2020-06-25 Meeting notes

@Vadim Reutskiy

• We still need to have single approver for the "Iroha2*" branches

  • @武宮誠 > We need to be very careful because Iroha is a very significant product.

  • @Nikita Puzankov > We are just want to stick to the previous process.

  • We can consider increasing to two reviewers later, when the team will be bigger and closer to the first production release.

  • No objections here from the other team members.

  • @Andrei Lebedev > If we will have ~6 people in the team, it will be a good moment to switch to w reviewers

 @Nikita Puzankov

• Since the last meeting made an RFC for MST transactions, we discussed it with Iurii and Vladislav

• Checked requests for PRs

• There is a request regarding the query security vulnerabilities from Iurii, I will continue with it

• Now I am working on the maintenance subscription mechanism, will proceed with PR later today

• There are some questions from Vladislav about the ISI

• There is also some new dependency proposed, we need to discuss it in RFC

@Andrei Lebedev

• There are no updates on the document from Eugene, hence we will proceed with Mikhail

• We are in contact with the data model project intern, there was a plan proposed, so we will include it also in the proposal

• I will look for the RFC with MST description.

• There is not so much RFC about the Maintenance endpoint

  • @Nikita Puzankov > We are working without RFC, as things are changing now

@Михаил Болдырев

• Currently finishing the HSM integration in 1.2.0

• Also, working on the solution of the linking problem

@Kamil Salakhiev

• I have reviewed the security vulnerability RFC, and look like that we need to have a brainstorm the solution as it looks like serious now

• Probably, we have to improve somehow to improve our permission problem

  • @武宮誠 > There is not a big problem as Iroha still permissioned network. In Private solutions the environment should be protected, in Public – it is not a big deal.

@Sara Garifullina

• I want to discuss the one issue with MD usage in RTD. There is no option for TOC structures.

  • Can we have a single index page using RST format to put the TOC? 

  • I am also trying to find the solution

  • @Nikita Puzankov > Yes, sure, having such workaround is okay.

@武宮誠

• I have an idea of composability for the Iroha 2 based applications. This idea should be a basis for further improvements.

• There are some issues in other projects, caused by bad implementation of ERC20 tokens. We can avoid such problems with Iroha 2.

• Another key thing – is to have the possibility to create events and put corresponding logic. 

• We should consider it while designing the event model

@Egor Ivkov

• Finalized the Docker compose tests for the pipeline, along with correcting the configuration

• There are some required scenarios for synchronization improvement

  • Will start with AddPeer instruction

• Block sync is not a part of Sumeragi

• Regarding Sumeragi there are some minor TODOs left, hence I will finish the block sync first.