Tracy Kuhrt: All right. Welcome everybody to the January 26 Hyper Ledger Technical Oversight Committee call.
Tracy Kuhrt: as you are all aware, 2 things that we must divide by on the call. The first is the antitrust policy. Notice that is currently displayed on the screen.
Tracy Kuhrt: and the second is our code of conduct which is linked to the agenda
Tracy Kuhrt: for announcements. Today we have the Standard Hyper Ledger that weekly developer newsletter that goes out each Friday. If you have something that you would like to reach the hundreds of hyper ledger developers that we have in the community.
Tracy Kuhrt: Please leave a comment on the Wiki page that is linked in the agenda.
Tracy Kuhrt: Any other announcements that anybody has for today?
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay, I will take that as a. No.
Tracy Kuhrt: So for quarterly reports we
Tracy Kuhrt: still have the outstanding. Q. 4 Hyper Ledger Orsa reports we
Tracy Kuhrt: I have the Saw Tooth report that's coming in today. I did get reached out to you from the folks there.
Tracy Kuhrt: currently working on a release, and then they will get to the report, probably later today. So we should expect to see that coming in
Tracy Kuhrt: check your inboxes, or your task list to see when that does show up.
Tracy Kuhrt: And then Steven was
Tracy Kuhrt: ahead of schedule. I guess it got us the Hyper Ledger areas report ahead of schedule. So I saw that a number of people have had the opportunity to review that already.
Tracy Kuhrt: If you haven't that one is waiting for your review.
But for those who have had a chance. Are there any questions on the Hyper Ledger areas report
Tracy Kuhrt: that anybody has?
Tracy Kuhrt: It looks like we just have some updates for the
Tracy Kuhrt: data from the Insights report that needs to come in on that. So we'll expect that
Tracy Kuhrt: update it here hopefully, shortly.
Tracy Kuhrt: just laughing. I'm watching the participants come in, and we now have 2 people for a Hyper ledger Project folks. So I just
Tracy Kuhrt: It's amazing.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay. Anyway, Next next thing that we have on the agenda here is to talk about the move. The project reports to Github.
Tracy Kuhrt: so I think we're probably ready to make a decision on this today.
Tracy Kuhrt: I did see a number of people who have agreed to
Tracy Kuhrt: this on the chat, and have provided some input as to where they, I think these reports should be hosted.
Tracy Kuhrt: Any questions or comments that exist on this that we need to talk about in the meeting
Tracy Kuhrt: any concerns that anybody has, they'd like to bring up. I know. Last week the
Tracy Kuhrt: the concern was whether or not we would have any objections from people who submit project reports didn't see any that showed up on the chat.
Tracy Kuhrt: But any other comments or concerns that we have with this.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): So to see this, although I I am no problem. I just think that
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): obviously we will have to update the documentation so
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): well, I mean
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): I you know i'm thankful for buying me the effort to
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): collaborate on the process being proposed, which you didn't have. Initially, I think this all sounds good, but we need to capture that somewhere else. Then in my tissue eventually. Right?
Tracy Kuhrt: Correct. That is correct. We'll have to
Tracy Kuhrt: make sure that we redirect people to where they need to go to to create those project reports in the future.
Tracy Kuhrt: probably on the Wiki we'll. We'll put a link there directly, and then
Tracy Kuhrt: I think there's a few other places that we talk about. Project reports that we should consider either updating and or moving from the Wiki.
Tracy Kuhrt: I I think there was a
Tracy Kuhrt: document that we had wrote 2 years ago, maybe about the the value of these project reports, and why we create them
that could potentially be moved over to
Tracy Kuhrt: Github as well as just a kinda introduction for this particular section on the on the Toc site.
Tracy Kuhrt: But yeah, we'll definitely have to go through and see if there's any other places that we have to update.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): So the ways we had talked about reaching out to the projects. To us the Maintainer is the we have those reports. So they felt about it. But we haven't heard back from anybody.
Tracy Kuhrt: So I did reach out on the Maintainer's Discussion Channel. The only thing that I saw was a few people said, yeah, this looks good and a a few thumbs up.
Tracy Kuhrt: if you will. There, I didn't see anybody who objected to the
Tracy Kuhrt: request.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): so I just
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): you know it'll be interesting to see. I mean, people submit the next pro report on the Wiki
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): and Didn't get them able.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): Yeah, for sure, it will be a data point on how effective we are at reaching out to maintainer
Tracy Kuhrt: any other comments or concerns.
No, their comments? No, they're concerned.
Tracy Kuhrt: Did we want to make a motion for
Tracy Kuhrt: moving. The project reports to Github.
Marcus Brandenburger: This is Marcus speaking just one question. So what will happen with the existing project reports which we have on the Wiki? Do we also migrate them to get up to everything in the single place?
Ry Jones: That's my plan.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): Hi! How are you?
Ry Jones: I've already export them as
Ry Jones: HTML, and I use Pandoc to convert them to mark down.
Ry Jones: Those will come over time
Ry Jones: mostly because the
Ry Jones: HTML export doesn't preserve the voting status.
Ry Jones: So I need to.
Ry Jones: I said, voting status the checkbox status.
Ry Jones: So my plan is to move those over
Marcus Brandenburger: right, so that most probably will also mean that we will violate the proposed protocol in order to basically review and approve on Github all the existing project updates. I I guess.
Tracy Kuhrt: Yeah. So I think all the existing project updates.
Tracy Kuhrt: You know they've already obviously been approved by previous Tocs or Tsc. As the case may be. And so, yeah, I don't think we'll enough necessarily need to have everybody in this Poc. Approve those before we can
Tracy Kuhrt: get those merged over. I think that was your question. Right, Marcus.
Yes.
Tracy Kuhrt: or not
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): so. I I mean if there is a way to transfer the old stuff I mean the get up. I think it's great, but I
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): can. We just leave With that you can link
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): from Github to to the Wiki and say, for all the repos, go check that out over there.
Ry Jones: What I would like to do
Ry Jones: is mitigate this
Ry Jones: durability point to right.
Ry Jones: So we've we've lost founding documents.
Ry Jones: and I want to get them into. Get
Ry Jones: okay.
Ry Jones: I don't play on deleting them from the Wiki.
Ry Jones: But I just want to get them somewhere. Version controlled. That's not the Wiki.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): Okay.
it's fine. Thanks.
Tracy Kuhrt: Alright. Any other comments concerns questions before we go to a motion.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): so i'll move.
Tracy Kuhrt: Alright, I'll thank you.
Tracy Kuhrt: Oh.
Tracy Kuhrt: do we have a second?
Yes, I can.
Tracy Kuhrt: Alright, thanks. A room
Tracy Kuhrt: all right.
Tracy Kuhrt: So right. Do you want to just take us to a
Tracy Kuhrt: objection? Abstain, approve.
Ry Jones: sure
Ry Jones: all those who object, say nay.
Ry Jones: all those who abstain say.
Ry Jones: abstain
Ry Jones: all those who approve say, aye.
Ry Jones: the motion before the T Oc. Passes by Voice phone.
Tracy Kuhrt: All right, thanks, Ry.
Tracy Kuhrt: All right. So for our next agenda item. We have a discussion about some proposed task forces.
Tracy Kuhrt: so just to bring up to speed those who may not have been on the Toc. Last year
we had
Tracy Kuhrt: last year moved to running task forces during the second half of the Toc call.
with the first half being
Tracy Kuhrt: used for discussion and decisions, potentially depending on the agenda. We did tend to go beyond the half an hour mark, but
Tracy Kuhrt: the the intention really is to run task forces so that we're getting some work done by the Tosc.
Tracy Kuhrt: And
Tracy Kuhrt: how last year, I think we had
Tracy Kuhrt: 4 different task forces that we ran during the Toc.
Tracy Kuhrt: And then a number of those task forces also had, like off cycle meetings where they met and get got some work done outside of the Toc calls.
Tracy Kuhrt: So I think the the intention is to continue that practice here. We did have quite a lot of
Tracy Kuhrt: suggestions and and goals that people had in our first Poc meeting this year where we can possibly create some task forces. I did try to create a list of those I did have. Some people add to that list earlier in the week. And so
Tracy Kuhrt: you could see the full list here of proposed task forces
Tracy Kuhrt: that we're based on both our goals, discussions.
Tracy Kuhrt: and other things that are ongoing in the
Tracy Kuhrt: in the community. So I first wanted to start with a conversation about whether or not things look like
Tracy Kuhrt: the right set of task forces. I don't think we can
Tracy Kuhrt: obviously do all of them initially, but I think we can start with some of them, and then, as those close up. We can bring others on
Tracy Kuhrt: to the list.
Tracy Kuhrt: But I do want to see if, first of all, if there are others that we should be adding to this list.
Tracy Kuhrt: Bobby.
Bobbi Muscara: Yeah, I was looking at the list all week and kind of thinking and trying to get a higher view, looking down on these task forces, and I kind of think
Bobbi Muscara: the list we have when you start with the project best practices, I think out of that task force would flow the badging, the documentation, and possibly security, so that
Bobbi Muscara: you would
Bobbi Muscara: have the best practices and then possibly get badges for creating correct documentation guidelines. Again, the documentation would be a task force in and of itself, with the suggestions for the community to use.
Bobbi Muscara: You know the best practices would be decided, and by task, force or whatever. But there would be a place where people would be able to go to see
Bobbi Muscara: that everything for each project is badged, pro or, you know, awarded. The proper
Bobbi Muscara: badging is the lack of better work, and I think that those 3 kind of can be tied together into one. And then I have comments on on boarding for later. But that's just for those 3 right there for me. It just seems like they are kind of in the same family
Bobbi Muscara: comments.
Tracy Kuhrt: Yeah, Bobby, I I I agree with you. I think that project best practices is a very huge task force, and I do think we probably have to break it down into some sub task forces, because
Tracy Kuhrt: I I still, I think, like the best practices for automated pipelines might forward to project best practices as well, right.
Tracy Kuhrt: And and so you know, I I guess the question is, do we start with
Tracy Kuhrt: trying to figure out what all the best practices are that we want the projects to focus on and then create some task forces around those, or do we work on what might be the smaller task forces around documentation and automated pipelines
Tracy Kuhrt: and those feed up into the project Best practices task force at a later point.
Tracy Kuhrt: And I I I mean, I understand. I think I have the same sort of question in my mind, and so I I don't know which way is the best.
Tracy Kuhrt: Right. Is it breaking down the project best practices, or is it
Tracy Kuhrt: building up the pro project? Best best practices, if you will?
Tracy Kuhrt: Oh, no!
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): So for those of us who've been around for a while. You probably remember that
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): the way we define task forces with something along the lines of something that is.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): you know that as a very fairly narrow scope with a clear mission that is expected to be delivered in a fairly
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): bounded the time by night.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): and so, for that reason, I do think it's better to have smaller
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): scopes and like topics.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): I I do think that you know best practices is too broad.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): and
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): or it would have to be something that.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): as you were saying.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): the goal of which it becomes like spawning off other smaller task forces that are more now refocused.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): and and the experience shows that it's
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): much more. You get a lot more momentum when you have a fairly well defined. Now the scope that you can execute on and deliver quickly
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): because people get, you know you do get a boost that you know the satisfaction of having achieved something.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): and and and then people are encouraged to participate in more task forces, because you get a sense of achievement
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): rather than having some kind of really long winded the task force that just never seem to add, and it becomes much less obvious what you're achieving, and it can become.
Tracy Kuhrt: Yeah, I agree. I I put a link into the Task Force guide that we had created in the
Tracy Kuhrt: the chat for this meeting.
Tracy Kuhrt: and in that document it does talk about
being.
Tracy Kuhrt: The task Forces should last no longer than 6 months. As far as time to complete, they they have to have
Tracy Kuhrt: the introduction, and of what the task force is, and the tasks that are to be completed in the deliverables or or the work product. Right?
Tracy Kuhrt: So I I agree that we definitely want to make these things
Tracy Kuhrt: smaller as far as what it is that we're trying to accomplish with each of these task forces. And if we were to
Tracy Kuhrt: decide that the project best practices task force was something that we wanted to start with. Then it would.
Tracy Kuhrt: It would definitely be a case where I think we we start with on list right? That's the
Tracy Kuhrt: initial task that needs to be done. A list of what we believe these best practices are that we would include there.
Tracy Kuhrt: And, Dave, I know you have your hand up. You were also the one to recommend that in the goal, so would appreciate your thoughts on this as well.
David Enyeart: Yeah, Can you hear me?
David Enyeart: Yeah. So my intention with that one was not to boil the ocean into all project best practices under that task force, but to pull together some of the existing information that's in various places, so that it's like a a one's top shopping place where people can see everything, and then also have a structure such that we can link to other things as they come in with these other task forces.
David Enyeart: So I do see from that perspective it's kind of a focus thing just to pull together a structure of how we want to
David Enyeart: expose stuff to the outside world. But then, yeah, there'll be a lot of open items that the other task forces will complete over time
Tracy Kuhrt: all right this day.
Tracy Kuhrt: And oh, no, I guess back to your point right about smaller task forces. That's also why the security has 2 separate
Tracy Kuhrt: items that are listed there. I think even Hart had been talking about
Tracy Kuhrt: trying to make those, you know.
Tracy Kuhrt: discrete tasks that could be accomplished in the short timeframe that we would want from the task force so
Tracy Kuhrt: completely agree that we want things that are smaller in nature
Tracy Kuhrt: all right. If we could go back to the meeting record
Tracy Kuhrt: so that people can take a look at these.
Tracy Kuhrt: see if there's other ones that they think might be something that we want to include.
or
Tracy Kuhrt: possibly, you know.
Tracy Kuhrt: have. If anybody has questions on kind of what we think, these task forces might be.
Obviously that will be up to
Tracy Kuhrt: the chair to really define that. But you know.
Tracy Kuhrt: love to have any additional thoughts of other task forces that we might want to focus on short term.
Tracy Kuhrt: John.
John Carpenter: Yeah, thanks. I just wanted to comment on a little bit of you know where the learning materials Development working group is looking to go this year.
John Carpenter: And so we've talked about focusing on the onboarding task force, which is, I think, the fifth item down there.
John Carpenter: and really being able to get people who are interested in the hyper ledger ecosystem engaged, and being either contributors or
John Carpenter: maintainers.
John Carpenter: and then also looking at as part of that, delivering some educational content.
John Carpenter: That would be a regular series of meetups that can be promoted by Hyper Ledger. That we can, you know, continue to go through and provide educational or instructional content.
John Carpenter: And
John Carpenter: also, you know, just look at continuing to focus on the
John Carpenter: career fair that we've had for now 2 years in a row, and to make sure that that's on track for 2023, as well, so that'd be my only comments about task force this year.
Tracy Kuhrt: So so, John, I I guess I have a question. So the onboarding, the education
Tracy Kuhrt: pieces, those are distinct and separate task forces
Tracy Kuhrt: that you are thinking about doing in the learning materials, working group.
John Carpenter: Yes, and so the great thing is, Arun is on the call here, you know. He's done a great job of working on the start here.
John Carpenter: that hyper ledger Org.
John Carpenter: and you know, going ahead and collaborating with the run, and that team, and really continuing to build that out
John Carpenter: also providing some resources that are
John Carpenter: access to lot on the Hyper Ledger Org website.
