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:38:29 GMT):
the way we are moving forward is to tie it to the LFID... but moving VERY SLOWLY.
lehors (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:38:32 GMT):
that's really uncalled for
lehors (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:39:05 GMT):
I didn't hear anyone saying they want to punish Besu or any other project
shemnon (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:39:08 GMT):
ed has teh requeiste 5 commits and I was going to propose it after thanksgiving to give proper exposure.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:39:57 GMT):
I feel that the spirit of the objective is summed up by "there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project".
nage (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:41:14 GMT):
Or perhaps "there is no single company or entity whose withdrawl would kill the project" -- if the primary maintainers left they would be missed but the project wouldn't have to be retired
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:41:32 GMT):
Agree.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:42:03 GMT):
I'm not sure how I can evaluate this objective right now for Besu?
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:42:17 GMT):
"There is no single company or entity whose withdrawal would kill the project"
PegaSys withdrawal would NOT kill the project.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:43:30 GMT):
It sounds to me that the criteria for active status need a lot more work.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:44:08 GMT):
I personally agree that it is likely too early.
But the poor criteria have wasted a lot of people's time.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:44:08 GMT):
I personally agree that it is likely too early.
But the poor criteria have wasted a lot of peoples time.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:44:08 GMT):
I personally agree that it is likely too early.
But the criteria not been sufficiently clear have wasted a lot of peoples time.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:44:08 GMT):
I personally agree that it is likely too early.
But the criteria not being sufficiently clear have wasted a lot of peoples time.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:44:24 GMT):
Both on calls
bobsummerwill (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:44:27 GMT):
And before the calls.
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:45:52 GMT):
@bobsummerwill Yes, we need to refine the document for sure.
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:48:46 GMT):
If the LF staff is even confused, then document needs work....
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:49:57 GMT):
Beating us with the law of bureaucracy! Devious!
nfrunza (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:51:44 GMT):
@Silona thank you, do we take in consideration demand of the project? how active is the community in Rocket chat channels?
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:52:25 GMT):
@Silona I commented on this on the explorer doc--we haven't done a 1.0 for a non-security related tool yet.
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:53:11 GMT):
@Silona The best way to get something done in Hyperledger is to write something that makes a lot of people angry, then make them edit it until they are happy ;)
nfrunza (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:53:18 GMT):
@hartm I'm somehow confused about the "non-security" related tool
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:53:44 GMT):
@nfrunza We require most projects to undergo a security audit for 1.0. That would be silly for Explorer.
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:54:35 GMT):
That seems to be the demotivating trend?
nfrunza (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:54:43 GMT):
@hartm we have audits in the past, and any security vulnerability is raised we are fixing within time range
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:54:55 GMT):
Only if you don't enjoy causing trouble!
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:56:14 GMT):
@hartm is there a small subset of explorer that may still have security impacts? I do not know this project, but I was curious about https://github.com/hyperledger/blockchain-explorer/blob/master/README.md#Authorization-Configuration
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:56:14 GMT):
@hartm is there a small subset of explorer that may still have security impacts? I do not know this project, but I was curious about (for example): https://github.com/hyperledger/blockchain-explorer/blob/master/README.md#Authorization-Configuration
hartm (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:57:45 GMT):
Maybe there is now? I haven't looked in a while. I still would expect it to be much less in-depth than a core DLT review.
nage (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:58:21 GMT):
My feeling is that any objectors should clearly articulate reasons for not moving forward before the end of the week (I could support if _____), and plan on having a vote in the next meeting no matter what the answers are?
nage (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:59:13 GMT):
(this doesn't solve the more generalized problem, but we can't hold Besu hostage for that process cleanup)
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:03:17 GMT):
@nage this could even be done on the mailing list, without requiring a meeting
lehors (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:16:01 GMT):
I wish we could avoid all these negativity, I don't think anyone is "hostage" here
lehors (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:16:01 GMT):
I wish we could avoid all this negativity, I don't think anyone is "hostage" here
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:17:16 GMT):
It feels very punitive to me, as an outsider.
lehors (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:18:07 GMT):
and how is that a punishment?
nage (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:22:16 GMT):
I agree with @lehors that it isn't intended as punishment, but it often feels that way to the project that is waiting on an answer. The problems being raised are ones of ambiguity and not specific to their situation. This pattern happened with Accord, the performance and scale group, Caliper and perhaps other times as well. A clear no is often more helpful than ongoing discussion without any clear way to affect getting to any decision. My hope is that we can at least give an answer like "we have to fix X, then ask again".
nfrunza (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:23:33 GMT):
@troyronda would you elaborate on your comment?
VipinB (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:40:00 GMT):
:thumbsup:
troyronda (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:56:04 GMT):
@nfrunza Beyond DLT security, I also assume GUI or API authn/authz or some forms of user-entered input (etc...) could be reviewable.
(I was just taking a very quick glance at the README.)
nfrunza (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 19:03:48 GMT):
@troyronda I agree with you, it may need to be reviewed, thank you as of now we do not have roles for the explorer, anyone knowing the fabric crypto acts as an admin.
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 22:48:04 GMT):
I believe when it got moved over to github is is also now getting scanned by the automated security tools in GH. which helps with GUI related input. can y'all confirm? @dhuseby @rjones
Silona (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 22:48:28 GMT):
but that doesn't address everything obviously
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 23:48:15 GMT):
the automated scanning is for dependencies with CVEs.
rjones (Thu, 21 Nov 2019 23:52:43 GMT):
For example: https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/nephos/pulls?utf8=✓&q=is%3Apr+label%3Adependencies
toddinpal (Fri, 22 Nov 2019 09:25:32 GMT):
Has there been any consideration of establishing a liaison relationship with ISO TC 307?
lehors (Fri, 22 Nov 2019 09:35:46 GMT):
Not officially. Some of us have unofficially liaised through participation in both organizations.
toddinpal (Fri, 22 Nov 2019 11:15:55 GMT):
Any reason to not officially establish a liaison relationship?
toddinpal (Fri, 22 Nov 2019 11:48:36 GMT):
Any reason to not officially establish a liaison relationship? Seems as though there would be a lot of value to both Hyperledger and ISO.
lehors (Fri, 22 Nov 2019 15:17:17 GMT):
I honestly can't remember whether we officially discussed it but I'm pretty sure the topic has come up before. I think the challenge would be to figure out who would be representing hyperledger.
lehors (Fri, 22 Nov 2019 15:17:53 GMT):
maybe @bbehlendorf knows more about this
rjones (Fri, 22 Nov 2019 15:44:58 GMT):
this is the same issue with EEA, right?
BrettLogan (Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:36:49 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
toddinpal (Sat, 23 Nov 2019 11:18:53 GMT):
Not sure about EEA
toddinpal (Sat, 23 Nov 2019 13:45:46 GMT):
I only bring it up as it would make sense to make sure Hyperledger projects are inline with the ISO standards that are being developed, and without Hyperledger participating in those standards, they may end up conflicting.
rjones (Sat, 23 Nov 2019 18:56:56 GMT):
Sure. What I was getting at is that Hyperledger and EEA have associate memberships in each other, but it's unclear to me who from Hyperledger can participate at what level at EEA.
lehors (Sat, 23 Nov 2019 19:47:07 GMT):
IBM for one is participating in TC307 with the main goal of ensuring whatever they produce doesn't conflict with what we are doing at Hyperledger
lehors (Sat, 23 Nov 2019 19:47:07 GMT):
IBM for one is participating in TC307 with the main goal of ensuring that whatever they produce doesn't conflict with what we are doing at Hyperledger
yacovm (Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:22:28 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Silona (Wed, 04 Dec 2019 16:45:10 GMT):
Reminder for tomorrow - there is much discussion happening on the updates for tomorrow and new decision log topics. Please readup and comment now :-)
cbf (Wed, 04 Dec 2019 19:29:57 GMT):
it would make more sense to have ISO standards reflect market reality and not fantasy... I am also unclear on who would represent us
Dan (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:06:41 GMT):
Hola
bbehlendorf (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:10:49 GMT):
This doesn't seem like we're ready to have this conversation right now. Let's do some research and discuss online
bbehlendorf (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:11:24 GMT):
switching chat platforms is a much bigger issue than streamlining the LFID process or fixing a bug with anon access
bobsummerwill (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:12:48 GMT):
@rjones "but it's unclear to me who from Hyperledger can participate at what level at EEA." My understanding is that the associate membership agreement for EEA applies ONLY to Hyperledger staff and "officials" - so probably all the TSC members can get access. But specifically HL members do not get inside the EEA paywall because of it. Which makes it pretty "meh", IMHO.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:13:44 GMT):
Essentially, an particular company needs to be a member of both EEA and Hyperledger to be able to usefully bridge the mapping of EEA specs onto Hyperledger code bases.
Silona (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:14:48 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/SCWG/Work+Products
Silona (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:23:32 GMT):
Nick cannot do 1.0 without being active under the new rules.
Silona (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:24:08 GMT):
Sorry Explorer cannot go 1.0 without active status
rjones (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:24:10 GMT):
@mastersingh24 agreed: people do think Hyperledger ships products, not projects.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:24:38 GMT):
Open source projects do ship products.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:24:55 GMT):
Companies may create derivative works of those products to make their own products too
mastersingh24 (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:25:09 GMT):
these are not products
mastersingh24 (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:25:13 GMT):
they are projects
mastersingh24 (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:25:37 GMT):
I won't vent here ... but I think it's a problem
mastersingh24 (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:26:17 GMT):
If Hyperledger PAID for developers, might be different
mastersingh24 (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:26:23 GMT):
But HL does not
bbehlendorf (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:26:25 GMT):
This probably requires a longer conversation to make sure we're using the word "product" similarly. For example, it may include an expectation of support, and that may be where end-users can get confused
mastersingh24 (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:26:38 GMT):
correct
mwagner (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:28:42 GMT):
Double Secret Probation...
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:29:58 GMT):
Can we clean up the project lifecycle documentation? It's not even consistent at this point.
rjones (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:32:48 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/2763
rjones (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:33:02 GMT):
@hartm sounds like a task force (I'm not being snarky)
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:33:04 GMT):
The rules never say "three MAINTAINERS." Just contributors.
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:33:23 GMT):
@rjones I knew someone would say that....
troyronda (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:33:25 GMT):
It probably should say maintainers.
rjones (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:35:04 GMT):
I think active contributors naturally migrate to maintainers, though, in a healthy project?
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:35:22 GMT):
Right now active status is required for a 1.0 release. That's really the only carrot right now.
rjones (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:35:38 GMT):
@mastersingh24 would Fabric and Sawtooth be willing to remove active status?
troyronda (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:36:33 GMT):
Is part of the concern the length of time spent in incubation to see how the project community evolves?
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:36:36 GMT):
Regardless of what people think of my proposal, I think it's pretty universal that we should have better community support metrics publicly available. Can we do something to ensure this happens?
mastersingh24 (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:37:02 GMT):
well I'd rather have people writing code .... maintainers are not always the people writing code.
and HL has admin rights to the repos .... so if maintainers bail, HL admin(s) can always add someone else ;)
mastersingh24 (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:38:16 GMT):
but if there's no one to maintain (write / fix ) the code, that's an issue
nage (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:38:54 GMT):
Like a community health weather report? (Outlook stormy vs warm and sunny?)
troyronda (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:39:04 GMT):
:)
rjones (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:40:50 GMT):
or BitWise from Sawtooth
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:42:14 GMT):
If we had good community metrics tools, it would be very easy to continually check whether communities were active...
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:42:40 GMT):
I disagree with the point that we shouldn't periodically check on communities. They change. We need to make sure they're still good.
Dan (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:42:43 GMT):
we've got the contributor scripts
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:43:11 GMT):
@Dan As I said in the email, I'd like to see more detailed metrics than that, and have them made public.
Dan (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:43:42 GMT):
Do you see that in other oss projects?
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:43:54 GMT):
No. But I would like to!
Dan (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:44:41 GMT):
One thing I do when I'm evaluating another oss project is just look at the github contributors page. you get a pretty visceral sense of whether there's many contributing and how frequently they are contributing.
hartm (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:45:54 GMT):
I do that too. But it doesn't list people by company unless they use their company emails (which isn't very common), and it's hard to eyeball if there are a lot of contributors.
rjones (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:50:22 GMT):
I would really like to get to the DCO topic today
mastersingh24 (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:51:34 GMT):
you're a dreamer ;)
rjones (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:51:50 GMT):
yeah I know.
rjones (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:58:17 GMT):
People change jobs, too.
Dan (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 15:59:29 GMT):
This DCO stuff feels like a policy and mechanisms the Linux Foundation could provide. That's one of the reasons companies come to the LF to setup governance on these kinds of oss projects.
Dan (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 16:00:33 GMT):
Gotta drop. Thanks all.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 21:27:51 GMT):
@lehors @cbf The question of liaison with TC307 is something which I raised in 2017 with me EEA hat on.
At the time I noted that the ISO groups existed, but had no idea who was participating in those groups or what they were saying. And noted the rather horrifying prospect of BAD STANDARDS being pushed into ISO by people who were not actively involved in building real world enterprise blockchain solutions (ie. participants in EEA, Hyperledger and R3).
From the EEA side, I don't think anybody did anything about that, and I was out of the EEA from October 2017 onwards.
I met with Walid AL-SAQAF of the Internet Society in March 2017 to talk about some of these issues. How should the EEA and Hyperledger interact with:
- IEEE
- IETF
- ISO
- ITU
- ICANN
I still don't think we have answers, but something I know for sure is that we need to be having the conversations. That was true then in 2017 and it is most certainly the case in 2019.
shemnon (Thu, 05 Dec 2019 21:55:02 GMT):
If it helps the legal team I can point to a specific instance I have in mind (in private).
karthiknvlr (Fri, 06 Dec 2019 05:45:58 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Silona (Wed, 11 Dec 2019 21:45:49 GMT):
Hello everyone -
Do you know of a developer event that we would like to get some Hyperledger representation at?
Please submit it here. The marketing committee will review them all as we go thru our budget for 2020
Thank you! - Silona
Silona (Wed, 11 Dec 2019 22:02:49 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/Marketing/Developer+Events
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:57:28 GMT):
TSC meeting starting n 3 minutes - https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup to login
rjones (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:07:38 GMT):
@lehors we have quorum
guoger (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:08:02 GMT):
twgc is also ready for review: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q4+Technical+Working+Group+China
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:12:03 GMT):
If we're going to have separate documents, I'd prefer if we had a common indexing method across all documents.
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:12:55 GMT):
I can make this a special space on the wiki also
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:13:07 GMT):
so easy to get notification etc
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:13:24 GMT):
and lock down for comments only until votes are taken
rjones (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:13:29 GMT):
Or use a git repo
Dan (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:15:08 GMT):
Yay for git repo
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:15:20 GMT):
I'm fine with either way.
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:15:35 GMT):
What I want to ensure is that we have proper indexing--numbering and labeling all rules and items.
Dan (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:16:51 GMT):
Like we've done whitepapers, might work best to draft it in something like wiki/docs and then when it's 90% move to git repo.
rjones (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:16:57 GMT):
yes
rjones (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:17:11 GMT):
what I meant to say was the results are published to a git repo.
rjones (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:17:30 GMT):
The collaboration could easily happen elsewhere
Dan (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:19:59 GMT):
Good to look for existing examples from other orgs:
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/bylaws
Dan (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:20:16 GMT):
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:26:57 GMT):
Chris
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:27:11 GMT):
Chris's point is vaild--we should create a new document from scratch.
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:27:19 GMT):
Or, from copy-pasting, anyway.
rjones (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:27:28 GMT):
I think the Besu project might disagree about how well things are working
Dan (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:30:35 GMT):
thanks @Silona
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:32:24 GMT):
Still in Beta but https://lfanalytics.io/projects/hyperledger
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:33:04 GMT):
We could ask for a specific dashboard from LFIT on what a diversity dashboard could look like? It will take awhile though
rjones (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:33:13 GMT):
His long, very good series of emails
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:34:02 GMT):
Could expand labs for incubation?
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:34:48 GMT):
I'm totally fine being persuaded that removing active/incubation status is a bad idea. However, I'd prefer these suggestions offer a constructive way to handle the community diversity requirement. What we have today seems really confusing and arbitrary.
troyronda (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:39:10 GMT):
I still thinks there needs to be some diversity requirement so that projects demonstrate community building.
troyronda (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:39:10 GMT):
I still think there needs to be some diversity requirement so that projects demonstrate community building.
troyronda (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:43:42 GMT):
+1 to Chris' point.
troyronda (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:43:42 GMT):
+1 to Chris' point (it's about avoiding domination).
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:44:38 GMT):
Can we give some examples of what it means to be "dominated" by one employer? I'm not sure where we want to draw the line, and I think this would be very useful for projects that want to propose active status.
mastersingh24 (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:46:52 GMT):
docker is/was the best example
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:47:23 GMT):
We also need to be careful about moving the goalposts.
mastersingh24 (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:47:32 GMT):
it was relly the fact that they did not accept things from others ... they just did what Docker the company they want
mastersingh24 (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:47:32 GMT):
it was relly the fact that they did not accept things from others ... they just did what Docker the company wanted
mastersingh24 (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:47:32 GMT):
it was really the fact that they did not accept things from others ... they just did what Docker the company wanted
mastersingh24 (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:48:45 GMT):
basically led to Kubernetes and mulitple container backends
hartm (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:52:55 GMT):
We didn't approve this, and this happened: https://www.hyperledger.org/blog/2019/11/01/announcing-hyperledger-quilt-v1-0-interledger-for-the-java-platform
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:53:09 GMT):
On sept 25 they changed it and created a bit of a loop that you have to be active to do a major release
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:53:19 GMT):
or sept 24th?
nage (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 15:56:40 GMT):
We do endorse things that are “releases” and expect certain criteria to be met by them: https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric/releases
Dan (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:00:13 GMT):
I think (maybe Hart) also captured that in one of the earlier threads (the defn of First Major Release). All part of let's just get those docs sorted out before we create more process related agenda topics.
tkuhrt (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:02:41 GMT):
I would say that the word "release" in "first major release" is more the issue. We probably need to change this completely to "project marketing announcement" or some such.
tkuhrt (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:06:14 GMT):
The question is whether each project has the same criteria for a release. Should https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Release+Taxonomy be expanded to cover that criteria?
Silona (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:09:40 GMT):
DLT vs tools vs libraries are all very different release criteria wise
tkuhrt (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:14:06 GMT):
Maybe. If you look at https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/fabric/Release+Exit+Criteria, there are a number of items in here that could pertain to any sort of project:
1. all of the agreed supported features are complete
2. features should comprise in total a meaningful set of functionality
3. adequate test coverage (unit and functional/integration) to have confidence that there aren't likely to be any gotchas lurking in the untested code,
4. maintainers have reviewed all remaining open bugs and agree on severity/priority,
5. zero high or highest priority bugs remain open,
6. the preceding release candidate will have been published for a minimum of two weeks
7. no bugs that affect security of the system remain open unless they have mitigating workarounds published in release notes,
8. that there have been security scans (static and dynamic), code audit and penetration testing with all significant findings reported in JIRA (major releases only),
9. code included in the release has been scanned for license infringements and no infringements have been found,
10. crypto code included in the release has been audited for crypto export compliance,
11. release has met all the criteria for CII Best Practices Badge Best Practices Badge,
12. documentation sufficient to ensure that users/operators have clear guidance on how to get started and how to configure and operate. The operational aspects need to be correct and independently user tested,
13. any features that we choose not to support, because there is risk or they are incomplete, need to have a build tag or runtime feature flag to disable said feature and clear guidance as to the risks attendant to enabling it,
tkuhrt (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:14:32 GMT):
These are all generic enough that they would apply to any of the projects within Hyperledger.
mastersingh24 (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:15:30 GMT):
There is no place to go to in Hyperledger to actually download / obtain releases ... we have no definition of what release artifacts are
mastersingh24 (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:16:06 GMT):
see http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
mastersingh24 (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 16:22:22 GMT):
man .. we were on our game back in the day ;)
shemnon (Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:04:29 GMT):
This is how EEA does most of their specs. Occasionally skipping the 90% in wiki step and going straight to github for some specs. Many of the meeting agendas are basically lists of github issues and github pull requests, all referenced by pull/issue number, so it is explicit as to what was agreed on. Then you can say "Section II B 3 was edited by PR #34, and here's the contextual discussion in the PR thread"
DordokaMaisu (Fri, 13 Dec 2019 19:26:38 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
DordokaMaisu (Fri, 13 Dec 2019 19:27:09 GMT):
Has left the channel.
bobsummerwill (Tue, 17 Dec 2019 18:06:02 GMT):
Is the TSC meeting on Dec 26th NOT happening?
I assume that will be cancelled with the holidays?
rjones (Tue, 17 Dec 2019 18:35:24 GMT):
@bobsummerwill correct: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2019+12+19+TSC+Agenda says ```Holiday break: no calls on 12/26 and 1/2/2020, next call on 1/9/2020```
bobsummerwill (Tue, 17 Dec 2019 18:44:55 GMT):
Thanks for the confirmation, @rjones.
bobsummerwill (Tue, 17 Dec 2019 18:44:55 GMT):
Thanks for the confirmation, @rjones
MicBowman (Tue, 17 Dec 2019 22:52:14 GMT):
for those who are interested... David Kohlbrenner from UC Berkeley will be speaking tomorrow during the AWG about Keystone, the Risc-V open source hardware TEE that is planned for use in the Oasis Labs blockchain. Meeting is 9am PT
klenik (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 10:10:27 GMT):
Hi All! The Caliper project update is published, sorry for the delay: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/2019+Q4+Hyperledger+Caliper
TL;DR; Everything's on track :)
Silona (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:59:25 GMT):
TSC meeting starting in 2 minutes https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
Silona (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:01:01 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2019+12+19+TSC+Minutes and https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2019+12+19+TSC+Agenda
Dan (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:21:09 GMT):
Yep cheers to @Bobbijn for all the work and energy.
Silona (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:21:17 GMT):
@Bobbijn is awesome and uplifts me every time I meet with her
Silona (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:21:42 GMT):
We need support from the projects themselves - go back to your teams and help her recruit!
shemnon (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:33:20 GMT):
Can we get clarrification on what role committer maps to? It is contributor or maintainer?
shemnon (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:34:44 GMT):
And can that clarification be written into the exit criteria page?
hartm (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:38:48 GMT):
Can we also get some clarity as to HL marketing efforts regarding projects? Apache, for instance, has very strict requirements around marketing for projects in incubation. HL doesn't have these, and we seem to market things that aren't active.
Dan (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:41:24 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=16321788
hartm (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:47:30 GMT):
I like Tracy's idea: allow projects to ask the TSC for promoted releases (and there can be multiple of them). We coordinate with marketing to ensure that appropriate releases are promoted.
Silona (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:47:37 GMT):
I would submit this to the decision log for clarification of that piece of that document
hartm (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:54:47 GMT):
Haha, it's a direct copy from Apache...
lehors (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:56:05 GMT):
does this work?
lehors (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:56:23 GMT):
yes
rjones (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:56:33 GMT):
https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=ZaBjkYwQhGTMaMf2L
Silona (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:00:37 GMT):
Meeting notes are up - https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2019+12+19+TSC+Minutes
Silona (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:00:45 GMT):
--END OF TSC MEETING
rjones (Thu, 19 Dec 2019 17:41:19 GMT):
`Recordings have been posted`
bobsummerwill (Mon, 23 Dec 2019 09:41:38 GMT):
FYI ... https://ethereumclassic.org/blog/2019-12-22-coop-contributes-ethercluster-to-hyperledger-labs/
VipinB (Mon, 23 Dec 2019 23:08:47 GMT):
@bobsummerwill was happy to help usher ethercluster into labs
Yazanator (Thu, 26 Dec 2019 20:05:12 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Silona (Thu, 09 Jan 2020 20:19:06 GMT):
Last chance! The Linux Foundation worked with Hyperledger Fabric Developer subject matter expert volunteers to identify the core domains and competencies for the Certified Hyperledger Fabric Developer (CHFD) exam, scheduled to launch in March 2020. Are you interested in participating in the Beta and receiving an early peek? The CHFD Beta is FREE for the first 100 who take the exam. Complete the CHFD Beta Sign-up Form by January 15, 2020 for your chance. If you pass you will be CHFD Certified!
Silona (Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:51:03 GMT):
Help Us Help you! Attend the Developer Relationship Meeting with Myself and our Marketing Dept. tomorrow at 9:00am Pacific Time.
For the agenda and Dial in info
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/Marketing/2020-01-15+Meeting+notes
Silona (Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:01:56 GMT):
Calling all Projects! We will have a special Kiosk setup at Hyperledger Global Forum for Projects. We are asking that all projects sign up to do 10 minute presentations. https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HGF/Projects+Kiosk We will close this page on Feb 28 for printing reasons.
Silona (Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:06:35 GMT):
Calling all Projects, SIG, and WG!!! We will have a Video recording Studio setup at HGF (Hyperledger Global Forum). We are asking that all projects and groups help us create a 5 minute video about your group so that we can promote it afterward. Sign up Here! https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HGF/Video+Recording+Schedule
Silona (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:13:15 GMT):
TSC meeting in Progress https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
troyronda (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:17:18 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/WGs%27+purpose+set+to+information+exchange+rather+than+production+of+deliverables
Dan (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:17:26 GMT):
Decision log item for WGs: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/WGs%27+purpose+set+to+information+exchange+rather+than+production+of+deliverables
I don't see discussion of reports
Dan (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:17:35 GMT):
Jinx @troyronda ;)
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:21:23 GMT):
I think "promoted release" means promoted by Hyperledger here. You're obviously entitled to promote your own stuff!
Dan (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:22:28 GMT):
I'm not worried about blogs.
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:22:59 GMT):
Dan is right--the "promoted release" stuff should correspond to the expensive stuff.
Dan (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:24:40 GMT):
Live blogging @tkuhrt 's comments: Expensive = {Audit, License Scan, Legal Committee, Official Marketing}
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:24:51 GMT):
+1 to Tracy. It's important to get documentation correct.
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:27:18 GMT):
The fact that we can't immediately come up with what promoted means indicates that we should define it in the documentation.
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:28:45 GMT):
Re Chris: if you look at the Apache guidelines (which ours are based upon) there are very restrictive guidelines for promoting incubated "podlings" in Apache, much more than we have for incubated projects in Hyperledger.
rjones (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:32:23 GMT):
What does Besu need to do to get over the bar?
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:33:14 GMT):
Can we say that a promoted release will have Hyperledger resource (people and cash) put towards it for doing things like security audits, legal review, and marketing.
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:33:14 GMT):
Can we say that a promoted release will have Hyperledger resource (people and cash) put towards it for doing things like security audits, legal review, and marketing?
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:33:14 GMT):
Can we say that a promoted release will have Hyperledger resources (people and cash) put towards it for doing things like security audits, legal review, and marketing?
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:37:47 GMT):
a promoted release will have Hyperledger resources (people and cash) put towards it for doing things like security audits, legal review, marketing, and other expensive items
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:39:45 GMT):
Note that this would read "a promoted release WILL HAVE" not "a non-promoted release WILL NOT HAVE."
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:39:54 GMT):
Marketing can still be marketing, even with this restriction.
Dan (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:51:26 GMT):
I am so confused about how this got confusing :face_palm:
Silona (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:54:35 GMT):
Active is such a strange term. Instead since Active is about having Vendor Diversity. Should we change it to a badge?
Silona (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:54:44 GMT):
Make it something measurable?
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:57:11 GMT):
I said something like this before the holidays and got blown to bits.
MicBowman (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 16:29:01 GMT):
@hartm: that was in your email right? badges with set criteria seem like a much more concrete way to communicate the status of a project... more work, but more concrete
cbf (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 16:47:38 GMT):
Actice is actually very commonplace in open source.
Silona (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 16:50:34 GMT):
I have only seen "Active" referenced in regards to are regular updates and bug fixes being made. Not to indicate Vendor diversity.
cbf (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 17:03:29 GMT):
The criteria for graduating at Apache is almost the same language
Silona (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 17:10:45 GMT):
Do you have a link? I see much on becoming a top project but they are more concerned with concrete documentation and licenses. http://incubator.apache.org/
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 18:17:27 GMT):
Yeah, if you dig through the Apache documentation, it looks very similar to Hyeprledger (unfortunately they also have the problem that we do of documentation being very decentralized and hard to find).
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 18:18:13 GMT):
That being said, we are way less restrictive than Apache is on incubated projects. If I recall correctly, "podlings"--Apache's term for incubated projects--cannot even use the Apache name except under special circumstances.
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 18:18:55 GMT):
Brian is definitely the person to ask about this. I've never personally worked in an Apache project, so I don't know how things work in practice.
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 18:22:11 GMT):
From https://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html:
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 18:22:25 GMT):
The project is considered to have a diverse community when it is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project). Basically this means that when a project mostly consists of contributors from one company, this is a sign of not being diverse enough. You can mitigate this requirement by admitting more external contributors to your project that have no tie to the single entity.
hartm (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 18:22:32 GMT):
This is almost our text verbatim.
shemnon (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 21:12:48 GMT):
Will the common repo structure task force be starting up anytime soon? I was hoping for some standard Code of Conduct boilerplate to update the Besu CoC so I only had to harass the maintainers for a sign off once. Will that come in the near term or should I just plan on running a CoC PR with broad maintainer buy in twice?
cbf (Thu, 23 Jan 2020 21:16:29 GMT):
Hi Danno, I made a recommendation in the wiki, and should probably post to the mailing list as well. Basically, that the repolinter tool that Ry suggested seems to tick all the right boxes if we tweak the policy slightly
JonGeater (Mon, 27 Jan 2020 13:29:49 GMT):
But we're not in Apache: we're in Linux Foundation. LF CII already defines diversity criteria for a Gold badge as follows:
"""
Continuity
The project MUST have at least two unassociated significant contributors. [contributors_unassociated]
Details: Contributors are associated if they are paid to work by the same organization (as an employee or contractor) and the organization stands to benefit from the project's results. Financial grants do not count as being from the same organization if they pass through other organizations (e.g., science grants paid to different organizations from a common government or NGO source do not cause contributors to be associated). Someone is a significant contributor if they have made non-trivial contributions to the project in the past year. Examples of good indicators of a significant contributor are: written at least 1,000 lines of code, contributed 50 commits, or contributed at least 20 pages of documentation.
Rationale: This reduces the risk of non-support if a single organization stops supporting the project as FLOSS. It also reduces the risk of malicious code insertion, since there is more independence between contributors. This covers the case where "two people work for company X, but only one is paid to work on this project" (because the non-paid person could still have many of the same incentives). It also covers the case where "two people got paid working for Red Cross for a day, but Red Cross doesn't use the project".
"""
We might quibble over whether 2 is enough, and whether continuity is the only reason for requiring diversity, but sure it makes sense to inherit this rather than invent something new nad slightly different from a completely different organisation?
JonGeater (Mon, 27 Jan 2020 13:29:49 GMT):
But we're not in Apache: we're in Linux Foundation. LF CII already defines diversity criteria for a Gold badge as follows:
"""
Continuity
The project MUST have at least two unassociated significant contributors. [contributors_unassociated]
Details: Contributors are associated if they are paid to work by the same organization (as an employee or contractor) and the organization stands to benefit from the project's results. Financial grants do not count as being from the same organization if they pass through other organizations (e.g., science grants paid to different organizations from a common government or NGO source do not cause contributors to be associated). Someone is a significant contributor if they have made non-trivial contributions to the project in the past year. Examples of good indicators of a significant contributor are: written at least 1,000 lines of code, contributed 50 commits, or contributed at least 20 pages of documentation.
Rationale: This reduces the risk of non-support if a single organization stops supporting the project as FLOSS. It also reduces the risk of malicious code insertion, since there is more independence between contributors. This covers the case where "two people work for company X, but only one is paid to work on this project" (because the non-paid person could still have many of the same incentives). It also covers the case where "two people got paid working for Red Cross for a day, but Red Cross doesn't use the project".
"""
We might quibble over whether 2 is enough, and whether continuity is the only reason for requiring diversity, but surely it makes sense to inherit this rather than invent something new and slightly different based on rules from a completely different organisation?
Silona (Mon, 27 Jan 2020 22:28:01 GMT):
The Linux Foundation’s CommunityBridge engineers are working on a tool to measure the health of critical open source projects and one of the key areas identified is QA Testing. They request that our communities provide honest and detailed information on testing tools and methodologies you use in your projects for us to come up with a detailed analysis, which they will share with all respondents and projects. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/9H5G2GV. It’s only 5 questions long.
abdelhamidbakhta (Wed, 29 Jan 2020 10:41:11 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
abdelhamidbakhta (Wed, 29 Jan 2020 10:41:12 GMT):
Would like to know if it is ok to ask for a YourKit open source free license for Besu (https://www.yourkit.com/purchase/#os_license) ? The only thing we have to do is to update the README and add a reference to their website.
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:02:35 GMT):
*** Beginning of TSC weekly Call ***
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:03:01 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020-01-30+TSC+Agenda
hartm (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:07:05 GMT):
The biggest issue for me with respect to the mentorship program is that it seems to require a summer of work (essentially an internship) but the stipend isn't remotely competitive with a Silicon Valley internship salary. It'd be difficult for me to convince a lot of people to try for something like this due to that reason.
mwagner (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:16:15 GMT):
@mastersingh24 so are you saying that you need a reminder from @Dan ?
mastersingh24 (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:18:33 GMT):
It's done!
mastersingh24 (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:19:01 GMT):
I was compelled to do it immediately
silasdavis (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:27:16 GMT):
I've had a bit of hiatus - but are we now in a position where I could make a 1.0.0 semantic non-promoted release without a TSC decision barrier?
silasdavis (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:27:16 GMT):
Captain Mark Sparrow...
Dan (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:27:50 GMT):
yes... i think ;)
Dan (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:28:47 GMT):
It depends on what the definition of is, is.
hartm (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:29:23 GMT):
If this passes, yes.
shemnon (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:30:17 GMT):
What if instead we make the propsal about LTS releases and not promoted releases?
Dan (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:32:19 GMT):
That would be the same to me. Just different words. There's some kind of release that requires approval.
Dan (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:33:34 GMT):
"vii. establishing community norms, workflows or policies for releases;"
cbf (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:35:01 GMT):
yes, we have no bananas
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:35:28 GMT):
Guidelines would be useful for determination of Quality expectations
silasdavis (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:36:07 GMT):
tech vetting...
mastersingh24 (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:36:36 GMT):
we get to do tech? ;)
silasdavis (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:37:29 GMT):
we should probably make a proposal for that
rjones (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:37:36 GMT):
@mwagner your point about more steering, less gatekeeping is a good idea
mastersingh24 (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:38:10 GMT):
but first we need to approve the tool we use for the proposal LOL
mastersingh24 (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:39:27 GMT):
can we set a limit on how many words Ferris can use in a response?
Dan (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:40:25 GMT):
_overflow_
hartm (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:40:31 GMT):
Use the busy beaver function!
rjones (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:47:44 GMT):
I'll create the COC file.
cbf (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:50:41 GMT):
thx
cbf (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:50:50 GMT):
do we have a .github repo?
cbf (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:50:58 GMT):
might want to do that
Dan (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:51:11 GMT):
yeah we maintain it on gitlab
rjones (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:51:11 GMT):
ok
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:51:46 GMT):
*** end of TSC weekly meeting ***
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:51:51 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020+01+30+TSC+Minutes
myu (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:01:13 GMT):
@hartm Thanks for bringing up the stipend issue. Our stipends are comparable to other open source project stipends and it's in line with other projects hosted at the Linux Foundation. Besides stipends, we provide travel funding to send mentees to attend a Hyperledger event to network, professionalize in addition to meeting each other and their mentors in person.
hartm (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:51:13 GMT):
Thanks for the response! Maybe I'm in an outlier position here, but unfortunately this is just not something I have been able to make work.
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 20:53:32 GMT):
Launched a new channel #hgf for all things Hyperledger Global Forum. Come on Come all
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 20:59:03 GMT):
There is a bug in rocketchat - this is the workaround https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/CA/Logging+in+to+chat thank you @rjones
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 20:59:03 GMT):
There is a bug in rocketchat - this is the workaround https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/CA/Logging+in+to+chat thank you @rjones
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 20:59:09 GMT):
Silona (Thu, 30 Jan 2020 20:59:45 GMT):
I did pin this at the top of #general but I thought this is another group that should know.
VipinB (Sat, 01 Feb 2020 16:03:41 GMT):
I had written something on the Capital Markets SIG about this, which was moved by @DavidBoswell and socialized in Chat Channel Tips (https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/CA/Chat+Channels). But @rjones has captured it visually and powerfully. It should be added as a link into chat channel tips. Thanks @rjones.
VipinB (Sat, 01 Feb 2020 16:10:22 GMT):
I have already added this link to the CMSIG channel tips
Dan (Mon, 03 Feb 2020 21:55:42 GMT):
Where are we with the governing docs reorganization task force?
Silona (Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:04:32 GMT):
working on gathering volunteers before launching
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:05:58 GMT):
HGF = Hyperledger Global Forum, if anyone was lost by the TLA
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:09:03 GMT):
The automatic reminders and calendar needs to be more intelligent. If the reports are already done, we should not get a reminder...
mwagner (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:11:34 GMT):
the pswg one did go to ur list, just 7 hours ago
mwagner (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:11:46 GMT):
ur=our
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:12:10 GMT):
IDWG had submitted, but we got reminders anyway
Silona (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:12:13 GMT):
Sorry - *** TSC meeting started 10 min ago ***
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:12:42 GMT):
@VipinB I'm not going in and editing the calendars when the wiki is updated.
