Context:
Hyperledger currently supports RocketChat for all of its community chat needs, but this technology is insufficient. The move to Matrix was met with challenges and abandoned. Hyperledger needs to determine a way forward for its community chat channels by the end of the year to ensure the Hyperledger community can scale with the projects within it.
Decision Points:
0. Should Hyperledger have an official chat platform?
- What platform should Hyperledger focus its efforts on (Discord, RocketChat, other)?
- Should the Hyperledger projects all operate on the same platform, or should they be allowed to choose a platform that best supports their community needs? Based on discussions in the TSC, we should not have multiple chat mechanisms within Hyperledger. (Ry: we already do - APAC is on WeChat, Iroha is primarily on Telegram, etc) (Tracy: We have one official chat for Hyperledger. The others are not mentioned on the Hyperledger website.)(Ry: good point - I propose decision 0 is "should Hyperledger have an official chat platform?")
- How do we keep chat channel choices visible and easy to find regardless of the platform or strategy we choose?
- What is the Linux/Hyperledger Foundation willing to spend on a chat platform?
- Ry: on the order of hundreds a month is OK.
- What support will be provided if we choose a chat platform that is not supported by the LFIT?
- What resources are able to be allocated to stand up any new chat platforms (or work through a migration plan)?
- What are the technical requirements for a migration?
- LFID authentication?
- Infrastructure hosting?
- What is the change management plan and deprecation plan (if any) for the current chat communities?
- Deprecation planning (for RocketChat)
- Communication plan
- Changes to hyperledger.org
- What requirements do the different projects within Hyperledger have?