2016 03 17 TSC Minutes

Owned by Ry Jones
Oct 01, 2019

Hyperledger Project

Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting

Hyperledger Hackathon Agenda 20160316.pptx

dummyfile.txt

March 17, 2016 (7:00am - 8:30am PT) via GoToMeeting

TSC Members

Emmanuel Viale

Accenture


Stan Liberman

CME Group

Yes

Tamas Blummer

DAH

Yes

Stefan Teis

Deutsche Boerse Group

Yes

Pardha Vishnumolakala

DTCC


Hart Montgomery

Fujitsu

Yes

Satoshi Oshima

Hitachi


Chris Ferris

IBM

Yes

Mic Bowman

Intel

Yes

David Voell

J.P. Morgan

Yes

Richard G. Brown

R3

Yes


Resources:


Agenda

  • White Paper Update (Dave Voell)
  • Code of Conduct (Arnaud Le Hors)
  • Technical F2F (3/22 - 3/25), Brooklyn, NY (Chris Ferris)
  • Linux Foundation IT Discussion (Steve Westmoreland)
  • Requirements WG Update (Patrick Holmes)


White Paper Update

  • Dave Voell is the editor
  • Chris Ferris laid out a potential outline for this white paper
  • For next week F2F, Dave will lead a breakout on this (looking for people to participate)
  • Please pre-read the IBM whitepaper, other versions are welcome, as well
  • OBC whitepaper is a good template and has done a good job of articulating plans
    • Scalability, confidentiality, privacy
    • Enterprise use cases -- many operating in regulated industries (big requirements there)
  • Q:  How do you want feedback on this?  Google docs comment?
    • Yes, Google docs works


Code of Conduct

  • Seems to be preference for W3C (not a landslide, but preference)
    • Majority prefer W3C
    • Also, more people object to CF version (only 1 disagrees with W3C)
  • The goal is to have a Code of Conduct to start moving on.  Suggest TSC to adopt W3C draft as a starting point.
    • Add a point about staying focused/on topic (from CF version)
    • Add a point about step down considerately -- if you leave the project, don’t just drop the ball, put a transition plan in place (from CF version)
  • TSC 6 in favor (Stan, Hart, Chris, Mic, Dave, Stefan), 1 abstain (Richard) -- W3C version with 2 additions above is approved as the Code of Conduct
  • Arnaud to make edits and work with Todd to get posted


Technical F2F (3/22 - 3/25), Brooklyn, NY


Linux Foundation IT Discussion

  • General discussion led by Steve Westmoreland, CIO, The Linux Foundation
    • LF IT provides a host of services to projects
    • Infra, security, web services, wiki, etc.
    • Github and Gerrit
    • Support both Travis CI and Jenkins CI functionality
    • Bug mgmt / bug tracking -- Jira
    • There will likely be a dedicated release engineer (not manager)
    • Ability to have geo-diversity to support timezones/locations
  • SW:  Gerrit is a tool that has historically been integrated in with Github.  Allows to control the process around code review. Code gets checked in, pre-configured requirements that it will go through review, enforces fact that it requires two committers, etc. other requirements that the code gets reviewed, scored, passed or failed.  Part of ecosystem that comes w/ Git.
  • CF:  mitigates potential for random code merge or accidents or mistakes
  • DV:  yes, should start off with something like this.  If there are complaints or issues… we can evaluate other options.  But, we need something in place that shows evidence of code reviews.
  • Stan:  think Gerrit is a great thing to have with this many potential contributors.  However, there may be a risk with setting up this early, could be a barrier to contributions.  Maybe after Hackathon, once we have a more final form for project. But, it could be problematic before we have a single line of code (as it could be viewed as a barrier).
    • Sheehan:  agrees. I like code review, but it can also slow things down if reviewers are not very active.
  • Need for further IT discussion


Requirements WG Update