John Carpenter: So people know, you know really what's popular content.
John Carpenter: and you know, making sure it's really a good onboarding experience. And if there are people that come to the community and want to get engaged.
John Carpenter: you know, being able to really point him in the right direction and get him going quickly.
John Carpenter: is the thing. And then
John Carpenter: I've also been conferring with Jim Sullivan around doing these instructional content workshops.
John Carpenter: and, you know, being able to have more
John Carpenter: of you know the library that we can offer to the Hyper Ledger community around these instructional workshops and including them in the Hyper Ledger, Youtube Channel.
Tracy Kuhrt: Go ahead.
Tracy Kuhrt: Bobby.
Bobbi Muscara: I first. I want to
Bobbi Muscara: just put it out there that John has stepped up to be the chair of the learning materials, working group and congratulations, and i'm so happy he's done that so hats off to to John for that
Bobbi Muscara: I was thinking with the new task force for the Toc. That documentation, and on boarding become one of those I would gladly take a leadership role in that and work with John in a room to to make that happen.
The onboarding definitely has to be
Bobbi Muscara: parsed out a little bit. I think you have on boarding citizens on boarding developers, on boarding, sig chairs on boarding Maintainer and on boarding poc members. So there's definitely a lot of onboarding that needs to be talked about and
Bobbi Muscara: determined. So again, those 2, John and I have, you know, worked well together, and we would gladly keep moving with those. So if anybody has any suggestions or
Bobbi Muscara: information that they would like to help us, and I I think the badging process might come from some of the work in those 2 task forces.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay, that's really interesting, Bobby. I think the
Tracy Kuhrt: I want it to see if maybe I can edit this list because you had on boarding sync shares
on boarding.
Tracy Kuhrt: You see, members
Bobbi Muscara: on boarding maintainers.
Bobbi Muscara: maintainers on boarding developers.
Bobbi Muscara: Okay, and citizens
Bobbi Muscara: people like me, who my first year here just was involved in calls, going to meet ups scheduling, meet ups, creating meet ups. You know we're not develop. We're we're. But you know just people who want to be in the community. Yeah, community members is a good.
Tracy Kuhrt: okay, Any other ones that I should include here.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay. So I just I wanted to capture that because I do think, as you look at, or as we look at these task forces, we should, as our know mentioned right, make sure that these are distinct and and small enough to
Tracy Kuhrt: to be covered
Tracy Kuhrt: in the 6 month time period that we have
Tracy Kuhrt: set up for task forces.
So I appreciate you kinda
Tracy Kuhrt: expanding those, if you will.
Tracy Kuhrt: David.
David Boswell: Thanks, Tracy, I plus one. I just wanted to plus one what both Bobby and John said, I totally agree that on Porting is a broad topic, so it's nice to we're clarifying what we're talking about. You're right, and the way we onboard. One of those groups is going to be different from the way we on board another. So that makes sense to me.
David Boswell: I also think the task force structure is going to be a a better format for the work that people in the learning materials working group want to do than perhaps the working group model itself. So I I think this will be an interesting experience to see if the task force brings more people into those efforts.
David Boswell: I also think it's great to try to combine those. I mean.
David Boswell: I think we've already mentioned it. But you know, for example, the work that a run and the India chapter has done around start here has been great, and the word the learning materials working group has been doing has been great, too, but those have been separate efforts, you know. I think it's much better to have one combined effort at bringing new people into the community than having multiple ones. So i'm
David Boswell: really excited that people seem interested in the onboarding task force, and then i'd i'd be happy to support all that.
Tracy Kuhrt: Alright, thanks, David.
Tracy Kuhrt: Yeah, I think the
Tracy Kuhrt: so. We talked about
Tracy Kuhrt: kind of the project best practices, Steven, You had suggested the automated best or the best practices for the automated pipelines as a goal
Tracy Kuhrt: to try and capture. So I I did include that here, hopefully that one is self explanatory to people.
Tracy Kuhrt: But, Steven, did you just want to remind people of what you.
Tracy Kuhrt: what you were thinking when you brought that up as a goal.
Stephen Curran: Sure, we're doing a lot on in in the various projects we have on
Stephen Curran: what I consider sort of reinventing and rediscovering what's the best way to
Stephen Curran: produce artifacts where to produce them, and so on. It also goes back to what our no talked about last week, which is, you know, handling dependencies and things like that, looking for You know what tools we're using for making sure our artifacts we're producing are safe.
Stephen Curran: So going through that we had a huge effort on Indy
Stephen Curran: to
Stephen Curran: basically redo what had been done, and it, you know, it was pretty expensive, but it was. It was
Stephen Curran: very manual and and difficult to use, and in bringing it up to to current best practices. I think I think it's there, and and
Stephen Curran: applying those would be very helpful. So that's that's sort of the idea about.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay.
Tracy Kuhrt: Dave, I added. These 2 bullet points to the project best practices. I think those were what you had suggested as what
Tracy Kuhrt: your intention was was to gather the current those practices
Tracy Kuhrt: and determined gaps
Tracy Kuhrt: that might exist, as did I capture that correctly, Dave. That looks good. Yeah. Okay. Great. So the badging life-site lifecycle one that exists here is one that
Tracy Kuhrt: we have talked about multiple times in the last.