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:13:10 GMT):
I am not suggesting you do- maybe a way to automate this
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:13:11 GMT):
The community is more than welcome to be more self-service when it comes to this.
hartm (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:13:12 GMT):
I came away with the impression that working groups didn't need to submit quarterly reports as well. Not sure what the actual rule is....
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:15:24 GMT):
There could be quarterly reports for general edification...
hartm (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:15:36 GMT):
"Working groups do not need to provide quarterly reports unless they have an attached task force."
Silona (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:15:51 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/TSC+Decision+Log
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:16:12 GMT):
I will continue to publish QR for IDWG- will remove the tsc members need to read
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:16:13 GMT):
"Working groups that do not have deliverables or task forces do not need to submit quarterly reports"
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:16:26 GMT):
It's probably still a good idea as a health check tho
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:17:23 GMT):
Great to hear the sweet sound of the pounding of the keys
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:17:38 GMT):
An hour well worth spending
cbf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:17:44 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Working+Group+Quarterly+Reports
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:32:35 GMT):
Dan was saying that requiring many files would lead to "clutter"
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:35:33 GMT):
I do think maintainers should be following the TSC mailing list and changes to the TSC wiki space, to watch for things that may affect their project, rather than the TSC having to remember to remind them to pay attention to relevant issues
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:35:48 GMT):
There are some files that are needed and it should not be up to the maintainers alone, I do agree that bringing the maintainers along is important
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:36:00 GMT):
In the usual case, issues discussed and decided here will affect them
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:36:50 GMT):
Is there a maintainers only mailing list or a maintainers wiki
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:36:50 GMT):
Is there a maintainers only mailing list or a maintainers wiki. Socializing using these for resources that affect the repo structure...
hartm (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:37:21 GMT):
I agree, but in practice many do not. Is there a way we can change this?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:38:40 GMT):
Mentioning that expectation the quarterly report reminders, perhaps.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:38:57 GMT):
But we shouldn't have to repeat the DCI call-out across each project for everything we think will affect maintainers
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:39:25 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/maintainers/topics
MicBowman (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:39:41 GMT):
i assume this will apply to labs repos also?
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:42:09 GMT):
The config file should be the same for all-otherwise modifying the config file would drift from best practices..
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:42:45 GMT):
We put this as suggestions in labs
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:43:05 GMT):
It is not enforceable anyway
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:43:17 GMT):
Even in non-labs repos
mwagner (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:44:08 GMT):
cant we just move the tool to the cloud and then it will all just automagically work for everyone everywhere?
mwagner (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:44:22 GMT):
and we can also give the users a pony
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:45:12 GMT):
Teeth?
hartm (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:47:06 GMT):
I'm holding out for a unicorn!
hartm (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:47:28 GMT):
I was hoping the DCO stuff would get resolved and we could use whatever came out of that to help us with election infrastructure.
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:50:27 GMT):
From guys that are not here
cbf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:54:27 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=WG&type=&language=
cbf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:54:39 GMT):
there are WGs that use GH
cbf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:54:58 GMT):
the issue is not identifying people wligible, it is getting eligible people to vote
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:55:10 GMT):
I disagree.
cbf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:55:32 GMT):
we have addressed this by moving the election to Sept rather than during the Summer holiday period, and but making the process more visible
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:55:47 GMT):
I welcome the TSC to run the election and see how easy it is to identify people.
hartm (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:55:54 GMT):
To further expand on my comment, I expect that once we hear back from the lawyers, we will need to base contributing privileges on the LFID. In other words, you'll need valid LFID with attached signed forms (for things like patent release) to contribute. If we have such a system where the LFID is the root of everything, then it should be very easy to find contributors and make sure everyone is accounted for.
cbf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:56:54 GMT):
@rjones that's a separate issue and I think orthogonal... frankly, I think there's a missing component of responsibility on the part of people to self identify
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:57:24 GMT):
Be sensitive to the observation from my team that the status quo is not good and needs improvement.
cbf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:57:37 GMT):
the list is published and people are encouraged to find themselves and either fix their data or request to be added
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:57:47 GMT):
Buddy.
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:58:24 GMT):
Status quo is not good
cbf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:58:33 GMT):
dude, I am aware how much you do and quite thankful, but I think we are misplacing the responsibility here
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:58:59 GMT):
So long as we accept contributions via forums that are not limited to LFID-badged tooling (the only way to really get working email addresses ) then no, the DCO thing won't really affect this
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:59:06 GMT):
Needs to evolve
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 15:59:23 GMT):
It is not a criticism of the past
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 16:00:32 GMT):
Let us look forward
Silona (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 16:06:38 GMT):
Things are changing tooling wise. My team has to stay on top of this and reflect it properly to the LF. Please understand that much of this is difficult to give to them as software requirements.
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 16:06:39 GMT):
Who is eligible is one of the questions. If it is just github, the community tools work well. What about the wiki and other contributions.
The next is participation rates: we need to have an active campaign to increase these. Both of these need to be addressed
Silona (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 16:27:42 GMT):
*** TSC meeting ended ***
shemnon (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 16:28:35 GMT):
If an LFID is required to submit a PR I would expect this to negatively affect Besu. I think LFID is fine for maintainers. It raises the barrier for casual contributions and that is the on-ramp to regular contributions.
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 16:48:52 GMT):
I don't think we could do that, since it's unlikely GitHub will accept LFID SAML any time soon.
toddinpal (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:19:53 GMT):
Is it just me (probably so) but is the TSC a misnomer? What technical issues does or has the TSC addressed? It seems far more consumed with policy and governance than any sort of technical issues.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:35:43 GMT):
It steers the technical community, and its governance decisions are intended, long term, to lead to optimal technical outcomes. Also, there are some types of decisions much more technical than others - decisions about accepting a new project, for instance, where scrutinizing the technology is a key part.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:36:27 GMT):
election issues are meta and ideally minimized to spend more time on more technical issues.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:42:19 GMT):
Fair enough. The LFID signup process has improved but could improve further (and we're told it will). But to ask this the other way - will those casual contributors be discouraged from contributing if, for lack of an LFID, they aren't given a vote in the TSC election?
shemnon (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:43:38 GMT):
requiring a LFID to cast a ballot seems like a reasonable step. I think the casual contributors who won't LFID to submit a PR are very unlikely to vote or care about the outcome untill they are onboarded to becoming a regular commiter.
shemnon (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:43:38 GMT):
requiring a LFID to cast a ballot seems like a reasonable step. I think the casual contributors who won't LFID to submit a PR are very unlikely to vote or care about the outcome untill they are onboarded to becoming a regular contributor.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:43:40 GMT):
It would be possible to automate a process that looks at the PR, determines whether all associated Github accounts correspond to an LFID account in good standing, and flag if it doesn't as something the maintainer should not accept. As one possibility.
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:43:54 GMT):
true
shemnon (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:46:06 GMT):
We get "drive by" commits to address obscure build issues and to update named network boot nodes. I don't want to add friction to those contributions.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:49:20 GMT):
Right - so one proposal could be to allow anyone to contribute (they still need to sign their commits with a CLA of course, and it's on the maintainers to have confidence in who they are) and not insert an LFID creation step in submitting such a response, or needing to log into an LFID-based system, but those contributors without associated LFIDs would not get a right to a vote. Just a proposal, but that seems to strike a balance and significantly improve the elector process.
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:49:36 GMT):
s/CLA/DCO
shemnon (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:51:51 GMT):
If they can do "eletion day registration" by getting an LFID and associating it with a prior contribution it satisfies my concern.
shemnon (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 18:51:51 GMT):
If they can do "election day registration" by getting an LFID and associating it with a prior contribution it satisfies my concern.
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 19:27:48 GMT):
I did not place any responsibility on anyone. Please do not put words in my mouth. Just that the process could be improved. This sentiment is more common than you think.
rjones (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 19:33:47 GMT):
Pretty sure that was directed at me
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 19:37:27 GMT):
In that case I am sorry and should delete my response
VipinB (Thu, 06 Feb 2020 19:38:35 GMT):
Which I have done...
hartm (Fri, 07 Feb 2020 02:46:05 GMT):
While I agree that requiring an LFID increases friction for a first contribution, I'm betting it's something that will be required by legal after the DCO stuff gets reviewed. As it stands right now, I could anonymously contribute something that I had a patent on and then turn around and try to sue the LF (or, something like this). As I understand, it would be very murky legally since who contributed the patented code couldn't be traded. While a per-commit CLA approach might work, I'm guessing this won't be any less cumbersome than signing up for an LFID (which would presumably include signing the CLA).
hartm (Fri, 07 Feb 2020 02:47:01 GMT):
Unfortunately, I am worried that we might get tied down here by legal requirements. I'm not sure how we can best satisfy DCO requirements without making "drive-by" contributions more cumbersome. Any thoughts?
hartm (Fri, 07 Feb 2020 02:48:37 GMT):
Yep! Brian is suggesting what I basically had in mind. We could have a whitelist of github accounts, essentially.
cbf (Fri, 07 Feb 2020 12:49:04 GMT):
I like Danno's suggestion. Not sure I'd take it to the extreme of election-day registration, but certainly could help resolve the un-crossreferenced commits in the list.
rjones (Fri, 07 Feb 2020 15:46:33 GMT):
I was doing essentially day-of registration for the length of the last election. the numbers were small.
VipinB (Sat, 08 Feb 2020 15:15:18 GMT):
This falls under cast the net wide!
jamesbarry (Mon, 10 Feb 2020 17:52:03 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
yacovm (Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:40:22 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-labs.github.io/blob/master/proposal-template.md
yacovm (Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:40:31 GMT):
> A sponsor is required and must be a maintainer of one of the Hyperledger projects, a TSC member, or a WG chair.
yacovm (Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:41:25 GMT):
Is a sponsor required to be *both* a maintainer *and* a TSC member, or can it be *either* a maintainer *or* a TSC member?
mwagner (Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:12:54 GMT):
I believe that the sponsor must be at least one of those three
rjones (Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:21:09 GMT):
either
rjones (Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:21:09 GMT):
either. the idea was to make it low-friction
yacovm (Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:23:55 GMT):
thanks, i wasn't sure
BrettLogan (Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:32:00 GMT):
`OR('Maintainer.member', 'TSC.member', 'WG.chair')`
yacovm (Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:49:55 GMT):
@BrettLogan - finally a format I recognize and can work with!
Dan (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:01:22 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020-02-13+TSC+Agenda
Dan (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:03:43 GMT):
@Silona did we get you DCI people for the kiosk / video or do we still owe you that?
Silona (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:09:40 GMT):
Yes we need DCI people to sign up here https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HGF/Projects+Kiosk and here https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HGF/Video+Recording+Sign+ups
Silona (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:10:31 GMT):
Getting started in iroha -https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/iroha
Silona (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:11:58 GMT):
*** TSC meeting time ***
Silona (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:14:32 GMT):
Description:Jessica Rampen is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: Monthly Contributor/Marketing Committee Sync
Time: Sep 11, 2019 12:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
Every month on the Second Wed, until Mar 11, 2020, 7 occurrence(s)
Sep 11, 2019 12:00 PM
Oct 9, 2019 12:00 PM
Nov 13, 2019 12:00 PM
Dec 11, 2019 12:00 PM
Jan 8, 2020 12:00 PM
Feb 12, 2020 12:00 PM
Mar 11, 2020 12:00 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your calendar system.
Monthly: https://zoom.us/meeting/982600073/ics?icsToken=069d0f6cbe5e5ecc5ffbbc7f4b2691ef6c0f4ca458d2d8b50a8e24e145058b1c
Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/982600073
One tap mobile
+16465588656,,982600073# US (New York)
+16699006833,,982600073# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
877 369 0926 US Toll-free
855 880 1246 US Toll-free
+1 647 558 0588 Canada
855 703 8985 Canada Toll-free
Meeting ID: 982 600 073
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abaoIu7JMk
Agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wNi4YqkyVvEw94yNaJR3UPgrtnGoXhYFDMlO9SGgFMU/edit
Silona (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:15:09 GMT):
Please come to the marketing Committee/Contributor Sync
Silona (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:19:22 GMT):
#cicd channel!
seanyoung (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:19:26 GMT):
Apologies for the background noise.
mwagner (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:20:41 GMT):
@dhuseby that teflon spray can be handy, nothing sticks!
rjones (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:24:01 GMT):
The perfect shouldn't stop the good in the interim
hartm (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:26:04 GMT):
I don't think Gretel agrees.
hartm (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:42:59 GMT):
It's a privacy violation anyway if you can get a list of who did and didn't vote, most likely.
Dan (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:44:39 GMT):
if we get more than 2 volunteers how do we elect them? ;)
hartm (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:45:46 GMT):
We need to have a long discussion to determine the election process, obviously. Then we can decide that that process needs observers too! But then if we get more than 2 volunteers, how will we elect them?
Dan (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:46:38 GMT):
I've got an idea. We could have an election for the observers of the observers of the election to elect the observers for the election!
Dan (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:49:28 GMT):
+1 tracy; human map reduce
nage (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:53:01 GMT):
Hyperledger Staff++
mwagner (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:53:30 GMT):
the Santa Clause
nage (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 15:53:32 GMT):
I agree we should give them leeway, they have done a good job running these elections and advocating for the community
Silona (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 16:06:20 GMT):
*** end tsc call ***
Silona (Thu, 13 Feb 2020 18:26:27 GMT):
Howdy Contributors and Maintainers! Are you wondering about tapping into Developer marketing for your group or project? Do you have a blog post idea? An awesome announcement? Please attend our Contributor/marketing meeting! https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/Marketing/2020-02-19+Meeting+notes
Silona (Mon, 17 Feb 2020 22:19:33 GMT):
Are you wondering about tapping into Developer marketing for your group or project? Do you have a blog post idea? An awesome announcement? Please attend TOMORROW! https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/Marketing/2020-02-19+Meeting+notes
Silona (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:59:17 GMT):
*** TSC meeting starting ***
Silona (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:59:25 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020-02-20
mwagner (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 15:07:25 GMT):
will we be given proximity devices for the 3 ft rule ?
hartm (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 15:44:40 GMT):
Is signing up for an LFID really that much friction? Rebasing your commits to deal with the signing issue seems like something that's more annoying than signing up for an LFID.
silasdavis (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 15:46:38 GMT):
There is a very limited way that DCO protects us from malintent; in the case of a first party insertion of patented code. It cannot protect from someone else inserting copyrighted code. Also adding a layer of indirection to, say LFID, doesn't practically add any more protection without doing serious KYCing which LF does not do anyway. So it is preferable to have the most minimal form of legal arse-covering we can get away with IMO
hartm (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 15:48:18 GMT):
I'm betting that LF legal will want us to do at least some light KYCing. Enabling anonymous contributions (at least, anonymous from the perspective of the LF) seems dangerous from a legal perspective (I'm obviously not a lawyer though).
hartm (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 15:57:51 GMT):
Solang seems great from a technical perspective. The question for the TSC is whether we want to accept very small projects (in terms of contributors) for project incubation. To my knowledge, we have never approved a project for incubation without initial contributors from two different companies.
Dan (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 15:59:32 GMT):
Regarding LFID, any service that requires me to signup for an ID before doing the thing I actually want to do is a problem for me.
hartm (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 16:02:41 GMT):
I'm going to argue that a notification that says "sign up for an LFID before your code can be merged" is lower friction than something like "navigate through the labyrinthine wiki to find out you need to sign off your commits so your PRs aren't rejected" which is what happens currently.
Dan (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 16:18:08 GMT):
well if we could pop up a notification that says "use `git commit -s`" that would be the same.
Dan (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 16:19:02 GMT):
really that should be clearly written in the contributing.md file which will have other requirements that maintainers need before they accept a patch.
shemnon (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 16:24:02 GMT):
We do discuss DCO in our contributing and point them to a wiki giving them all the details. And when our DCO check finds errors we given them cut and paste instructions on how to do it, and even chat support. They still walk away on occasion. There are some contributors who won't touch the terminal when it comes to git commands.
hartm (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 17:58:10 GMT):
@Dan I agree, but, from a legal perspective, we are probably much better covered by "sign up for an LFID". I would love for us to live in a world where we could all contribute seamlessly and anonymously, but alas, that doesn't seem to be the case. And the real problem (at least from what I've seen) is people forgetting or not knowing to use -s and having to rebase commits.
hartm (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 17:59:25 GMT):
@shemnon That's great practice for onboarding contributors. More of us should be doing stuff like that. And yes, you're right--some people walk away when you have to use a terminal. But presumably using an LFID would eliminate the terminal use for minor commits, which is a bonus in my opinion.
Silona (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 18:48:44 GMT):
*** end of meeting *** (oops sorry I was late) notes and recording are here https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020+02+20+TSC+Minutes
rjones (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 20:00:17 GMT):
Is there any plan for a TSC or maintainer get together on Monday before HGF? or the weekend before?
tkuhrt (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 21:54:02 GMT):
Here are a couple of things that might help new contributors:
* https://gist.github.com/tkuhrt/2cb6ae09fa6c122674766d2bb9239cdb
tkuhrt (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 21:54:02 GMT):
Here are a couple of things that might help new contributors:
- https://gist.github.com/tkuhrt/2cb6ae09fa6c122674766d2bb9239cdb
- https://tkuhrt.github.io/git-workflow/ (hit the space key to go through it)
mwagner (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 21:56:40 GMT):
@Silona since the meeting ran really late, I put in for overtime ;)
mwagner (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 21:57:38 GMT):
@rjones I dont get in until Mon eve, partly because I was under the impression we werent doing anything.
rjones (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 21:58:33 GMT):
@mwagner OK. I was hoping to at least hand out the rest of the TSC chips
mwagner (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 21:59:49 GMT):
@rjones should we bring the chips we have as a bargaining tool ?
rjones (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:00:03 GMT):
up to you all! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
mwagner (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:00:54 GMT):
btw, I am assuming that I dont need a car when I am there, anyone know ?
rjones (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:03:42 GMT):
if you're staying in the hotel where we have the special rate, I think it's in the same building
tongli (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:14:19 GMT):
@rjones do you know if the room is still available for conf participates?
tongli (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:14:33 GMT):
Our system showed no room available.
rjones (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:14:42 GMT):
the hotel may be sold out - I don't know
tongli (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:14:56 GMT):
Ok. I will give them a call. Thx
rjones (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:14:58 GMT):
you might ask events@hyperledger.org - they control that
tongli (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:15:12 GMT):
Oh. Ok . Thx
tkuhrt (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:29:45 GMT):
Mark, if you want, there is light rail from Sky Harbor to downtown. And Lyft and Uber still come to the airport too.
mwagner (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:49:10 GMT):
@tkuhrt Thanks!
rjones (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 23:03:01 GMT):
@tongli I was wrong - reach out to housing@linuxfoundation.org for reservations in the space
tongli (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 23:12:21 GMT):
@rjones great. Thanks.
rjones (Thu, 20 Feb 2020 23:12:35 GMT):
I only just got this information (when I asked who I should have asked, instead of guessing) :)
Dan (Fri, 21 Feb 2020 15:19:49 GMT):
I will need someone to drive me around though, so you probably still get a car Mark. :-D
rjones (Fri, 21 Feb 2020 16:39:06 GMT):
Warning: my oldest kid drives Uber in Phoenix, and he thinks he's the second coming of Kulwicki
Dan (Fri, 21 Feb 2020 18:09:05 GMT):
@cbf or anyone else on fabric, do you have the 2+ reviewer requirement written up somewhere? I'm just looking for good verbiage.
mwagner (Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:52:39 GMT):
@rjones can you get us a sweet discount ?
MicBowman (Wed, 26 Feb 2020 18:12:55 GMT):
is there a channel for the global forum? a couple questions have come up about the nCoV policies
VipinB (Wed, 26 Feb 2020 18:17:04 GMT):
Yes there is a COVID-2019 page linked to the HGF @MicBowman
agunde (Wed, 26 Feb 2020 18:17:35 GMT):
@MicBowman #hgf
VipinB (Wed, 26 Feb 2020 18:18:07 GMT):
https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/events/hyperledger-global-forum-2020/
VipinB (Wed, 26 Feb 2020 18:20:37 GMT):
I guess I spoke too soon. You have questions about the policies @MicBowman - Some of them are quite difficult to implement like standing 1 meter away from people.
MicBowman (Wed, 26 Feb 2020 18:52:10 GMT):
I'm aware of the page. More interested in how it will be adjusted as the state department adjusts the no travel, restricted travel lists
MicBowman (Wed, 26 Feb 2020 18:54:03 GMT):
Several companies are providing fairly restrictive guidelines for travel
Dan (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:11:30 GMT):
If anyone has the link to the HGF mentor session and sign up feel free to paste that into the announcement links. Thanks.
hartm (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:18:43 GMT):
Has anyone here looked at oxide, or using oxide for smart contracts? Links (https://cs242.stanford.edu/f18/lectures/07-1-sergio.html, https://cs242.stanford.edu/f18/lectures/07-1-sergio.html)
hartm (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:19:07 GMT):
https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.00982
shemnon (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:22:38 GMT):
eWasm also bans non-deterministic wasm operations, mostly floating point math.
Silona (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:53:36 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HGF/BOF+tables
Silona (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:54:37 GMT):
@dan here ya go https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/INTERN/2020+Projects
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:06:27 GMT):
On the ethereum problem of maintaining contract state, note that Substrate charges rent for contract storage.
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:21:15 GMT):
On the discussion of webassembly and the host functions, here are the host functions of a few DLTs:
https://github.com/ewasm/design
https://github.com/hyperledger/sawtooth-sabre/blob/master/tp/src/wasm_executor/wasm_externals.rs
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/fabric-chaincode-wasm
https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/blob/master/frame/contracts/src/wasm/runtime.rs#L503
You can see there are very different approaches in the details, however broadly they all provide the same functionality.
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:21:15 GMT):
On the discussion of webassembly and the host functions, here are the host functions of a few DLTs:
https://github.com/ewasm/design/blob/master/eth_interface.md
https://github.com/hyperledger/sawtooth-sabre/blob/master/tp/src/wasm_executor/wasm_externals.rs
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/fabric-chaincode-wasm
https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/blob/master/frame/contracts/src/wasm/runtime.rs#L503
You can see there are very different approaches in the details, however broadly they all provide the same functionality.
shemnon (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:33:08 GMT):
State rent was investigated on Eth mainnet but has been set a side for "stateless ethereum" research. Rent is a good solution but exceedingly hard to bring in 4 years after launch.
shemnon (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:34:46 GMT):
But a standard set of host functions that smart contracts can use to interact with DLT hosts I think is a target of opportunity HLP should examine.
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:50:43 GMT):
I think this is a great opportunity. The ewasm host functions are very ethereum centric (storage values are always 32 bytes for example, not great for string).
As I understand it, the Fabric wasm chain code is not stable yet. That might be a great opportunity to design, and implement a new standard set. I'm sure Burrow will be on board too.
Any such standard would need to deal with DLTs that do not provide functionality, e.g. no block height on sawtooth.
@swetha @amundson any insights would be appreciated. Thanks!
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:50:43 GMT):
I think this is a great opportunity. The ewasm host functions are very ethereum centric (storage values are always 32 bytes for example, not great for string).
As I understand it, the Fabric wasm chain code interface is not stable yet. That might be a great opportunity to design, and implement a new standard set. I'm sure Burrow will be on board too.
Any such standard would need to deal with DLTs that do not provide functionality, e.g. no block height on sawtooth.
@swetha @amundson any insights would be appreciated. Thanks!
swetha (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 17:10:25 GMT):
In regards to the Fabric WASM, @shubham_aggarwal would be the right person to loop in here, but I think he would be on board
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 19:35:44 GMT):
@dhuseby you asked if wasm can have side-channel attacks. Now meltdown and spectre require access to a high-resolution timer, which is not true for smart contracts. You have access to the block time, but that does not change the duration of the smart contract execution.
I'm not sure what other side channel attacks are possible. I'll ask my friend Ben Gras, who works for intel. He's written several papers on the subject. https://download.vusec.net/papers/anc_ndss17.pdf
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 19:35:44 GMT):
@dhuseby you asked if wasm can have side-channel attacks. Now meltdown and spectre require access to a high-resolution timer, which is not true for smart contracts. You have access to the block time, but that does not change during the duration of the smart contract execution.
I'm not sure what other side channel attacks are possible. I'll ask my friend Ben Gras, who works for intel. He's written several papers on the subject. https://download.vusec.net/papers/anc_ndss17.pdf
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 19:35:44 GMT):
@dhuseby you asked if wasm can have side-channel attacks. Now meltdown and spectre require access to a high-resolution timer, which is not true for smart contracts. You have access to the block time, but that does not change during the execution of the smart contract.
I'm not sure what other side channel attacks are possible. I'll ask my friend Ben Gras, who works for intel. He's written several papers on the subject. https://download.vusec.net/papers/anc_ndss17.pdf
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 19:38:30 GMT):
Interestingly if a side channel attack is found, that would make the smart contract execution non-deterministic which would cause problems on DLTs.
seanyoung (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 19:47:05 GMT):
wasm multithreading is a terrible idea for smart contracts.
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:43:42 GMT):
@seanyoung I was asking if the WASM code could be attacked by an attacker on the same system using a side-channel analysis method to extract private keys from WASM code doing crypto.
mwagner (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:43:47 GMT):
@seanyoung so what are the performance implications of not multithreading ? are limited to single execution?
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:44:09 GMT):
the only way to defend against that kind of thing is to make sure the crypto code you write/use does equal-cost-multi-path branching.
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:44:52 GMT):
if you implement crypto in Rust and compile it to WASM and then it gets JIT'd, there it is almost certainly not going to be resistant to side-channel attacks
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:44:52 GMT):
if you implement crypto in Rust and compile it to WASM and then it gets JIT'd, it is almost certainly not going to be resistant to side-channel attacks
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:45:34 GMT):
if you're doing any encryption using code written that way, attackers just have to be on the same system, not in the same process, to be able to extract your private keys eventually.
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:47:16 GMT):
the only way to fix this would be to externalize the crypto to a library that is resistant to side channel attacks. it likely won't be written in a way that is so easily portable across systems as WASM
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:47:27 GMT):
the takeaway is, do not do crypto in WASM
dhuseby (Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:48:03 GMT):
in browsers--even the ones moving to WASM--they externalize the actual crypto operations to known-good libraries such as OpenSSL or NaCl
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:01:06 GMT):
I don't think you would want to do signing crypto in a smart contract any way, only verifications.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 02:32:35 GMT):
@dhuseby the cache side channel attacks all depend on a high resolution timer. How do you think can be achieved?
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 02:32:35 GMT):
@dhuseby the cache side channel attacks all depend on a high resolution timer. How do you think a side channel attack can be made without one?
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 02:42:53 GMT):
current smart contracts are single threaded. There are proposals for multi threading in wasm. We would need to look closely at that before allowing it in smart contracts.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 03:10:23 GMT):
exactly. everything executed on-chain does not have private keys
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 06:41:42 GMT):
Yep! There's not any good way to do this without revealing the key.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 06:43:00 GMT):
It's been shown you can do side channel attacks remotely. Here's the original paper: https://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/papers/ssl-timing.pdf. Here's a more modern side channel timing attack that affects cryptocurrencies: https://crypto.stanford.edu/timings/paper.pdf. That one is remote too.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 07:42:44 GMT):
The second paper uses monitoring on a users wallet.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 07:44:07 GMT):
the inputs, outputs and execution code of smart contracts are known to everyone on the chain. You don't need "side channels" to know what's going on.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 07:44:45 GMT):
So, having dismissed that possibility, I was talking about using smart contracts to side channel into the validator nodes.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 07:46:45 GMT):
So I was talking about using malicious wasm contracts to extract private key information from validator nodes. That would require a high resolution timer.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 07:46:45 GMT):
So I was talking about using malicious wasm contracts to extract private key information from validator nodes. That would require a high resolution timer available to the wasm smart contracts, which there is not (and should never be).
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 08:35:07 GMT):
Yes, if there are no secrets on smart contracts, then there are no opportunities for side channels on smart contracts.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 08:38:46 GMT):
I guess you could, in theory anyway, have a smart contract that communicated to the network based on validator input/output and could attempt a timing attack this way. This would seem practically difficult though (the first paper did a similar thing for OpenSSL way back in the day--with enough samples you could average out the network noise).
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 09:48:11 GMT):
That would be one way, in theory. I was more thinking of something using cpu cache attacks, like this one: https://web.eecs.umich.edu/~genkin/papers/drive-by.pdf
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 09:51:14 GMT):
there a few of these attacks, however they all depend on a good timing source (like the tsc register on x86 :smile: )
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 09:51:14 GMT):
There are a few of these attacks, however they all depend on a good timing source (like the tsc register on x86 :smile: )
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 10:11:01 GMT):
Here is another that shows that the "equal-cost-multi-path branching" is not an effective defense. However it does need a timing source. https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/806.pdf
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:32:55 GMT):
One mitigation would be to execute the smart contract first on a non-signing node and have the signing node either accept the executors results or re-run it and check the results. The attack contract would need to be non-deterministic to extract different values based on cache results so a second execution would show changes, and it would also be dependant on the specific JIT or impl of interpreter. This mitigates exfultration of the key on-chain. To keep off chain exfiltration I would sandbox contracts away to prohibit use of network code as a matter of course, but there is still the possiblity of using host functions as a way to get it out.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:25:24 GMT):
So smart contracts should be deterministic and never have access to network code or anything with side effects other than contract storage and emitting events.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:25:47 GMT):
This is probably a dumb question, but I'll ask anyways since I've waded into a discussion of Ethereum experts discussing side channel attacks: why is it clearly not possible to somehow exploit gas costs on Ethereum for side channel attacks?
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:27:01 GMT):
Deterministic execution is one smart contract model, EOS doesn't have that as it uses a wall clock to ensure halting, a a counter example.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:27:50 GMT):
And yes, I agree with you in principle: it's generally a bad idea for smart contracts to make network calls.
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:28:09 GMT):
EVM is designed that for the same inputs the same outputs always exist. Those inputs are defined via what is on the block chain. If there was variance introduced by processor then that is not an input found on the chain.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:28:29 GMT):
And should we consider moving this conversation elsewhere? While I enjoy this, it's probably not appropriate for this channel.
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:28:33 GMT):
If a precompile contract were defined that would give CPU samplings the contract would be non-deterministic.
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:29:38 GMT):
For consensus all nodes need to be able to re-produce the exact execution of the contract. This is as evidenced by state changes, which includes balance, which is where gas would be charged if there wa a gas cost.
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:30:08 GMT):
If gas is zero then the transaction receipt would have a different gas cost, and the receipts root is also a source of consensus checking.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:30:36 GMT):
That makes sense. I'm just curious if something like the following could be done (it probably can't): a contract is deterministic, and all runs use the same amount of memory, but the exact amount of memory it uses reveals something about a secret. This could potentially be revealed by the gas cost.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:30:42 GMT):
Probably a dumb idea, but I was just curious.
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:31:01 GMT):
However, the attacker could use invalid blocks being propagated to exfultrate the data. This would depend on a custom precompile that was not deterministic.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:31:39 GMT):
Where should this discussion move to? I would like a good place for this and to discuss a standard set of host functions for wasm smart contracts.
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:31:53 GMT):
A new working group or a task force?
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:33:50 GMT):
@rjones What's the procedure to ask for a rocketchat channel? I don't think the TSC wants to hear endlessly about this stuff.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:35:22 GMT):
I think that would be a good idea.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:36:39 GMT):
OK, I tagged Ry. So hopefully he'll get back to us.
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:36:47 GMT):
feels like it could be in the smart contracts WG or a task force of that working group.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:46:33 GMT):
so far that group has not been busy with these kinds of problems.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:48:05 GMT):
I think it should be specific to wasm and evm technologies, languages that compile to wasm to evm, and implementations/standards of the VM.
rjones (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:09:42 GMT):
@hartm what name do you want
mwagner (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:12:42 GMT):
@hartm I am enjoying it getting quite an education!
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:25:42 GMT):
@seanyoung Can you suggest a name then? Some of the things you've been discussing have more general applications than just wasm.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:26:21 GMT):
Maybe "smart-contract-technical"?
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:26:56 GMT):
"smart-contract-WASM"?
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:27:27 GMT):
I talked with Sergio Benitez on Wednesday about oxide smart contracts. It was pretty interesting, and they seem to offer a lot from a security perspective.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:27:32 GMT):
smart-contract-vm?
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:29:06 GMT):
or smart-contracts-runtimes
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:31:19 GMT):
All of those are basically fine.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:32:01 GMT):
I'd be curious to see what you all thought about this stuff: https://cs242.stanford.edu/f18/lectures/07-1-sergio.html
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:51:11 GMT):
Making rust programs terminate if they run out of fuel/gas does proof they terminate without certain bounds. However what you really want to know is that the program *completes* within certain bounds. Not terminate early.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:51:11 GMT):
Making rust programs terminate if they run out of fuel/gas does proof they terminate within certain bounds. However what you really want to know is that the program *completes* within certain bounds. Not terminate early.
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:53:17 GMT):
The osmium idea is interesting, but ignored the reality of the device driver authors: the internal state of the device is totally a black box. Anyway totally off topic
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 19:01:21 GMT):
You can't prove that programs complete within certain bounds unless you severely restrict the language (I'm sure you already know this, but I'll state it here for others). I'm mostly interested in the oxide stuff for type safety.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 19:02:03 GMT):
Here's some brief formalization of some similar work that I found useful: https://sergio.bz/docs/rusty-types-2016.pdf
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 19:43:02 GMT):
very interesting
seanyoung (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 21:24:57 GMT):
so as I understand it, the existing smart-contracts-wg deals with writing smart contracts and applying them to particular fields.
What we're after is more about implementing smart contract languages and their VMs. I'm not sure how to best name that.
shemnon (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 21:26:07 GMT):
Some context - https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Smart+Contracts+-+Approved+on+Jan+31+2019 - it has a broad scope and this was a concern.
hartm (Fri, 28 Feb 2020 22:11:38 GMT):
How about smart-contract-languages?
Dan (Thu, 05 Mar 2020 17:20:33 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/SCWG/Smart+Contracts+Working+Group
Dan (Thu, 05 Mar 2020 17:21:10 GMT):
#smart-contracts-wg https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/smart-contracts-wg
Dan (Thu, 05 Mar 2020 17:21:39 GMT):
topic would probably also have been appropriate for Arch WG
Dan (Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:16:49 GMT):
@jamesbarry @wkatsak good meeting you at HGF. Would you be willing to present your recommendations about the HL portfolio next week (2020-MAR-19)?
wkatsak (Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:16:49 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
jamesbarry (Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:27:36 GMT):
@dan We would love to be able to present next week. Give me a time and I will make sure we don't have a customer commitment. @wkatsak
Dan (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:58:30 GMT):
It is at 7am PDT. I'm not sure if this calendar link works https://www.google.com/calendar/event?eid=X2NkZ21vcGJlY2hnbjRiaGg2b3BqZWU5ZTZvczNjZTlrNnQwNm9xYmplaHBpc3EzcGUxaW40cjM1Y2hqbWFzaGVkdHA2ZSA1Z3JiM284Y2wwdThmbnVuNXM5bGZwbTFpYWQ3MGFmZkBp&ctz=Etc/GMT
Dan (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:59:04 GMT):
and here's the link to the whole calendar if that item link didn't work: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Calendar+of+Public+Meetings
jamesbarry (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:02:36 GMT):
We can present then. Is there a place we should place the presentation prior to the meeting? We will change it a bit from a general presentation at the HGF to one more appropriate for the TSC, but basically the same.
jamesbarry (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:03:53 GMT):
@Dan I am assuming that we should keep the time to 25 minutes like the HGF, leaving time for discussion ?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:08:49 GMT):
I meant to add this to the Announcements section, so in case we don't have time at the end of the call for this, I wanted to announce that @Silona is moving on from Hyperledger to lead open source efforts at the IEEE. Thank you to Silona for helping guide this community and the Community Architecture team to a better place. Good luck on future endeavors!
hartm (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:09:06 GMT):
This efficiency on quarterly reports is amazing!
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:09:22 GMT):
I'm on now - sorry for being late.
hartm (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:20:49 GMT):
Yes, tying the rule changes to a PR is what we want to do.
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:38:49 GMT):
As an example of cross-project integration, we have been working on integrating Fabric with Aries via DID anchoring. We have done some of our efforts within Hyperledger projects and some in our own Github repos.
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:39:06 GMT):
I think it's a bit of a tricky topic.
hartm (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:39:20 GMT):
+1 to @MicBowman .
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:44:03 GMT):
It's a bit tricky since we had a focus on this goal and ended up extending Fabric to do so.
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:44:35 GMT):
Cross-project projects isn't its own category...
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:45:45 GMT):
(so far, we have been doing it here: https://github.com/trustbloc/ ... e.g., https://github.com/trustbloc/fabric-peer-ext and https://github.com/trustbloc/sidetree-fabric)
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:48:18 GMT):
It would be great to have these conversations somewhere in Hyperledger :).
