----- Original message -----
From: wsparks--- via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
To: tbenzies@..., hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Exit Criteria notes from TSC Weekly GtM, 5-19-2016
Date: Thu, May 19, 2016 10:37 AM
Thank you guys for what you do!
Below is my list of items noted in the exit criteria discussion from today’s TSC GtM. I hope at least a line or two is useful.
Exit Criteria Notes from TSC GtM meeting, May 19, 2016
Diversity of contribution is key
need contributions from members & non-members
also from architecture (usage companies) deploying solutions in a variety of usage sectors
Test Coverage issues/ideas discussed:
threshold of test coverage; 80% to start?
Maybe 90% or above, 5 lines per 1000 standard error baseline
Does threshold too high limit ideas, innovation or development?
Biz logic, smart contracts maybe at 15/1000 serious errors, (Chris A referenced an article from memory)
IBM creating derivative keys, not reviewed cryptographically yet
Must be cautious in releasing as mature without sacrificing innovation? (I am not quite clear on the accuracy of my note on this one)
Chris A, Proof of Concept, virtual or interledger type testing, still PoC but effective (no value coins used)
Signal of mature; less knowledgeable individual does a contract with someone (cited as example)
Mic D or Mic B stated; project may be deemed mature as solid code base but may not know of or how it is used thereafter...or degree of success when used
Does the code fit into regulatory environment in which it is deployed?
Important to have running systems that can be "poked at".
Running apps could be part of exit criteria
Seems to be differences in positions of mature criteria. Very useful discussion nonetheless and deserves larger discussion...to be continued.