Tracy Kuhrt: Well, I don't know. Probably ever since I started joining the Psc.
Tracy Kuhrt: Where we're we're trying to figure out how people can best determine the status of projects
Tracy Kuhrt: we've talked about potentially coming up with a number of different badges that people can make sure our current and and accurate. We've talked about, you know, is our life cycle the correct life cycle. Do we need to do anything to to change kind of the status of where projects are?
Tracy Kuhrt: Do we need to have some sort of
Tracy Kuhrt: yearly review cycle or or that sort of thing. And so I think this is a task force that I added specifically, because the governing board
Tracy Kuhrt: had a discussion in December
Tracy Kuhrt: regarding regarding this, and so I think it's something that they're sending back to us to take a another gut and see if we can get it
Tracy Kuhrt: right this year or not. So that's what that one is all about
Tracy Kuhrt: the documentation task force. I think there was some comments in our initial meeting about
Tracy Kuhrt: the
Tracy Kuhrt: one where we
Tracy Kuhrt: store our documentation and to the format of our documentation, and making them more consistent across the board.
Tracy Kuhrt: An and so I think that is what that particular task force is all about. Does anybody have any additional items that they remember from from the documentation?
Tracy Kuhrt: Oh, Bobby.
Bobbi Muscara: Yeah, I worked with that with one of the community members, Ben, and he did a great job. We just really don't know where to put it. It was more suggestions. And again, I know that it needs to be updated and needs to be looked at. But there was great momentum on that, just to make it easier for maintainers and developers to transfer their github stuff into
Bobbi Muscara: a you, not a uniform, but an accepted hyper ledger format with a lot of leeway for them to pick. You know their own styles and stuff, but just to give them some basic guidelines. So I think that that was one piece of the documentation task force, and then the other, where I think there might be
Bobbi Muscara: another opportunity, is with the documentation, almost like a hyper ledger library for people to go, and you know, not research, but look up. And yeah, research, actually
Bobbi Muscara: information that is available to the community.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay?
Tracy Kuhrt: And Steven.
Stephen Curran: Yeah, I was gonna add that a a bunch of the documentation challenge is the tooling involved in in publishing a decent.
Stephen Curran: The putting the documentation into a a format accessible to
Stephen Curran: the set of onboarding people that are listed below, and so common tooling for doing that, and just
Stephen Curran: being able to spin up a repo, and have.
Stephen Curran: you know, all of these things like the best practices for automated pipelines, but also documentation there. So it's more a checklist, and and and the ideas are already there of how to do it.
Stephen Curran: Read these to me, read these, and and mark down files or
Stephen Curran: so 2,018, and we have to get up to 23, and that means actually publishing these out to a more accessible in a more accessible way.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay.
right?
Ry Jones: One thing that we could do is Github does have
Ry Jones: template repose.
Ry Jones: So it would be.
Ry Jones: It's possible
Ry Jones: to
Ry Jones: have a, you know. Have a repo that's a template that contains all of that.
Ry Jones: and
Ry Jones: you know it might
Ry Jones: be overkill in some cases, because the first commit would be someone from the community immediately removing all the stuff that doesn't matter.
Ry Jones: I don't have a strong feeling about it.
Ry Jones: but
Ry Jones: you know it it is. It is something that's available.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay.
Tracy Kuhrt: thanks, Chris.
Tracy Kuhrt: All right.
Marcus.
Marcus Brandenburger: So when I think about documentation. So sometimes as a if I go to some documentations of several projects, so sometimes the scope of the documentation, I think it's not really clear, and maybe
Marcus Brandenburger: it depends on the lack of some guidelines to define. Okay, what should be in a good documentation for operators, for end users for just people who would like to get the the gist of a project.
Marcus Brandenburger: But the documentation for a new contributor to project a new developer should maybe look completely different.
Marcus Brandenburger: And
Marcus Brandenburger: so I think there.
Marcus Brandenburger: yeah, maybe some guidance on how to define certain scopes or the audience
Marcus Brandenburger: would be helpful.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay.
Tracy Kuhrt: great.
Tracy Kuhrt: All right. So moving down here to the supported project. So in the latest version of the charter.
Tracy Kuhrt: we introduced a concept called supported projects.
Tracy Kuhrt: Supported projects are
Tracy Kuhrt: those that have separate technical oversight, pursuant to a separate technical charter.
Tracy Kuhrt: and those projects are called supported projects in the Charter.
Tracy Kuhrt: 1 one of the things that we need to do is find all of the places where we need to update documentation
Tracy Kuhrt: of how we would deal with a supportive project
from the Technical Oversight Committee.
Tracy Kuhrt: For example, do we require quarterly reports from supported projects?
Tracy Kuhrt: What do we do when a incubated or a a new project? Proposal comes in for incubation.
Tracy Kuhrt: and we would
Tracy Kuhrt: be reviewing that
as far as
Tracy Kuhrt: the project that's coming in like, is there anything that we have to do to the lifecycle documentation, that sort of thing. Who's ever scrolling it at the very top in the very first section.
Tracy Kuhrt: It's the very last par paragraph of the section
Tracy Kuhrt: talks about supported projects. So those are the sorts of things that I was thinking about for that particular task force. It's just understanding what that truly means for us, as we now have those as part of the charter, and
Tracy Kuhrt: might expect to see some of those projects coming in. It would be good if we have an idea of how we want to handle those before they actually show up.
Tracy Kuhrt: So yeah, that's what that particular task force was intended to represent.
Tracy Kuhrt: And then I think the the last to our security task forces
Tracy Kuhrt: or no hard. I don't know if one of you want to talk about these from the perspective of what exactly. You were thinking here.
Hart Montgomery: I'm happy to talk or no. Do you want to talk?
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): No, it's all right. Go ahead. But so that's why I was. Paul said, You go first.
Jim Zhang: Oh, no, I just. I was still a little puzzled about this concept of this supported project. Maybe
Jim Zhang: someone can give an example.
Tracy Kuhrt: Yeah, I think the the example is, let's say we have a
Tracy Kuhrt: project that already has a brand associated with it.
Tracy Kuhrt: but they want to bring their source space into Hyper ledger.
Tracy Kuhrt: They want to basically be whatever project name a a hyper ledger project instead of Hyper ledger
Tracy Kuhrt: project name. And this is a supportive project they have. They will have their own technical charter
Tracy Kuhrt: that they will work under and beyond that i'm not sure that I can actually give you much more information about how that's going to work within Hyper Ledger, because we don't have it, and that's why I think this task force is is really important is to really try and understand.
Tracy Kuhrt: What would that look like for us as a project comes in? How do we approve that project?
Tracy Kuhrt: What's what additional steps would need to be taken to make sure that project is remaining healthy.
Tracy Kuhrt: and that there's nothing that we would want to do from a a to.
Jim Zhang: So that's like hosting it. But not only it is that the right way to understand it.
Jim Zhang: so the Source code will be hosted in hyperbolic repositories, but we Don't
Jim Zhang: Hyper Ledger does a quote unquote own that
Jim Zhang: the copyright of it, or the license of it, like we do with the regular projects.
Tracy Kuhrt: I believe that's correct, Daniela. Any thoughts on that.
Tracy Kuhrt: any additional ideas you can add beyond what
Tracy Kuhrt: has been said
Tracy Kuhrt: our heart, I don't know if what if you have a thought. To add to this.
Tracy Kuhrt: Can you repeat the question, please? I apologize.
Tracy Kuhrt: Projects that we would consider hosted by Harper Ledger, but not necessarily owned by a hyper ledger, or
Tracy Kuhrt: you know we're we're trying to understand them better, I guess, in this context. Yeah, they would be part of the Hyper Ledger foundation.
Daniela Barbosa: So they would be, you know, governed under the
Daniela Barbosa: talk.
Daniela Barbosa: but have their own project charters if they so do wish.
Daniela Barbosa: and the same, you know, governance and support project services, etc., that we have today for a hyper ledger. Xxx project would be applied in the same way.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): So what is the key difference?
Daniela Barbosa: The key difference is that they don't need to have
Daniela Barbosa: the name Hyper Ledger in front of their name.
Daniela Barbosa: It's a marketing. It's a marketing thing more than anything else.
Jim Zhang: Okay, and, Daniel, the fact that it's still governed by Toc. Does that mean how they elect maintainers? How that community grows would still follow.
Daniela Barbosa: As you know Hyper Ledger Firefly Project the same way that you know the maintainers are selected. The processes within that project are selected.
Daniela Barbosa: It's the same thing. Maintainers are kings here
Daniela Barbosa: and Queens
Gotcha.
Jim Zhang: Thanks.
Daniela Barbosa: Traces of that address. The question.
Tracy Kuhrt: Yeah, I think so, although I still think there's a bit of
Tracy Kuhrt: just confusion about what a separate technical charter truly means.
Tracy Kuhrt: you know. And you know, is there anything that's going to
Tracy Kuhrt: need to be a a concern for this poc and the sort of processes that we currently have around, you know. Would we expect these projects in projects to still report to the I mean, based on what you said, it sounds like yes.
Tracy Kuhrt: and so maybe there's not really any changes that have to occur here. But I just
Tracy Kuhrt: I feel like
when
Tracy Kuhrt: when we looked at the the technical charter that was created.
Tracy Kuhrt: I think, for the a non credits project that I don't know if we got rid of at this point
Tracy Kuhrt: I. I just feel like there were some concerns around what was stated in there, and the way in which it
Tracy Kuhrt: potentially conflict it with the Hyper Ledger charter and the toc processes.
Daniela Barbosa: It's got his hand up. I'll let him address that part.
Hart Montgomery: Yeah, Tracy, you're You're totally right. That
Hart Montgomery: the suggested charter that we thought about using for a non-credit was was not workable. But in response to the project, charters like one thing we want to encourage projects to do is to have more documentation about things like how maintainers are promoted, how releases are handled.
Hart Montgomery: You know what policies, you know.
Hart Montgomery: Does the project sort of use
Hart Montgomery: all of this stuff that would sort of be in a charter document.
Hart Montgomery: So one of the things we want to do is to to encourage projects to to document and have this.
Hart Montgomery: and while this isn't exactly a charter.
Hart Montgomery: it is sort of in the same vein and spirit. So we think that if we sort of encourage projects to to have stuff like this. It won't be too different
Hart Montgomery: from, you know. A supported project having its own charter in the long run.
Hart Montgomery: Does that make sense
Tracy Kuhrt: makes sense for me hard? I
Tracy Kuhrt: I think I get it.
Jim Zhang: Not sure everybody else does. But Jim did it. Yeah, so maybe the last question for me that that that that'll help me the the need for creating this new type of project is it to allow a rather mature community to come into high pleasure, but
Jim Zhang: maintain their own brand. That was basically why we need this, because it sounds like everything is the same.
Hart Montgomery: Yeah, that's one thing, you know. Another thing is we have. We've talked to projects that might be interested in coming into the Linux foundation.
Hart Montgomery: but
Hart Montgomery: they, you know they don't have enough, say you know, funding or whatever to become their own top-level project.
Hart Montgomery: and you know they're they're related to blockchain, but they're not, you know, specifically blockchain right.
Hart Montgomery: you know. For instance, if you had a project
Hart Montgomery: that was, you know, exclusively focused on 0 knowledge proofs right, you know. Hyper Ledger might be a good home. But you might not want to market that, as you know, specific or exclusive, to blockchain right? Because there are a lot of different other applications.
Hart Montgomery: So so that's sort of the another scenario we were thinking about.
Hart Montgomery: In addition to the branding one which you correctly bring up as an important one
Jim Zhang: that helps. Thanks.
Tracy Kuhrt: All right. So back to the security task forces that are listed here.
Tracy Kuhrt: And then I don't know who who won the the fight there was there on our heart.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): I can talk about it. It's okay. As a side note. I had a side conversation with with H, and I think he's suffering from the same.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): How to call that like a challenge that I used to have. And you know I used to encourage Why, to speak up on the Tsc. Calls You felt like well, as a staff member, it wasn't for him to speak up, and I think we have a lot more to gain
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): from ending those guys participate actively, they not? And so I've been saying, they said to Hart.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): since you know he especially he was a tech or Tsc. Member, and we benefited from a lot of his participation over the years, and I think he'd be ashamed that now, because he's on the staff side, he just becomes quiet all the time. So
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): with that saying, Sorry hot to put you on the spot. But I hope this way. You know it clears things out, you know, if anybody disagrees with you. But I would I'd be very surprised. Speak anyway.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): But so on this very point. The disclosure is what I've talked about before, which has to do with you know the openness as as published. Best practice guide, kind of thing that describes pretty
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): pretty in in pretty great details the kind of processes open source projects should have in place the kind of documentation they should have in place to handle Vin. Everything disclosures we bought from security researchers, for instance.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): and the process how to how you get into the actual dialogue, the communication, the protocol you should follow to to handle the those reports and the security researchers who, you know, by the way, are not the always.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): They're easy to deal with.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): Let's just put it this way. And so this task force is about looking at the very specific aspect of adopting this broadly within Hyper ledger.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): making sure you know, develop your policy
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): as to what that actually means to implement this across the board for the project to have.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): So how about that?
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): And if there's any question about this, otherwise I can talk about this on one.
Hart Montgomery: maybe, at your urging I'll jump in here or no.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): so
Hart Montgomery: you know, as all of you know, or many of You know, Arnold is heavily involved with the open Ssf.
Hart Montgomery: And you know they have a lot of nice tools.
Hart Montgomery: But one thing that we really noticed was that they didn't have, you know, a fantastic template
Hart Montgomery: for a vulnerability disclosure process.
Hart Montgomery: So what we'd like to do with the task force is to write.
Hart Montgomery: You know default.
Hart Montgomery: vulnerability.
Hart Montgomery: disclosure processes for hyper ledger projects
Hart Montgomery: that you know projects could use, and maybe we have one. Maybe we have a couple. But the idea is, we would have a
Hart Montgomery: defaults template for vulnerability disclosure processes and says that it says, you know. And the the idea is, basically do this unless you know you know what you're doing, and you have good reasons to do otherwise.
Hart Montgomery: So you know I went to the Open Ssf working group on vulnerability disclosures yesterday. Arnold was also there.
Hart Montgomery: They don't have this in quite the detail that they want yet, or that we want yet, or they want, and they're actually willing to work with us on this.
Hart Montgomery: So if we come back and say, hey, you know, can you help us with this? They've already said they would say yes, and we can push whatever outputs that we have, you know, as examples to the open Ssf: so you know we can sort of be like the
Hart Montgomery: you know the umbrella project, you know, for this, and you know, I think this this would be a a really good collaboration that could help both us
Hart Montgomery: and the open Ssf.
Hart Montgomery: You know, and and looking ahead, we also
Hart Montgomery: want to do something similar for the 6 store.
Hart Montgomery: which is the next topic. But i'll, you know i'll stop for now.
Hart Montgomery: are there any sort of questions on this?
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): Yeah, just I will add on this declar disclosure thing that you were just talking about. Essentially the document they publish
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): describes the process and tell you you need to publish your process, but they didn't go as far as actually giving you a template that you can just stop from
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): to to say. Okay, this is where we're into published, and maybe we need to make some adjustment, and that's what to what has been talking about.