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:48:47 GMT):
Gah my bandwidth seems fine, maybe Zoom is overburdened thanks to covid19, I'll type out my point here so it doesn't get lost in audio glitches again.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:50:36 GMT):
We have a couple of dimensions to our "steering" which is more like "oversight": carrots (good things, encouragement, here's-something-that-works-let's-adopt-more-widely) and sticks (projects SHALL or SHALL NOT do X or Y). We can have both, and we want to use sticks rarely, but we have those options and can use them gradually to increase the amount of harmony between projects.
rjones (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:51:04 GMT):
I think I'm also suffering from being in an area where all of the Amazon, Google, and Microsoft employees are working from home
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:51:46 GMT):
and then re-active vs pro-active - pro-active being things like what Dan is proposing, re-active being things like "hey our WASM efforts are all slightly and needlessly different, we should harmonize those"
seanyoung (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:52:31 GMT):
I'd like to point out that we could work on a common wasm host interface for smart contracts across our ledgers. I've made a tentative start here https://github.com/seanyoung/hyperwasm which I hope will become a labs project.
seanyoung (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:52:31 GMT):
I'd like to point out that we could work on a common wasm host interface for smart contracts across our ledgers. I've made a tentative start here https://github.com/seanyoung/hyperwasm which I hope will become a labs project. See #smart-contract-languages
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:52:36 GMT):
that's a nice thought... however, because every platform handles smart contract execution differently, then there is no reason to try to generalize
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:52:58 GMT):
I think Troy's point is that labs means "experimental", and this is more about refactoring
hartm (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:53:35 GMT):
@bbehlendorf We don't want to be overly restrictive, but what we do want to do is make sure there is enough communication between projects that, in your example, people realize early on that they all want to build WASM stuff and can decide on potential collaboration options before they start.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:53:38 GMT):
We should improve labs and make sure it can germinate useful projects, but also there may be a need for a different kind of project that is more about shared modules between projects
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:53:45 GMT):
building a general purpose, reusable component is extremely difficult and, frankly, the platforms (that would be the way to make the generalized platform useful and "meaningful" to the developers) aren't interested in general constructs
shemnon (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:54:15 GMT):
It wouldn't be a 100% solution, but an 80% solution that covers commonaities would help the ecosystem.
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:55:12 GMT):
@shemnon completely agree... but in practice that's not how it works... you need to come in with a module that has sufficient value to overcome the inertia in the existing solution
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:56:46 GMT):
to use a networking concept... we don't have a "narrow waist" that separates component/tool development from platform development
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:56:52 GMT):
Generally speaking, Mic, I agree, but users are far more interested than platform builders in portability.
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:57:11 GMT):
then we need to give the users more voice in these conversations
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:57:31 GMT):
Seriously, I'm not sure there's great justification for these differences in WASM, at least as Silas described them to me. If there are, I think they should be more explicitly declared/justified, as it does carry substantial cognitive burden
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:58:18 GMT):
WASM provides a POTENTIAL narrow waist at least for application development, however... every platform has to expose their own native APIs (e.g. the fabric routines for storing data)
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:59:11 GMT):
obviously, i'm very interested in WASM (we just added support to the PDO lab project to run WASM contracts in an SGX enclave)
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:59:18 GMT):
I am very interested in helping Solang grow its community while still in Labs.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 14:59:29 GMT):
let's see if there are things we can improve in Labs to make that possible
seanyoung (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:01:07 GMT):
For solang I've had look at all the different ledgers. Actually the interface for storing/loading data is a good example where it is very similar on all the ledgers and straightforward to have the same interface.
Dan (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:01:37 GMT):
What if one of the things we do is facilitate a conversation here. Without any preconditions of arriving at some shared component, we just get all the projects and labs together to talk about what they are doing. Maybe out of that comes some common problem that nobody wants to handle alone. Maybe there's no explicit outcome but at least everyone in that space is now connected so they can still collaborate even if it's on different code.
Dan (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:01:57 GMT):
specically that meant about wasm.
Dan (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:02:11 GMT):
get all the projects/labs that are working on wasm together for an hour or something like that.
seanyoung (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:02:22 GMT):
Basically they all want a key-value store like leveldb (ethereum wants 32 bytes
seanyoung (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:02:38 GMT):
though, but that's a terrible idea which I hope we can agree on)
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:02:58 GMT):
agreed @seanyoung (as you know!)... and there are a number of problems that have to be overcome that will make it difficult... AND you still have to convince the various platforms (or enough of them at least) to add the wasm interpreter
Dan (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:03:10 GMT):
it's 33 bytes or nothing! :rage:
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:03:42 GMT):
Another example of WASM in Hyperledger: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-framework-go/blob/master/cmd/aries-js-worker/README.md (a WASM output and JavaScript binding of an Aries agent).
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:03:42 GMT):
Another example of WASM in Hyperledger: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-framework-go/blob/master/cmd/aries-js-worker/README.md (a WASM output and JavaScript bindings of an Aries agent).
seanyoung (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:04:28 GMT):
fabric, sawtooth, burrow already have a wasm interpreter but they all have slightly different interfaces which is terrible for projects like grid.
What you want it is compile once - run anywhere.
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:05:03 GMT):
not to be snarky... (but i will be anyway just because i like lively discussions...) but in four years of doing this, is WASM really the only example we have of something that could be practically useful cross-platform?
Dan (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:05:38 GMT):
solidity was a little (burrow integrations with sawtooth, fab, etc.)
Dan (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:05:59 GMT):
transact might still be (narrow waist for engines)
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:06:43 GMT):
yes... and @seanyoung that is really what i mean... *someone* will have to go through and write the code for each of those platforms, get the code accepted by the developers (many of whom already have dependencies on their extent interfaces), provide all of the build/test/etc necessary to make it part of the project... building the WASM interpreter is the easy part
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:07:40 GMT):
the integration work isn't sexy but its absolutely necessary... and we have to figure out how to motivate it
seanyoung (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:09:05 GMT):
@MicBowman so with the wasm standard we create, we can have some example assemblyscript, rust and Solidity (via Solang) support. So any ledger that supports it will get stuff for free. That might help your project too :smile:
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:09:39 GMT):
you know that i'm planning to pick up your stuff asap
seanyoung (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:10:23 GMT):
I'm just finishing dynamic array support will improve string support, once that is done I'll start looking at your project.
MicBowman (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:10:32 GMT):
just pushed a PR into PDO last night that brings our WASM support up to the current WAMR version... which means we can start exploring execution of native code generated by their AOT compiler :-)
shemnon (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:17:17 GMT):
@MicBowman Most hyperledger platforms have EVM support (mostly via burrow), so there's another cross-platform target.
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:31:24 GMT):
I posted a quick status update on this topic to the Fabric and Aries folks: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b5AHZyklexolzUIZ4Yz_Ma1atKM2mudpD6-SNplGJu0/
troyronda (Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:32:37 GMT):
I posted a quick status update on this topic to the Fabric and Aries folks: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b5AHZyklexolzUIZ4Yz_Ma1atKM2mudpD6-SNplGJu0/
hartm (Fri, 13 Mar 2020 00:28:48 GMT):
32 bytes actually might make sense on a public blockchain like Ethereum, since it's the minimum you'd want if you wanted to make it cryptographically hard to find collisions.
seanyoung (Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:37:58 GMT):
When chain code is executed, the wasm code, storage, and inputs are all unknown to any node in the chain. So if you have e.g. a hash table in your smart contract storage you might want to make it difficult to find collisions.
However, most on-chain data strutures are much more plain; e.g. simple lists, or primitive types. These do not need to be stored under a hashed key and such a large key is just overhead.
Conversely you might want to have composite types, e.g. a hash table, containing a mapping from string to a structure, and that structure contains an large static sparse array and a hash itself. For this, it useful to have a concatenated key. 32 bytes is very limited in this case and special care must be taking to avoid collisions.
In fact, Solidity on Ethereum suffers from this problem. If you declare a spare array large enough, the solc compiler will warning you might get collisions.
`
pragma solidity 0;
contract c {
int[2**128] foo;
}
`
solc says:
`
$ solc f.sol
f.sol:4:2: Warning: Variable covers a large part of storage and thus makes collisions likely. Either use mappings or dynamic arrays and allow their size to be increased only in small quantities per transaction.
int[2**128] foo;
^-------------^
`
This can be avoid by having storage keys length.
seanyoung (Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:37:58 GMT):
When chain code is executed, the wasm code, storage, and inputs are all unknown to any node in the chain. So if you have e.g. a hash table in your smart contract storage you might want to make it difficult to find collisions.
However, most on-chain data structures are much more plain; e.g. simple lists, or primitive types. These do not need to be stored under a hashed key and such a large key is just overhead.
Conversely you might want to have composite types, e.g. a hash table, containing a mapping from string to a structure, and that structure contains an large static sparse array and a hash itself. For this, it useful to have a concatenated key. 32 bytes is very limited in this case and special care must be taking to avoid collisions.
In fact, Solidity on Ethereum suffers from this problem. If you declare a spare array large enough, the solc compiler will warning you might get collisions.
`pragma solidity 0;
contract c {
int[2**128] foo;
}
`
solc says:
`$ solc f.sol
f.sol:4:2: Warning: Variable covers a large part of storage and thus makes collisions likely. Either use mappings or dynamic arrays and allow their size to be increased only in small quantities per transaction.
int[2**128] foo;
^-------------^
`
This can be avoid by having storage keys length.
Dan (Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:11:40 GMT):
Yes 25 min would be great. You could maybe post the presentation to the wiki for the meeting:
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020-03-19+TSC+Agenda
jamesbarry (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 01:57:01 GMT):
@Dan The presentation is now on the agenda.
Dan (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 02:05:13 GMT):
Gracias
rjones (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:06:48 GMT):
don't we all depend on other libraries?
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:08:43 GMT):
Yep, thanks for commenting @duncanjw
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:08:57 GMT):
@rjones Yes, I think we do. Ursa certainly does.
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:10:19 GMT):
The key is just depending on Apache 2.0 things, and things that you think are likely to be well-maintained (and, things that you must be willing to maintain/pull in yourself if people stop maintaining).
rjones (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:12:15 GMT):
Do we check the licenses of everything in NPM?
cbf (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:13:35 GMT):
here's the updated GH Security Advisory policy https://help.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-github-security-advisories
Dan (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:17:15 GMT):
that's really cool, esp. the private branches
duncanjw (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:37:21 GMT):
This is one of the threads in #sawtooth-core-dev I had in mind https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/sawtooth-core-dev?msg=j2AhdDk5iZtE7s459
Dan (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:37:33 GMT):
Key storage project?
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:37:44 GMT):
We have a meeting about key storage today.
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:37:52 GMT):
If anyone is interested in joining, please ask!
Dan (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:37:55 GMT):
for ursa?
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:37:58 GMT):
Happy to send along the information.
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:38:05 GMT):
@Dan Yep!
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:38:14 GMT):
(Jon Geater is coordinating).
Dan (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:38:56 GMT):
cool I don't know if I can make it or not but plz send along the invite. if I can't make it I'll try to catch the recording
Dan (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:39:44 GMT):
I think there's also a commercial integration of fabric with fortanix
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:40:26 GMT):
Sovrin Crypto Meeting to discuss TEE/HSMs
Thursday, March 19⋅9:00 – 10:00am
https://zoom.us/j/567114224,
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:40:39 GMT):
@Dan Feel free to join.
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:40:53 GMT):
Or anyone else who's interested in secure key storage.
Dan (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:41:02 GMT):
that's PST?
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:41:11 GMT):
Life is Pacific time ;)
hartm (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:41:17 GMT):
But yes.
mwagner (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:43:09 GMT):
@Dan unless surfs up then the meeting is canceled Dude
mwagner (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:43:45 GMT):
(and dudettes)
Dan (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:44:42 GMT):
So this idea of HL as the apache of blockchains has come up before. I think it's worth discussing. I feel like we are better served by being more .. curated
duncanjw (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:45:41 GMT):
Reply to @jamesbarry's questions makes it clear that splinter would be an integral component of sawtooth validator if community goes that route
duncanjw (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:59:21 GMT):
@Dan +1 to starting somewhere e.g. with consensus or storage
Dan (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:59:56 GMT):
thanks @jamesbarry @wkatsak !
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:05:07 GMT):
@jamesbarry my CCLang project is definitely in the spirit of what you're getting at: https://github.com/dhuseby/cclang It is currently an RFC for Ursa: https://github.com/hyperledger/ursa-rfcs/pull/17
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:05:25 GMT):
CCLang is to cryptographic constructs what postscript is to printers
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:06:26 GMT):
where it really shines is the asynchronous construction and validation of parallel and serial multi-sig digital signatures
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:10:01 GMT):
@wkatsak ^^^
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:10:58 GMT):
I'm already using CCLang for an abstracted block storage for a local-first, offline-first personal data provenance/sync tool.
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:11:28 GMT):
I'm using it to handle keeping all of my dotfiles synchronized across all of my Linux computers and servers as a test case.
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:13:54 GMT):
I think it is a good abstraction point for cryptographic constructs and fits nicely on top of the crypto algorithm abstractions of Ursa
jamesbarry (Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:17:16 GMT):
Thanks for giving us the opportunity to present. I see Hyperledger as in a position to assert real leadership in the Blockchain industry. Ideally it would be great to have Hyperledger formed projects/components embedded in multiple blockchains, regardless of where they come from.
grace.hartley (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:16:33 GMT):
Yay! Thanks all! The Besu team will be thrilled to hear the news.
hartm (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:16:34 GMT):
Congrats Besu folks, and thanks for all of your hard work at integration!
nage (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:16:46 GMT):
Besu++
shemnon (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:17:26 GMT):
Thanks!
cbf (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:21:30 GMT):
congrats!
mwagner (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:22:29 GMT):
@grace.hartley @shemnon Congrats! great job integrating into the community and addressing the concerns of the TSC!
mwagner (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:23:37 GMT):
@dhuseby clap clap clap
troyronda (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:35:07 GMT):
Of course, it would be great to see a library-based approach to make it possible to assemble the lego bricks into a solution.
troyronda (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:35:07 GMT):
Of course, it would be great to see more library-based approaches to make it possible to assemble the lego bricks into a solution.
Bobbijn (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:38:43 GMT):
The Learning Materials Development Working Group could be a centralized collection point for project communications.
jamesbarry (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:39:17 GMT):
Here is a document that the architecture working group was working on over a year ago https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bdr4MdnpUvv_3jN5DYSNp1ctjKGPH7K_yiMSQYcwBBo/edit
MicBowman (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:43:54 GMT):
much older than a year ago...
troyronda (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:44:19 GMT):
I think these modules should be viewed as not just about being shared among frameworks but also enable more customized external usage for a particular solution.
MicBowman (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:45:12 GMT):
@cbf could you talk about why fabric maintainers chose to not incorporate transact into fabric right now? the motivation for adding or not adding would be very insightful
troyronda (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:45:16 GMT):
e.g., we are building components in external repos that could be useful beyond ourselves.
bobsummerwill (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:45:26 GMT):
@shemnon @grace.hartley Congratulations on Active status, Besu team :-)
Just joining the call late.
Bobbijn (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:45:53 GMT):
Congrats !
MicBowman (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:46:35 GMT):
and i know we've had the discussion for why fabric is not using ursa (language bindings)... how much work would the ursa team ned to do to make it reasonable for fabric to switch to ursa?
troyronda (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:47:25 GMT):
beyond language bindings, I think it is preferable to have Go native code.
troyronda (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:47:25 GMT):
beyond language bindings, I think it is preferable to have Go native code (for some solutions).
hartm (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:47:29 GMT):
The question I think that we need to answer is: how can we motivate people to work together on common components? We haven't been effective at this. I think most of our core contributors are business-focused and paid to contribute by their employers, and their priorities are on the business cycle. What can we do to encourage everyone to work together? I think maybe just trying to get people that are working on similar components across different projects to share ideas periodically might be a good start.
troyronda (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:49:55 GMT):
Sometimes the native code approach is taken (e.g., https://github.com/google/tink)
hartm (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:51:55 GMT):
To follow up: asking people who are under business deadlines to refactor their code to accommodate modular interfaces might be a tough ask. Asking these people to have a periodic meeting with similar people across different projects to discuss ideas and plans isn't such a big ask, and might lead to future modular interfaces, because it's much easier to work together if you're starting from scratch than trying to refactor code. It might also lead to better ideas and implementations across projects.
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:53:15 GMT):
I like what @cbf is saying. This was exactly the method for the creation of Ursa. There was this large chunk of functionality that all of our projects had to do and had to do in similar ways.
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:53:21 GMT):
So Ursa was born
MicBowman (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:53:46 GMT):
how many projects are using ursa?
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:53:50 GMT):
The only remaining blocker for Fabric using Ursa is the Go/Rust barrier
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:54:08 GMT):
Iroha, Indy, Aries
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:54:29 GMT):
@MALodder any more projects using Ursa?
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:54:38 GMT):
There are a few projects outside of HL that are using it
troyronda (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:54:42 GMT):
We also have the Go/Rust barrier in Aries-framework-go
troyronda (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:54:42 GMT):
We also have the Go/Rust barrier in aries-framework-go
mwagner (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:58:06 GMT):
does "retire a maintainer" mean they get taken out back and shot ?
cbf (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:58:26 GMT):
right... libraries are I think less valuable in this polyglot environment we have
cbf (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:58:40 GMT):
microservices OTOH...
cbf (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:58:53 GMT):
as long as they share a common protocol
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 14:59:59 GMT):
I agree with you
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:00:24 GMT):
it would be interesting to make Ursa a standalone microservice
dhuseby (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:00:48 GMT):
we might have to do that anyways for use in applications that use physically isolated HSMs
MALodder (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:13:10 GMT):
transact is using ursa
MALodder (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:13:22 GMT):
iroha
MALodder (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:13:24 GMT):
indy
MALodder (Thu, 26 Mar 2020 15:13:28 GMT):
aries
cbf (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:06:56 GMT):
FYI, I need to drop at bottom of te hour
cbf (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:06:56 GMT):
FYI, I need to drop at bottom of the hour
nage (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:18:58 GMT):
I wonder if the TSC maintainers could play that role of promoting RFCs we think would be helpful for the rest of the Hyperledger family?
nage (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:20:00 GMT):
I remember how helpful it was to learn about the magic Fabric JIRA ticket that had architecture documentation around the 1.0 era....that sort of thing.
hartm (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:22:09 GMT):
Yep, even just a one-sentence description of new RFCs might be useful, as Chris suggests.
cbf (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:29:17 GMT):
had to drop
nage (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:30:49 GMT):
We do something a little like the RFC summary in the Identity WG Implementers call's "Working Group Reports and Release Plans" section, but we don't always take the best notes.
lehors (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:34:01 GMT):
@cbf just closed the call so you didn't miss much
lehors (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:34:01 GMT):
@cbf, I just closed the call so you didn't miss much
rjones (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:50:37 GMT):
Here is an example tag that's already in use on the TSC mailing list: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/search?q=%23tsc-project-update&ct=1
dhuseby (Thu, 02 Apr 2020 15:05:35 GMT):
@cbf I just did a quick recon on automating posts from Github RFC repos to a Groups.io mailing list and it is definitely doable. I confirmed that Groups.io does have an API for posting new messages. I also confirmed that it is possible to write a Github action that logs into Groups.io and posts a message based on arbitrary triggers. If a project decided that their RFC lifecycle was submit, final review, rejected or merged then they could set up triggers for those status tags and have automated posts to Groups.io.
troyronda (Mon, 06 Apr 2020 15:27:09 GMT):
@rjones I noticed dependabot PR request. I assume it is safe to merge these from a DCO/etc perspective? https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-framework-go/pull/1567
rjones (Mon, 06 Apr 2020 15:28:48 GMT):
@troyronda yes
troyronda (Mon, 06 Apr 2020 15:29:21 GMT):
Cool, thanks @rjones .
klenik (Tue, 07 Apr 2020 21:59:27 GMT):
Hi Everyone! The Caliper project update has been submitted. Sorry for the delay :sweat_smile: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020+Q1+Hyperledger+Caliper
Dan (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:12:28 GMT):
could audit 'compliance' along with license checks etc. at release milestones
nage (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:28:53 GMT):
Doesn’t that make the interoperability validators a trust proxy for the foreign network, why not validate directly on chain code?
nage (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:28:53 GMT):
Doesn’t that make the interoperability validators a trust proxy for the foreign network, why not validate directly in chain code?
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:30:51 GMT):
@nage There are old lower bounds that imply that two-party exchange can't be done without a trust proxy. The issue is that the relevant set of chain codes exists on multiple blockchains and may not be able to talk to each other directly.
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:32:43 GMT):
If I'm swapping an asset on blockchain A for a different one one blockchain B, then this meta-transaction consists of (at least) one transaction on each blockchain. There needs to be some way to ensure that either both sub-transactions happen or neither happen, and this can't usually be done with existing chaincode on blockchains.
seanyoung (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:40:37 GMT):
@hartm two-way peg?
seanyoung (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:40:37 GMT):
@hartm how about using a two-way peg to avoid trust proxy?
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:44:40 GMT):
@seanyoung That works well for sidechains, but not so well for two completely different chains.
lehors (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:45:16 GMT):
@hartm how many more slides to you guys have?
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:45:37 GMT):
6
seanyoung (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:46:27 GMT):
how so?
nage (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:49:09 GMT):
Yes but the concept of cross chain finality only really exists with either cross anchoring or deferring to a trust mechanism of policy or (misplaced?) optimism. How does deferring that to this intermediary processor not undermine both chains dependent state in the same way we see in the oracle problem?
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:53:44 GMT):
In my understanding, a two way peg requires locking one asset so that another can be used on a side chain. We want to do full asset exchanges so that both can be used. Is my definition of two-way peg what you're thinking?
mwklein (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:54:45 GMT):
There are physical examples within the lab project: https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/blockchain-integration-framework
Dan (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:55:24 GMT):
is it the case that each transactor could run a BIF (as opposed to having a 3rd party running a BIF for several transactors/companies)?
seanyoung (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:56:58 GMT):
two way peg can be used for full asset exchanges
seanyoung (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:58:08 GMT):
Making cross chain transactions possible is not that hard. Making it possible in a trusted way is very hard.
Dan (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:58:27 GMT):
I guess what I'm asking is "Where's the BIF?" :hamburger:
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:58:31 GMT):
You're right. We use (depending on configuration) both cross anchoring and deferring trust to external validators. Which oracle problem are you referring to?
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:59:23 GMT):
I'm guessing that our "overlay" solution very much resembles what you're defining as a two way peg here.
mwklein (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:00:02 GMT):
BIF has its own validator nodes that can run on a subset of a given DLT nodes and provides an overlay network for transacting across chains.
mwklein (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:01:11 GMT):
So BIF could be centralized, but the vision is for it to be deployed in a federated model of validators across chains
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:01:40 GMT):
By the way, please feel free to ask questions in the channel #blockchain-integration-framework
lehors (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:05:21 GMT):
I must say I was a bit confused by the assertion that BIF wouldn't limit to the common denominator and then the statement that if a transaction involve a network that can't support private transaction there is no expectation of privacy
lehors (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:05:21 GMT):
I must say I was a bit confused by the assertion that BIF wouldn't limit to the common denominator and then the statement that if a transaction involves a network that can't support private transaction there is no expectation of privacy
lehors (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:05:21 GMT):
I must say I was a bit confused by the assertion that BIF wouldn't limit to the common denominator and then the statement that if a transaction involves a network that can't support private transactions there is no expectation of privacy
lehors (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:05:39 GMT):
those two statements seem to contradict each other, don't they?
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:07:16 GMT):
@lehors It's definitely the case that if one network involved in a transaction cannot support private transactions, then there is no expectation of privacy.
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:07:35 GMT):
I think the point about the common denominator was that BIF should not be the bottleneck in any operations.
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:07:39 GMT):
I guess that wasn't clear.
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:08:37 GMT):
In other words, if two networks are fast, then we don't want BIF to slow them down. If two networks give good privacy guarantees, we don't want BIF to compromise that. Obviously some goals in this regard are really ambitious and we can't meet them all at this point, but that's the objective.
lehors (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:08:54 GMT):
ok
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 15:55:22 GMT):
Now that we're not constrained by the meeting, if you point out an explicit definition of two-way peg, I can probably answer this question in more detail if you'd like.
nage (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 17:57:07 GMT):
It is hard to come to consensus on observations that occur outside of the chain, things coming from the other chain have that same issue.
hartm (Thu, 16 Apr 2020 18:37:12 GMT):
Yep! This is why blockchain integration is a difficult task, and some kind of (federated) trusted mediation is needed.
mwagner (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:04:36 GMT):
"contribute positively" is that a new requirement ?
hartm (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:16:02 GMT):
Does anyone have a reason to have a unique code of conduct (i.e. with additional rules)? If not, then a link is definitely fine.
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:22:32 GMT):
Sawtooth had NOTICES file at some point
Dan (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:22:46 GMT):
Good memory @tkuhrt :)
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:23:05 GMT):
I suggest SECURITY and CODE_OF_CONDUCT be in github.com/Hyperledger/Hyperledger. Then links to those from the projects.
hartm (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:26:20 GMT):
I'm in favor of links here for stuff like this because it seems like it will be difficult and annoying to force updates if we change things in these policies.
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:26:36 GMT):
Agree, Hart
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:26:51 GMT):
We can add the repolinter report addition to the template
hartm (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:26:54 GMT):
It seems very reasonable to tie the compliance evaluations to quarterly reports.
Dan (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:27:01 GMT):
for security there was some discussion about moving away from jira to github issues
rjones (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:42:24 GMT):
@tkuhrt how about putting those files in hyperledger/tsc? that was the repo I created for governance documents.
rjones (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:42:36 GMT):
the links could refer to the hash at the time, if they like.
rjones (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:42:56 GMT):
so then the hash would be of a pointer and a hash... huh
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:42:59 GMT):
I was looking for that repo...for some reason I could not find it
Dan (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:43:40 GMT):
makes sense if those are governance docs that they should reside in hyperledger/tsc
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:44:00 GMT):
Works for me
hartm (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:52:55 GMT):
To clarify: the business logic plugin doesn't have to be a privileged entity on any blockchain.
hartm (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:53:07 GMT):
It just has to be able to verify transactions.
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:53:15 GMT):
This drawing may help: https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/blockchain-integration-framework/blob/master/docs/images/blockchain-integration-framework-high-level-workflow.png
tkuhrt (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:53:35 GMT):
There is an overlay network in both of the distributed networks that communicate with each other
Dan (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 15:00:27 GMT):
What is Angelo's handle?
Dan (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 15:04:14 GMT):
Anyway I was just going to say I would be interested to know from Angelo whether or not the whitepaper satisfies his concerns.
rjones (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 16:41:00 GMT):
@Dan his is @adc
adc (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 16:41:00 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Thu, 23 Apr 2020 18:07:21 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/tsc https://hyperledger.github.io/tsc/
troyronda (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:15:50 GMT):
Has there been project interest in BIF beyond the two sponsors?
MicBowman (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:16:19 GMT):
i have interest
nage (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:18:24 GMT):
Mic++ I prefer ledger-native transaction validation approaches (like state proofs) rather than proxy approaches, but this seems like a reasonable step forward with interest from different groups with more than one business motivation. So it seems like something that can be a sustainable project.
troyronda (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:19:37 GMT):
I see a key worry in the proposal being "just a lab". This seems like it might be a general issue that we have?
troyronda (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:19:37 GMT):
I see a key worry in the proposal being as its current status as "just a lab". This seems like it might be a general issue that we have?
troyronda (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:19:37 GMT):
I see a key worry in the proposal being as its current status as being "just a lab". This seems like it might be a general issue that we have?
Dan (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:20:58 GMT):
Labs have their place. When something wants to progress from a lab it should satisfy a few things which I won't type all of here, but basically maturity, resourcing, utility to HL.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:25:28 GMT):
Angelo, perhaps you should propose the private chaincode lab as a full fledged project
hartm (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:25:29 GMT):
I think people would probably support the Fabric private chaincode becoming a project.
troyronda (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:25:34 GMT):
I guess with these two categories, it seems to be difficult to evaluate the threshold for some projects. Particularly with earlier projects or less sponsors on it.
troyronda (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:25:34 GMT):
I guess with these two categories (lab vs project), it seems to be difficult to evaluate the threshold for some projects. Particularly with earlier projects or less sponsors on it.
hartm (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:25:39 GMT):
But yes, I agree we need more precise criteria.
Dan (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:25:53 GMT):
it will always be subjective
hartm (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:26:18 GMT):
It will always be subjective, but I would hope that people can have a "good idea" whether or not their project would be approved or not.
nage (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:26:22 GMT):
The project also needs to be ready and ask for it.
MicBowman (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:30:57 GMT):
rather than FPC... i think PDO is a better example of a lab project that should stay a lab project. we use it for collaboration to develop concepts. those concepts (and some of the code) has migrated into several other mature projects. the lab facilitates collaboration on ideas that can be matured through other channels
troyronda (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:31:51 GMT):
From the BIF proposal: "An important topic to address is why we want to have project incubation status, and not just a lab. "
Dan (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:31:56 GMT):
Likewise I have an attestation lab now that would never make sense to promote to a project.
nage (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:32:15 GMT):
A lot of integration efforts should never be projects but common features across frameworks
troyronda (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:32:15 GMT):
(they list their reasons in the proposal).
bbehlendorf (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:36:31 GMT):
Congrats to the BIF team. Now we need a good name!
Dan (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:36:35 GMT):
Congrats BIF team .. or whatever you will soon be named
hartm (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:37:28 GMT):
Thank you everyone. If you have concerns that are outstanding, we'd be happy to speak about them.
shemnon (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:37:58 GMT):
Congrats to passing the gauntlet BIF
Dan (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:39:03 GMT):
Project icon:
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/bttf/images/7/7b/Griff-tannen-back-to-the-future-ii.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/340?cb=20111124103720
nage (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:42:13 GMT):
Chris++. There are some qualitative factors about being supportive of new contributors and being a good first friend to new Maintainers from diverse backgrounds and use cases that we have had trouble writing down
nage (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:42:13 GMT):
Chris++. There are some qualitative factors about being supportive of new contributors and being a good first friend to new contributors from diverse backgrounds and use cases that we have had trouble writing down
nage (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:43:41 GMT):
We use maintainer approval to help gauge that, but there is danger that can turn into a cabal if you end up with bad apples as maintainers
Dan (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:44:44 GMT):
self correcting problem.. why would you want to maintain a poisoned project?
rjones (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:45:20 GMT):
There is a question in parallel: when a project has no active maintainers, does that start the clock for deprecation
rjones (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:45:20 GMT):
There is a question in parallel: when a project has no active maintainers, does that start the clock for deprecation?
nage (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:45:43 GMT):
Ry, I think it should
rjones (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:45:49 GMT):
Excellent
nage (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:46:15 GMT):
Or it could be absorbed into one of the projects that depend on it to effectively give it maintainers
shemnon (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:56:31 GMT):
The problem with any anti-cabal mechanism is the HLP charter requires a majority vote of maintainers of a project to approve new maintainers. The only real check I see in that case is for the TSC to move the project to deprecated.
knagware9 (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 15:33:03 GMT):
Congrats BIF team
VipinB (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 20:17:42 GMT):
BIF, POW maybe POPEYE ! :grinning: congrats to BIF
mwagner (Thu, 30 Apr 2020 20:26:48 GMT):
Delorean...
VipinB (Fri, 01 May 2020 11:03:28 GMT):
I had suggested Hyperledger Bridge, simple and efficient
jmbarry (Mon, 04 May 2020 18:18:48 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
mwagner (Mon, 04 May 2020 18:27:59 GMT):
topics for tomorrow ?
rjones (Thu, 07 May 2020 13:59:35 GMT):
@lehors https://xkcd.com/1865/
hartm (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:05:51 GMT):
Would it be possible to plan more individual meetings between projects and marketing? This might spur more attendance than just a general meeting.
rjones (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:10:34 GMT):
If anyone wants a chat account rename - reach out to me directly, @Dan
troyronda (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:11:27 GMT):
yes - thanks for putting this together @tkuhrt !
dhuseby (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:19:10 GMT):
is machine parse-able a requirement?
nage (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:28:22 GMT):
Sounds like @dhuseby needs to make a PR on the document format to be happy with the parse-ability—hopefully without destroying human readability
nage (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:28:51 GMT):
Inlining proofs is a story for later PRs
hartm (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:30:36 GMT):
Yeah, this is a case of "don't let perfect be the enemy of good."
shemnon (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:31:48 GMT):
+1 to flexibility on policy but requirement it is explicit.
nage (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:31:51 GMT):
We don’t like SHOULD, prefer MUST...UNLESS...
nage (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:36:47 GMT):
Dan++ things here are reversible, having everyone +1 in github gets really tedious, if something is controversial we take it to the call and reverse it
Dan (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:36:49 GMT):
we like WANNA, SHOULDA, and COULDA
nage (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:44:11 GMT):
I am intrigued by the idea of an alternating maintainers call, but we’d have to know that there is an appetite for it. Many see the TSC as representing them for those processes so that they don’t have to deal with any of that stuff directly.
rjones (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:45:58 GMT):
I'm going to rename @Dan so he can be @mentioned
cbf (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:46:05 GMT):
+1 Tracy
Dan (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:46:12 GMT):
discussion always grows to fill the time alotted. If we constrained the time, we'd increase our SnR.
Dan (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:46:43 GMT):
Don't you dare ruin my incognito mode @rjones!
dhuseby (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:48:01 GMT):
+1 to half hour
Dan (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:48:09 GMT):
so is that 1.5 hrs?
dhuseby (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:48:11 GMT):
I'll see your half hour and raise you 15 minutes?
dhuseby (Thu, 07 May 2020 14:48:25 GMT):
can we get the meeting done in 5 minutes?
rjones (Thu, 07 May 2020 15:58:29 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/tsc/pull/3
rjones (Thu, 07 May 2020 19:03:57 GMT):
OK; I'm done porting documents. Copy edits welcome; a rendered version is here: https://ryjones.github.io/tsc/
lehors (Thu, 07 May 2020 19:52:43 GMT):
thanks @rjones
rjones (Fri, 15 May 2020 19:30:31 GMT):
[For your consideration](https://ryjones.github.io/hyperledger-hip/process.html). I've copied over @tkuhrt 's work and done light copyedits. I haven't worked out the phrasing on the fork/pr process yet.
mwagner (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:02:53 GMT):
hmm, zoom says waiting for host to start this meeting \
hartm (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:03:04 GMT):
Are you sure?
hartm (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:03:07 GMT):
We are all in...
mwagner (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:05:38 GMT):
had to log in to zoom
hartm (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:07:59 GMT):
Can we just make it easy to copy over the reports? That way it's easy to generate a new report if things haven't changed.
hartm (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:09:48 GMT):
No problems in Chrome....
dhuseby (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:16:12 GMT):
I'm with @rjones on the link for the reasons I'm certain he's for it
hartm (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:19:06 GMT):
Thanks @rjones for all the work on this!
dhuseby (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:25:01 GMT):
you win @Dan :joy:
Dan (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:27:12 GMT):
first time in my life I've ever heard those words :cry:
hartm (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:38:03 GMT):
I'm with Dan here. Let's just vote on the final plan.
cbf (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:38:20 GMT):
works for me
Dan (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:42:12 GMT):
I remember the inauguration .. it was tremendous.. biggest crowds ever .. just really really uuge.
hartm (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:42:48 GMT):
Chris's inauguration as chair was bigger than yours, Dan. HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THAT?
Dan (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:43:29 GMT):
My chair had the biggest legs!
Dan (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:43:48 GMT):
(It's like a high chair.. only way I can reach the desk)
mwagner (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:44:32 GMT):
we are getting closer to Feb 29th
mwagner (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:45:48 GMT):
when do we start getting our stipends ?
mwagner (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:46:13 GMT):
travel allowances, etc
dhuseby (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:47:03 GMT):
:joy:
rjones (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:47:40 GMT):
@Dan I said that you won in the meeting, as well
Dan (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:49:33 GMT):
I figured he was quoting you. But I'll count it as two wins :fireworks:
Dan (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:49:58 GMT):
thanks for the doc port by the way. it's really nice to have those in git[hub]
rjones (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:51:03 GMT):
sure thing.
rjones (Thu, 21 May 2020 14:51:35 GMT):
I like that it gives someone else to blame if it doesn't render. :)
rjones (Thu, 21 May 2020 19:09:37 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/tsc/pull/4
Dan (Tue, 26 May 2020 19:11:27 GMT):
cool. can you ask @tbenzies to double check if any amendments the board had approved made it into that copy? (I'm not sure if he still monitors this chat).
Dan (Tue, 26 May 2020 19:12:24 GMT):
Or I suppose @bbehlendorf might also know, but I don't think he's normally awake during those meetings ;) KIDDING!
rjones (Tue, 26 May 2020 20:46:43 GMT):
@Dan I did uncover a couple issues that were fixed. :)
Dan (Mon, 01 Jun 2020 14:50:45 GMT):
I like the new avatar :)
Dan (Mon, 01 Jun 2020 14:50:45 GMT):
I like the new avatar, @rjones :)
rjones (Tue, 09 Jun 2020 22:50:28 GMT):
FreeBSD changed CoC: https://www.mail-archive.com/freebsd-announce@freebsd.org/msg00965.html
Dan (Wed, 10 Jun 2020 15:54:12 GMT):
Just a reminder that in 1 hour we have our first DCI guest speaker https://wiki.hyperledger.org/x/kw7cAQ
We would love to see you there and help us welcome any new participants to the community
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup
Dan (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:02:40 GMT):
:wave: good morning/afternoon/evening
Dan (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:04:27 GMT):
https://lfanalytics.io/projects/hyperledger
hartm (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:05:27 GMT):
Thanks @rjones! This is a great tool.
mwagner (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:11:47 GMT):
Is Gari even his real name ?
mwagner (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:12:10 GMT):
@rjones this looks great
Dan (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:12:18 GMT):
@mastersingh24 only communicates using AIM.
Dan (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:16:46 GMT):
https://jira.linuxfoundation.org/servicedesk/customer/portal/4
hartm (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:34:14 GMT):
I think the "sponsorship list" is a great idea, but can we list people by categories? In other words, encourage people to choose a sponsor based on the type of lab.
Dan (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:48:40 GMT):
I see the future... it is an out of date list
rjones (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:48:50 GMT):
yes?
rjones (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:49:34 GMT):
it's a list where I've delegated to the edge
nage (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:50:10 GMT):
I like the friendly sponsor list idea and am happy to be listed. With machine parsable maintainer lists it seems like an obvious improvement to have an automatically up to date full Hyperledger Maintainers directory.
