To clarify, as Jason mentioned the Jira FAB-33 got caught up in a recent mass cleanup of stale issues that hadn't been touched in a long time. Any issue that was automatically closed in error can be re-opened, we simply ask that a comment be added to explain the rationale for re-opening. I've re-opened FAB-33 and commented that it is targeted for a future release.

Jason is correct that for major features, Jiras will typically be created after an RFC is merged, and they will cross reference each other. But if a Jira already exists for an item that is intended to be worked, I see no problem keeping the Jira open and tagged as Future.


Dave Enyeart

"Brian Behlendorf" ---02/03/2020 01:24:35 PM---You really should use a different status for deferred feature requests than "Closed", because "deci

From: "Brian Behlendorf" <bbehlendorf@...>
To: fabric@...
Date: 02/03/2020 01:24 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] Potential project in need of BFT orderers #consensus #fabric-orderer
Sent by: fabric@...

---

You really should use a different status for deferred feature requests than "Closed", because "decided not to implement this ever" is a closer inference from "Closed" than "maybe someday".  Jira is depended upon as a future-feature-request tool by lots of other projects and asking people to know it's differently treated at Fabric is another cognitive burden to new contributors.  At the very least I suggest updating FAB-33 with a link to new work.

Brian

On 2/3/20 7:44 AM, Jason Yellick wrote:

I've seen some similar confusion to this on Rocketchat as well.

FAB-33 was closed along with hundreds of other items in an overall cleanup of JIRA.  Its closure does not indicate any mothballing or abandonment of BFT efforts, in fact, there's been considerably more activity in the space in the recent months; particularly there are some ongoing efforts to develop a golang BFT consensus library that is compatible with Fabric.

JIRA can be a good tool for tracking the progress of a designed, approved, and mid-implementation item, but it's the wrong place to look for future work.  Future work is to be submitted and approved as an RFC https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric-rfcs/ so I would watch that space for updates.

Thanks,
~Jason
 
----- Original message -----
From: atom@...
Sent by: fabric@...
To: fabric@...
Cc:
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Potential project in need of BFT orderers #consensus #fabric-orderer
Date: Sun, Feb 2, 2020 6:16 PM
 

We are leading a standardization effort within SunSpec.org to utilize blockchain for securing the distributed power grid in the US.

https://sunspec.org/sunspec-alliance-advances-security-for-distributed-energy-resource-systems/

Fabric could be a good candidate for this effort but we need BFT in the orderer nodes.  It looks like this effort has been mothballed to an extent:

https://jira.hyperledger.org/browse/FAB-33

What are the options for revitalizing this effort?

Thanks,
Alfred
Wivity Inc.

 

--
Brian Behlendorf
Executive Director, Hyperledger
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf

-- 
Brian Behlendorf
Executive Director, Hyperledger
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf