2018 11 29 TSC Meeting

Owned by Ry Jones
Oct 01, 2019
3 min read

Hyperledger Project

Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting

dummyfile.txt

November 29, 2018 (7:00am - 8:00am PT) via Zoom

TSC Members

Arnaud Le Hors

Yes

Baohua Yang

Yes

Binh Nguyen

Yes

Christopher Ferris


Dan Middleton


Hart Montgomery

Yes

Kelly Olson


Mark Wagner

Yes

Mic Bowman

Yes

Nathan George

Yes

Silas Davis

Yes


Resources:


Event Reminders


Quarterly project updates

  • Hyperledger Burrow

    • The roadmap was changed completely

    • Casual contributors. No maintainer diversity outside of Monax

    • Need help with documentation

    • Release cadence was good in the last quarter

    • We may be considering moving towards 1.0 after Tendermint hits 1.0 in March

    • Would like to add WASM engine inside of Burrow

    • We may consider bringing the Blackstone project to Hyperledger

    • Is the BPM engine that is used in Burrow the same as that in Monax? Blackstone contains most of the BPM. Monax has their own UI on top of it.

    • Identity WG is asking for help with the whitepaper that they are working on. Need a ~300 word section on how identity works in Burrow.

    • Would like to hear more about Blackstone in a future call. Need to think about whether this as a proposal in labs or as a project.

    • Need to work on increasing diversity prior to 1.0 request. We receive interest from Solidity people, but we need to do a better job of communicating the features and how it works.

  • Hyperledger Cello

    • More people are using Cello. Tong presented at the Montreal hackfest and got useful feedback from the people there that have gone into the roadmap. New design spec to enhance support for consortium governance model.

    • Thinking about a 1.0 next quarter

    • No new maintainers in the past quarter. A major issue is still related to contributor diversity. Contributors come from China, India, and US.

    • Any plans to support other DLTs other than Fabric? This is a question we got at the Montreal hackfest. The conclusion is that we don't have enough developers that are familiar with other DLT platforms.

    • Are there similar orchestration products in the other platforms that would allow us to merge those functionalities into Cello that would suggest architectural changes in Cello? Baohua would like others to review the architecture spec to see how it might fit with the other projects.

    • Let's work with the Community Architects on ensuring requirements are met for a 1.0 release.

  • December 6th: Hyperledger Explorer

  • December 6th: Hyperledger Composer deferred due to lack of update (original due date October 29th)


Quarterly WG updates

  • None until next quarter


Open Discussion

  • Community Survey

    • Please review and provide feedback

  • Hyperledger Labs Sponsor roles and responsibilities

    • Arnaud LeHors: When Labs was first proposed, we created a sponsor role to ensure that the Labs did not become a dumping ground. Charter does not specify what does it mean to be a sponsor. We don't want to have too much burden placed on a sponsor, as this will limit the number of people who will want to be a sponsor and therefore the number of labs that exist.

    • Vipin Bharathan: Duties in open source are whatever someone does. Initial thing is that the lab makes sense to the sponsor. Second is to help with the proposal. Mentorship can vary. The idea was for the list to be suggestions and not requirements.

    • Mark Wagner: The sponsor should not just be a rubber stamp. It would be ideal to have a minimal set of requirements and some optional ones. The sponsor should be able to represent the lab to the TSC at least for the proposal and potentially updates to the TSC.

    • Vipin Bharathan: Labs do not require a report back to the TSC today.

    • Nathan George: A lab is run by the maintainers and the sponsor is a facilitator for bringing it in. They should not have the primary responsibilities over communication.

    • Silas Davis started a discussion around ensuring that we do archive inactive labs.

    • Tracy Kuhrt mentioned that we do have within the charter how to archive inactive labs. We are working on the second quarterly report, which will tell us where the individual labs are and whether we have some that should be archived.

    • Action Item: Lab Stewards to discuss further based on the discussion and come back with a suggestion for how we change the Lab charter.

    • Should we extend the list of people who can be a sponsor to Hyperledger Staff? Let's defer this until Dan is back.

  • Project vs. Sub-project - Deferred until next week due to time