Dan (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:52:12 GMT):
thanks all
rjones (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 18:12:16 GMT):
Pull requests accepted: https://hyperledger-labs.github.io/sponsors/
rjones (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 18:12:29 GMT):
I just grabbed the Fabric maintainer list to start
rjones (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 21:19:06 GMT):
I have imported most of the contents of every Maintainers file I could find: https://hyperledger-labs.github.io/sponsors/
rjones (Thu, 11 Jun 2020 21:19:59 GMT):
I found 144 distinct maintainers across Hyperledger projects.
troyronda (Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:14:25 GMT):
@rjones @tkuhrt I am adding a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md to one of the project repos. Is https://hyperledger.github.io/tsc/code-of-conduct.html a stable URL to link against? Or should I, for now, be using the same URL that fabric currently uses: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Hyperledger+Code+of+Conduct ?
rjones (Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:15:31 GMT):
@troyronda the goal of having the TSC repo is that it is the source of truth.
rjones (Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:16:30 GMT):
(so link there)
hartm (Thu, 25 Jun 2020 14:07:22 GMT):
The new analytics tool from @rjones is great for getting your statistics for the quarterly reports!
hartm (Thu, 25 Jun 2020 14:22:19 GMT):
There aren't any teeth for this document, are there? What if I put I am "Hyperledger Chief Shaman" on my (nonexistent) linkedin? I guess we are just asking people to be nice?
rjones (Thu, 25 Jun 2020 14:22:29 GMT):
correct.
seanyoung (Thu, 25 Jun 2020 14:24:47 GMT):
@dhuseby labs projects can't pretend to be full hyperledger projects. Can I identify as "Hyperleger Solang Maintainer" or would that confuse matters with labs/non-labs status?
hartm (Thu, 25 Jun 2020 14:25:37 GMT):
Can we get Arnaud's social security number on there as well ;)
hartm (Thu, 25 Jun 2020 14:30:45 GMT):
I can't wait to land my 10,000 email commit!
rjones (Thu, 25 Jun 2020 14:41:35 GMT):
If we use the list of maintainers I compiled, the number is very close to the number of ballots cast in the last election
tkuhrt (Fri, 26 Jun 2020 20:56:01 GMT):
From the original Lab proposal "Labs representation
It is not permitted to publicly refer to work under the hyperledger-labs org as an “Hyperledger project” and directly use the Hyperledger brand as in “Hyperledger
MicBowman (Wed, 01 Jul 2020 16:01:11 GMT):
discussion about baseline protocol on the architecture call this morning, https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community
Dan (Wed, 08 Jul 2020 19:31:00 GMT):
TSC Meeting 2020-07-09 Cancelled :skull_crossbones:
rjones (Wed, 08 Jul 2020 23:27:48 GMT):
https://hyperledger.github.io/hyperledger-hip/
nicarq (Wed, 15 Jul 2020 03:41:15 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Wed, 15 Jul 2020 17:12:21 GMT):
All are welcome to join the TSC call this Thurs, July 16 @ 7AM pacific to take part in a discussion on diversity with special guests Keisha Bell and Robert Palatnick from DTCC. https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020-07-16+TSC+Agenda
hartm (Thu, 16 Jul 2020 14:55:09 GMT):
A lot of our maintainers/contributors don't really follow the TSC or overall maintainer stuff, so I'm not sure they would even be aware of these meetings. Having someone from marketing show up to a technical meeting (and asking for agenda space well in advance) once in a while to make people aware of marketing resources might be a good thing.
rjones (Thu, 23 Jul 2020 16:34:44 GMT):
The login process for the wiki has changed - if you run into turbulence, please bring it up in #infra-support
rjones (Thu, 23 Jul 2020 16:35:21 GMT):
this will be the same process chat will be using at some point in the future
nage (Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:05:31 GMT):
Apologies on the lateness of the Indy report. We are still figuring out some of the changes from when we lost the full-time Sovrin Foundation staff.
nage (Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:06:26 GMT):
(we're mostly still around, but some of the more "busy work" mechanics aren't part of anyone's full-time gig now)
hartm (Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:26:59 GMT):
Was the survey only sent out in English?
rjones (Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:27:16 GMT):
I think that's correct.
hartm (Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:38:29 GMT):
I'm guessing we got lower response rates from East Asia then due to this. I suspect that more than 2% of our contributor base is from China (correct me if I'm wrong here), which, if I read the survey responses correctly, was the response rate from China.
mwagner (Thu, 30 Jul 2020 15:01:05 GMT):
time flies when you are having fun!
rjones (Thu, 30 Jul 2020 15:01:44 GMT):
I'd propose moving the TSC nomination statements to GitHub, with a PR template for guidance, but not this year.
troyronda (Fri, 31 Jul 2020 00:14:52 GMT):
It would be good to understand if the DCO topic is closed? https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/DCO+and+Pseudonyms
(I assume from the last comments that DCO signoff should have full name and email address).
troyronda (Fri, 31 Jul 2020 00:14:52 GMT):
It would be good to understand the status of the DCO topic. https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/DCO+and+Pseudonyms
(I assume from the last comments that DCO signoff should have full name and email address).
davidkhala (Tue, 11 Aug 2020 14:22:45 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:00:07 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020+08+13+TSC+Minutes
mwagner (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:09:04 GMT):
"you choose, you use"
rjones (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:09:36 GMT):
the check tool was a proof-of-concept
mwagner (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:24:05 GMT):
I know a lot of PoCs that end up in production...
cbf (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:46:12 GMT):
ah, @rjones is correct here's the link to all projects view https://lfanalytics.io/projects/hyperledger%2Fhyperledger-all/dashboard?filter=%23%2Fdashboard%2FGit%3Fembed%3Dtrue%26_g%3D(refreshInterval:(pause:!t,value:0),time:(from:%27now-90d%27,to:%27now%27))&time=%7B%22from%22:%22now-90d%22,%22type%22:%22datemath%22,%22to%22:%22now%22%7D
cbf (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:46:28 GMT):
looks like as an organization, the commits are flat
rjones (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:47:14 GMT):
https://tinyurl.com/yy5m87od should have the last five years
rjones (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:47:55 GMT):
https://tinyurl.com/y438h8bt
hartm (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:49:53 GMT):
If you don't specify, then it's EOD anywhere on earth ;)
seanyoung (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:52:13 GMT):
Is is possible to see these stats with the labs included?
rjones (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:54:34 GMT):
we have a card for labs
rjones (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:54:53 GMT):
https://lfanalytics.io/projects/hyperledger%2Fhyperledger-labs/dashboard
rjones (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:55:18 GMT):
The data doesn't roll up to Hyperledger All, tho.
seanyoung (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:56:35 GMT):
Yes. I'm top committer for labs, but can't be found in the hyperledger all.
seanyoung (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:57:24 GMT):
Anyway, still interesting
seanyoung (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:57:28 GMT):
:thumbsup:
hartm (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:58:02 GMT):
Also, about subprojects: how do we count use by projects outside of Hyperledger? For instance, a large component of Ursa growth at this point is from of people who don't even use Hyperledger blockchains--they're just interested in, say, anonymous credentials.
rjones (Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:02:48 GMT):
it's an implementation detail. Labs used to be a whole other top level thing, I moved it under Hyperledger, but I still need to jiggle all the data. it may be a month or so before I can revisit
davidkhala (Wed, 19 Aug 2020 14:03:47 GMT):
Well, I am also expecting a better `used by` statistic sidebar on Github. If those using repos are hosted on github then it would possibly be counted in github future release.
Dan (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:50:02 GMT):
recovering from a crash. might be a few min late.
Dan (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 13:59:50 GMT):
i'm on
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:04:24 GMT):
Until the break of dawn?
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:10:45 GMT):
Same with Ursa
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:14:47 GMT):
Looks like Brian, Dan, Chris
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:14:47 GMT):
Looks like Dan, Chris, David
dhuseby (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:15:49 GMT):
then me
hartm (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:16:27 GMT):
I think this debate entirely comes down to marketing and what the maintainers feel best about.
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:16:52 GMT):
Sort of?
hartm (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:17:33 GMT):
As far as Explorer: no promises, but there may be a Cactus GUI in the works. If we get this working, then it will obviously have to work with many ledgers, and maybe we can work with the Explorer community on this. But no promises for now...
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:18:46 GMT):
@hartm have you seen the recent (last 12 hours or so) integration between @tongli's minifab and Explorer?
hartm (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:19:06 GMT):
No.
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:19:25 GMT):
https://github.com/litong01/minifabric pretty cool
hartm (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:20:21 GMT):
Oh that's cool!
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:20:55 GMT):
it's nice. You get fabric running easily, explorer running easily.
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:21:00 GMT):
It's sort of like Composer
hartm (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:21:08 GMT):
Haha, yeah, I was going to say that.
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:22:15 GMT):
I spent way too much time getting it working on Windows :(
hartm (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:23:31 GMT):
I spend a ton of time getting stuff to work on Windows like that....
rjones (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:23:56 GMT):
yeah, it was annoying, there was a change between older windows 10 and newer windows 10 that broke things
Dan (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:28:19 GMT):
Over the last few years many of us have tried to find ways to get more cross-project collab. Cutting projects that strive to be cross-project works against that. Our efforts should be to facilitate success.
nage (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:32:16 GMT):
Having looked at and having not to be able to reuse a few projects (in good faith on both sides), we need to make sure that each project is measured both directions: from the internal project perspective and from the external consumer perspective.
hartm (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:41:43 GMT):
Explorer dates back from the days when we made Fabric SDKs (e.g. the Java and Python SDKs) top level projects. It was a point in time when we had a very different organizational philosophy on projects.
Dan (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:42:18 GMT):
Composer became EOL because the maintainers left. I can't tell if it's coming up here because of misinterpretations about whether or not it was cross project. It's unrelated to this discussion.
nage (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:42:58 GMT):
Composer thought about ledger deployment and adoption differently than other blockchain projects and it helped recruit project participants that made the rest of our community better
nage (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:43:08 GMT):
it had a good run
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:43:34 GMT):
have to drop, sorry
hartm (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:43:48 GMT):
I honestly thought that Composer was just a victim of its own success. They did such a good job that people wanted to build real blockchains on top of Composer, which was not what the maintainers intended.
hartm (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:46:54 GMT):
One thing we haven't done is ask the maintainers of the project that we're discussing here why they want separate projects (or, maybe they don't even care--who knows--but the point is we don't know). Should we ask them for their opinions?
nage (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:47:33 GMT):
My "shoot from the hip" take on questions for deciding if something is a stand alone project: "Does the architecture support multiple frameworks?" (If no --> look for home in existing framework or lab)
If yes: "Will the existing developers commit to spend resource to support contributions from another framework?" (If no --> look for home in existing framework or lab)
If yes and the project is more than 12 months old: "Has anyone made such contributions and what was their experience?"
If the answer is that they are working together or that the experience wasn't negative (even if cross-framework use didn't result) I say we give the project a pass and let things continue and ask the questions again at the next project report.
tkuhrt (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:28:44 GMT):
Some possible verbiage for consideration @lehors in a proposal:
We will consider a project a top-level project if it meets one of the following criteria:
* one that is used across more than one Hyperledger project (e.g., Caliper)
* one that is used by both a Hyperledger project and a project outside of Hyperledger (e.g., Ursa, Aries)
The above leaves a lot out like timeframe that we give for a project to meet one of these goals. It also wouldn't help us to decide on future DLT platforms/frameworks. And probably a lot of other things that we would need/want to consider.
lehors (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:55:52 GMT):
Thanks @tkuhrt, this is indeed the kind of objective criteria we need to establish
shemnon (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 17:29:42 GMT):
@tkuhrt Is that ment to be an all-inclusive definition? What about stand alone projects? For example if another DLT or client for a DLT network comes in? Or projects that work only with non-HL projects, like a bitcoin L2 solution?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 18:37:30 GMT):
Evolving the criteria for approving a top-level project is one thing; criteria for evaluating current projects is another. The issue with Transact may have been that it was approved before it really should have been (it probably should have gestated longer as a lab, for instance) but that's a moot point now; the question is more what the TSC can or should do to help Transact become what it was destined to, or what corrective action it can or should take if it's not intending to head in that direction originally promised
amundson (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 19:16:54 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
amundson (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 19:29:45 GMT):
Sorry, missed the conversation - what's the issue? Transact is chugging along ok. Now here I'm reading about "corrective action".
amundson (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 19:49:57 GMT):
"not intending to head in that direction originally promised" -- nothing has changed about Transact's direction...
tkuhrt (Thu, 20 Aug 2020 21:32:53 GMT):
Hi, @shemnon (Danno). My take was definitely not meant to represent an all inclusive definition. Thus my comment that followed:
> It also wouldn't help us to decide on future DLT platforms/frameworks.
Regarding the point about projects that work with non-HL projects, that would be something that the TSC would need to agree with and whether projects made sense within the greater Hyperledger mission.
gregdhill (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 13:34:28 GMT):
Has left the channel.
tkuhrt (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:08:58 GMT):
@shemnon : https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/TSC+Decision+Log in case you need the link
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:10:11 GMT):
Sorry for the sound quality issues!
rjones (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:14:40 GMT):
@hartm when I looked, I don't think you had any commits this year
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:14:48 GMT):
I found the email in my gmail "promotions" folder.
tkuhrt (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:15:19 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/TSC+Election+voters+selection
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:15:25 GMT):
I do! And I found the email.
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:28:57 GMT):
I do agree with Chris, though, that the TSC should count as a working group (and thus Arnaud should be able to list people like other working group leaders).
tkuhrt (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:32:25 GMT):
Email sent from Hyperledger
tkuhrt (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:32:25 GMT):
TSC Election email sent from "Hyperledger
nage (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:32:54 GMT):
I didn’t see or track down the email until Tracy gave the email to search for. The marketing emails typically get filtered out.
nage (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:33:00 GMT):
But it is there
troyronda (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:34:20 GMT):
Agree that TSC should count as a WG.
dhuseby (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:35:37 GMT):
@cbf I sent an email to the work email I have for you. is that the one you'd like me to use?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:35:55 GMT):
I still am amazed people who care about making sure they don't miss important mail use Gmail.
dhuseby (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:36:09 GMT):
right
dhuseby (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:36:21 GMT):
I use FastMail on purpose
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:36:24 GMT):
Sorry Brian!
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:37:31 GMT):
There are also some situations we may not have considered: what if the framework/parent project doesn't want to take the child project?
nage (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:39:54 GMT):
If a framework maintainer group concludes they cannot support a project that is entirely dependent on that framework, approving it as a top level project undermines their authority as maintainers no? This proposal gives us a better tool to review that.
nage (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:41:33 GMT):
Our role there would be to help encourage and support inclusivity and good collaboration culture in that maintainer group rather than steamroll them by approving the project that is ultimately dependent on their support.
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:44:45 GMT):
Fundamentally, doesn't this come down to marketing? If we're not going to change how projects are managed, then merging projects is essentially just declaring that certain repos would be affiliated. It probably wouldn't even change maintainer structure.
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:46:55 GMT):
Maybe it makes sense just to accept some kind of unequal marketing amongst projects (which is already happening, I imagine, and this is totally fine). We could have a greenhouse graphic that is skewed towards the more commonly used top level projects, for instance.
rjones (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:48:01 GMT):
it isn't just financial cost - it's diffusion of focus
rjones (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:49:53 GMT):
Would the TSC authorize a security audit of `fabric-sdk-py` ?
rjones (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:50:49 GMT):
If Cello became `fabric-sdk-k8s` would there be any audits?
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:51:28 GMT):
If these were a part of Fabric, wouldn't they be included in any security audit of Fabric?
rjones (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:51:52 GMT):
I think it's just the `fabric` repo, not `fabric-*`
rjones (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:51:52 GMT):
I think it's just the `fabric` repo, not `fabric*`
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:52:33 GMT):
I think we
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:52:33 GMT):
I think the decision to audit these would be independent of whether they were independent or not.
rjones (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:54:05 GMT):
The previous audit included some of those repos, I'm wrong. https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/SEC/Security+Code+Audits?preview=/2393550/2393584/technical_report_linux_foundation_fabric_august_2017_v1.1.pdf
hartm (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:54:23 GMT):
Thanks for digging that up!
cbf (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 14:54:57 GMT):
seriously? I get on the order of 100+ emails a day from hyperledger sources... whether I use gmail does not change the fact that it is impossible to deal individually with each. This is why I requested that THIS election email go to my work email, because at least there I can hope to notice it (despite the fact that I also get tons of spam but it would stick out better there.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 15:02:42 GMT):
Chris, if I recall correctly (and I'll check), your work email address, as well as Arnaud's and Gari's, were set as "never contact" by LF's automated messaging systems as a result of clicking an opt-out link at some point with a "never contact again" checkbox clicked. I think that was corrected before this outreach, and the election mail was sent to your work address, but again will double check.
amundson (Thu, 03 Sep 2020 18:33:27 GMT):
It would be helpful to be specific about the intent in relation to existing projects. A policy that forces X project and Y project to merge may be equivalent to ejecting X project or Y project from HL. Such a move should be explicit and discussed. As it is now, it sounds like malicious maneuvering against projects that specific TSC members aren't directly invested in. TSC should focus instead on fostering collaboration instead of attacking projects. "If you don't write your project report the right way, we will immediately start to talk about 'sanctions' or removing the project." isn't collaborative.
bbehlendorf (Fri, 04 Sep 2020 08:40:15 GMT):
I agree, mostly. We should talk more about the sequence of events as I think it's less about rules or lack of them and more about unachieved goals or expectations. I wrote up what I think is the bigger issue here. https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/3112
shemnon (Wed, 16 Sep 2020 23:57:37 GMT):
Here's an initial proposal for updating the Release Taxonomy to allow projects to define their own - https://github.com/shemnon/hyperledger-tsc/pull/1
shemnon (Wed, 16 Sep 2020 23:57:37 GMT):
Here's an initial proposal for updating the Release Taxonomy to allow projects to define their own - https://github.com/shemnon/hyperledger-tsc/pull/1/files
lehors (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:57:13 GMT):
That's not quite in line with the formal proposal put forth in https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Allow+projects+to+use+CalVer+or+SemVer
lehors (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:57:54 GMT):
not that this makes it unacceptable but worth noting
shemnon (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:05:50 GMT):
I broadened it off of the comment feedback, but it's still a 'red herring'
Dan (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:14:02 GMT):
question to fabric maintainers.. you have been making LTS releases... would you switch to calver to be like ubuntu or stick to semver?
dhuseby (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:17:14 GMT):
@DannoFerrin my only concern is that the release policy must have a section that addresses what a "promoted release" is as per the rules for releases that get promotion and security audits and other money spent around it
DannoFerrin (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:17:14 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
grace.hartley (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:17:46 GMT):
@shemnon
dhuseby (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:18:06 GMT):
Indy does
dhuseby (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:18:13 GMT):
Aries also defines public API
dhuseby (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:18:16 GMT):
so does Ursa
Dan (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:18:20 GMT):
and sawtooth
dhuseby (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:18:24 GMT):
yup
shemnon (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:18:25 GMT):
good to know. Where are those pages so we can compare notes?
dhuseby (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:18:47 GMT):
typically any project that has a
dhuseby (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:18:56 GMT):
which affects the public API stuff
Dan (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:19:20 GMT):
https://sawtooth.hyperledger.org/docs/
dhuseby (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:19:36 GMT):
Thanks Grace
nage (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:20:51 GMT):
We really want to support the culture of "don't break user-space", the version numbering seems less significant than a culture that preserves stability and dependability.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:25:46 GMT):
Promoted releases: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=24779174
Dan (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:26:39 GMT):
As an enterprise focused project I like sticking to well established practices wherever possible. I'm open to extending from semver to calver, but prefer not to just say do whatever you want.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:27:26 GMT):
Yes - accepting a second template like calver doesn't mean anything goes it's all chaos :)
hartm (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:28:55 GMT):
I am pretty sure you could define some very adversarial numbering systems using Danno's modified proposal! Something like Version = g^{ Hash(version)} for some group of unknown order and random oracle. Sorry for nerding out here...
rjones (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:29:25 GMT):
And yet, when I name things with hashes, people complain
hartm (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:29:51 GMT):
Ry, you just need to use them as powers in groups of unknown order!
Dan (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:30:32 GMT):
what does this mean? ```The project is not intended to be used as an embedded library but is instead a standalone program.
```
rjones (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:31:10 GMT):
My previous project used Ubuntu-style numbering; it was fine.
Dan (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:31:52 GMT):
did it have an API or was it more like an OS?
shemnon (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:32:03 GMT):
Stuff like aries and ursa are meant to be consumed as libraries. A stand alone process, such as an ethereum client, would not be a library. If besu spin out libraries those would be API versioned.
hartm (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:32:08 GMT):
You could also define a numbering system over some complex ring.
Dan (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:33:38 GMT):
Thanks for the clarification. I'm considering whether we want that level of granularity in the policy.
rjones (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:33:49 GMT):
AllJoyn was an API, and a library.
cbf (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:44:15 GMT):
don't know if you heard but I abstained
rjones (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:45:15 GMT):
I didn't hear it, your vote will be recorded
shemnon (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:00:15 GMT):
TeX uses the digits of Pi for it's releases (currently 3.14159265). Not quite complex numbers, but irrational.
shemnon (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:00:15 GMT):
TeX uses the digits of Pi for its releases (currently 3.14159265). Not quite complex numbers, but irrational.
shemnon (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:12:37 GMT):
Official PR for the SemVer change - https://github.com/hyperledger/tsc/pull/6
shemnon (Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:12:37 GMT):
Official PR for the CalVer change - https://github.com/hyperledger/tsc/pull/6
Dan (Wed, 23 Sep 2020 14:29:26 GMT):
how long until :robot: dev-analytics-bot :robot: turns against us? Even now it gathers its intelligence confident in its eventual supremacy.
rjones (Wed, 23 Sep 2020 15:44:34 GMT):
@Dan pretty scary, huh?
bbehlendorf (Fri, 25 Sep 2020 19:38:27 GMT):
Hi all. We just sent a note to the TSC mailing list with the slate of candidates for the 2020 TSC Election, which starts on Saturday. Just mentioning it here for redundancy. https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/3145
Dan (Fri, 25 Sep 2020 21:33:20 GMT):
dev-analytics-bot already voted for me
mwagner (Tue, 29 Sep 2020 13:38:38 GMT):
@Dan twice I heard
Dan (Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:30:45 GMT):
yes, dev-analytics-bot :robot: can only operate in positive powers of two. :white_check_mark: :white_check_mark:
rjones (Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:33:35 GMT):
I have a solution for that problem, but it's too small to scribble in the margin of this channel
Dan (Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:40:44 GMT):
You might say dev-analytics-bot :robot: is _even_ handed.
Dan (Wed, 30 Sep 2020 17:53:36 GMT):
@hyperledger-bot :robot: are you friends with dev-analytics-bot :robot:?
hyperledger-bot (Wed, 30 Sep 2020 17:53:36 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:52:30 GMT):
If you join as a new user, you get a message from the bot. @tkuhrt set it up
rjones (Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:58:32 GMT):
@Dan this is the message you get: ```Welcome to the Hyperledger community. We have separate channels set up for each of the projects. You can see details about the different channels that exist at https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/tools/Chat+Channel+Mapping . You can join a channel (or even just search to see which channels exist) in the upper-left corner of the screen. For example, if you type fabric, you should see all channels related to Hyperledger Fabric. The #general channel should ONLY be used for non-project-specific questions. Please refrain from using @ here and @ all```
Dan (Wed, 30 Sep 2020 19:10:48 GMT):
Hyperledger-bot and I are old friends. I just didn't know if it knew dev-analytics-bot. I assume they've met at LF Bot conferences but you never know.
rjones (Wed, 30 Sep 2020 19:25:40 GMT):
there's also @cbf-bot and @sawtoothlake-github-l and @hyperledger-jira-l and @hyperledger-bridge
sawtoothlake-github-l (Wed, 30 Sep 2020 19:25:40 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Wed, 30 Sep 2020 19:31:03 GMT):
So cbf is a bot, eh? I guess that explains the lack of empathy. :wink:
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 13:52:21 GMT):
User User_1 removed by rjones.
lehors (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 13:59:30 GMT):
in case anyone is having trouble connecting to the meeting, try this link: https://zoom.us/j/93304666234?pwd=OEswSmpjS2oxeWE2NmZId2hBanBnQT09
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:01:07 GMT):
hmmm still requiring some sort of sign-in for me
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:01:18 GMT):
you need to be signed in to your zoom account
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:01:37 GMT):
so I need to create a zoom account eh?
cbf (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:01:51 GMT):
password?
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:02:20 GMT):
check the link above
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:02:25 GMT):
https://zoom.us/j/93304666234?pwd=OEswSmpjS2oxeWE2NmZId2hBanBnQT09
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:02:33 GMT):
the passcode is 475869
lehors (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:03:20 GMT):
yes, it seems that you need an account
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:04:24 GMT):
my company account is having an issue I think I'm going to have to miss today. I think I know why and I think that's going to take >1hr to resolve. I think I'm going to have to miss for today.
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:04:24 GMT):
my company account is having an issue I think I'm going to have to miss today. I think I know why and I think that's going to take >1hr to resolve.
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:05:21 GMT):
dan - try now?
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:06:43 GMT):
got it !
hartm (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:10:41 GMT):
I suspect a lot of these emails are getting spam filtered.
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:12:09 GMT):
agreed
hartm (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:13:01 GMT):
I think marketing cloud might be the issue here--I know my emails (to both gmail and company email) that get sent from what I am guessing is there get filtered.
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:13:56 GMT):
this is why I let dev-analytics-bot handle all of my voting
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:13:57 GMT):
there is an issue around people who have opted out of Linux Foundation emails for Marketing Cloud
bbehlendorf (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:14:15 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020+Nomination+Statements
hartm (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:15:27 GMT):
I'm assuming that "all" implies a quite substantial amount!
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:15:32 GMT):
```From:Dave Huseby (CIVS poll supervisor)
nage (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:15:35 GMT):
I have been advising folks who ask me to search their mail for "CIVS" and they usually find it
bbehlendorf (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:16:27 GMT):
We mention this address in the message going through marketing cloud to voters who can't find their ballot
hartm (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:17:35 GMT):
Figuring out this email stuff is good, though. If we want to do meaningful surveys of community feedback (e.g. DCI, etc.) then making sure we have a good way to communicate with the community is important.
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:19:41 GMT):
@dhuseby what address do you have for me?
nage (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:19:56 GMT):
That is a good answer for me. If there is a big deal someone can raise the alarm. We should be okay.
nage (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:19:56 GMT):
That is a good answer for me. If there is a big issue someone can raise the alarm. We should be okay.
hartm (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:24:55 GMT):
I think Mark's point belies a bigger issue around marketing.
greg2git (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:27:03 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
greg2git (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:28:03 GMT):
hello tsc, the zoom is now password protected but not sure how it can be safely shared, thx
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:28:38 GMT):
@greg2git here is the URL: https://zoom.us/j/93304666234?pwd=OEswSmpjS2oxeWE2NmZId2hBanBnQT09
greg2git (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:29:20 GMT):
thx, rjones
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:34:10 GMT):
that was a royal we
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:34:10 GMT):
that was a royal `we`
hartm (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:37:56 GMT):
I think this discussion will be related to the active/incubation status discussion as well.
nage (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:38:12 GMT):
^^ Unavoidably so ^^
tkuhrt (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:40:19 GMT):
Back in the day, I attempted to create a maturity report for projects. You can see thoughts about possible items to consider here: https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/blob/master/project-reports/docs/requirements.md. We might be able to use the community bridge/analytics tool to pull some of this information into an easily digestable report
mwagner (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:42:25 GMT):
@Dan could you capture your thoughts on the combing projects on that page so it doesn't get lost? pretty please!
davidwboswell (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:43:03 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
hartm (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:57:31 GMT):
Brian compared the CII badge to active status. I think we need to answer the question as to whether or not active status is a simple metric for the outside community (like the CII badge) or some kind of internal milestone for projects. I think it's useful to note, though, that the CII badge process is much simpler than achieving active status, and doesn't require approval of a governing body.
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:57:53 GMT):
p.s. I found @DavidBoswell 's email helpful.
DavidBoswell (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:57:53 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:59:38 GMT):
CII Badge also doesn't reflect community size, diversity, and activity.
To echo @mastersingh24 's comment, seeing that really isn't too hard. You can see metrics .. commit frequency on github. Diversity is harder to see.
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:59:38 GMT):
CII Badge also doesn't reflect community size, diversity, and activity.
To echo @mastersingh24 's comment, seeing most of that really isn't too hard. You can see metrics .. commit frequency on github. Diversity is harder to see.
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 14:59:38 GMT):
CII Badge also doesn't reflect community size, diversity, and activity.
To echo @mastersingh24 's comment, seeing most of that really isn't too hard. You can see metrics .. commit frequency etc. on github. Diversity is harder to see.
hartm (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 15:00:31 GMT):
The community bridge has some diversity metrics, including commits by company.
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 15:01:35 GMT):
if we had a feature request for exactly how to represent something, I can file that with product development
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 19:38:17 GMT):
are projects using .github/settings.yml and any anecdotes on it good/bad/indifferent?
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 19:38:40 GMT):
Yes, a lot are using it. It’s good.
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 19:39:11 GMT):
it lets maintainers make changes without asking me to do it
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 19:45:20 GMT):
got an example project in mind that set many settings?
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 19:57:58 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric-docs-i18n/blob/release-2.2/.github/settings.yml
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 19:58:34 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/avalon/blob/master/.github/settings.yml
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 20:00:12 GMT):
Cool thanks. Anyone using the collaborators settings? Looks like you can control roles directly with that. Like you could add and remove maintainers by PR.
rjones (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 20:23:46 GMT):
I think that's available via codeowners? Not that I know of
Dan (Thu, 01 Oct 2020 20:32:15 GMT):
I think codeowners is just for notification on PRs.
I was looking at this example https://github.com/apps/settings for settings that shows a `collaborators` field that assigns pull/push/admin. Seems less granular than the full set of settings that e.g. restricts force pushes etc. The warning on that page is also notable .. push==admin
shemnon (Fri, 02 Oct 2020 00:02:45 GMT):
Admins can flip a switch to require codeowners to be a reviewa approver for a PR - https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/administering-a-repository/enabling-required-reviews-for-pull-requests
shemnon (Fri, 02 Oct 2020 00:02:45 GMT):
Admins can flip a switch to require codeowners to be a review approver for a PR - https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/github/administering-a-repository/enabling-required-reviews-for-pull-requests
rjones (Fri, 02 Oct 2020 16:32:49 GMT):
@shemnon I think that is the case for all of the hyperledger repos, but I'm not sure. The auditing tools for GitHub need work. If you have pointers to nice ones, let me know?
rjones (Fri, 02 Oct 2020 16:33:23 GMT):
I imagine there is a graphql query that would pull down all of the teams, permissions, and repo settings, but I've spent 0 time trying to figure it out
VipinB (Fri, 02 Oct 2020 16:36:43 GMT):
Yes graphql is integrated into github
cbf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:00:59 GMT):
passcode?
rjones (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:01:13 GMT):
475869
rjones (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:01:58 GMT):
https://zoom.us/j/93304666234?pwd=OEswSmpjS2oxeWE2NmZId2hBanBnQT09
rjones (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:04:03 GMT):
@troyronda ^^^
troyronda (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:04:48 GMT):
thanks
Dan (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:05:07 GMT):
terminal meeting
mwagner (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:07:32 GMT):
would US mail be more reliable ?
hartm (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:08:58 GMT):
Maybe we should use RFC 1149?
hartm (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:11:23 GMT):
I assume this deliverability metric doesn't count the emails getting spam filtered? I bet that's the big problem here.
seanyoung (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:12:25 GMT):
My ballot was sent without dkim. That makes a difference when sending email to e.g. gmail
seanyoung (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:13:18 GMT):
I had to enable dkim for own domain name to stop my email being marked as spam
seanyoung (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:15:01 GMT):
https://support.google.com/mail/troubleshooter/2696779?hl=en#ts=9283752%2C2696841%2C2696793%2C9288748
rjones (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:21:41 GMT):
One option for next year, self host civs: https://github.com/andrewcmyers/civs
Dan (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:21:49 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/3160
nage (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:23:30 GMT):
It is also appropriate to have announcements about elections in developer email lists and on developer calls as well (but it is best if those come from regular, active participants)
Dan (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:26:23 GMT):
I'm not concerned that there was a lack of advertising. More that the tools have defects such that when someone is notified and follows the process there are still problems.
rjones (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:28:27 GMT):
or CNCF-like
bbehlendorf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:29:32 GMT):
Apache's board does a lot of what this TSC does, in terms of approving & reviewing projects and setting org-wide policies and culture
hartm (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:31:59 GMT):
I agree--the documentation improvements for the TSC have been great.
troyronda (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:33:03 GMT):
I don't seem to have a way to raise my hand for the current zoom meeting (the chat is disabled for me).
Dan (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:36:41 GMT):
MHLGA? I'm afraid that doesn't have a good ring to it, Mark.
cbf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:44:27 GMT):
+1 Arnaud did great
tkuhrt (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:45:49 GMT):
+1 to more voices being heard
bbehlendorf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:50:07 GMT):
Renaming the TSC to the Community Steering Committee to better describe its role may be appropriate. There are currently "project-level TSCs", the maintainer calls or email lists. You still want some forum & decision-making body regarding the community across Hyperledger.
hartm (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:52:53 GMT):
In the very beginning, I guess I expected the governing board to do more of the "community management."
tkuhrt (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:54:53 GMT):
+1 to learning from each other
bbehlendorf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:56:25 GMT):
I don't think it's fair to say there isn't collaboration between projects. Ursa, Indy, and Aries work with each other really well.
nage (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:56:26 GMT):
I really like the idea of "promoting" important issues from some of the projects, SIGs and WGs into the TSC meeting discussions. It might be a good way to get technical obstacles heard by a wider audience--more like a code review or an academic forum than "how do we make rules to fix this process" discussion. The question there is how do we find those topics and recruit the right audience. Right now those of us looking for those discussions are subscribed to the project lists and show up at random to other calls.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:56:40 GMT):
Add Iroha/Ursa to that as well
shemnon (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:57:35 GMT):
It wasn't me.
cbf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:57:40 GMT):
lol
cbf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:57:56 GMT):
It waas Danno's sock puppet
shemnon (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:58:15 GMT):
Yes, able to be in two breakouts at the same time with different voices. Secret ninja skills.
rjones (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:59:52 GMT):
@mwagner he'd already quit when you said that
bbehlendorf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 15:00:44 GMT):
When we've emailed voters, we've consistently asked people to check their spam folders, giving them the address the ballot is coming from. That did catch a few.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 15:04:21 GMT):
It does feel like 98% of the election problem has been deliver-ability from the CIVS system to people's inboxes, which seems to be much worse this year than previous years. @seanyoung 's comments on DKIM amplify that. We've been using an external, hosted service both for simplicity and objectivity - as a system we don't run, we can't be accused of putting our thumb on the scales. But that now clearly comes at the cost of ability to deliver a trusted election to not just 98% of eligible voters but 100% of them, because we can't see where the failures are. So next year I suspect we'll decide to use a system we drive directly, favoring something that works over something separated.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 15:14:55 GMT):
Here's another place where not having direct control over CIVS causes us grief. By design, CIVS does not retain the email addresses of the ballots it sends out, but it does retain a hash. If we give it an email address, it can tell us if it's already been provisioned a ballot in a given poll, or if it represents a new address. We can always add a second email address for someone to the voting rolls, but we can't invalidate their earlier address and corresponding ballot. So, if that person is not honest, it allows them to vote twice. So, while we are happy to use a different address if we can't get the first one to work after a couple of attempts, there are trust issues with using secondary email addresses frequently.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 15:23:58 GMT):
And it may be stating the obvious, but it's possible that the tension and anxiety we all feel around the upcoming US election may be transferring to our interactions here. Apologies if my own defensiveness is coming from that.
hartm (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 19:56:44 GMT):
True. My work email has several tiers of spam filter, though--one of which I have to log on to a website to even find messages that get flagged. I'm assuming other people are in the same boat.
hartm (Thu, 08 Oct 2020 19:57:04 GMT):
The IACR uses the same system and seems to have no problem getting emails sent and through spam filters. I'm curious what they are doing differently.
rjones (Fri, 09 Oct 2020 18:00:08 GMT):
Please note: https://tsc.hyperledger.org/
hartm (Fri, 09 Oct 2020 23:06:12 GMT):
Looks good! Thanks Ry.
lehors (Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:07:49 GMT):
Has anyone received the election results?
bbehlendorf (Mon, 12 Oct 2020 16:14:15 GMT):
We have just sent them out: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/3171 Congrats to all new and returning TSC members!
bbehlendorf (Mon, 12 Oct 2020 16:17:02 GMT):
The wiki and tsc.hyperledger.org websites were updated at the same time. We've also notified the TSC members directly to get past any mailing list filters, and we'll be sending a note to all voters later today via Marketing Cloud with the results and thank them for participating.
bbehlendorf (Mon, 12 Oct 2020 16:18:08 GMT):
I'll highlight that we put together a couple of tips for TSC members in particular to use to best follow activity in the TSC: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/A+Welcome+to+New+TSC+Members They might be useful for other maintainers and people following what the TSC is doing.