Hart Montgomery: Exactly. Thanks for the clarification.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): So the the the last point on the Security artifact signing it has to do with this notion of, You know, a a big problem that you know we have today. There's all sorts of
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): artifacts, and this is meant to be very inclusive, but it refers to, you know, any kind of piece of software whether that container images with it. They are packages, you know, like a node, the Gs package or something.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): and
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): we include those with that much verification as to the providence of those packages, and
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): there is a series of tools now that are being developed to help with the process of
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): first signing those things, and then be able to verify those signatures when you on the consumer side. So, since we all produce in the Hyper major projects, artifacts such as container images and binaries.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): we should get into the process of signing all those artifacts, using some of the tools that are now available, they all open source they are free to use.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): There are, you know, infrastructures in place with servers that are for free to use that we can leverage for that purpose. So I think that's a kind of a low hanging fruit that we should. That is a best practice that we should definitely
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): stopped doing implementing and I for later.
Okay.
Tracy Kuhrt: thanks. I know for that.
Tracy Kuhrt: So now that we understand what all of these different task forces are Are there others that people think we've missed, or that we should potentially also include in our list to prioritize
Tracy Kuhrt: part
Tracy Kuhrt: part. You're on mute.
Hart Montgomery: I am on mute. Thank you so much.
Hart Montgomery: Do you know, if we could start jotting down people who are interested in the the task forces, it might be a good idea
Hart Montgomery: if we, you know.
Hart Montgomery: if if we keep track of you know, whoever is suggesting the task force might be an excellent person to lead the task force.
Tracy Kuhrt: Yeah. So I think, given the timing that we have, just noticing that we're about 5 min out from the end of this one.
Tracy Kuhrt: My thought was that we should do similar to what we did last year, where we voted
Tracy Kuhrt: to express interest in these, to see which one we which ones we might address. First.
Tracy Kuhrt: as I see
different task forces that we want to focus on, and then.
Tracy Kuhrt: you know, from there.
Tracy Kuhrt: Yes, maybe the the right lead is the one who initially suggested it, or somebody else wants to step up and actually need that task force.
Hart Montgomery: So how does that sound? Great sounds like a good plan. Thank you.
Tracy Kuhrt: All right. So my intent then would be to in the Tsc. Channel.
Tracy Kuhrt: create a a poll similar to what we did the pool, for
Tracy Kuhrt: where we should put the Github project reports.
Tracy Kuhrt: and then
Tracy Kuhrt: before next week, I want everybody to vote. Let's say, vote for your top 4
Tracy Kuhrt: in in what it is that you think is the most interesting and the ones that you want to prioritize for
Tracy Kuhrt: the start of this year, then we'll expect that the other ones
Tracy Kuhrt: we'll revisit in the second half of the year.
Tracy Kuhrt: As we move forward. So
Tracy Kuhrt: yeah, any thoughts or comments on that.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): Yeah, we see. I mean, does that imply? I mean, when we use it for
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): people
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): expressing an interest to participate in those task force as well. Right?
Tracy Kuhrt: Yes, for sure, for sure.
Arnaud J Le Hors ("Arno"): Because if he's just saying, yeah, yeah, you should. You guys should do that. But don't count on me to do it. The I. You know we might have things that get voted high, and we don't have actually enough people to do it. Then it's not very helpful.
So
Ry Jones: would it be more?
Ry Jones: Would this be better served as issues on the Toc. Repo.
Ry Jones: Because we can't really comment on polls.
Tracy Kuhrt: Sure, we can definitely do that, and a
Tracy Kuhrt: thumbs up on the issue. If you're interested in it.
Ry Jones: Yeah, or a comment, or whatever Say, I would like to share this or something.
Tracy Kuhrt: Exactly, yeah, definitely would love to have the people stand up to to be chairs.
Tracy Kuhrt: That'd be great.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay. So then I will create
Tracy Kuhrt: the issues for these. I'll send out a message to the Tsu Chat and ask you to
Tracy Kuhrt: vote. Slash, comment on the the ones that you want to participate in
Tracy Kuhrt: your promo.
Ramakrishna V: Yeah, sorry.
Ramakrishna V: Since the last Agf. Been considering, creating an interoperability task force. But we have other activities going on in probability, around the world, including trying for a having a working group under the it. So
Ramakrishna V: can I think about this further, and add to this list later or this list is going to be settings. Don't know
Tracy Kuhrt: no definitely. If If there's ever a task force that anybody thinks is something that we should focus on, we can always add those
Tracy Kuhrt: we do have that task force process. So I think, where it actually suggests creating an issue
Tracy Kuhrt: in the Tsc.
Tracy Kuhrt: Issue Tracker. So that's probably a a really good way to
Tracy Kuhrt: deal with that?
Ramakrishna V: Sure. Thanks.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay. Any other comments or questions before we close out the meeting.
Tracy Kuhrt: Okay.
Tracy Kuhrt: So then, with that we will close out for today. Thank you for the discussion and the
information on what each of these task forces should be in the
Tracy Kuhrt: expansion of those task forces as well.
Tracy Kuhrt: So have a great week. Everybody.
David Enyeart: thank you, bye. Thank you.