VipinB (Mon, 12 Oct 2020 16:55:30 GMT):
Congrats @lehors
VipinB (Mon, 12 Oct 2020 16:57:11 GMT):
congrats to the entire new TSC!
lehors (Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:42 GMT):
Thanks for your support Vipin!
arsulegai (Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:09:58 GMT):
Congratulations to the new TSC, happy to be part of it :)
tkuhrt (Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:24:44 GMT):
Congrats to the 2020-21 TSC.
knagware9 (Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:03:53 GMT):
Congrats to the New TSC
arsulegai (Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:00:14 GMT):
Is there a meeting today?
tkuhrt (Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:02:35 GMT):
I do not think so
lehors (Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:04:49 GMT):
no, no meeting today because we have no chair
lehors (Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:04:58 GMT):
you can use the time to cast your vote though! ;-)
lehors (Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:05:24 GMT):
all TSC members should have received a ballot, if you haven't check your spam folder
lehors (Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:05:36 GMT):
and if you can't find it email election@lists.hyperledger.org
lehors (Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:06:48 GMT):
The email looks like this:
Subject: Poll: 2020-2021 Hyperleder TSC Chair Election
Dave Huseby (CIVS poll supervisor)
Sent by: civs@cs.cornell.edu
arsulegai (Thu, 15 Oct 2020 14:17:17 GMT):
I see Ry sent an email to verify if our email IDs are listed. Title: "[Hyperledger Election] The election has started"
rjones (Thu, 15 Oct 2020 17:39:15 GMT):
yes, unfortunately, the election was for the `Hyperleder TSC Chair`, not the `Hyperledger TSC Chair`, so you've all voted for some other thing
greg2git (Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:35:00 GMT):
@rjones, you lost me there
rjones (Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:27:22 GMT):
The ballot had a typo.
VipinB (Fri, 16 Oct 2020 21:18:03 GMT):
Hyperleder - a very fancy kind of leather in German
hartm (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:16:01 GMT):
The "new subproject" process is not written down, at least in a Hyperledger-wide sense.
Dan (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:16:29 GMT):
Time to start channeling my inner Waldorf & Statler
Dan (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:21:17 GMT):
Waldorf: `those sub-projects aren't half-bad`
Statler: `nope, they're ALL bad`
rjones (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:21:28 GMT):
agreed
rjones (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:21:45 GMT):
monorepos are the only way to go. we need a hyperledger monorepo
bbehlendorf (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:24:06 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/SEC/Security+Home
dhuseby (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:24:23 GMT):
my apologies
dhuseby (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:24:30 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/SEC/Security+Code+Audits
rjones (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:24:53 GMT):
We started checking in our hold build trees at Microsoft. The compiler binaries, all that, after we couldn't reproduce old builds
rjones (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:24:53 GMT):
We started checking in our whole build trees at Microsoft. The compiler binaries, all that, after we couldn't reproduce old builds
dhuseby (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:24:58 GMT):
I will raise my hand next time :grimacing:
arsulegai (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:26:38 GMT):
I see this chat is pretty much active, realized when Arnaud pointed out. TSC will bear these "too many" questions from me for first few weeks.
tkuhrt (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:30:19 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Working+Group+Process
mtng (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:31:52 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
grace.hartley (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:33:14 GMT):
+1 Ry and Arnaud's comments about letting the working groups work through the vice chairs/assistant chairs/other roles
rjones (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:37:47 GMT):
let's please talk more about election processes
Dan (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:38:38 GMT):
let's start from first principles...
rjones (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:38:49 GMT):
what is an election, anyway?
shemnon (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:41:19 GMT):
Is there any way we could remove e-mail as a required step? Some sort of a LFID login web app to get your ballot link?
rjones (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:41:55 GMT):
@shemnon I would love that
nage (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:42:02 GMT):
For the new ideas agenda item: Over the last year the TSC expressed a desire to raise the level of technical discussion in TSC meetings. To help with this I would like to propose a once monthly technical topic on our agenda. If it is desirable, I will reach out to each project maintainer group, the SIGs and WGs in turn to ask for a technical, architectural or interesting innovation or academic papers to discuss at the TSC level that the project maintainers believe are of general interest, fun or deserve more attention. If we can get enough productive topics we could consider doing it as often as every other week, but certainly this shouldn’t be _the_ way to get good technical discussions on the agenda, just an effort by the TSC to solicit those topics from the community and make the community more comfortable bringing up interesting discussions on their own.
tkuhrt (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:43:03 GMT):
Good feedback, Baohua, regarding timing
dhuseby (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:43:58 GMT):
we also extended the voting to two weeks specifically just in case there were any holidays
tkuhrt (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:44:38 GMT):
This is a good idea, Nathan. I agree that we need to get projects and labs presenting interesting things that they are working on or considering starting in order to do the cross-project collaboration
tkuhrt (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:44:38 GMT):
This is a good idea, Nathan. I agree that we need to get projects and labs presenting interesting things that they are working on or considering starting in order to get more cross-project collaboration
Dan (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:46:07 GMT):
@grace.hartley The DCI WG experience with surveys was that people don't respond to surveys :)
grace.hartley (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:47:38 GMT):
Haha very fair feedback. Maybe an interview process sampling community members would be a better strategy to gain feedback?
Dan (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:48:34 GMT):
Yeah that could work. I think one idea that came up that didn't get follow-up was TSC members going to the project meetings and doing outreach to the projects
nage (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:51:23 GMT):
If the TSC is representative of the community, I would hope we have folks attending most technical meetings already.
nage (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:52:06 GMT):
Maybe we should test that by asking what meetings we attend to identify any gaps?
hartm (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:52:17 GMT):
+1 on the surveys. I worry that the surveys we do perform have such a low response rate that there might be a large sampling bias.
lnuon (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:52:41 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lnuon (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:52:41 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/DCI/DCI-WG+Recommendations+To+The+TSC+2020
dhuseby (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:53:09 GMT):
@SaraG I just posted the Iroha security audit report: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/SEC/Security+Code+Audits and https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/iroha/Audits
Dan (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:53:26 GMT):
It probably wouldn't hurt for each TSC member to pick a meeting / community they haven't participated in and join it for a session.
tkuhrt (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:53:34 GMT):
A survey to the TSC. :) I agree though, Nathan. We should put together a wiki page that covers all of the different WGs, Labs and projects meetings and allow us to respond back whether we attend (always, sometimes, never)
nage (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:54:59 GMT):
I’m not interested in shaming TSC members into more meetings, but I would like to know if we have very well travelled or much underrepresented corners of our projects
Dan (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:55:20 GMT):
I'm totally interested in shaming TSC members ... really for any reason :D
nage (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:55:21 GMT):
Because then we can account for bias and be more helpful
shemnon (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:56:48 GMT):
sorry for forgetting to mute. I had to go make sure my son was dialed into his band class. and was afk.
shemnon (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:57:58 GMT):
quarter is the 90 days prior to the day the report is due?
hartm (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:58:14 GMT):
I already use that information for the quarterly reports--makes it very easy to do them!
nage (Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:58:55 GMT):
Will take six thumbs up as charter to move forward. If you want your favorite group or topic to go first /msg @nage
arsulegai (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:03:48 GMT):
Daylight saving trick, my timezone remains to be GMT +5:30, TSC meeting in the public calendar remains to be at 15:00 hrs GMT. But the meeting has pushed up for me by an hour :)
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:06:58 GMT):
Add comments on the next newsletter: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/DR/2020 (there is a new one every week)
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:07:25 GMT):
this is the current one: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=41584772
hartm (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:12:15 GMT):
I think if Tracy suggested they might be a good fit for labs, then you may have a sponsor...
tkuhrt (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:13:35 GMT):
Agree. Happy to be sponsor for these.
hartm (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:18:24 GMT):
Do we have a proposal written down for this?
hartm (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:18:33 GMT):
(I think everyone probably agrees).
arsulegai (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:18:33 GMT):
Would it be nice to bring it upto TSC (distinguish) before a new org-space is created with hyperledger name? Appears like twgc space seems to be undocumented.
arsulegai (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:18:33 GMT):
Would it be nice to bring it upto TSC (distinguish) before a new org-space is created with hyperledger name? Appears like twgc space is undocumented.
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:18:50 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Add+Insights+dashboard+reference+to+quarterly+reports has a formal proposal
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:19:02 GMT):
```Require projects to provide as part of their quarterly reports a direct link to the relevant Insights dashboard to make it easier for reviewers to get to that data. Links should follow the following template link for Fabric (i.e., name of project and time range will need to be set as appropriate):
https://lfanalytics.io/projects/hyperledger/fabric/dashboard;subTab=technical?time={"from":"2020-07-01T07:00:00.000Z","type":"absolute","to":"2020-10-01T07:00:00.000Z"}
The report template will be updated accordingly.```
hartm (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:19:33 GMT):
OK, if thats
hartm (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:19:33 GMT):
OK, didn't realize that was the exact text we were voting on.
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:02 GMT):
maybe it isn't?
mwagner (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:24:02 GMT):
so Fabric has alien tech in it ?
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:24:10 GMT):
well I don't know
mwagner (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:29:12 GMT):
I mailed in my vote the other day. didn't you get it ?
tkuhrt (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:30:12 GMT):
Maybe confluence removed this include page feature or it is disabled.
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:30:23 GMT):
I see there are plugins
shemnon (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:34:10 GMT):
Screen Shot 2020-11-05 at 8.33.51 AM.png
Daniela_Barbosa (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:35:22 GMT):
looks like @shemnon got to it first - thank you!
shemnon (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:37:18 GMT):
From the wiki - https://members.hyperledger.org/display/MSS/Preparing+for+Member+Summit+-+Read+and+View+Ahead+Suggestions?preview=/15303382/15303864/State%20of%20Enterprise%20Blockchain%20Fall-2020(1).pdf (need to log in)
tkuhrt (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:42:04 GMT):
Should we be moving to multiparty systems?
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:42:37 GMT):
we can still call them blockchains if we're using DLT's to manage provenance and consensus around the provenance of important data such as proof-of-existence and identity key events
dhuseby (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:42:58 GMT):
off-chain storage has been the best practice since early in year one of Hyperledger
hartm (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:44:06 GMT):
We have definitely said no to proposals.
shemnon (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:46:08 GMT):
But were those rejected for hard and fast policies (Apache 2, patents, etc) or for scope issues?
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:47:17 GMT):
I don't remember what happened with Convector
tkuhrt (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:48:57 GMT):
I wonder if this comes back to the not really understanding all of the different projects within the greenhouse, which we tend to discuss quite often.
troyronda (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:49:17 GMT):
Re: IPFS. Blockchain combined with distributed content addressable storage is an interest of ours. (and we have been working on combining IPFS features with Fabric.)
hartm (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:51:21 GMT):
We haven't rejected for scope issues. But we have definitely "soft rejected" projects where we said "come back when you have changed XXXXXX" and we never heard back.
troyronda (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:51:38 GMT):
I posted a quick update on the fabric-maintainers chat channel about our efforts. https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/fabric-maintainers?msg=o7dK4JKD2gPwgLWpR
shemnon (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:52:14 GMT):
IPFS has always been a part of early Web3 app stacks I've seen. It's a natural fit for sure.
grace.hartley (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:53:02 GMT):
+1 I feel the same. I would try to continue our education efforts on current projects and from that continued education process we'll gain feedback on what the community might think is missing.
Bobbijn (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:53:30 GMT):
If we create a technology wish list and challenge the community , we could get projects started in areas that are lacking.
hartm (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:56:43 GMT):
I think adding this kind of presentation to the TSC meetings once a month (as Tracy is suggesting) is a great idea. It would hopefully also increase TSC meeting turnout by maintainers.
lehors (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 16:02:10 GMT):
given the lack of hackfests and similar meetings I too find this an interesting idea
lehors (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 16:02:27 GMT):
this could help fill in the gap that was created
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 16:02:29 GMT):
A post-mortem on the process of bringing Besu into Hyperledger from the perspective of Grace and Danno might help
lehors (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 16:13:25 GMT):
with what?
rjones (Thu, 05 Nov 2020 16:45:05 GMT):
the process of recruiting and bringing in new projects
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:07:35 GMT):
Has there been progress made in potentially automating the embedding of the analytics information into the quarterly reports?
rjones (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:10:09 GMT):
@hartm no. You may have noticed the url root changed, and there are other changes in progress so I'm a little leery of using uris today
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:10:37 GMT):
I see. Thanks for the update.
rjones (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:11:17 GMT):
I don't want to make a template, and rely on `nginx` doing the right thing going forward
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:12:42 GMT):
Yeah, that makes total sense--although ideally this should be a thing that LFAnalytics (or whatever the name is now) supports.
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:14:51 GMT):
We were planning on spending 30 minutes for the Cactus presentation to the TSC in January.
tkuhrt (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:20:36 GMT):
We could use one of our cancelled meetings each month to dedicate to people coming into the TSC to talk and provide insights into how to be more connected with the TSC regardless of SIG, WG, or projects
tkuhrt (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:21:40 GMT):
+1 Nathan. Focused technical discussion is what we should look for
nage (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:23:54 GMT):
“We tried X and here is why we think it didn’t work” would be very interesting
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:24:40 GMT):
Question, now that Mark mentioned the hackfests: is it worth going ahead and starting to think about what we want these to look like in the post-COVID future (if at all)? Hopefully we'll all be vaccinated in the not too distant future and have the option to travel again.
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:24:53 GMT):
Historically hackfest planning has been a big issue.
nage (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:27:38 GMT):
The Aries and Indy developers have had read success doing virtual versions of our in person events—it has helped keep a sense of continuity as we do without our normal in person events.
nage (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:27:38 GMT):
The Aries and Indy developers have had real success doing virtual versions of our in person events—it has helped keep a sense of continuity as we do without our normal in person events.
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:30:44 GMT):
"People can agree or disagree with that but it's a fact." LOL, but I agree with you Gari.
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:30:57 GMT):
I'm pretty sure the _*one*_ interop project that would get lots of traction is a "wallet kit" and good documentation/tutorials on how to build W3C VC capabilities into mobile apps and/or creating a branded VC app.
arsulegai (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:30:59 GMT):
Agree with @DannoFerrin , core protocol development could even converge to fewer than today. TSC has capacity to foster projects up the stack
dhuseby (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:31:55 GMT):
Protocols are the right way to get interop/integration
shemnon (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:20 GMT):
One example for developer tooling: if we had a project that is an implementation of Baseline Protocol (https://baseline-protocol.org/) but with pluggable backends to the other Hyperledger Project DLTs.
Daniela_Barbosa (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:37:00 GMT):
SIG Reports: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/SIG+Bi-Annual+Reports
mtng (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:37:34 GMT):
thank for sharing @Daniela_Barbosa !
mtng (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:37:34 GMT):
thanks for sharing @Daniela_Barbosa !
Bobbijn (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:38:21 GMT):
Learning Materials Working Group has a quick presentation if we have time.
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:40:58 GMT):
If the greenhouse diagram itself is confusing, can we have the marketing committee come up with a new one?
shemnon (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:53:31 GMT):
I'd like to see what a stack focused diagram might look like. That stack that was part of the member summit report.
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:55:12 GMT):
We could also have an application-focused diagram that ignores the more technical projects focused on developers rather than end users.
shemnon (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:57:03 GMT):
Rather than ignoring developer focused projects maybe make them a layer in the stack?
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:59:57 GMT):
This would turn the stack into some kind of directed graph. I've mentioned this before as a possibility, but people didn't like it.
shemnon (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:00:10 GMT):
Should we do scheduled presentations before the discussion style items in the future?
hartm (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:00:34 GMT):
@shemnon Yes. We usually push unstructured discussion to the end.
rjones (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:01:06 GMT):
_in which @hartm implies there are structured discussions_
arsulegai (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:02:28 GMT):
[ ](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/tsc?msg=TZGAhFgZFyzhoaKoN) It would have been great, maybe we could have added that to the agenda. @lehors how about considering this presentation in next meeting?
lehors (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:03:45 GMT):
we will, I didn't want to get into any specific group on *this* call but I certainly expect Bobbi to be among the first people to come and present to the TSC
Bobbijn (Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:04:36 GMT):
Great!
arsulegai (Fri, 20 Nov 2020 07:00:21 GMT):
How about inviting CNCF and the other LF projects into our TSC meetings, looking for possible collaboration/opportunities/integrations?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:05:24 GMT):
It may be useful to reach out for either a presentation or if there's something specific we'd love their input on - for example, someone from CNCF can help us understand the Kube move from Docker to containerd and what that might mean for Fabric or BAF and the right way to be cloud native across our projects
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:09:09 GMT):
@rjones the comments are on the bottom
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:09:09 GMT):
@rjones the comments are on the bottom of the page
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:09:09 GMT):
@rjones the comments that Arnaud is talking about are on the bottom of the page
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:11:06 GMT):
We can probably separate these into "things that we have easy consensus" and "things that will need a lot more discussion or we can't immediately solve."
mwagner (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:13:39 GMT):
"any decision worth making is worth making it again and again and again..."
rjones (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:16:32 GMT):
https://hyperledger.github.io/hyperledger-hip/
rjones (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:17:14 GMT):
and that's how the argument started
tkuhrt (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:17:23 GMT):
[Contributing a New Source Base to Hyperledger](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1O2v6t_TNoT8v0MswiwMr6ddE132eCNmK-m3KhD1pGGE/edit#slide=id.g3cf4a9ebda_0_647)
tkuhrt (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:18:01 GMT):
Slide #5 shows what might be suitable for a lab
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:22:01 GMT):
Can we come up with a take on the greenhouse that is focused on applications and end users rather than developers (i.e. less focus on libraries/tools)?
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:22:14 GMT):
Maybe this will help clear up some external confusion.
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:22:32 GMT):
We could also do a dirty, glorious DAG that highlights all of the complexity for developers.
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:22:56 GMT):
Haha. The labs thing wasn't controversial!
rjones (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:23:50 GMT):
Backus–Naur form is not just for breakfast
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:25:50 GMT):
I have a meeting on formal proofs later today!
rjones (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:26:20 GMT):
Nice. For a DAG, I like using dot and graphviz
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:26:55 GMT):
I feel like developers would appreciate a DAG. Plus, it would serve as advertisements for our libraries and tools since it would be evident that they are in use.
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:29:10 GMT):
Plus, it encourages cross-project collaboration. Maybe if you add an arrow to the DAG then Brian has to buy you a beer at the next HL event ;)
mwagner (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:29:56 GMT):
oh, music to help make his points!
rjones (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:30:09 GMT):
heh
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:34:59 GMT):
I'm thinking @shemnon should lead a task force on coming up with a potential badging system.
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:35:48 GMT):
Figuring out a criteria would be awesome. Even if we don't end up changing the status quo, just putting this "badge" information on our website in an easily consumable form would be useful to people looking to understand Hyperledger projects.
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:37:22 GMT):
Ideally the criteria for these things would be totally objective.
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:39:47 GMT):
Badges don't have to be binary. You obviously don't go directly from "non-diverse" community to "diverse." We can have a continuum that doesn't make projects stress about badges.
rjones (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:40:21 GMT):
Something like the CII badge has gradiations
bbehlendorf (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:43:01 GMT):
It's right to worry about gaming the badging system, but even a "hurry let's get 5 random people to make commits in time for the diversity badge" can trigger positive outcomes. :)
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:43:47 GMT):
@rjones Right. Importantly, pretty much all of the CII badge criteria is also objective. It's a pretty good system.
hartm (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:44:34 GMT):
If it's getting new contributors, that's great. But if it's one guy signing into 5 different dummy accounts to add one-line comments to code, then that's not so great. Unfortunately I think the latter would be more likely...
shemnon (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:46:26 GMT):
Apache also has a comparably heavyweight release process with required voting by maintainers and PMCs.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 15:49:30 GMT):
I personally have heard from few that Hyperledger has hard entry point restrictions :) It hurts
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 16:50:41 GMT):
Great suggestion. Specially on the BAF part. I'll note it down to be brought up in never meeting.
shemnon (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 17:23:12 GMT):
Here is an incomplete badging proposal. The key portions for Legal and Community support are present and should be enough to determine if the rest of the badges should be filled out in a similar way or if the TSC want something different - https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/~shemnon/Project+Badging+Proposal
shemnon (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 17:23:47 GMT):
The intent is to spur discussion on a wiki page and try and hammer out something actionable.
rjones (Thu, 03 Dec 2020 17:55:10 GMT):
The [Marketing - DevRel call is next Wednesday](https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/viewevent?repeatid=26090&eventid=954291&calstart=2020-12-09):
lnuon (Tue, 08 Dec 2020 16:53:00 GMT):
Have they elaborated on what they felt those were?
lnuon (Tue, 08 Dec 2020 16:53:00 GMT):
Have they elaborated on what they felt those were @arsulegai ?
tkuhrt (Tue, 08 Dec 2020 22:10:28 GMT):
I completely missed this Wiki page until today. Added some initial thoughts there.
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:07:43 GMT):
@hartm pointed out there were no Cactus updates on the calendar - I added one, but I forgot to add it to the update page, so I've rescheduled it for next year
hartm (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:08:52 GMT):
@rjones I also just noticed we owe an Ursa report--I guess we must have missed the email (or it got spam filtered or something). We'll get that done soon.
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:15:00 GMT):
[It is in there](https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/ursa/viewevent?repeatid=30518&eventid=924675&calstart=2020-12-04)
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:18:00 GMT):
I guess it was someone else that told me about Cactus
hartm (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:18:32 GMT):
I think it was me--I just didn't check Ursa at the time...
hartm (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:18:40 GMT):
I believe Jonathan found it though.
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:19:15 GMT):
Regardless, it does exist.
hartm (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:19:25 GMT):
Blind faith in emails getting through my spam filter is probably not a good thing.
hartm (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:19:28 GMT):
Yep, it does!
arsulegai (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:22:17 GMT):
Can there be a link of the LMDWG in the dev weekly newsletter?
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:25:34 GMT):
sure, feel free to add one
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:26:16 GMT):
I deleted my spurious reminder
arsulegai (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:26:50 GMT):
Sure, I see many useful links in this presentation. The community in India is currently working on a whitepaper, writing up a blog as a summary of what happened this year. These would help in structuring them.
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:27:17 GMT):
I haven't done the edits for this week - jump in and add a comment with your content
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:27:51 GMT):
our goal is that the community does all of the editing :)
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:28:19 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=41588007 add comments here for this week
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:28:19 GMT):
[add comments here for this week](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=41588007)
hartm (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:29:03 GMT):
Nice job @Bobbijn ! Honestly this looks more useful than the official project wiki pages.
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:29:14 GMT):
yes indeed
arsulegai (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:31:27 GMT):
Added, the work done in the LMDWG should be noticed by the larger community :)
hartm (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:39:29 GMT):
A presentation database is a great idea, particularly if it also allows for reuse of the materials.
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:39:43 GMT):
yes
tkuhrt (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:44:44 GMT):
Here was a library that was started on presentations: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/events/Presentations+for+Meetups
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:47:24 GMT):
[The LMDWG has a gh-pages branch](https://github.com/hyperledger/learning-materials-dev/tree/master) so a palantír could go there
hartm (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:48:06 GMT):
I've used stuff from here! But this never really seemed to gain momentum, in that the community hasn't contributed a ton of stuff to it. Given that the LMDWG has done a great job of managing content, it might be a good place for community-contributed slides.
arsulegai (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:57:50 GMT):
Can LMDWG help on identifying such interesting topics?
grace.hartley (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 16:02:05 GMT):
@rjones that looks great!
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 16:03:10 GMT):
I only found out it existed a little over a week ago, so I've been working to get requirements to feed development. At the same time, Danno, Hart, and Tracy put together a bunch of ideas around badging in the wiki which I think feed the same thing
rjones (Thu, 10 Dec 2020 19:46:27 GMT):
https://insights.lfx.linuxfoundation.org/projects/health
greg2git (Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:14:47 GMT):
'the host has another meeting' - hmm, seems it was canceled but who knows?
rjones (Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:14:59 GMT):
there is no TSC call this morning
greg2git (Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:15:27 GMT):
@rjones thx for responding
arsulegai (Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:19:24 GMT):
Anomaly detection - can we automate an alert on them to the TSC mailing list or aggregate them in the report?
rjones (Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:40:24 GMT):
nice.
lehors (Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:40:32 GMT):
ouch
lehors (Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:40:42 GMT):
is it just me or did all get kicked out?
mtng (Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:40:51 GMT):
Me too
rjones (Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:40:57 GMT):
please rejoin
rjones (Mon, 04 Jan 2021 20:39:11 GMT):
[I have slightly adjusted the quarterly report schedule](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2021+TSC+Project+Update+Calendar)
rjones (Mon, 04 Jan 2021 20:39:36 GMT):
I aligned two sets of reports to happen at the same time, mostly.
lehors (Tue, 05 Jan 2021 10:44:44 GMT):
sounds good. Thanks
rjones (Wed, 06 Jan 2021 16:51:32 GMT):
Do you think aligning Sawtooth with Grid and Transact would be better?
rjones (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:05:00 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/DR/2021
arsulegai (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:24:43 GMT):
I remember when Cactus was first proposed to TSC, it was told it should not be considered as blockchain connecting multiple underlying networks. But rather it should be considered as a framework that helps in connecting those blockchain network. Is this correct understanding?
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:25:07 GMT):
To be more precise with Cactus and middlemen, we want to emphasize that no middleman is *required*. The system is modular enough that you can configure the business logic plugin to be as centralized or decentralized as you like--in other words, you can have a middleman if you want, but it is certainly not required. That being said, there are certain cases where you need some sort of external trust (e.g. working with a blockchain like bitcoin that doesn't natively support powerful smart contracts).
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:25:40 GMT):
That's correct. I believe this is the "integration" vs "interoperability" discussion.
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:26:22 GMT):
@adc We're working on a full academic paper with a UC-inspired security model. It's still not complete though.
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:26:57 GMT):
We'll sent it to you when it's in a state to read.
arsulegai (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:27:15 GMT):
So, do we call Cactus a integration framework?
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:27:24 GMT):
That's what we call it anyway.
arsulegai (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:31:06 GMT):
Makes me more curious on how is trust is anchored from siloed blockchain network, does it require any modifications to the underlying blockchain framework?
rjones (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:32:14 GMT):
Please use the "raise hand" feature to get in the queue
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:33:54 GMT):
We don't assume that we can modify underlying blockchains.
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:34:55 GMT):
However, this does make some actions difficult. For instance, we can't do powerful smart contracts on bitcoin. So if we want to integrate bitcoin into something, trust becomes slightly more complicated: we need to trust someone or some system (potentially decentralized, obviously) to attest to bitcoin transactions.
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:35:34 GMT):
Please feel free to use our email list, chat channel, or even come to our meeting if you have more questions! Thanks for your time!
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:40:30 GMT):
This seems totally reasonable. Maybe there are just no objections?
arsulegai (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:43:48 GMT):
Which point? I read this message now
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:44:55 GMT):
Ah, this was about Tracy's proposal.
shemnon (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:48:54 GMT):
October 2019, right durring the last Ethereum DevCon.
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:52:18 GMT):
Have we started planning for the return of in-person events? It might not be unreasonable to plan for something in October/November this year.
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:52:41 GMT):
(I have no idea how that axe-throwing place has insurance, LOL).
hartm (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:53:50 GMT):
And historically, the member summit has been focused more on the people paying the Hyperledger checks rather than the maintainers. Are we planning on switching the focus?
tkuhrt (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:55:48 GMT):
I have seen qiqochat used successfully for virtual meetings with breakouts.
shemnon (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:56:21 GMT):
sorry for silence, juggling pandemic school-from-home.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:56:56 GMT):
Qiqochat is a very reasonable option. It's the one the LF events team recommends for technical gatherings like this
arsulegai (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:57:11 GMT):
When is the global forum planned?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:57:43 GMT):
We are currently aiming at late June for HGF. In fact we're starting to look for people to join a program committee for that, if anyone's interested
bbehlendorf (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:58:26 GMT):
HGF will be virtual, and we've not yet started thinking about any F2F events, though I think we'll see F2F meetups again in some countries soon
bbehlendorf (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:58:33 GMT):
in fact there was one a few weeks ago in Beijing
bbehlendorf (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:59:22 GMT):
The Linux Foundation is currently anticipating its first face-to-face major event in August, to be Open Source Summit North America in Vancouver. That feels ambitious to me.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 15:59:39 GMT):
I certainly hope we could meet F2F by October or November but would not put money on it right now
arsulegai (Thu, 14 Jan 2021 16:10:19 GMT):
March, virtual maintainer summit sounds cool. It can then be a physical member summit towards the end of the year.
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:09:10 GMT):
They don't meet the CII badge requirements, for one.
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:09:17 GMT):
But I think they meet all the "big" criteria.
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:09:52 GMT):
I think it wouldn't be much work for Aries to meet all of the requirements.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:10:20 GMT):
We use aries-framework-go in our DID and Verifiable Credential systems being implemented in the TrustBloc project (https://github.com/trustbloc).
troyronda (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:11:55 GMT):
(we also have integration with a DID registry implementation built on top of fabric).
troyronda (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:11:55 GMT):
(we also have integration with a DID registry implementation built on top of fabric - https://github.com/trustbloc/sidetree-fabric).
nage (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:14:42 GMT):
https://www.lfph.io/ is doing some cool credentials work around immunization cards related to the pandemic
nage (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:17:40 GMT):
also see https://www.iata.org/en/programs/passenger/travel-pass/
rjones (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:21:20 GMT):
@arsulegai : https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-rfcs/tree/master/concepts/0302-aries-interop-profile
rjones (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:22:54 GMT):
@swcurran sent that link
swcurran (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:22:54 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:23:14 GMT):
There are ongoing efforts to define an updated interop profile: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-rfcs/pull/579
arsulegai (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:23:39 GMT):
Thanks Ry, it would help to have a document like this https://hyperledger-indy.readthedocs.io/projects/hipe/en/latest/text/0002-agents/README.html. But dedicated to Aries and not couple it up with Indy.
arsulegai (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:23:55 GMT):
Call drop made me fumble up on my question
troyronda (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:24:05 GMT):
As mentioned in the report, aries-framework-go wasn't based on the indy codebase (and implemented some updated protocols) which has resulted in some differences.
troyronda (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:24:05 GMT):
As mentioned in the report, aries-framework-go wasn't based on the indy codebase (and implemented some updated protocols and specs) which has resulted in some differences.
arsulegai (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:26:20 GMT):
The current document currently, as I understand from feedbacks I received is to start with one of the agent. For example, the `aca-py` goes very deep on providing a specific example in detail.
arsulegai (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:26:20 GMT):
The process to read the document currently, as I understand from feedbacks I received is to start with one of the agent. For example, the `aca-py` goes very deep on providing a specific example in detail.
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:28:56 GMT):
Thanks for the presentation David and Ry! This definitely seems like something we should try with other projects.
rjones (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:32:53 GMT):
Fabric was the example I was going to use :)
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:33:20 GMT):
Active status is about community involvement, right? So I think active status should probably either judge the whole community, or the community of the largest sub-project.
tkuhrt (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:36:39 GMT):
I think about this as the SDKs within Fabric that were still under development even when the project was active. I do not think that an in development subproject should impact the Active/Incubation status. Again, has the community come together and figured out how to work in an open source manner to do releases. Given the diversity of Aries and the strength of the community, it seems like it meets the Active status.
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:36:44 GMT):
+1 to Nathan. More community involvement is almost always better. We can leave it up to the project itself to police the quality of subprojects (potentially lower-quality subprojects would be the only downside of this amount of freedom).
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:37:40 GMT):
I think they have a little more work (for instance, their CII badging is not done). But I agree that the community merits active status, which is the big point.
nage (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:39:56 GMT):
The main frameworks in Aries are doing quite well in terms of contributors, pace of development, and paying attention to common use cases and co-developing the spec to keep things interoperable. When we have an sdk or framework that isn't doing well, my feeling is we are happy to recruit help for it and move it to "lab" or "deprecated" status if we cannot address its health
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:41:06 GMT):
If I recall correctly, we decided to mostly separate out code quality and community quality. Code quality --> 1.0 release, community quality --> active status. We can obviously change these, but we should clarify what everything means.
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:41:35 GMT):
(There's no reason a project shouldn't be able to release multiple different codebases at multiple different qualities/states either).
troyronda (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:46:03 GMT):
I'd also say a difference in aries has come from the contributor pool. In particular, some subprojects have initially focused more on Indy as their contributor pool came from there. This has also led to some initial differences with aries-framework-go's ledger-agnostic focus.
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:47:16 GMT):
+1 to Sam. The line between standards and interfaces can be very blurry.
hartm (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:59:57 GMT):
"Pre-standards" ;)
troyronda (Thu, 21 Jan 2021 16:00:15 GMT):
I think having a space for "pre-standards" is important, particularly for aries.
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:14:37 GMT):
I assume it's fine to comment on quarterly reports for a little bit and expect a response, even outside the TSC meeting.
rjones (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:17:59 GMT):
I think so
tkuhrt (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:19:36 GMT):
> Each repo will add the same repolint.json file and the CA team (or preferably CI) will periodically run a check to ensure projects are in compliance.
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:24:45 GMT):
+1 to Arnaud (and Tracy). We all need to do better implementing the decisions we have made.
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:25:30 GMT):
But this goes back to the TSC not really having teeth for these things (or in some cases, the TSC really isn't strongly connected to some of the projects).
arsulegai (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:26:48 GMT):
Good idea @grace.hartley :) Let the TSC follow up, be the bad cop, say hi and get the things done.
shemnon (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:27:37 GMT):
I'll spend to day getting a github action running off of community tools and post a formal proposal for the next meeting to make the community tools json the master and to ensure automated checks (either via a copy of the json file or do a github action)
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:30:56 GMT):
What tools does the TSC have to incentivize things like this?
grace.hartley (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:31:13 GMT):
To confirm the actions from that convo so I'm following. Apologies if I'm missing something:
1. There will be an email sent to the mainainters list reminding them of the decision and to update their repo structure
2. Any projects missing from the maintainer list will be reached out to directly. Ry/Grace to coordinate on this effort.
grace.hartley (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:32:24 GMT):
Incubation and active status seems to be one way. I think we could also think about how Danno's badging proposal fits in to the accountability or incentive plan.
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:33:22 GMT):
Linking these changes to active status isn't necessarily a bad idea, but what about projects that aren't trying to achieve active status (which is most of our projects at this point)? They still don't have any incentive to apply for active status. I guess this is a good segue to our badging discussion.
tkuhrt (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:34:21 GMT):
+1 to Arnaud's comments. I like adding these specific questions to the quarterly reports:
1. Have you switched from master to main in all your repos
2. Have you implemented repolinter.json
tkuhrt (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:34:21 GMT):
+1 to Arnaud's comments. I like adding these specific questions to the quarterly reports:
1. Have you switched from master to main in all your repos
2. Have you implemented repolinter.json in all your repos
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:34:38 GMT):
This is a good idea, but we need projects to want to achieve active status for this to work (which is not the case for many projects). Maybe the badging process will make this better--you can lose your "HL Infrastructure approved" badge or something like that if you don't do this stuff by a deadline.
grace.hartley (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:36:04 GMT):
I like Mark's idea of giving them until March too.
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:43:42 GMT):
I like Danno's overall strategy, but I'm worried that the challenge process could become arbitrarily adversarial (i.e. I challenge all of the projects' badges just to cause headaches) or oligarchic (my friends an I ignore each others' shortcomings). Can we try to make most of the badging criteria immediately clear so that ambiguous challenges that become a matter of opinion are unlikely?
arsulegai (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:44:06 GMT):
Can we prepare a checkbox list for badges? A tool that auto suggests what badges a project gets.
tkuhrt (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:53:05 GMT):
Part of the discussion previously is that there should only be objective criteria for achieving a badge. This would imply that there should be no question/challenge.
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:54:37 GMT):
Yeah. My opinion is that challenges should generally follow actions. For instance, if I want to use a project and find that documentation is years old, I might ask the maintainers for updated documentation. If they don't have it (but maybe they have the documentation badge) that's when the badging can be discussed.
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:56:20 GMT):
@adc The point of badging is essentially to replace the active/incubation project status. It's to inform users of the projects about the state of the community around projects without them having to dig heavily into the details of the contributions. We want projects to be able to convince outsiders (users, potential contributors) that they are healthy and trending in a positive direction. The badging program (and the active status) are ways we try to address this.
arsulegai (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:57:11 GMT):
I have an open question, is there a process setup for the project RFCs or is it that each project is free to choose their own format?
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:57:26 GMT):
They are free to choose their own format.
arsulegai (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:58:11 GMT):
Thanks Hart, I had an idea for the Aries project active status. Will post it in the quarterly report.
hartm (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:59:47 GMT):
Yeah, my opinion is that Aries pretty clearly meets most of the metrics for active status (they still need to do some administrative things like CII badging, but the community requirements--the hardest ones--are in good shape).
arsulegai (Thu, 28 Jan 2021 16:01:40 GMT):
Agree, few questions I have around are to streamlining the documentation and setting up the stage for beginners.
rjones (Sun, 31 Jan 2021 23:27:30 GMT):
Hi - @swcurran has been asking good questions about `repolinter.json` - which version is canonical, etc. @lehors do you have the version/setup that you're using available?
swcurran (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 00:31:16 GMT):
Specifically noted that the referenced repolinter.json in Fabric is in a closed PR that was never merged.
swcurran (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 00:33:01 GMT):
Separate technical question is what to do with these warnings found when run on the Aries Cloud Agent Python (https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-cloudagent-python) repo.
Specifically -- why did the python, license and apache-2 messages come up when the repo is python, has a license and is apache-2?
```
Copyright
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=javascript"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=ruby"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=java"
ℹ license-detectable-by-licensee: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "license=*"
ℹ notice-file-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "license=Apache-2.0"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=python"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=objective-c"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=swift"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=erlang"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=elixir"
```
lehors (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 10:49:55 GMT):
I think we should amend the decision to point to the repolint.json file that's in the community-management-tools repo instead.
lehors (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 10:50:19 GMT):
incidentally we really should move that repo out of the labs and into the hyperledger org
arsulegai (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 13:26:04 GMT):
@rjones do you remember a place where master to main is mentioned the first time?
arsulegai (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 13:26:04 GMT):
@rjones do you remember a place where changing the name from master to main is mentioned the first time?
swcurran (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 14:01:01 GMT):
FYI -- checked https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools and there is no repolint.json file there.
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 15:54:42 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/tree/main/repo_structure
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 15:55:53 GMT):
My thought is that if it is biding it should be in the TSC repo. If I have time I'll get a PR ready by end of day.
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 15:55:53 GMT):
My thought is that if it is binding it should be in the TSC repo. If I have time I'll get a PR ready by end of day.
lehors (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 15:56:29 GMT):
yeah, I have to say I'm not sure duplicating this file everywhere is the right thing to do
lehors (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 15:57:16 GMT):
but @swcurran is right that the hyperledger-community-management-tools isn't compliant because it doesn't contain it *for itself*
lehors (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 15:57:32 GMT):
I have actually ran it locally before
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 15:57:40 GMT):
I have a github action that will repo-lint based on a remote URL - https://github.com/shemnon/besu/pull/7/checks
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 15:57:40 GMT):
I have a github action that will repo-lint based on a remote URL - results look like this https://github.com/shemnon/besu/pull/7/checks
lehors (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 15:59:29 GMT):
nice
rjones (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:03:36 GMT):
@arsulegai I’m not sure what you mean
swcurran (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:08:50 GMT):
Different results from using that `repolint.js` file, but running it naively from the instructions in the repolinter repo had new errors. Anyone know how to resolve? I've removed ones I understand:
```
Axiom language failed to run with error: Unexpected end of JSON input
Axiom license failed to run with error: Licensee not installed
Lint:
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=javascript"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=ruby"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=java"
ℹ license-detectable-by-licensee: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "license=*"
ℹ package-metadata-exists: ignored due to unsatisfied condition(s): "language=python"
```
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:09:31 GMT):
Those are not errors. The script strips out these info lines.
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:10:21 GMT):
The triangle or heavy X lines are warning and errror responses, only those lines matter.
lehors (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:11:24 GMT):
right, if there is a 'i' at the beginning it's informative only
lehors (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:11:37 GMT):
I have no idea what triggers this though, I haven't seen that
swcurran (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:12:06 GMT):
The one I don't get is why the repo is not detected as python. I expect the rest. Also, the Axiom errors.
I assume you mean the `repo-structure.sh` file.
arsulegai (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:12:32 GMT):
I meant to ask when was the announcement done, or a request was made to change the name of GitHub branch from `master` to `main`. I am sure it must have been sometime last year.
rjones (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:16:35 GMT):
@arsulegai [this covers a lot of the history](https://www.hyperledger.org/blog/2021/01/26/removing-barriers-to-contribution-with-inclusive-language)
arsulegai (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:17:27 GMT):
Awesome! This is the kind of information I was looking for :)
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:33:17 GMT):
The language detection is done via the linguist node module. Here is the master data file https://github.com/github/linguist/blob/master/lib/linguist/languages.yml - maybe file extensions are unexpected?
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:33:17 GMT):
The language detection is done via the linguist node module. Here is the master data file https://github.com/github/linguist/blob/master/lib/linguist/languages.yml - but your repo looks pythonic to my untrained eye.
hartm (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:47:27 GMT):
Does anyone know if there is a call for papers out for the HGF yet? Thanks!
shemnon (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:59:01 GMT):
Looks like it just went out - https://twitter.com/Hyperledger/status/1356272092224708612
hartm (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 19:51:40 GMT):
Ah, looks like I missed the fact that the "submit a proposal" information was hidden behind the "register" button. Thanks @shemnon !
rjones (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 20:34:02 GMT):
We only just rolled it out this morning :)
rjones (Mon, 01 Feb 2021 20:34:12 GMT):
PRs indirectly accepted
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:05:18 GMT):
We might be able to do an in-person in November or December this year.
grace.hartley (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:06:02 GMT):
Sorry for being a little late. I'm on now.
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:08:10 GMT):
Would setting up project to project meetings be something that people are interested in doing?
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:13:31 GMT):
My experience is that the maintainers care little about the TSC stuff (badging, active status) and are just interested in building stuff. So, at least for the projects that I work with, I don't think we'd get a lot of interested people if we focused on TSC business.
troyronda (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:24:54 GMT):
I'm working on setting up repolint based on the labs rules, but I noticed that some changes will be needed. E.g., GitHub Actions detection for CI, sub-pathed node_modules, exclusion for additional vendored files license headers.
troyronda (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:25:40 GMT):
Some of those are generic fixes, but vendored files can be more project specific.
troyronda (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:26:27 GMT):
I assume this is the most recent repolinter rules: hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/main/repo_structure/repolint.json ?
rjones (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:30:38 GMT):
@shemnon could you share the link to your action with @swcurran ?
shemnon (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:31:01 GMT):
https://github.com/shemnon/besu/pull/7
shemnon (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:39:21 GMT):
https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-your-work-on-github/managing-labels#about-default-labels
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:40:28 GMT):
Do most projects already tag "good first issues"
seanyoung (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:40:46 GMT):
how about `good-first-issue`
seanyoung (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:40:46 GMT):
how about `good first issue`
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:40:49 GMT):
Cactus has a "good first issue" tag which is pretty self-explanatory.
troyronda (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:41:21 GMT):
There could be a Go warning for missing go.mod & go.sum
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:41:29 GMT):
(Peter gets full credit for this).
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:41:42 GMT):
How about projects which do not use Github issues?
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:42:27 GMT):
Is that process standardized?
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:42:38 GMT):
Some set of common labels is probably useful, although projects will still want some of their own labels.
tkuhrt (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:45:01 GMT):
Slide #24 of our [HGF20 presentation](https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/hgf20/90/All%20are%20Welcome%20Here_%20Creating%20an%20Inclusive%20Hyperledger%20Community.pdf) shows good-first-issue as the label
tkuhrt (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:45:01 GMT):
Slide #24 of our [HGF20 presentation](https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/hgf20/90/All%20are%20Welcome%20Here_%20Creating%20an%20Inclusive%20Hyperledger%20Community.pdf) shows `good-first-issue` as the label
tkuhrt (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:45:37 GMT):
That seems to be the Jira version
troyronda (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:46:07 GMT):
As we are on GitHub, I would suggest the GitHub defaults.
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:46:25 GMT):
I don't think contributors will be confused by the dashes, but I would agree that we should defer to the Github defaults.
tkuhrt (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:46:41 GMT):
The github screen capture was `good first issue`
rjones (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:48:15 GMT):
Screen Shot 2021-02-04 at 7.48.04 AM.png
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:52:25 GMT):
Crashing the automation script is always a fun challenge ;)
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:53:22 GMT):
Bogus readme :sweat_smile:
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:53:24 GMT):
readme.txt = "; DROP TABLE; "
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:57:18 GMT):
Personally, I think whatever we can come up with badging will be less broken than the active/incubation dichotomy. So thanks @shemnon for driving this issue!
rjones (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:18:25 GMT):
I argue that, instead of sending @swcurran on a fool's errand, the TSC should have an email vote to suspend that requirement, or make it a "should".
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:20:52 GMT):
I agree. But we vote directly on active status anyway, right? It's the TSC's interpretation of whether or not these properties are satisfied or not. So we can just ignore it?
rjones (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:21:43 GMT):
sure; however, there is non-zero time being spent on trying to comply with a requirement that can't today be met.
rjones (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:22:25 GMT):
maybe "until this is fixed, this specific requirement is a should"
hartm (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:22:30 GMT):
Yeah, that's true. I agree.
rjones (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:23:15 GMT):
I guess it isn't in here: https://tsc.hyperledger.org/project-incubation-exit.html
rjones (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:25:11 GMT):
It is by reference: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Common+Repo+structure
swcurran (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:25:23 GMT):
What fool's errand am I on? FYI - we have a do have a document in process to request exiting incubation -- https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=41591994
rjones (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:27:11 GMT):
I meant that you're spending time trying to resolve questions about repolinter that can't be answered today. You're right, it isn't a fool's errand; I think it is unfair to require that projects meet requirements that aren't agreed on how to meet.
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:16:02 GMT):
I was able to work around all of the quirks on repolinter and have a PR out for Fabric: https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric/pull/2366
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:16:35 GMT):
This did involve me publishing the image for repolinter myself, I needed to pull the entrypoint out of the Dockerfile to make it compatible with Azure DevOps and GitHub Actions
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:17:09 GMT):
So projects can make use of it by using the image at `hyperledger-tools.jfrog.io/repolinter:0.10.0`
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:18:04 GMT):
I intentionally tagged it as the GitHub tag I built it from so people can debug why it might now be working for their use case by seeing whats changed since that tag was released
shemnon (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:21:45 GMT):
Is the entrypoint for that docker image the same? i.e. are the env vars expected compatible?
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:23:27 GMT):
Yea, nothing was edited other than to remove the entrypoint which was `bundle exec /app/bin/repolinter.js`
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:24:02 GMT):
Instead we call `bundle exec /app/bin/repolinter.js` as the command executed in the container by CI
shemnon (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:24:12 GMT):
I think I can make that work as a github action.
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:34:06 GMT):
```name: PullRequest
on:
pull_request:
branches: [ main ]
jobs:
build:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
container: hyperledger-tools.jfrog.io/repolinter:0.10.0
steps:
- name: Checkout code
uses: actions/checkout@v2
with:
path: fabric
- name: Lint Repo
run: bundle exec /app/bin/repolinter.js
working-directory: fabric
```
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:34:06 GMT):
```name: PullRequest
on:
pull_request:
branches: [ main ]
jobs:
build:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
container: hyperledger-tools.jfrog.io/repolinter:0.10.0
steps:
- name: Checkout Code
uses: actions/checkout@v2
with:
path: fabric
- name: Lint Repo
run: bundle exec /app/bin/repolinter.js
working-directory: fabric
```
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:34:13 GMT):
Yea, it looks something like this
BrettLogan (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 18:34:17 GMT):
In actions
shemnon (Thu, 04 Feb 2021 19:31:20 GMT):
This docker container has the axioms pre-installed, so it's superior to the action I was forking off of that manually installed repolint.
lehors (Tue, 09 Feb 2021 18:45:18 GMT):
@shemnon Danno, I hadn't seen your PR and I submitted one that fixed the test for the Maintainers file that has been merged. As a result your PR has a conflict. Sorry about that. Could you please rebase it so we can merge it and move forward? https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/pull/54
lehors (Tue, 09 Feb 2021 18:47:23 GMT):
@BrettLogan pointed out that the repolint.json file is badly formatted and hard to read, I'd like to reformat it but prefer doing that with a dedicated PR so that we get a clean slate before doing further changes
lehors (Tue, 09 Feb 2021 18:48:18 GMT):
but I don't want to do that and create more conflicts with your PR that has been sitting there for days (I wonder why)
swcurran (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 01:34:48 GMT):
The Aries Community would like the TSC to formally consider our request to exit incubation as soon as possible. Please let us know what we can do to move that forward as some in the community would really to see that as they are active in presenting the project to newcomers to the concepts.
The document written about this is here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=41591994
The only questions we had about the document relates to the following
1. Legal checking on the trademark (who does that)?
2. What is required for documenting alignment with the Hyperledger Architecture? There was a link to a page that really didn't provide much guidance on that.
Thanks
hartm (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:06:51 GMT):
Are we going to discuss the Aries active status proposal?
hartm (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:12:32 GMT):
@shemnon We've tried to do this in our quarterly reports--either list some things we're working on to get to active status, or list some bottlenecks as to why we aren't there.
shemnon (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:13:08 GMT):
My thought is it should be an explicit question for incubating projects.
hartm (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:13:49 GMT):
I guess maybe we should add it to the quarterly reports then? That seems like the easiest way to get reporting on this question.
hartm (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:17:58 GMT):
Can we roll this into the project badging discussion? It might make more sense to work on it in this context if we are going to overhaul active/incubation anyway. Some explanation on unsatisfied badges might be nice.
hartm (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:22:43 GMT):
I agree that bumping this up to formal standards groups in the long run is the best idea. The problem is that these bodies are incredibly slow and we need something in the short to mid term. It seems like everyone here agrees with this though.
troyronda (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:23:18 GMT):
Note - the DIDComm Messaging aspect of Aries is now happening in Decentralized Identity Foundation (https://github.com/decentralized-identity/didcomm-messaging)
troyronda (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:23:18 GMT):
Note - the DIDComm Messaging spec aspect of Aries is now happening in Decentralized Identity Foundation (https://github.com/decentralized-identity/didcomm-messaging)
bbehlendorf (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:24:22 GMT):
https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/spdx-specification-becomes-the-second-iso-iec-jtc-1-submission-from-jdf/ is an example of a community specification moving on to ISO, as the LF (through JDF) is an ISO PAS submitter
bbehlendorf (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:32:01 GMT):
I added a comment to the document regarding the trademark. Tl;dr is that we're good there and let us know if you'd like us to file a formal trademark.
hartm (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:37:34 GMT):
Can we do a "sponsor matching" initiative? One of the best things about sponsors is seemingly that they can help people looking to join Hyperledger get accustomed to how HL works, including the many unwritten laws that the organization follows. Apache, if I recall correctly, as a "champion" role for up and coming projects (or something like that) that helps the project with the community. Having a labs sponsor fulfill a similar role would be great.
arsulegai (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:42:48 GMT):
We have a hackathon rolling in next month, few participants have reached out asking if their submissions can be added to labs. I am happy to review those proposals and get them onto labs.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:45:32 GMT):
In the Apache incubator they're called mentors: https://incubator.apache.org/
hartm (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:48:05 GMT):
What about the following: we eliminate sponsors in general. But we require that if a new labs project does not have any existing HL contributors, we appoint them a "mentor."
arsulegai (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:48:15 GMT):
Can we point to those new proposers to a link or mailing list? That way they have people noticing their willingness.
Bobbijn (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:48:45 GMT):
The sponsor's role as community liaison between developers and the Hyperledger Labs should occur before the project is in the labs , Letting the developers know there is a place for their work.
Helen_Garneau (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:51:57 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:53:42 GMT):
Given the time I suggest the Labs stewards put forward a proposal for the next TSC call - and if it's just to do away with sponsors, great, but show how Labs will document what's required and perform the required oversight.
Bobbijn (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:55:36 GMT):
Here is a space to collect our thought: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/LMDWG/Lab+Sponsors+Proposal
bbehlendorf (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:56:23 GMT):
The sponsor requirement was a 1:1 map to the mentor model in the Apache incubator, and to lessen the burden on the Labs stewards to perform that necessary oversight
hartm (Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:56:35 GMT):
Don't know what you're talking about Gari ;)
hartm (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:05:24 GMT):
I'll help update the whitepaper if you'd like me to contribute.
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:06:18 GMT):
Where can we edit or add comments?
tkuhrt (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:07:36 GMT):
The problem with the [Indy report](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2021+Q1+Hyperledger+Indy) is that the TSC members are not @'d in the report, which means we did not get notified it was out there.
rjones (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:07:57 GMT):
hmm.
tkuhrt (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:14:15 GMT):
Let's use what Github defines them to be:
Label Description
bug Indicates an unexpected problem or unintended behavior
documentation Indicates a need for improvements or additions to documentation
duplicate Indicates similar issues or pull requests
enhancement Indicates new feature requests
good first issue Indicates a good issue for first-time contributors
help wanted Indicates that a maintainer wants help on an issue or pull request
invalid Indicates that an issue or pull request is no longer relevant
question Indicates that an issue or pull request needs more information
wontfix Indicates that work won't continue on an issue or pull request
tkuhrt (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:17:29 GMT):
^ From https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-your-work-on-github/managing-labels#about-default-labels
Helen_Garneau (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:28:53 GMT):
For the Hyperledger Intro Whitepaper and Greenhouse update project- Wondering if a 'Task Force' page in wiki would be appropriate or if there is a another way to organize the group?
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:28:55 GMT):
Show the list of sponsors, connect to one of us?
rjones (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:30:49 GMT):
When I proposed a list of sponsors, nobody joined the list.
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:31:23 GMT):
I did miss out that call, please tell me where to subscribe there
hartm (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:31:32 GMT):
Can we have a list of potential sponsors for SIGs/labs/whatever with a description of what kinds of projects that particular sponsor might be interested in? This might be a way to get more people to volunteer--they would only get projects in areas that they're interested in working, which might increase participation.
swcurran (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:34:59 GMT):
The @ notifications were put there -- copied from the previous. Did they not work? A number of TSC members reviewed it immediately after it was published.
rjones (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:35:18 GMT):
I went in and put them in manually
rjones (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:35:35 GMT):
a copy/paste of text strips the link
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:36:06 GMT):
Prof Ali Dorri and Raja Jurdak's work on IoT & blockchain, blockchain and security are interesting. I heard about this session through TSC meeting minutes. Maybe we need a way to spread the information, to those who are outside the SIG mailing lists?
swcurran (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:38:04 GMT):
Sheesh - awesome :-(. Thanks, but do let me know for next time when you have to fix something. Is there any way to do get the @ s in without having to repeat every time?
rjones (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:39:45 GMT):
If you create from the template, I think it's free - you can then copy/paste text as you like
swcurran (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:42:29 GMT):
Ah...so use a template vs. copy page from the previous report. OK.
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:45:35 GMT):
Oh! This is about not getting selected through to mentorship program
hartm (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:54:13 GMT):
+1 to David. This is not just a problem in labs, but everywhere in Hyperledger.
hartm (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:58:15 GMT):
@lehors Same here. We've been fighting this in projects as well. I also get really frustrated when people close PRs from non-familiar people without commenting, which is something some of our maintainers have done as well. I think this is pretty much a universal Hyperledger thing as well.
rjones (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:58:39 GMT):
the auto-close bots are an anti-pattern.
lehors (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 16:06:22 GMT):
I haven't seen maintainers close PRs right off the bat but I've seen it happen after a PR was ignored long enough that the submitter had disappeared and nobody was around anymore to respond to any comments or requests for changes
lehors (Thu, 18 Feb 2021 16:06:34 GMT):
not the best way to grow a community
hartm (Fri, 19 Feb 2021 03:51:59 GMT):
Yep, that's basically the exact issue I had in mind. Someone new does a PR that's not perfect (but well-intentioned and certainly not useless), but maintainers don't respond for a while. There is then minimal effort to reach out to the person.
davidkhala (Sun, 21 Feb 2021 15:14:32 GMT):
Keeping an eye on this. it indeed frustrate new contributors, especially as long as our evangelist keeping advertising "We are calling for contributions"
lehors (Mon, 22 Feb 2021 01:52:18 GMT):
no, I think if you start with a copy the page
lehors (Mon, 22 Feb 2021 01:52:18 GMT):
no, I think if you start with a copy of the page created with the duplicate function that works, what you can't do is create the page via copy-paste of its content because that will lost its "magic"
lehors (Mon, 22 Feb 2021 01:52:18 GMT):
no, I think if you start with a copy of the page created with the duplicate function that works, what you can't do is create the page via copy-paste of its content into an empty page because that will lost its "magic"
mwagner (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 14:43:36 GMT):
I will miss todays call
rjones (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 14:44:09 GMT):
OK. Did you want to cast your vote on Aries active status?
rjones (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:05:16 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Whitepaper+and+Greenhouse+Graphic+Update+Taskforce
hartm (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:08:14 GMT):
I sure did! Thanks for asking @lehors .
arsulegai (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:12:10 GMT):
How about a landing page for Aries with information on 4 parts to Aries?
arsulegai (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:12:21 GMT):
The document is really well written. Kudos to the team :)
mtng (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:15:38 GMT):
i don't know how to vote yes :)
grace.hartley (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:16:49 GMT):
Congrats Aries!
bbehlendorf (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:16:52 GMT):
Yay!
hartm (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:16:55 GMT):
Congrats Aries project! Very well done.
mtng (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:17:11 GMT):
Congrats!
nage (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:17:46 GMT):
@swcurran++ thanks for all the hard work on the excellent proposal
hartm (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:31:36 GMT):
The diversity issue will still be a bottleneck for automation, but we can still try to make it as clear as possible.
hartm (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:35:31 GMT):
I like everything about this discussion: great idea Tracy, and I think the graphics and integration/joint work with LF analytics would be fantastic.
arsulegai (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:44:08 GMT):
I would signup and volunteer on defining what it can takes to automate/tooling the proposal
bbehlendorf (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:46:20 GMT):
apologies, had to drop, but wanted to note, anyone who thinks there are parts of this that can or should be automated, feel free to start drafting a spec for work that could be funded, whether into core LFanalytics or outside of that, to help with this badging
bbehlendorf (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:46:34 GMT):
I will find the funds for that if there is healthy community support.
seanyoung (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 16:01:42 GMT):
If this can be automated -- with the links to the data to back it up -- that would be very nifty and novel as well.
shemnon (Thu, 25 Feb 2021 17:05:26 GMT):
So when we speak of diversity we speak of people correct? DE&I meanings? I'd like us to move "corporate diversity" to a different word to increase clarity. I propose "decentralized" as it encompasses both the meaning and the intended value of "corporate diversity."
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 13:30:57 GMT):
I will miss first half of the meeting today, couldn't avoid the conflict
davidwboswell (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:17:27 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/blockchain-carbon-accounting
rjones (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:20:26 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=41593366
davidwboswell (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:23:12 GMT):
SIGs have submitted some mentorship projects for the year: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/INTERN/2021+Projects
davidwboswell (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:31:01 GMT):
The India event Daniela is mentioning: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HIRC/HYPERHACK+2021
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:31:26 GMT):
Joined late
Bobbijn (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:31:59 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/SISIG/2021-03-02+Meeting+Agenda?preview=/41593893/41593894/1612556926390.jpeg
Bobbijn (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:32:15 GMT):
HYPERHACK
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:32:29 GMT):
I see HYPERHACK here, what's going on?
rjones (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:35:00 GMT):
[Here is the page for this week's /dev/weekly](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=41593366) so feel free to comment to add items
davidwboswell (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:36:45 GMT):
Example of how Mozilla bubbles communications from different parts of the community into one place: https://planet.mozilla.org/
troyronda (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:46:58 GMT):
fyi: aries-framework-go is not coupled to indy.
shemnon (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:49:28 GMT):
Nathan: is this presentation or training still available somewhere?
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:49:43 GMT):
Thanks @troyronda :) I wasn't sure
rjones (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:53:50 GMT):
I feel auto-close bots are an anti-pattern
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:54:08 GMT):
Not necessarily to have auto-close
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:54:14 GMT):
But we can have auto-remind bots
shemnon (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:55:26 GMT):
Putting metrics around PR age incentivizes stuff like "Stale Bots" and "PR Bankruptcy" - https://twitter.com/headius/status/1367116838283464708
shemnon (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:55:49 GMT):
Not a reason to not do PR ages stats, but we need to be mindful of the follow on effects.
shemnon (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:56:37 GMT):
For example: if stale bots do emerge we should have a metric around stale bot closures, and view it as a negative.
rjones (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:57:21 GMT):
A lot of projects in Hyperledger are using StaleBot.
shemnon (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:57:37 GMT):
Today I Learned.
arsulegai (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:58:00 GMT):
Which project?
rjones (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:00:59 GMT):
OK, I just looked, and I'm wrong. All of those were removed when Fabric moved from Gerrit to GitHub.
rjones (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:21:08 GMT):
@arsulegai @shemnon ```./caliper/.github/stale.yml
./cello/.github/stale.yml
./fabric-chaincode-evm/.github/stale.yml
./fabric-sdk-go/.github/stale.yml```
rjones (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:21:08 GMT):
@arsulegai @shemnon ```% find . -name stale.yml|grep -v composer|sort ./caliper/.github/stale.yml
./cello/.github/stale.yml
./fabric-chaincode-evm/.github/stale.yml
./fabric-sdk-go/.github/stale.yml```
rjones (Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:21:08 GMT):
@arsulegai @shemnon ```% find . -name stale.yml|grep -v composer|sort
./caliper/.github/stale.yml
./cello/.github/stale.yml
./fabric-chaincode-evm/.github/stale.yml
./fabric-sdk-go/.github/stale.yml```
Helen_Garneau (Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:44:11 GMT):
Hello TSC- Reminder to please join the DevRel Marketing Committee call at 9am PT today. Take a look at the agenda and add items if you'd like here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/x/Nqx6Ag (Please note new zoom info!)
greg2git (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 15:14:28 GMT):
a cancel without notice this morning?
rjones (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 15:24:55 GMT):
there was email sent to the mailing list yesterday
greg2git (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 15:27:27 GMT):
found it, thx
greg2git (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 15:28:03 GMT):
i hope everyone is doing ok, though
rjones (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 15:29:44 GMT):
oh yeah - there just wasn't anything on the agenda so @lehors cancelled it
lehors (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:04:41 GMT):
indeed, at the same time I asked TSC members to contribute to making progress on the open issues
lehors (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:08:02 GMT):
@rjones, I submitted a PR against the repolinter config file that has been ignored... https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/pulls
lehors (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:08:20 GMT):
this is merely a reformatting
lehors (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:08:50 GMT):
I'd like people to then try and use it and propose changes as necessary
lehors (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:24:36 GMT):
thanks
greg2git (Thu, 11 Mar 2021 17:33:21 GMT):
@rjones @lehors glad to hear it and chatting back
seanyoung (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 15:42:55 GMT):
Both Burrow and Solang are Apache and MIT licensed. As a result, repolinter fails with:
```
repolinter --rulesetUrl https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/raw/main/repo_structure/repolint.json
Target directory: /home/sean/git/solang
Axiom language failed to run with error: Linguist not installed
Axiom license failed to run with error: Licensee not installed
Lint:
✖ apache-license-file:
✔ LICENSE-APACHE: Contains Apache License.*Version 2.0
✖ LICENSE-MIT: Doesn't contain Apache License.*Version 2.0
```
I'm not sure how to write the repolinter rules so this is permitted.
seanyoung (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 15:42:55 GMT):
Both Burrow and Solang are Apache and MIT licensed. As a result, repolinter fails with:
```
$ repolinter --rulesetUrl https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/raw/main/repo_structure/repolint.json
Target directory: /home/sean/git/solang
Axiom language failed to run with error: Linguist not installed
Axiom license failed to run with error: Licensee not installed
Lint:
✖ apache-license-file:
✔ LICENSE-APACHE: Contains Apache License.*Version 2.0
✖ LICENSE-MIT: Doesn't contain Apache License.*Version 2.0
```
I'm not sure how to write the repolinter rules so this is permitted.
seanyoung (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 15:42:55 GMT):
Both Burrow and Solang are Apache and MIT licensed. As a result, repolinter fails with:
```
$ repolinter --rulesetUrl https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/raw/main/repo_structure/repolint.json
Target directory: /home/sean/git/solang
Axiom language failed to run with error: Linguist not installed
Axiom license failed to run with error: Licensee not installed
Lint:
✖ apache-license-file:
✔ LICENSE-APACHE: Contains Apache License.*Version 2.0
✖ LICENSE-MIT: Doesn't contain Apache License.*Version 2.0
```
I'm not sure how to change the repolinter rules so this is permitted.
shemnon (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 16:03:09 GMT):
I wasn't around when burrow got approved as a project, but unless there's a governing boar waiver I view this as a legit error. I don't see anything in Section 12 of the Hyperledger Charter that permits dual (as in pick one) outbound licensing.
shemnon (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 16:03:09 GMT):
I wasn't around when solang got approved for labs, but unless there's a governing boar waiver I view this as a legit error. I don't see anything in Section 12 of the Hyperledger Charter that permits dual (as in pick one) outbound licensing.
shemnon (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 16:04:20 GMT):
12.b does have some room for interpretation, but a strict reading is apache 2.0 and only apache 2.0
seanyoung (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 16:46:07 GMT):
aha
seanyoung (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 16:49:07 GMT):
well, I don't mind relicensing under apache-2.0 only, apart from the legal side of getting contributers to ok this.
seanyoung (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 16:50:41 GMT):
Having said that, the rule "b. All outbound code will be made available under the Apache License, Version 2.0." is certainly met. The code is available under the apache license, version 2.0.
seanyoung (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 16:54:35 GMT):
Having said that, I think @shemnon is taking a very strict reading of this. Solang is available under the apache license.
seanyoung (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 16:54:51 GMT):
What's the best way to proceed?
seanyoung (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 16:55:21 GMT):
It never occurred to me that this would be a problem.
rjones (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:32:28 GMT):
@bbehlendorf thoughts?
shemnon (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:35:08 GMT):
I admit that my reading may be too strict, and I'm willing to be wrong on it. But I think it needs to be clarified and this is a good test case.
shemnon (Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:35:08 GMT):
I admit that my reading may be too strict, and I'm willing to be wrong on it. But I think it needs to be explicitly clarified and this is a good test case.
rjones (Mon, 15 Mar 2021 14:48:47 GMT):
@shemnon I don't know if dual-licensed code is allowed. I know the board has made some decisions around this in the past.
seanyoung (Mon, 15 Mar 2021 15:39:56 GMT):
If dual-licensed code is not allowed, what is the process for re-licensing to apache-only?
bbehlendorf (Mon, 15 Mar 2021 16:49:17 GMT):
So there's a difference between inbound license (prior works under their own license, as well as individual contributions) and outbound license (what is published as e.g. LICENSE.md or otherwise depended upon). With the former, it has to either be Apache, or an Apache-compatible variant such as MIT (though if it's a lot of MIT-ish code without the patent protections, that really deserves TSC and GB attention, can explain further later). Outbound, it must be Apache. Our downstream users and contributors depend upon the patent protection, and there is no extra value to using MIT, but more basically it's what we say all our code is under.
bbehlendorf (Mon, 15 Mar 2021 16:50:06 GMT):
Process for "re-licensing" outbound to Apache-only should be to just change that license text.
bbehlendorf (Mon, 15 Mar 2021 16:51:13 GMT):
Obviously, don't change the license text associated with inbound contributions, e.g. something that exists on a vendor branch or was imported some way other than via a developer's original contribution under a DCO.
rjones (Mon, 15 Mar 2021 16:58:44 GMT):
@seanyoung
seanyoung (Mon, 15 Mar 2021 17:08:23 GMT):
@bbehlendorf thanks, that's clear. I'll update the LICENSE file, and that should be it.
seanyoung (Mon, 15 Mar 2021 18:07:41 GMT):
I've updated Solang license file: https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/solang/pull/401
Now repolinter passes. :innocent:
seanyoung (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:10:19 GMT):
Sorry about this.
seanyoung (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:10:41 GMT):
Please continue
seanyoung (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:13:46 GMT):
I just wanted to point out that burrow now also has ewasm support. This means that with Solang, we can compile Solidity and run it on burrow -- it works end to end. This will also work with other ewasm tooling.
Since Fabric, Sawtooth, and Iroha already use the burrow evm implementation, merging ewasm support as well would be easy. This would bring ewasm and Solang support to those ledgers.
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:14:33 GMT):
I think that very few people follow the maintainers' list, unfortunately.
troyronda (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:19:56 GMT):
I need to create a better diff, but this is what we used in aries-framework-go: https://github.com/troyronda/hyperledger-community-management-tools/commit/a544e0ffaca6a77f93f5b09fb0e3c41ae21214f3
troyronda (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:19:56 GMT):
I need to create a better diff, but this is what we used in aries-framework-go for repolint: https://github.com/troyronda/hyperledger-community-management-tools/commit/a544e0ffaca6a77f93f5b09fb0e3c41ae21214f3
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:28:09 GMT):
How do people feel about "mature" or some other synonym for "adult"?
rjones (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:33:27 GMT):
_takes that personally_
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:36:19 GMT):
I think Tracy's point is that it's hard to get the current people to update to the modern terms, which confuses the new people because there is an official set of terms, but the actual people use some other set of terms.
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:43:10 GMT):
I think I hold the consensus opinion: n a vacuum, "graduated" is much better than "active." The question is 1) is it worth it to replace legacy terms, perhaps confusing new people, mostly when old people don't use the new terms and 2) what does the new label mean with respect to the badging system. Is this indeed what people think?
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:43:10 GMT):
I think I hold the consensus opinion: in a vacuum, "graduated" is much better than "active." The question is 1) is it worth it to replace legacy terms, perhaps confusing new people, mostly when old people don't use the new terms and 2) what does the new label mean with respect to the badging system. Is this indeed what people think?
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:45:26 GMT):
@shemnon "Premier" project isn't a bad idea--we could tie other things to it, like documentation, marketing obligations, etc. that are currently difficult to force projects to do. We could also let "ecosystems" apply for premier status jointly (i.e. Indy/Aries) which might also help us simplify the greenhouse diagram. Not sure how others will feel about this though...
shemnon (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:47:23 GMT):
My thinking for "Premier" is that it is a status that has to be maintained, and if the standards are not met the status reverts to whatever is past incubation.
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:48:44 GMT):
I agree that it should be something that should have to be maintained. But I also think it would be useful to add additional community requirements that currently aren't required by active status, but would be very nice (e.g. documentation, marketing, "enough" maintainers attending relevant HL events, etc.).
shemnon (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:49:37 GMT):
Yep. Above and beyond incubation exit. Perhaps an "adoption" badge as well to show that the project is used "in the wild"
shemnon (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:50:17 GMT):
We would have to collaborate with he marketing committee, but perhaps each "premier" project gets a marketing push once a year.
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:50:24 GMT):
We need some way to quantify "adoption", but yes.
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:51:19 GMT):
Right. I would imagine that the idea behind premier project would be sort of "you have invested in the HL community, so HL will help you in return with marketing, etc."
davidwboswell (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:52:03 GMT):
i really like the shadow program idea. could apply for a range of community roles and not just for release managers. like a maintainer shadow program.
hartm (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:52:15 GMT):
It should be totally acceptable for a project to not aim for premier status (if it doesn't want or need marketing--i.e. libraries) and a positive side effect would be for us to simplify the greenhouse effect.
nage (Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:59:16 GMT):
More mentor ship is a very good thing
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 13:58:10 GMT):
Repolinter and Go repos common warning: source-license-headers-exist: Did not find file matching the specified patterns. (due to rules being for JavaScript).
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 13:58:58 GMT):
example: https://github.com/ryjones/rl-report/blob/main/main/fabric-repolinter-report.md#warning-
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 13:59:38 GMT):
Also the package-metadata rule is also ignored for go repos. https://github.com/ryjones/rl-report/blob/main/main/fabric-repolinter-report.md#ignored-
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:02:07 GMT):
Once these rules are enabled for Go, there could be a larger number of warnings in the repolinter report for Go repos.
hartm (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:21:22 GMT):
Nice presentation Silas!
greg2git (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:22:20 GMT):
it's ethereum 'centric', isn't it?
hartm (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:24:08 GMT):
+1 to Danno. What most people ultimately want with blockchain is a "database with decentralized trust" and don't need a "pure" blockchain. This would help them achieve that more easily.
seanyoung (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:25:08 GMT):
@greg2git I think it's more Solidity centric
seanyoung (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:25:54 GMT):
It would work with Substrate fine, for example.
greg2git (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:27:57 GMT):
@seanyoung thx for addressing my question here and i think the answer is the 'qualified yes'
silasdavis (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:28:38 GMT):
what @seanyoung said
silasdavis (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:30:46 GMT):
@rjones I have attached a pdf of presentation to my agenda item https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2021+03+25+TSC+Meeting+Record
silasdavis (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:31:20 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/burrow/tree/main/vent
silasdavis (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:31:20 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/burrow/tree/main/vent
'Chain' interface that other chains would need to implement: https://github.com/hyperledger/burrow/blob/main/vent/chain/chain.go
rjones (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:32:49 GMT):
this could be a github action
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:32:50 GMT):
I would rather keep DCO as a mandatory check
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:32:50 GMT):
I would rather keep DCO as a mandatory check in the tooling.
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:32:57 GMT):
It's too easy to forget.
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:35:16 GMT):
And if it's forgotten, what would be the process of fixing the repo?
rjones (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:35:44 GMT):
`git push --force-with-lease`
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:35:49 GMT):
Right yuck.
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:36:04 GMT):
This is *after* the PR has been merged.
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:36:12 GMT):
So the admin would need to do it.
tkuhrt (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:36:20 GMT):
Sounds like CLA
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:37:17 GMT):
Missing copyright headers are already annoying when that gets missed by tooling.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:37:24 GMT):
https://opensource.com/article/18/3/cla-vs-dco-whats-difference
hartm (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:37:27 GMT):
I think we should probably move in this direction, but I'm not a lawyer.
arsulegai (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:37:59 GMT):
When you squash merge it, does it combine all the commit messages? or would it allow to extend the commit description at the time of merge?
tkuhrt (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:40:31 GMT):
Aren't there some form of template that you can show on a pull request that would remind them to do the DCO
tkuhrt (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:40:31 GMT):
Aren't there some form of template that you can show on a pull request that could be used to remind them to do the DCO
shemnon (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:40:41 GMT):
Squash merges commits are editable by the maintainer. Github defaults the commit comment to be a concatenation of all of the commits in the squash.
shemnon (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:41:17 GMT):
For my own commits I'll clean it up, but for external contributors I don't edit.
arsulegai (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:42:08 GMT):
I am searching for current proposal that says DCO is must for PR, or is it more mentioned that it is before merge.
tkuhrt (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:42:34 GMT):
It is in the charter
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:43:53 GMT):
And force pushing the repo after a PR is merged is very problematic.
rjones (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:44:08 GMT):
Fire up the VSCode github interface and try to sign off a commit
troyronda (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:46:28 GMT):
*IF* DCO is required on the commit, my point is that we really need tooling to enforce this. I don't think rewriting the repo when it gets noticed is an acceptable solution.
tkuhrt (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:47:05 GMT):
Intellectual Property
"All contributions shall be accompanied by a Developer Certificate of Origin sign-off (http://developercertificate.org) that is submitted through a Governing Board and LF-approved contribution process. "
hartm (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:47:29 GMT):
I still am surprised that we can legally allow fully anonymous contributions (i.e. where the LF doesn't even know the contributor).
tkuhrt (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:48:19 GMT):
Looks like we would need both TSC and Governing Board approval to change
tkuhrt (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:48:19 GMT):
Looks like we would need Governing Board approval to change
arsulegai (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:51:55 GMT):
Thanks, it suggests contributions. It does not clearly say PR shall be blocked before merging (but it is kind of understood). So, no hard comments on having flexibility and adding responsibility on maintainers.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:56:46 GMT):
If issues are tagged as e.g. "bite-sized" in GH, one queries against that, and thus even a confluence page doesn't need to be maintained?
rjones (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:57:06 GMT):
yes, sort of
rjones (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:57:47 GMT):
there isn't an easy way to get "all good first issues for fabric in hyperledger"
davidwboswell (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:58:26 GMT):
Example of pulling issues tagged good-first-issue onto a wiki page: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/labs/Blockchain+Automation+Framework+lab
shemnon (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 17:31:53 GMT):
Here's the first draft of the DCO durring review proposal: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/DCO+Validation+During+Contribution+Review
shemnon (Thu, 25 Mar 2021 17:32:09 GMT):
One thing I learned durring my internet searches is that the Chef project already has a similar policy.
arsulegai (Mon, 05 Apr 2021 14:10:44 GMT):
Going back to the conversation on automating the badge generation, @bbehlendorf you told there can be support available from the LF team. Is that correct understanding? It will help if we can revive this discussion.
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:09:39 GMT):
Yeah, if we can get rid of that in the template, it'd be great. Thanks Ry!
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:12:15 GMT):
Done
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:13:39 GMT):
Are we still comfortable with anonymous contributors and the DCO?
troyronda (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:14:51 GMT):
How tools enforce that non-DCO commits don't get merged with this strategy.
troyronda (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:14:51 GMT):
How do tools enforce that non-DCO commits don't get merged with this strategy.
troyronda (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:15:04 GMT):
I don't like the idea of git history re-writes if mistakes get made.
arsulegai (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:15:21 GMT):
Maintainers signing off for a Contributor! And we need to search for a merge hook
tkuhrt (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:15:44 GMT):
From the [charter](https://www.hyperledger.org/about/charter) (*bold* mine):
"a. Members agree that all new inbound code contributions to HLP shall be made under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (available at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0). All contributions shall be accompanied by a Developer Certificate of Origin sign-off (http://developercertificate.org) that is *submitted through a Governing Board and LF-approved contribution process*. Such contribution process will include steps to also bind non-Member Contributors and, if not self-employed, their employer, to the licenses expressly granted in the Apache License, Version 2.0 with respect to such contribution."
troyronda (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:17:35 GMT):
@rjones what's the discussed remediation without git history re-write?
arsulegai (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:17:37 GMT):
Who can bring this up to Governing Board? Arnaud?
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:20:08 GMT):
This seems to me like it would rule out anonymous contributions (and our current process). Are other people reading it the same way?
troyronda (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:21:12 GMT):
What was just described is exactly what I don't want to see.
troyronda (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:21:34 GMT):
(force pushing main branch to fix DCO)
arsulegai (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:21:42 GMT):
No
arsulegai (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:21:42 GMT):
No, I read it as - as long as there is a DCO (with a fake ID rather be it), it is accepted.
tkuhrt (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:30:03 GMT):
@hartm : Are you referring to this sentence"Such contribution process will include steps to also bind non-Member Contributors and, if not self-employed, their employer, to the licenses expressly granted in the Apache License, Version 2.0 with respect to such contribution." This somewhat says that you have to know who the person is and who they work for.
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:30:36 GMT):
@tkuhrt : Yep, I was. It's a bit vague though.
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:31:13 GMT):
I (informally, doesn't count as legal advice) spoke with a patent attorney about our process--it's definitely in the gray area.
tkuhrt (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:31:21 GMT):
And a bit confusing that it is trying to differentiate member contributors vs. non-member contributors. I do not know what agreements are signed by the member agreements.
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:32:09 GMT):
I definitely agree. I think it'd be best if we had a good lawyer come in and tell us exactly what we need to do here, but I don't know what we need to do to trigger that process.
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:33:16 GMT):
(And, obviously, rewrite this section of the charter.)
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:34:31 GMT):
Can we guarantee that someone goes through the documentation and fixes everything?
mwagner (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:44:01 GMT):
yes
arsulegai (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:46:42 GMT):
Is there a provision to bring back the proposal on a later date, if there are more abstains which could change the decision?
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:48:32 GMT):
Do all the labs stewards agree on this proposal?
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:49:41 GMT):
9 votes for yes: ADC, Arnaud, Baohua, Bobbi, David, Gari, Hart, Troy, Mark. 4 Abstains: Arun, Danno, Maria, Tracy
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:53:51 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Rename+Active+status+and+call+it+Graduated
mwagner (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:55:45 GMT):
do we need to consider how we "protect" Hyperledger ? Is that part of the Lab Stewarts role ?
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:58:11 GMT):
As someone who has sponsored a bunch of labs, it has caused me to read through a bunch of labs and I've even reconnected with some old collaborators over sponsoring a labs proposal. But I think this is the exception rather than the norm.
hartm (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:01:19 GMT):
As I recollect, the motivation for labs sponsors was to help stop the labs being a dumping ground (in particular, a sponsor may have expertise in an area that the stewards don't) and also increase ties to the rest of the community. I'm not 100% sure this is correct, but I believe there was even a proposal at the time of labs creation to require that you had to be an existing contributor to propose a lab (which is much stronger than what we currently have). This was rejected.
mwagner (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:02:21 GMT):
the labs are essentially a black hole from my POV. perhaps the lab stewards could provide a quarterly report type of summary abot the labs ?
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:09:51 GMT):
@mwagner there is supposed to be a report every quarter, but I stopped doing it. I also pointed out a bunch of labs that should be archived, but that didn't happen.
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:44:55 GMT):
wait, @rjones, you seem to be saying we have never archived any labs, that's not correct, is it?
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:50:46 GMT):
@lehors no. I'm saying I brought to the attention of the stewards a bunch of labs that needed archiving, and it didn't happen, so I stopped looking.
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:51:23 GMT):
I didn't know you stopped looking
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:51:30 GMT):
I thought we responded when you brought them up
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:51:31 GMT):
@lehors [here was my report](https://chat.hyperledger.org/channel/labs?msg=LPMktT7vuFRZfWB3T) and nobody acted on it.
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:51:46 GMT):
and when we moved some back out of archival
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:51:48 GMT):
by acted, I mean, took up making a PR and filing it.
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:52:58 GMT):
ok, so maybe you didn't nag us enough on that one :)
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:53:30 GMT):
that was the nag :) I'm trying to push Lab Stewards to do more Stewarding
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:54:13 GMT):
I'm in favor of being pretty relaxed about this and archive fairly easily given that we can always restore them
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:56:00 GMT):
It looks like the last time [I did a lab update was H2 2019](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/labs/Hyperledger+Labs+Updates).
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:56:53 GMT):
yeah, maybe we should have a reminder like we have for the projects
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:57:03 GMT):
at least twice a year or so
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:58:02 GMT):
Maybe I should be more clear: I want the Lab Stewards to own this process of archiving and providing reports to the TSC. The reports should be easier now with Insights.
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:58:29 GMT):
I understand and don't disagree with the proposal
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:58:55 GMT):
I'm just saying having reminders would help make it happen
lehors (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:59:12 GMT):
it's not like I have intentionally decided not to do it
rjones (Thu, 08 Apr 2021 16:00:01 GMT):
Understood. I guess I could add these reminders to the Labs mailing list calendar, but any moderator could also do that.
lehors (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:09:52 GMT):
I submitted a PR to change the name "Active" to "Graduated" in the TSC documentation: https://github.com/hyperledger/tsc/pull/7
lehors (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:11:27 GMT):
In doing so I noticed that we still have the old wiki page around: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Project+Lifecycle
lehors (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:12:31 GMT):
The content of this page should be yanked and replaced with a link pointing to the new location and *please* DO NOT make this "Go here". See https://lehors.wordpress.com/2009/01/29/linking-the-proper-way/
lehors (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:13:26 GMT):
I would also appreciate if the link on that page could be updated: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Project+Lifecycle
lehors (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:14:13 GMT):
although one should probably simply redirect to the other
lehors (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:14:23 GMT):
note: I don't have permission to edit these pages
rjones (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 15:22:06 GMT):
@lehors [is this better](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/HYP/Project+Lifecycle) ?
rjones (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 15:22:38 GMT):
or would you prefer a redirect as well?
lehors (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 15:40:46 GMT):
very good! Thank you. :-)
rjones (Fri, 09 Apr 2021 16:07:37 GMT):
@lehors [here you go](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Project+Lifecycle) for the second one
hartm (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 14:43:21 GMT):
There have been Cactus-Weaver conversations as Arnaud alluded to. In particular, while some of the techniques used are different, there are parts of the codebases that are similar or that could be made more similar, such as the "ledger connectors." Some of these components would be good targets for "de facto standardization." We plan to have more discussion on what to do in the future.
hartm (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 14:49:53 GMT):
I'm fine if stewards want to appoint "champions" or "guides" or something like that to help projects out.
rjones (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 17:56:26 GMT):
hi @anilkumargr let's talk about repo linter here
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 17:56:26 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 17:56:45 GMT):
ok sure
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 17:57:46 GMT):
My teammate Jeeva asked me to look into the repolinter report generated from your repo
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 17:59:21 GMT):
just a sec, let me give you the link
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:00:22 GMT):
https://github.com/ryjones/rl-report/blob/main/main/blockchain-explorer-repolinter-report.md
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:01:22 GMT):
So, I am trying to understand from this report, what changes do I need to make in Hyperledger Explorer repo to take care of these errors
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:02:00 GMT):
Could you please help me understand this report
rjones (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:03:00 GMT):
1) there is no code of conduct file - take a look at Besu, for instance, that has the correct CoC file
rjones (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:03:44 GMT):
2) if you look at the warnings, it says a NOTICE file is missing, which is only a warning.
rjones (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:04:11 GMT):
3) it also says a bunch of files are missing copyright headers - please add the correct SPDX header to those files
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:04:44 GMT):
ooh ok, got it
rjones (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:05:41 GMT):
you should be able to run it on your desktop to see what needs fixed
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:06:37 GMT):
I am new to the Hyperledger team, so please excuse me if I am asking a silly question. Could you please point me to the repo I can look at to see how the correct files look.
rjones (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:11:43 GMT):
no worries at all!
rjones (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:12:45 GMT):
If you look at [the action I use to make the reports](https://github.com/ryjones/rl-report/blob/cbc4167926e1924f23d456358ff0e7be7219166b/.github/workflows/main.yml#L13) you will see the docker image you need.
rjones (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:13:35 GMT):
Then you'll need to [run something like I do](https://github.com/ryjones/rl-report/blob/cbc4167926e1924f23d456358ff0e7be7219166b/.github/workflows/main.yml#L17) , but you'll need to point it at your local repo
rjones (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:16:37 GMT):
@anilkumargr it would look something like this: `bundle exec /app/bin/repolinter.js --rulesetUrl https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/master/repo_structure/repolint.json --format markdown -g your-repo.git`
anilkumargr (Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:31:29 GMT):
ok thanks Jones
hartm (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:13:27 GMT):
@lehors In my experience, very few maintainers pay attention to the TSC mailing list. This might be a symptom of our lack of cross-project coordination.
hartm (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:13:50 GMT):
Is anyone using the Quilt code?
hartm (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:14:05 GMT):
(Or anyone we can publicly identify?)
rjones (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:14:56 GMT):
This is a message from Elisabeth Greene in Zoom chat: ```I'm in the US with a flexible schedule, MS biomedical engineering Duke U. Other languages include Fortran & SAS in 1979, Turbo Pascal in 1988, HTML in 2000, and Python in 2017.
I am interested in zero-carbon emission, self-reliance focused, holistic healthcare and sustainable government.
I'm here to develop a systems viewpoint to see where I can be of most efficient assistance.
I recently proposed a use case for the CA2 SIG at info@climateledger.org```
arsulegai (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:15:10 GMT):
Do we know if somebody is using Quilt?
arsulegai (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:15:17 GMT):
What is the demand/usage metric?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:16:40 GMT):
https://attic.apache.org/
arsulegai (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:17:09 GMT):
Archiving solely for the reason for not having additional developers - is tough action. Activeness status (either through badge or a state) can help.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:18:02 GMT):
Attic does seem to be equal to end-of-life: "The Apache Attic was created in November 2008 to provide process and solutions to make it clear when an Apache project has reached its end of life. Specifically to be: "
shemnon (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:22:43 GMT):
Attic has a path out. We lack that path.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:23:09 GMT):
Our EOL state should have that path. Right to fork says it's always implicit
hartm (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:23:13 GMT):
Can we just give deprecated projects a path out?
shemnon (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:24:53 GMT):
Perhaps rename Incubation to Admitted, Deprecated to "on-hold", and allow Deprecated/"on-hold" and end-of-like to go back to Incubating/"admitted" via similar vetting to a new project entering Incubating/"Admitted"?
troyronda (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:25:27 GMT):
dormant :)
hartm (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:25:53 GMT):
What if we add a clause to deprecated saying that "if contributor levels rise to the level that meet the requirements of a project in incudbation, the project can be moved back to the incubation stage" or something like that?
hartm (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:26:13 GMT):
@troyronda "Dormant" is a great word choice.
shemnon (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:26:26 GMT):
More clear than on-hold.
grace.hartley (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:28:01 GMT):
I agree with this. 100% projects that are deprecated can apply for incubated again if their status changes.
hartm (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:32:05 GMT):
The concept of "promoted release" sort of died due to the reality of the marketing org handling what releases got promoted and how rather than the TSC.
lehors (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 15:02:31 GMT):
hmm, I can't get into Ry's call
lehors (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 15:02:56 GMT):
is it just me?
lehors (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 15:03:02 GMT):
@rjones
lehors (Thu, 22 Apr 2021 15:04:01 GMT):
ok, got in
hartm (Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:24:42 GMT):
I agree with Tracy. It might be good to have a state that says "we can't actively support this now, but we don't want to discourage you from using it if you already are or want to" versus a state that says "please don't use this".
davidwboswell (Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:28:18 GMT):
to add to the discussion about arun's tool i think it's great that he has built a way to aggregate issues, PRs, releases, etc into one place. ry and i are working with a designer on a new wiki main page design that will let us feature and link to that information. would be based on wikipedia's main page where there are sections that change daily with new information.
tkuhrt (Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:34:16 GMT):
Thoughts on this for the lifecycle: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/~tkuhrt/Lifecycle+Proposal
hartm (Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:37:00 GMT):
Looks great! Maybe you want arrows directly to EOL though? I would assume this could happen if some fatal flaw were found in, say, a project in incubation and the maintainers decided to quit rather than fix it.
tkuhrt (Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:38:01 GMT):
Directly from incubation and graduated? Or also Dormant?
hartm (Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:55:25 GMT):
I think maybe from all of them?
tkuhrt (Thu, 29 Apr 2021 15:02:09 GMT):
Updated to reflect the ask. If anyone else has thoughts/feedback, let me know. Otherwise, I will write this up in a formal proposal.
hartm (Thu, 29 Apr 2021 15:10:52 GMT):
Thanks a lot! Looking forward to the proposal.
tkuhrt (Thu, 29 Apr 2021 15:29:39 GMT):
Proposal available at https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Add+Dormant+State+to+the+Project+Lifecycle
hartm (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:06:58 GMT):
Out of curiousity, who is in charge of the newsletter? In particular, I'd like to be able to give people who are working with Hyperledger software but aren't necessarily involved with open source contribution contact information of someone who can potentially help them shepherd a newsletter article.
rjones (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:07:32 GMT):
Right now, @Helen_Garneau
rjones (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:08:02 GMT):
oh, the newsletter, or `/dev/weekly` ?
hartm (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:10:16 GMT):
I meant the /dev/weekly newsletter. The real newsletter is probably too high of a bar right now.
rjones (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:11:04 GMT):
well, you (the community) is in charge. Helen, Arun, and I do the editing each week.
hartm (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:19:48 GMT):
OK. Can I give some people your email about this?:
hartm (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:20:21 GMT):
I would like to try to use this as outreach within Fujitsu to try to get more people involved in the HL community.
rjones (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:22:05 GMT):
sure. Could you point them to please send email to community-architects@hyperledger.org ?
hartm (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:22:43 GMT):
Yep! Will do.
hartm (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:27:05 GMT):
Isn't blockchain so overdefined that it basically already means all of these?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:27:38 GMT):
https://www.hyperledger.org/about/charter
hartm (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:42:37 GMT):
I just want to get the line @lehors is required to buy beers for all attendees of HL events in the charter!
lehors (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:43:01 GMT):
:)
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:43:37 GMT):
we are not above bribery for someone willing to do this
bbehlendorf (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:43:49 GMT):
beers or otherwise
arsulegai (Thu, 06 May 2021 14:45:42 GMT):
I am in for the TF (already in the WG on Whitepaper)
arsulegai (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:11:48 GMT):
I have couple of open questions
1. I see a Hyperledger brand survey blog circulated, is it initiated by The LF or is it done for helping the whitepaper TF?
2. New project proposal and asking for contributions on CBDC. Not sure where and how is this initiated. More information on this will help.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:13:45 GMT):
1. initiated by Hyperledger staff and the marketing committee to better understand public perception. Happy to share what comes out of that with the whitepaper TF and the TSC.
hartm (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:16:41 GMT):
Will these slides be made public? Thanks!
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:16:42 GMT):
2. Similarly, HL staff sent a call out to HL members based on a sense that there are many emerging CBDC efforts building on top of HL ledgers, and we thought it would help everyone if those efforts could align around a common code base. We'll see!
lehors (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:22:33 GMT):
the recording is public so the slides are clearly no longer "Kaleido confidential" :)
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:32:18 GMT):
Full proposal, as mentioned by Jim Zhang on the TSC mailing list: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GR-YSlGPlVNpMIyikk9EJciTyrO2INwMpR9vrOrcbP0/edit#
hartm (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:32:26 GMT):
Can you just share a viewable link?
jimthematrix (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:32:27 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
shemnon (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:32:38 GMT):
I feel the timeline is a tad bit aggressive. We don't even have access to the proposed code contributions.
hartm (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:32:40 GMT):
(Or whatever is fine).
jimthematrix (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:34:14 GMT):
@shemnon thanks for the input Danno, the code repos (4 in total) will be turned from private to open shortly after the TSC call today
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:34:32 GMT):
The proposal mentions https://github.com/kaleido-io/firefly, but that returns a 404 (I assume it's private). Is that intended to be public?
bbehlendorf (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:35:12 GMT):
Ah, I see Jim's comment on that link - code is coming soon it sounds like
arsulegai (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:46:49 GMT):
Got it, thanks Brian. I was asked multiple questions on these today. There was one more on Fabric audit report.
arsulegai (Thu, 13 May 2021 14:56:47 GMT):
So, can I consider firefly having 2 parts
1. Control plane - that deals with policies etc
2. Data plane components - that deals with offchain exchange of data. I heard more about this in the meeting.
Is this good understanding of the proposal?
hartm (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:00:03 GMT):
Yeah, I'd prefer public as well. +1 to @shemnon
hartm (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:00:56 GMT):
Historically at least, all projects being proposed for incubation have made their codebases fully public.
grace.hartley (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:01:18 GMT):
Thanks for the presentation! I'd also be curious to hear more about the community management plans for Firefly and more details around how the team will facilitate it. It's a little more challenging to assess whether the project would be successful in Hyperledger because it doesn't have an open source history.
lehors (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:01:55 GMT):
good point Grace
lehors (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:03:04 GMT):
it might be a of a catch-22 situation in a case like this that hasn't been open sourced before though
lehors (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:04:13 GMT):
and to be fair although I think all projects were open sourced before coming to Hyperledger, at least early on, we mostly went on based on public commitments than an actual track record of a diverse community of contributors
lehors (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:04:13 GMT):
and to be fair although I think all projects were open sourced before coming to Hyperledger, at least early on, we mostly went on based on public commitments rather than an actual track record of a diverse community of contributors
peterbroadhurst (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:19:30 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
peterbroadhurst (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:35:48 GMT):
Here are the four initial FireFly repos, all now switched to public:
https://github.com/kaleido-io/firefly (Core - inc. Gen 1 & 2)
https://github.com/kaleido-io/firefly-cli (CLI)
https://github.com/kaleido-io/firefly-ui (UI)
https://github.com/kaleido-io/ethconnect (Ethereum blockchain connector)
jimthematrix (Thu, 13 May 2021 15:49:55 GMT):
@troyronda thanks for your questions on the TSC call today, I'd like to follow up further on your last question about DID, as I was starting to respond I saw the clock was running out so I took a short cut ;-) what I didn't get to say was that Firefly will have out of box organizational identities supported via a registry, for both verifying message signatures as well as encrypting message payloads, which is extensible. Firefly will provide both x509 certs based and ethereum address based identities to work with the underlying blockchain protocols. for user level identities within a member app (using their Firefly node as the back end), we tend to leave that for each applications to decide (oauth based, or DID). I should've asked which type of identities you meant for your question.
jimthematrix (Thu, 13 May 2021 16:06:02 GMT):
I've also added a response to your comment in the proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GR-YSlGPlVNpMIyikk9EJciTyrO2INwMpR9vrOrcbP0/edit?disco=AAAAMIywnIc
jimthematrix (Thu, 13 May 2021 16:25:28 GMT):
given that Firefly is fundamentally a decentralized event based architecture, I would tend to think there is no control plane sitting above them. you might consider the blockchain to be a "coordination plane" that sits beneath the instances that is responsible for network-wide concerns: policies, memberships, consistent data schema (where appropriate).
jimthematrix (Thu, 13 May 2021 16:28:42 GMT):
I think "data plane" is a good mental model for the "Firefly node" described in the proposal, that encapsulates the offchain processing logic, data storage, and data exchanges
shemnon (Thu, 13 May 2021 22:30:52 GMT):
For firefly there will be a licensing hurdle to overcome. Both ethconnect and firefly-cli use go-ethereum, which is LGPL3, and the firefly-ui has some use (via nested deps no doubt) of WTFPL which has problematic patent implications. I think those can be resolved with use of yarn and resolutions as the only WTFPL only lib went to MIT in a later version.
shemnon (Thu, 13 May 2021 22:31:47 GMT):
The go-ethereum deps are the more concerning, as I have seen the geth authors make public statements regarding some projects that re-licensed go-ethereum that they cannot do it and need to stay GPL.
shemnon (Thu, 13 May 2021 22:32:42 GMT):
firefly "core" looks to be in better shape.
rjones (Fri, 14 May 2021 00:49:48 GMT):
[Meeting recordings added](https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2021+05+13+TSC+Meeting+Record)
jimthematrix (Fri, 14 May 2021 05:00:37 GMT):
thanks for raising this Danno, licensing is an area we paid attention to from the very beginning because we have always wanted to have an enterprise friendly license with our code (Apache 2.0 in particular). since the "library" part of go-ethereum is under LGPL 3.0, as opposed to the "binary" being GPL, we should be in good standing since ethconnect only uses the geth library and it's a standalone runtime. As long as customers refrain from linking to ethconnect from a commercial component (which is not what ethconnect is intended for anyway), there shouldn't be any issues.
jimthematrix (Fri, 14 May 2021 05:00:37 GMT):
thanks for raising this Danno, licensing is an important area. we paid attention since the beginning because we have always wanted to have an enterprise friendly license with our code (Apache 2.0 in particular). since the "library" part of go-ethereum is under LGPL 3.0, as opposed to the "binary" being GPL, we should be in good standing since ethconnect only uses the geth library and it's a standalone runtime. As long as customers refrain from linking to ethconnect from a commercial component (which is not what ethconnect is intended for anyway), there shouldn't be any issues.
jimthematrix (Fri, 14 May 2021 05:04:10 GMT):
thanks for pointing out about WTFPL components in the UI, we'll investigate and find an alternative
peterbroadhurst (Fri, 14 May 2021 11:18:31 GMT):
Just to add that the ethconnect component that links to LGPL code, is a separate optional runtime "remote agent" to FireFly core (and none of those issues exist in the core).
The runtime plugin model of the project is designed to help with these types of isolation boundaries. Runtime HA, code language (runtimes like this can be Java etc. - as needed for Corda for example), and licensing.
nguyer (Fri, 14 May 2021 12:32:03 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
shemnon (Fri, 14 May 2021 14:18:30 GMT):
Because the Go code is statically linked (all in one file) and there is no alternative library, the connector may still be subject to the GPL vitality clauses (this should be run by lawyers, my opinions are not legal advice).
If the ethconnect does not come into hyperledger repos then the license clause won't be a concern. But this seems like a foundational component and it would be problematic to leave out IMHO.
nguyer (Mon, 17 May 2021 14:41:23 GMT):
Thanks for pointing this out. Just wanted to follow up and note that GPL, LGPL, and WTFPL dependencies have been removed from both firefly-cli and firefly-ui now.
shemnon (Mon, 17 May 2021 15:40:01 GMT):
how about ethconnect? Are there non-copyleft ABI libraries in Go? How hard would it be to write a Apache2 version of what is needed?
jimthematrix (Tue, 18 May 2021 03:53:18 GMT):
can you elaborate on your concern with using the LGPL licensed geth code as unmodified library (which is what we are doing in ethconnect)? our reasoning is pretty straightforward:
- the code is LGPL (https://github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum#license)
- the gist of LGPL is if the software is *modified*, then the modifications (fixes, enhancements) must be shared back
- ethconnect is using geth lib as-is without making any modifications (this is different than what Quorum is doing which is modifying geth code significantly), thus per LGPL the larger work (ethconnect) can be licensed differently
jimthematrix (Tue, 18 May 2021 03:54:16 GMT):
but of course OSS licensing can be complex so we'd like to make sure we get this right. looking forward to hearing more details from you
shemnon (Tue, 18 May 2021 13:18:53 GMT):
Please read the license. The LGPL discusses dynamic linking and "works that use the library."
shemnon (Tue, 18 May 2021 13:18:53 GMT):
Please read the license. The LGPL discusses dynamic linking and works that use the library.
shemnon (Tue, 18 May 2021 13:23:11 GMT):
My understanding is that the Gist of the Mozilla license focuses on not modifying the code, whereas the gits of the LGPL is based on '90s shared library patterns where the libraries were shipped separately from the applications.
shemnon (Tue, 18 May 2021 13:23:11 GMT):
My understanding is that the gist of the Mozilla license focuses on not modifying the code, whereas the gist of the LGPL is based on '90s shared library patterns where the libraries were shipped separately from the applications.
shemnon (Tue, 18 May 2021 13:29:36 GMT):
Not a lawyer (and we should have lawyers review this) but my concern is because Golang take the entire LGPL source code of the relevant functions used to compile the ethconenct binary and create object code from the LGPL code it becomes a deriviative work under the terms of the LGPL, or a gray area. Whereas if it read the API signatures from a header file and then used a separately provided object file to either dynamically link to at runtime or bundle the object code into a single binary then it would be a program that uses the library.
shemnon (Tue, 18 May 2021 13:29:53 GMT):
Golang is not a good fit for the LGPL as written. MPL is a better fit.
stevecerveny (Tue, 18 May 2021 17:08:23 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
stevecerveny (Tue, 18 May 2021 17:08:24 GMT):
do you know if HL or LF has a policy on this or a document that helps describe details here? Or is there someone that is an SME on licensing gorpy details that we could talk to further?
shemnon (Tue, 18 May 2021 17:09:19 GMT):
section 12 of the hyperledger charter - https://www.hyperledger.org/about/charter
shemnon (Tue, 18 May 2021 17:10:02 GMT):
My reading is apache 2 + LGPL obligations violates 12.b. outbound code should only have apache 2 obligations.
stevecerveny (Tue, 18 May 2021 17:14:49 GMT):
thanks I had seen that already. and I agree we're shooting for clean apache 2 only obligations for FF users
shemnon (Tue, 18 May 2021 17:23:13 GMT):
I'm not aware of any HLP docs, but Google's perspective on LGPL is enlightening: https://opensource.google/docs/thirdparty/licenses/#LinkingRequirements
stevecerveny (Tue, 18 May 2021 17:25:40 GMT):
helpful link :thumbsup:
shemnon (Wed, 19 May 2021 14:16:21 GMT):
Does hyperledger burrow have suitable alternative APIs in Go? https://github.com/hyperledger/burrow/blob/main/execution/evm/abi/abi.go
bbehlendorf (Wed, 19 May 2021 18:01:21 GMT):
I'll try to have some input from our side before the TSC call tomorrow
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 May 2021 14:05:11 GMT):
https://twitter.com/brianbehlendorf/status/1395066578366963716
bbehlendorf (Thu, 20 May 2021 14:25:04 GMT):
Closing out this thread, for now on this licensing question we'll await word from kaleido on the strategy for addressing the license issue with this piece, which if there's any question about linking and LGPL at that point we can pass it by LF legal for an opinion. And all that can happen separate from the approval of Firefly as a HL project.
troyronda (Thu, 20 May 2021 14:49:18 GMT):
When I mentioned DIDs, I was also curious about exposing decentralized identifiers. I think an important use case is the ability to hold a public key directory across the network.
troyronda (Thu, 20 May 2021 14:49:18 GMT):
When I mentioned DIDs, I was also curious about exposing decentralized identifiers. I think an important use case is the ability to host a public key directory across the network.
hartm (Thu, 20 May 2021 15:00:09 GMT):
I highly recommend a FAQ section for any proposal document.
matt.nelson.94 (Thu, 20 May 2021 15:02:36 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
arsulegai (Tue, 25 May 2021 17:28:21 GMT):
Firefly Project Proposal <> Arun @Walmart
hartm (Thu, 27 May 2021 14:34:50 GMT):
+1 to @adc on the importance of privacy definitions. It's always good to be sure to rigorously define exactly what privacy you get.
hartm (Thu, 27 May 2021 14:43:06 GMT):
Sponsors for proposals are different from "committed resources."
arsulegai (Thu, 27 May 2021 14:44:35 GMT):
I couldn't find a definition for the word "Sponsor" anywhere :(
hartm (Thu, 27 May 2021 14:50:31 GMT):
And for what it's worth--I'm personally in favor of a "many projects" Hyperledger. It's unclear where the current TSC stands on this though.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 27 May 2021 14:51:50 GMT):
https://tsc.hyperledger.org/project-lifecycle.html
stevecerveny (Thu, 27 May 2021 18:29:47 GMT):
thanks @bbehlendorf , this is the link I was referring to for the existing definitions of criteria. In particular, there is a detailed set of requirements to EXIT incubation into active status. Some of those were coming up on the meeting today - "project must have an active and diverse set of contributors", etc.
https://tsc.hyperledger.org/project-incubation-exit.html
jimthematrix (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:12:50 GMT):
@adc indeed had a valid question on privacy implications of using a token to represent entitlement and global uniqueness (no double spend) of the off-chain asset. This is a pretty complex topic and an open discussion outside of the TSC calls would be preferable to make sure the concerns are fully addressed.
jimthematrix (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:12:50 GMT):
@adc indeed had a valid question on privacy implications of using a token to represent entitlement and global uniqueness (no double spend) of the off-chain asset. This is a pretty complex topic and an open discussion outside of (and ahead of) the TSC calls would be preferable to make sure the concerns are fully addressed.
hartm (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:15:11 GMT):
This is a complicated topic indeed. I think the big point being made is that it's important to be careful of exactly what you claim. If you say your system has "full privacy" or something of that nature, then users will interpret that to mean it leaks absolutely nothing and use the system accordingly.
hartm (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:15:33 GMT):
This can obviously lead to disastrous real-world consequences.
jimthematrix (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:20:34 GMT):
at a high level you can choose whether to use a token to represent the off-chain message/doc or not, it's not always a requirement for the asset to be globally unique, as long as the sender and receiver both got cryptographic proof of the fact of the exchange (by both sides providing signatures over the hash of the content). in which case the pinning tx can be simply recording the hashes (and can be submitted from a random signing account).
jimthematrix (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:20:36 GMT):
but if double spend protection is indeed needed, one can add protection of privacy leakage by submitting fake txs as noise. since the input of the txs are hashes, external parties can't tell if they were for real message/doc exchanges or not.
jimthematrix (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:20:56 GMT):
but definitely agree with the point about being precise with the language
hartm (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:21:18 GMT):
I unfortunately speak from experience with this...
jimthematrix (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:25:38 GMT):
we will take another pass over the content and pay special attention to the language around privacy to make sure when we say "full privacy" we refer to cases of implementing with advanced cryptography via the plugin system. and feedback from cryptography experts like yourself @hartm and @adc are critical to make sure they adhere to the community standards and conventions
hartm (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:29:19 GMT):
Thanks for making the effort! And sorry the project incubation proposal process has become such a hazing ritual...
rjones (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:56:27 GMT):
For almost zero gain, as well
jimthematrix (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:56:53 GMT):
as long as each proposal review process is an opportunity to improve things, like what we are doing this time with using the github repo to record the proposal, we are happy to go through it together ;-)
jimthematrix (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:56:53 GMT):
as long as each proposal review process is an opportunity to improve things, like what we are doing this time with using the github repo to record the proposal, we are happy to work through it together ;-)
jimthematrix (Tue, 01 Jun 2021 01:56:53 GMT):
we are happy to work through it together and make it an opportunity to improve things, like what we are doing this time with using the github repo to record the proposal ;-)
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:37:25 GMT):
Having a landing place for the project will help to get in more folks/collaboration. Should it be a Labs or Hyperledger is the question.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:38:43 GMT):
My comments on it: Either is good enough. This is first of its kind project within Hyperledger, so having a space in Hyperledger would get more participation from community working in this space. Collaboration may continue there.
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:38:47 GMT):
@lehors I definitely agree that convergence is the ideal solution (as you could probably guess). The question is, will it actually happen, or are we being overidealistic? I think you have to have strong champions and projects that are willing to make some short-term sacrifices for this to happen. While I try to make sure that the projects I work on have this willingness (e.g. interop and Cactus), is it safe to assume in general?
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:41:08 GMT):
My take: It sounds like it's a bit early to promote firefly to a project. Tabling and letting firefly operate as a labs project 2-6 months in labs I think is what is needed to solidify the project's open source practices. I think convergence is worth looking into, but should not be blocking on either of the two projects mentioned. My main concern is that the project hasn't had much time as open source and that time would help shake out any issues. I expect after time in labs the vote to project status will be anti-climatic.
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:45:29 GMT):
@bbehlendorf The codebases for BIF and ConnectionChain (the precursors to Cactus) were actually in real-world use cases before Cactus.
bbehlendorf (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:47:28 GMT):
Yep, as I thought, though they were still characterized as early
nage (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:47:31 GMT):
It seems clear there is interest in having a project in this space. Just a question of how well we can get folks collaborating and working together. I leave it to those maintainers to work out which code bases are most mature and fit for purpose for what they are trying to accomplish. I am looking to the fabric maintainers to express what makes most sense here as these efforts seem to be most closely related to their framework. If it had gone to vote prior to today’s discussion I would have easily approved. Now I am more confused—are these other efforts the same or not?
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:47:40 GMT):
That's definitely true.
peter_somogyvari (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:48:51 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
troyronda (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:50:15 GMT):
What's going to happen during this two months?
troyronda (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:50:48 GMT):
Prefer that we have a proposed action / expected outcome attached.
nage (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:50:52 GMT):
I’m not sure why we are waiting unless it is a mandate to some other group to work at convergence with the firefly group
nage (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:50:59 GMT):
Who is volunteering to do that work
nage (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:51:02 GMT):
?
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:51:04 GMT):
Also, to the TSC: whatever people decide to do with this, can we finally write up some guidelines for projects applying for incubation (I realize I may be volunteering myself for part of this). It's not productive for anyone (and very frustrating for people proposing projects) to have these drawn-out discussions about project incubation votes. Ideally it should be as clear as possible when a project is ready for incubation, and everyone from the TSC to the proposers should have a good idea whether a project will be accepted or not.
peter_somogyvari (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:51:46 GMT):
@nage I wouldn't mind volunteering for that.
davidwboswell (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:51:56 GMT):
@hartm -- i agree that this would be helpful. there are other active labs interested in the process but are feeling blocked because it isn't clear what is needed.
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:55:03 GMT):
I realize that different TSC members have different criteria, but even some general guidelines such that "if you have X, Y, and Z, you are likely to be accepted, and if you're missing \alpha, \beta, or \gamma, you are likely to have problems" would be immensely useful.
mtng (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:56:33 GMT):
In this line, perhaps it would be interesting to promote conversations between different labs. Perhaps, several labs could end up converging in the same Hyperledger project. Because, for example TrustID Lab could be converged in or complement the Firefly identity management
In this line, perhaps it would be interesting to promote conversations between different labs. Perhaps, several labs could end up converging in the same Hyperledger project. Because, for example TrustID Lab could be converged in the Firefly identity management
mtng (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:56:33 GMT):
In this line, perhaps it would be interesting to promote conversations between different labs. Perhaps, several labs could end up converging in the same Hyperledger project. Because, for example TrustID Lab could be converged in or complement the Firefly identity management
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 14:57:20 GMT):
Do we have commitment from all parties involved on convergence?
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:03:22 GMT):
Given that this tabling motion passed, can we make an effort to avoid such a long discussion when we next discuss this proposal?
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:04:11 GMT):
Is there a provision of special call request? I am interested in a call with FSC and Forefly maintainers on one call, discuss all the open questions.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:04:11 GMT):
Is there a provision of special call request? I am interested in a call with FSC and Firefly maintainers on one call, discuss all the open questions.
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:05:22 GMT):
Agreed. Perhaps if a project proposal is discussed in one meeting and a vote to approve/disapprove doesn't occur by the end of the next meeting it is automatically tabled for... 1 month? But then there are issues relating to what if no discussion happens in the next month. Roberts rules of order and all.
rjones (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:06:26 GMT):
The TSC doesn't use Robert's rules of order - perhaps that would be a good amendment to the TSC charter?
nage (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:06:34 GMT):
It is important for an open source effort that those making tangible contributions aren’t blocked by those who are not. It seems we have tangible efforts to work on here, but we need to be sure the Firefly proposal isn’t blocked by abstract concerns or non-open-source product competition fears, and that the effort to collaborate and improve the project doesn’t go dark but proceeds with constructive dialog in a way that the maintainers are agreeable to.
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:07:09 GMT):
Yep, this was my ask for a guarantee that people will look at integration.
rjones (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:07:36 GMT):
not sure anyone can make that guarantee
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:07:54 GMT):
"Look at" not "do."
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:10:01 GMT):
This is why I think Firefly should go into labs today. Based on the mailing list it looks like Blockchain Automation Framework has been running regular calls for their contributors.
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:20:57 GMT):
re: convergence. I think it's worth publicly looking into, but my project vote will not hinge on whether or not convergence happens. My reason to table is I don't see sufficient evidence that the current firefly stewards can operate as a fully open source project. Do I think they can? Yes, but I can't point to evidence. 2 or more months as a labs projects give them opportunities to
(a) interact with community contributions
(b) run contributor calls
(c) discuss design issues in either the labs rocket chat room or the labs mailing list.
(d) get the code moved into Hyperledger repos
The convergence discussion will provide harsher than needed evidence for (c). And meeting all the published requirements for (d) always takes longer than you think. Governance issues like how to promote maintainers would be nice, but not required.
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:22:40 GMT):
My concern with an auto-table rule is if the agenda prevents discussion and vote it becomes a stealth filibuster. Perhaps we do it as a TSC practice and not a mechanical rule.
hartm (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:24:02 GMT):
I don't think we need an auto-tabling rule. But we should make an effort to streamline long discussions.
Bobbijn (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:27:00 GMT):
I agree with Danno. The Lab environment was set up to foster these conversations, what convergence looks like can take place there. Firefly becoming a lab project will help Firefly folks become acquainted with the Hyperledger open source environment and us to become familiar with Firefly.
davidwboswell (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:32:48 GMT):
good point. promoting more discussions among leads of labs could have a lot of positive results.
stevecerveny (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:46:32 GMT):
can someone please clarify if FireFly is now a HL Lab? Or is there additional process in front of that?
stevecerveny (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:55:12 GMT):
can someone point us at an example of a Lab that is being run like a full fledged project that is in a similar holding pen for evaluation? Since labs aren't given presence on the HL wiki, should we build the open community that you'd like to see evidence of before accepting the project?
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:56:11 GMT):
https://labs.hyperledger.org/labs/blockchain-automation-framework.html
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:56:30 GMT):
https://labs.hyperledger.org/labs/blockchain-integration-framework.html became Cactus
stevecerveny (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:56:49 GMT):
danno, is there a wiki for this for community calls, etc.?
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 15:57:13 GMT):
https://labs.hyperledger.org/
stevecerveny (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:02:24 GMT):
@arsulegai we will keep you posted on when the special call gets setup
stevecerveny (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:02:40 GMT):
thanks
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:02:40 GMT):
labs mailing list - https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/labs/messages?start=5:2021:360
#labs rocketchat channel
shemnon (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:03:47 GMT):
labs wiki - https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/labs/Hyperledger+Labs+Home
tkuhrt (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:21:10 GMT):
There is, Steve. Chat channel #blockchain-automation-framework . Wiki page : https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/labs/Blockchain+Automation+Framework+lab. Calls: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/labs/calendar
stevecerveny (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:22:12 GMT):
ah that's what I was looking for. Thanks @tkuhrt
tkuhrt (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:22:17 GMT):
I can connect you with folks if you are interested in having a call regarding how they are working.
tkuhrt (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:36:07 GMT):
@stevecerveny : there is a lab proposal that you need to complete. The Lab Stewards will review the proposal and then provide feedback/approval. I am guessing given the amount of discussion we have already had on this, that should not take too long.
lehors (Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:47:25 GMT):
@stevecerveny the process to start a lab is very straightforward, you can get the lab set up in a day
shorsher (Mon, 07 Jun 2021 15:49:13 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
lehors (Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:58:51 GMT):
reminder: no TSC call today
lehors (Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:59:18 GMT):
I hope you all take advantage to get a bit more out of the conference, there is so much going on!
greg2git (Thu, 10 Jun 2021 14:04:00 GMT):
@lehors thx for the heads-up - indeed quite a few announcements: Firefly (Kaleido), IBM Blockchain donation to RedHat, Angelo's code - did i miss anything?
tkuhrt (Fri, 11 Jun 2021 16:42:47 GMT):
I would like to suggest that we create sub-folders in the Decision Log:
* Approved
* Rejected
* Withdrawn
and leave the currently active items at the top level in the decision log. Would anyone object to me cleaning up the decision log structure to reflect the above? Or do I need to make a formal proposal to do this?
rjones (Fri, 11 Jun 2021 22:01:51 GMT):
go for it. You could also use tags, and query based on those.
rjones (Fri, 11 Jun 2021 22:02:01 GMT):
so no files would move
grace.hartley (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:23:59 GMT):
@hartm Would you mind sharing the Cactus invite meeting link here? The Besu team might be interested in joining too.
hartm (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:25:12 GMT):
@grace.hartley Absolutely!
hartm (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:26:28 GMT):
@grace.hartley We actually wanted to reach out to you guys for help on our Besu plugins, so this would be really great for us.
grace.hartley (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:27:05 GMT):
Oh perfect. Glad we're thinking along the same lines. :)
shemnon (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:31:20 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/hyperledger-community-management-tools/blob/main/repo_structure/README.md
rjones (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:35:41 GMT):
CII badges is what I was trying to think of: https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/en/projects/955
arsulegai (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:36:27 GMT):
I like @tkuhrt 's approach - identify must and good to have. Hyperledger mandated rules can be checked through the tool. Projects can have additional auto check tools.
troyronda (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:37:30 GMT):
We are running this https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-framework-go/blob/main/.repolint.json
arsulegai (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:37:52 GMT):
Hyperledger can decide to take a stand, validate that projects are not putting up something that is not supposed to. Could be done through any tool and not necessarily through repolinter.
troyronda (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:38:26 GMT):
As part of the Github actions on pull requests: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-framework-go/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml#L88-L96
arsulegai (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:47:18 GMT):
Here is the video recording https://youtu.be/4I2I-B5RJBc
rjones (Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:49:58 GMT):
https://start-here.hyperledger.org/
jimthematrix (Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:09:33 GMT):
@adc hi Angelo, I've added responses to your questions on some of the FireFly architectural designs in the HIP PR: https://github.com/hyperledger/hyperledger-hip/pull/3#discussion_r654523244, sorry it took a while. please let us know if you have any further questions
rjones (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:01:10 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/SEC/Security+Response+Representation
grace.hartley (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:03:05 GMT):
Apologies, I have a conflict at 10:30 so I will have to hop off then.
arsulegai (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:04:52 GMT):
Joined late, ran over on earlier meeting.
Bobbijn (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:23:41 GMT):
Not sure if this informaion helps: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=6425586
hartm (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:25:02 GMT):
We can move the goalposts over time for the criteria (which we probably need to do), but we need to keep it documented. The ideal situation is where community members have a very good idea about their chances of success for project proposals.
arsulegai (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:36:59 GMT):
History for GitHub wiki
arsulegai (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:37:00 GMT):
https://github.com/hyperledger/tsc/wiki/Test-Proposal/_history
KOttoni (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:39:16 GMT):
Editing in the wiki
https://confluence.atlassian.com/doc/collaborative-editing-858771779.html
KOttoni (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:39:20 GMT):
https://confluence.atlassian.com/doc/concurrent-editing-and-merging-changes-144719.html
arsulegai (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:39:32 GMT):
@Bobbijn need your help if you know somebody good at confluence. This is for home page edits and suggestions. cc: @davidwboswell @rjones
rjones (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:42:43 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Incubation+entry+considerations
Bobbijn (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:43:06 GMT):
@arsulegai Just let me know what you need .
KOttoni (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:46:38 GMT):
If you want to make an line comment on some text in the wiki, then click "update" so you're not in edit mode, highlight the text you want to comment on, (looks like a text bubble)
Select the add comment button that appears above the highlighted text
Enter your comment and select Save (Ctrl+S or ⌘+S)
https://support.atlassian.com/confluence-cloud/docs/comment-on-pages-and-blog-posts/
KOttoni (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:46:38 GMT):
If you want to make an inline comment on some text in the wiki, then click "update" so you're not in edit mode, highlight the text you want to comment on, (looks like a text bubble)
Select the add comment button that appears above the highlighted text
Enter your comment and select Save (Ctrl+S or ⌘+S)
https://support.atlassian.com/confluence-cloud/docs/comment-on-pages-and-blog-posts/
KOttoni (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:46:38 GMT):
If you want to make an inline comment on some text in the wiki, then click "update" so you're not in edit mode, highlight the text you want to comment on,
Select the add comment button that appears above the highlighted text (looks like a text bubble)
Enter your comment and select Save (Ctrl+S or ⌘+S)
https://support.atlassian.com/confluence-cloud/docs/comment-on-pages-and-blog-posts/
hartm (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:47:39 GMT):
+1 to @shemnon on this!
hartm (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:49:03 GMT):
There is a distinction between "open source software" and "open source *development*."
arsulegai (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 15:01:59 GMT):
@davidwboswell @rjones can we accommodate few min in our next week's call?
shemnon (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 15:11:49 GMT):
I think one good exercise for current and former TSC members is if they can think of a reason they would vote no for a project incubation proposal, add that reason maybe some exposition to https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Incubation+entry+considerations
shemnon (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 15:12:23 GMT):
(and by exposition I mean how to turn that no into a yes)
davidwboswell (Thu, 01 Jul 2021 15:16:56 GMT):
@arsulegai -- to talk about wiki stuff? Sure, there would be time for that.
seanyoung (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 09:33:54 GMT):
I'd like to make a suggestion. Would it be possible have github changes (PR opened, PR merged, issue created etc) to become notifications in element channels? It's great to have activity on github more publicised.
Forgive me if this isn't the right channel for this (I'm not sure where this should go).
seanyoung (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 09:33:54 GMT):
I'd like to make a suggestion. Would it be possible have github changes (PR opened, PR merged, issue created etc) to become notifications in rocketchat channels? It's great to have activity on github more publicised.
Forgive me if this isn't the right channel for this (I'm not sure where this should go).
arsulegai (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 13:35:11 GMT):
Thanks for the suggestion @seanyoung #community-architects would be more appropriate for this question. We have a similar tracker in https://start-here.hyperledger.org. Pull Requests for Solang https://start-here.hyperledger.org/pull-requests/hyperledger-labs/solang. This tool also tracks good first issues from GitHub and releases from last 7 days.
seanyoung (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 14:31:07 GMT):
@arsulegai that's interesting, thanks for pointing that out. It's not quite what I had in mind, let's discuss this further in #community-architects
rjones (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 14:51:04 GMT):
@seanyoung I would love to do that - rocket.chat is going away next quarter, so I would caution against building on it
seanyoung (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 14:52:05 GMT):
@rjones ah interesting. Yes no point in building on rocketchat then. What's the replacement?
rjones (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 14:52:20 GMT):
matrix
seanyoung (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 14:53:17 GMT):
Right, great choice. :thumbsup:
shemnon (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 15:59:36 GMT):
Q3 or Q4?
rjones (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 16:21:35 GMT):
We're behind one project right now; that isn't an answer to your question, but I would bet Q3
shemnon (Tue, 06 Jul 2021 16:21:56 GMT):
:+1:
rjones (Wed, 07 Jul 2021 16:08:53 GMT):
did I cancel the wrong meeting - is there no TSC call this week?
Helen_Garneau (Tue, 13 Jul 2021 13:25:47 GMT):
Hello TSC! Reminder to please attend the DevRel Marketing Committee call at 9am PT tomorrow- 7/14. Take a look at the agenda and add items if you'd like here: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/x/sANCAw
arsulegai (Tue, 13 Jul 2021 13:51:08 GMT):
I have a conflict in my calendar. I will miss DevRel Marketing Committee call
hartm (Wed, 14 Jul 2021 14:55:43 GMT):
I already managed to double-book myself during that time slot :(. Sorry.
tkuhrt (Thu, 15 Jul 2021 14:39:01 GMT):
@lehors : In the last meeting, you asked us to add our name so you knew who added each item.
lehors (Thu, 15 Jul 2021 14:39:26 GMT):
ok, thanks for reminding me :)
rjones (Thu, 22 Jul 2021 14:10:39 GMT):
https://chat.lfx.linuxfoundation.org/#/room/#hyperledger-tsc:chat.lfx.linuxfoundation.org
rjones (Thu, 22 Jul 2021 14:10:39 GMT):
https://chat.lfx.linuxfoundation.org/
rjones (Thu, 22 Jul 2021 14:56:52 GMT):
Should I mark this room read-only?
hartm (Thu, 22 Jul 2021 15:01:16 GMT):
+1 to Tracy.
arsulegai (Thu, 22 Jul 2021 18:33:28 GMT):
With a redirection link and redirection notices to matrix server. Quick question, are all these conversations archived?
rjones (Thu, 22 Jul 2021 18:38:28 GMT):
sort of. I did an export of the previous slack instance, and approximately nobody ever used it
rjones (Thu, 22 Jul 2021 19:21:14 GMT):
https://github.com/ryjones/hyperledger-slack-archive
tkuhrt (Thu, 22 Jul 2021 20:27:50 GMT):
I am having some problems looking at past messages in the Element client. Please see my note in the hyperledger-community-architects room before we get read only here. There may be problems with the matrix server.
lnuon (Fri, 23 Jul 2021 14:53:48 GMT):
Bumping up a recent request sent asking for participation in the survey on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in open source LF has launched in partnership with AWS, CHAOSS, Comcast, Fujitsu, GitHub, GitLab, Hitachi, Huawei, Intel, NEC, Panasonic, Renesas, Panasonic, Red Hat, and VMware. I took it in under 15mins. Your participation and social media shares would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.research.net/r/PZCK6NF?utm_content=173233166&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin&hss_channel=lcp-208777
arsulegai (Fri, 23 Jul 2021 19:14:08 GMT):
Did we ever face an issue of record keeping? Use a conversation that occurred here as a proof for something.
rjones (Fri, 23 Jul 2021 20:51:24 GMT):
no. chat is supposed to be ephemeral; the only time it was an issue was providing evidence for a COC violation
hartm (Thu, 05 Aug 2021 14:54:29 GMT):
@mastersingh24 Are you OK?
hartm (Thu, 12 Aug 2021 14:17:19 GMT):
Is a manual registration process actually going to be easier on the staff?
rjones (Thu, 19 Aug 2021 14:23:48 GMT):
Please join us on the new chat system! Use the same LFID: https://chat.lfx.linuxfoundation.org/
C0rWin (Thu, 28 Oct 2021 14:17:12 GMT):
Has joined the channel.
rjones (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 14:59:41 GMT):
https://zoom.us/j/91447530149?pwd=NWRNQ1BhRjhQd29GNTdUcmVSTWNKQT09
nage (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:22:06 GMT):
Jim++. When the TSC is the natural place to go looking for help, it is up to us to make sure it is a good place to get that help.
Bobbijn (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:27:09 GMT):
Yes to a Discord presence !
lehors (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:29:25 GMT):
my teenage son and his friends are on discourse, does that matter? ;-)
arsulegai (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:37:13 GMT):
Find everything in one place (a community forum) that lists all possible means of asking questions/reaching out to others within the community -> redirect people to respective chat platform (to directly talk to somebody)
arsulegai (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:37:44 GMT):
Like the way one adds their social handlers in the email signature.
nage (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:41:18 GMT):
Moving is hard and painful. It’s okay to move, but let’s do it once not over and over.
shemnon (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:42:26 GMT):
For an animated discord server gif we would need to fist animate the hyperledger logo.
rjones (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:43:03 GMT):
you use what animation tools you have, buddy
Bobbijn (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:43:06 GMT):
Grace, count me in !
arsulegai (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 16:00:52 GMT):
Question to the staff: Any areas to focus on and build as a community, as an outcome of the recent member summit?
tkuhrt (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 16:08:16 GMT):
Reminder: If you are interested in the Chat System task force, please let @grace.hartley know.
tkuhrt (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 16:08:37 GMT):
@grace.hartley : Sign me up to help
nguyer (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 16:34:48 GMT):
@grace.hartley If you're open to non-TSC members being part of the task force, I'm happy to help
grace.hartley (Thu, 11 Nov 2021 16:47:45 GMT):
yes, definitely @nguyer! will add you to the list
Bobbijn (Fri, 12 Nov 2021 12:54:02 GMT):
Count me in
arsulegai (Fri, 12 Nov 2021 18:37:16 GMT):
I am interested in this activity, count me in and let me know anyway to help out.
grace.hartley (Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:28:20 GMT):
As discussed in last week's TSC meeting, we are kicking off the Hyperledger Community Chat Task Force. The goal of this Task Force is to provide a recommendation around the chat channel(s) Hyperledger will use moving forward. The first meeting for the group will be tomorrow from 1 to 2 PM ET. Anyone is welcome to join the Task Force. https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/viewevent?eventid=1335444&calstart=2021-11-17
nguyer (Tue, 16 Nov 2021 18:43:23 GMT):
Thanks! I would love to attend, but unfortunately have a company-wide event at this time tomorrow. I'll try to catch the next meeting though
knagware9 (Wed, 17 Nov 2021 08:09:34 GMT):
count me in
rjones (Wed, 17 Nov 2021 22:52:21 GMT):
Howdy Task Force: Chat members. If you go here: https://gist.github.com/ryjones/ea023d5dd2a589e2ee8ece0f83f4d17e , the channel list is sorted such that typing in "fabric" will show you the most-used Fabric channels.
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 10:23:56 GMT):
Strange issue
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 10:23:57 GMT):
Clipboard - November 18, 2021 3:53 PM
rjones (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 14:55:06 GMT):
huh
lehors (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:11:06 GMT):
very good point Danno
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:11:08 GMT):
Ran late from my previous meeting
lehors (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:13:38 GMT):
I'll report that back to the OSSF vulnerability WG
lehors (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:14:14 GMT):
my network connection went down...
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:23:27 GMT):
How about we create core-maintainer's mailing list?
rjones (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:23:42 GMT):
maintainers@ exits
rjones (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:23:42 GMT):
maintainers@ exists
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:24:11 GMT):
I meant, each project having their own list. That is protected (only the right maintainers who are responsible are part of it).
lehors (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:24:18 GMT):
yeah, that specific page (hackerone) prompts for a login
lehors (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:24:42 GMT):
sorry I was responding to Ry
rjones (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:25:19 GMT):
@arsulegai I would love to have a list of maintainers; that doesn't easily exist
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:26:02 GMT):
This might help us solve few of the concerns popping up. Just a thought ~ maybe security concerns can also be circulated through this core list.
rjones (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:26:04 GMT):
If https://github.com/petermetz/github-organization-automation-tool worked, it would (eventually) give us one
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:28:31 GMT):
Does this tool extract maintainer's email from the commit and create a TO list?
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:28:47 GMT):
(sorry, README.md is not helping to understand the purpose)
Bobbijn (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:28:59 GMT):
Here is a link: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard
lehors (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:29:55 GMT):
https://github.com/ossf/scorecard
rjones (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:32:32 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Hyperledger+Community+Chat+Taskforce
rjones (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:33:08 GMT):
[calendar link](https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/viewevent?repeatid=40681&eventid=1336560&calstart=2021-12-01)
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:34:06 GMT):
@lehors I guess we all heard you at the end :)
rjones (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:34:29 GMT):
I didn't hear anything
lehors (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:34:35 GMT):
what?
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:35:23 GMT):
It sounded like unwilling "bye" to the call
arsulegai (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:35:39 GMT):
Happy Thanksgiving & a holiday season
lehors (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:36:19 GMT):
ah, no, didn't mean to sound anything special
lehors (Thu, 18 Nov 2021 15:36:25 GMT):
just saying goodbye :)
knagware9 (Mon, 22 Nov 2021 03:54:12 GMT):
I am able to access this and searching "fabric" gives list of most used fabric channels in descending order with no.of msg and users
arsulegai (Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:05:06 GMT):
I am running late, apologies for late notification.
grace.hartley (Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:30:17 GMT):
Congrats Bobbi, Nicko and team! Super cool project
hartm (Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:44:11 GMT):
lol @nage
nage (Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:45:16 GMT):
And Ry++. He is the one that set the calendar straight.
nage (Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:45:53 GMT):
“The ancient times” 🤪
davidwboswell (Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:49:22 GMT):
Maintainer's mailing list is at: https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/maintainers
troyronda (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:05:52 GMT):
Is there an updated zoom link?
troyronda (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:06:42 GMT):
Found it.
arsulegai (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:08:25 GMT):
Welcome Sean :)
arsulegai (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:10:34 GMT):
https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/viewevent?repeatid=40469&eventid=1324864&calstart=2021-12-16
hartm (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:10:40 GMT):
Glad to have you back Sean!
arsulegai (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:15:50 GMT):
That reminds me of a request I received in Hyperledger India Chapter. @grace.hartley is it possible to get help on Hyperledger Besu workshops for Indian community? There's a huge demand.
grace.hartley (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:16:35 GMT):
Definitely! We can chat offline. Happy to set up a call or maybe have a Besu maintainer join an India chapter meeting to talk about it.
hartm (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:16:56 GMT):
One thing that could help Firefly (and maybe others): ways to try to turn users into contributors. It seems Firefly has a lot of users and interest. Can this be turned into contributions?
arsulegai (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:17:36 GMT):
Burrow report is waiting since 15th November?
shemnon (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:17:50 GMT):
And they have received multiple pings via multiple channels
hartm (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:21:27 GMT):
@rjones If it's OK, I will coordinate with you to set up the wiki page for project meeting attendance.
arsulegai (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:24:11 GMT):
That would be wonderful, I will reach out offline.
hartm (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:27:23 GMT):
@shemnon Good point! Although it seems like inflation might be a steady state....
shemnon (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:28:23 GMT):
That was the subtle joke, it's been call transitory but it's just the degree it exists at.
arsulegai (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:43:00 GMT):
Dormant sounds like an informed decision.
shemnon (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:45:37 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Add+Dormant+State+to+the+Project+Lifecycle
rjones (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:50:09 GMT):
@hartm sure thing!
arsulegai (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:53:10 GMT):
What is making TSC attendance go down?
arsulegai (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:53:10 GMT):
What is causing TSC attendance go down?
arsulegai (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:53:10 GMT):
What is causing TSC attendance to go down?
shemnon (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:53:39 GMT):
For america and europe I would say christmas holiday slowdown.
shemnon (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:53:39 GMT):
For americae and europe I would say christmas holiday slowdown.
shemnon (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:53:39 GMT):
For americas and europe I would say christmas holiday slowdown.
tkuhrt (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:55:29 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Hyperledger+Security+Task+Force
tkuhrt (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:56:05 GMT):
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Hyperledger+Community+Chat+Taskforce
tkuhrt (Thu, 16 Dec 2021 17:42:22 GMT):
Opened https://github.com/hyperledger/tsc/issues/22 for your review and comments
SeanBohan (Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:55:13 GMT):
glad to be back!
jimthematrix (Thu, 30 Dec 2021 15:07:07 GMT):
is the TSC call happening today? I still see the calendar entry but on zoom I don't see anybody else
jimthematrix (Thu, 30 Dec 2021 15:08:56 GMT):
going to assume it's canceled for today as I see the agenda was only created for up to 12/16
jimthematrix (Thu, 30 Dec 2021 15:09:19 GMT):
Happy New Year everyone!
rjones (Wed, 05 Jan 2022 17:59:21 GMT):
Notes page for chat task force call today: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TF/Notes+on+05+JAN+2022+call
arsulegai (Thu, 06 Jan 2022 15:12:49 GMT):
+1 Arnaud
hartm (Thu, 06 Jan 2022 15:35:28 GMT):
I think one of the underlying issues here is that a lot of the projects and the project contributors don't feel a tight connection to the TSC (or that they benefit much by keeping the TSC informed). Lots of people on this call (e.g. Tracy, Bobbi) have given good evidence that projects do benefit from keeping the TSC informed, but I'm not sure some of the projects and contributors see this or are aware of this. I think that if we can delineate more benefits of keeping the TSC informed, then we will have less issues with late or nondescriptive quarterly reports.
hartm (Thu, 06 Jan 2022 15:37:23 GMT):
Another point: inactive projects that aren't doing their quarterly reports should clearly be considered for dormancy. But what about relatively active projects that aren't submitting their quarterly reports on time? It seems like we still have some of those.
hartm (Thu, 06 Jan 2022 15:44:37 GMT):
@rjones Thanks Ry!
tkuhrt (Thu, 06 Jan 2022 16:27:54 GMT):
I found the [original proposal on project reports](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yUGD1bKPk1APsgZwMKrBDzpl98x8nr0k3IPJhJnawOU/edit). The goal of the project reports was listed as follows:
> To access the health and status of the projects under the Hyperledger umbrella.
tkuhrt (Thu, 06 Jan 2022 16:29:01 GMT):
And the [mailing list thread on the proposal](https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/topic/17552056#854). I am sure there is a recording of the discussions in the TSC from that time
rjones (Thu, 06 Jan 2022 16:33:08 GMT):
@tkuhrt I thought of another way that history changes - a long-lived PR, when merged, will change history
tkuhrt (Mon, 10 Jan 2022 21:51:09 GMT):
Hello, TSC members. Does anyone have suggestions for projects, WGs, SIGs, or a lab that would like to present at this week's TSC call? At the moment, I only have one item on the agenda : The Importance of TSC Quarterly Project Updates.
knagware9 (Tue, 11 Jan 2022 07:02:40 GMT):
I think we should invite Climate action SIG, they are doing good stuff
knagware9 (Tue, 11 Jan 2022 07:03:06 GMT):
Can I ask them?
tkuhrt (Tue, 11 Jan 2022 14:57:45 GMT):
Yes, please
tkuhrt (Tue, 11 Jan 2022 14:58:10 GMT):
Even if they cannot make this week, let's get them on the calendar for a future call
tkuhrt (Tue, 11 Jan 2022 14:59:53 GMT):
Although, I may have another presentation scheduled for this week, but it has not yet been confirmed
tkuhrt (Tue, 11 Jan 2022 15:20:29 GMT):
Looks like the other presentation wants to push back by a month. Let me know if I should add the Climate Action SIG this week or at a later time.
knagware9 (Tue, 11 Jan 2022 16:10:20 GMT):
Sure @tkuhrt
arsulegai (Wed, 12 Jan 2022 11:27:22 GMT):
@tkuhrt we now have concrete information and plans to run Hyperledger Challenge. Request to accommodate @Nancy @Andrea @Erik
knagware9 (Wed, 12 Jan 2022 13:43:41 GMT):
talked to Climate SIG team, they are not available this week TSC meeting. I will ask them for next week.
tkuhrt (Wed, 12 Jan 2022 14:32:11 GMT):
I will add Hyperledger Challenge to the agenda
knagware9 (Wed, 12 Jan 2022 15:28:18 GMT):
Next week TSC 20th Jan Clima SIG chair & co-chair will join..can be added to TSC agenda
arsulegai (Wed, 12 Jan 2022 17:20:21 GMT):
Thanks
arsulegai (Thu, 13 Jan 2022 15:44:18 GMT):
@hartm what if the project starts to think that they do not have an issue, so no reports are needed?
hartm (Thu, 13 Jan 2022 15:45:29 GMT):
@arsulegai I think that's already what some projects think. Some of the reports are quite minimal.
arsulegai (Thu, 13 Jan 2022 15:51:11 GMT):
Having to send reports is also an indicator to the project to strive towards graduation. Projects get constantly reminded on what's next.
rjones (Thu, 13 Jan 2022 16:00:36 GMT):
https://challenge.hyperledger.org/
hartm (Thu, 13 Jan 2022 19:00:33 GMT):
This is opening up a whole different can of worms, and one that David's diagram addresses. I don't think there are enough incentives at this point to strive for graduation, and this is something we can't solve only with reports. Maybe we could try to have some kind of timeframe and help projects project where they should be? If you have any suggestions on this, it would be wonderful.
rjones (Thu, 13 Jan 2022 20:29:15 GMT):
time limit on how long you can be in incubation status, before you are transferred to labs?
arsulegai (Fri, 14 Jan 2022 05:08:11 GMT):
That’s brutal on projects? Let’s try incentive before punishment 😄
hartm (Fri, 14 Jan 2022 05:13:30 GMT):
I'd worry that a time limit would be much too brutal. Seeking approval for the TSC for graduation would be a huge swing: get in, and your project is approved. Don't, and you go back down to labs, which may kill your project. Imagine if you're using things (i.e. CI/CD) provided by Hyperledger extensively for projects in incubation and then lose those because you go back down to labs? People would probably just quit Hyperledger. My guess is that, in practice, this would just lead to project consolidation (projects that are on the bubble would join a related project--and mostly act independently still--rather than go through the graduation hurdle).
arsulegai (Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:01:06 GMT):
Could you please also help us with a new RocketChat channel?
rjones (Fri, 14 Jan 2022 17:21:09 GMT):
#challenge is there now
hartm (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:33:19 GMT):
As I understand it, a lot of the work that was being done in Avalon is now being done in https://confidentialcomputing.io/,'
rjones (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:34:34 GMT):
@lehors Unarchived :)
lehors (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:34:51 GMT):
:)
lehors (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:35:09 GMT):
well, that may not have been necessary because I expect that's the way it's going to be
rjones (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:37:02 GMT):
well, your point about updating the landing page is correct, so that needs to be done
lehors (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:37:24 GMT):
ok
lehors (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:39:14 GMT):
+1 to Tracy
lehors (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:39:35 GMT):
I don't think we should go out of our way to keep such projects alive
lehors (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:39:52 GMT):
if there are people interested they are welcome to step forward
lehors (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:40:07 GMT):
and we can then revisit the project status
arsulegai (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:42:26 GMT):
Shall we mark the project as Dormant for 6 months instead of Deprecation?
rjones (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:43:13 GMT):
I think that is misleading - there is no plan to revisit Avalon in the future
arsulegai (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:43:48 GMT):
Ok
lehors (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:46:15 GMT):
in case anyone is wondering, this is CCC: https://confidentialcomputing.io/
hartm (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:46:38 GMT):
I think the CCC is the best place to link, and the best story: the contributors to Avalon actually went there, and it's nice to know that they didn't just lose interest in the project--they just moved it to a more appropriate venue in the Linux Foundation.
hartm (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:47:22 GMT):
I suspect that this isn't the last time that this will happen within Hyperledger and the LF: we will probably have considerable overlap with some of the things that the OpenSSF is looking to build around identity, for instance.
lehors (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:47:57 GMT):
I suggest Hart volunteers for the PR :)
rjones (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:52:59 GMT):
I would appreciate it :)
rjones (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 15:53:21 GMT):
I was thinking about making a new, empty branch that only has the README and making it the default
hartm (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 16:03:07 GMT):
I am swamped. Can I do it this weekend?
rjones (Thu, 20 Jan 2022 16:05:52 GMT):
Sure
Daniela_Barbosa (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:10:33 GMT):
Min Yu, who manages our Mentorship Program and presented the mentorship program today also worked closely with the mentors and mentees to write up and record presentations. please check them all out here and help promote this great work in our community: https://www.hyperledger.org/category/hyperledger-mentorship-program
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:15:17 GMT):
@arsulegai I'm assuming this is about the performance sand box lab?
grace.hartley (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:21:38 GMT):
+1 to translations of documentation for graduated projects - Besu would like that
arsulegai (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:24:21 GMT):
Yes
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:24:53 GMT):
Thanks for spotting this and encouraging collaboration!
arsulegai (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:25:24 GMT):
I have a suggestion, it may not directly come under TSC scope. Would sponsoring additional developers to graduated projects be an option?
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:25:58 GMT):
Probably not?
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:26:11 GMT):
It's not something that has ever been done before.
arsulegai (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:27:51 GMT):
How about helping out on routine tasks?
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:27:53 GMT):
If there is some kind of expertise needed (i.e. a project needs a little bit of time from a security expert), then maybe this would be something we could help with graduated projects?
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:28:27 GMT):
I'm not sure that HL will be able to fund general development though.
arsulegai (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:28:28 GMT):
Ex: Project management, release management etc
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:29:35 GMT):
I think we can pretty reasonably require that projects graduate from incubation before we fund translation efforts.
arsulegai (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:38:28 GMT):
I always forget to announce at the beginning of the call :) ~ wanted to remind the TSC for tomorrow's Security Process Update Task Force meeting. Maybe I will raise hand at the end of this call.
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:45:31 GMT):
You're doing great @rjones !
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:46:02 GMT):
What time is that tomorrow again?
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:46:11 GMT):
Sorry for my calendar delinquency :(
arsulegai (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:47:12 GMT):
8:00 AM Pacific https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/tsc/message/3666
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:47:48 GMT):
Awesome, thanks! That's what I thought but I wanted to make sure.
Daniela_Barbosa (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:57:47 GMT):
https://community.lfx.dev/ LFX Community Forum
hartm (Thu, 27 Jan 2022 17:23:46 GMT):
www.fa
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 14:28:16 GMT):
@tkuhrt Raul is available to join today's TSC. After the announcements, if we can let him speak up for a short time, he can express his concerns.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 14:28:16 GMT):
@tkuhrt Raul is available to join today's TSC meetings. After the announcements, if we can let him speak up for a short time, he can express his concerns.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 14:29:49 GMT):
He just confirmed his participation a while ago.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 14:34:46 GMT):
Context: Raul (is from another project within The LF) had reached out to Alfonso for collaboration with Hyperledger community.
hartm (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:11:41 GMT):
@shemnon I think projects typically tend to overstate their healthiness in the quarterly reports. This is a good reason why we should put concrete metrics on the quarterly reports rather than ask the maintainers.
shemnon (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:12:02 GMT):
Yes, I'm sure they overstate. Some of those may be aspirational overstatements too.
hartm (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:12:13 GMT):
I'm actually quite happy that the Explorer team was straightforward with their report. It will help them more than just saying everything is fine.
shemnon (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:12:45 GMT):
And explorer's response is why I feel we should take report status at face value.
hartm (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:39:59 GMT):
@lehors Agreed. I think that we should let projects that decide to go dormant determine how long they want to stay dormant (contingent upon their support for critical fixes, etc.). The projects where the TSC has to intervene because literally no one is working on the project probably should go directly to end of life.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:40:44 GMT):
Shall we grant the status in 3 months chunks?
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:41:19 GMT):
i.e. A project can be dormant for 3 months, they will have to apply for it again at the end of 3 months
hartm (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:44:33 GMT):
These reports are great!
hartm (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:45:58 GMT):
@arsulegai As long as the maintainers are still fixing things, I don't know that it's necessary to have them keep reapplying for dormant status. In practice, I would imagine that maintainers still working on a project would quit when all of the major dependencies have updated to not use the project, and this may not be easily determined.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:52:28 GMT):
How about asking those passive maintainers to have a minimal summary report (in the regular report cycle)? It can be a yes or no to a bunch of questions or one word replies. This will keep us informed of what's coming. It will keep the maintainers engaged.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:52:28 GMT):
@hartm for that, how about asking those passive maintainers to have a minimal summary report (in the regular report cycle)? It can be a yes or no to a bunch of questions or one word replies. This will keep us informed of what's coming. It will keep the maintainers engaged.
hartm (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:53:47 GMT):
@lehors I think one of the best outcomes here is that we could "Tom Sayer" insights into doing this work for us...
hartm (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:53:47 GMT):
@lehors I think one of the best outcomes here is that we could "Tom Sawyer" insights into doing this work for us...
lehors (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:55:23 GMT):
that would be good
hartm (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:55:42 GMT):
@arsulegai I'm hesitant to ask maintainers who are trying to quit and not do work to actually do more work. Maybe a very minimal form like you suggest would do the trick.
nage (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:56:25 GMT):
I like the idea of an EOL coach better than asking maintainers who are feeling burned out to do more
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 16:00:17 GMT):
Nicer idea @nage . Connect with coach once every 3 months. No reports, the coach can help prepare a report.
arsulegai (Thu, 03 Feb 2022 16:00:17 GMT):
Nicer idea @nage . Connect with coach once every 3 months. No reports needed from the maintainers, the coach can help prepare a report. To be honest, we can be firm asking maintainers to do this as a least while during Dormant. If they feel that their intentions are tending towards no more support, it gives us sooner indications. TSC can then propose a EOL for them.
rjones (Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:34:01 GMT):
https://discord.gg/hyperledger if you want to join
grace.hartley (Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:41:33 GMT):
To address one of Arnaud's point regarding ensuring the migration is successful, we do have milestones and check ins for a successful migration path. We are also recommending the TSC play a role in checking in on the process for the projects over the transition period with the quarterly reports process.
rjones (Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:53:37 GMT):
https://github.com/ryjones/hyperledger-slack-archive
