Todd Benzies <tbenzies@...>
Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting
June 16, 2016 (7:00am - 8:30am PT)
Deutsche Boerse Group
Richard G. Brown
Action Item Review
Exit criteria summary (Arnaud Le Hors)
Jeremy Sevareid provided an overview of the table added to page 3 of the exit criteria summary doc, noting a preference that the Project should have a definition of “done.”
MD: If this helps add context, "done" is usually handled in most of our projects in release management. Incubation is normally a measure of whether there are people actually working on the project and following the rules. Some projects have an incubation exit criteria of "participating in two releases" to ensure there is also something "done" (again, done being determined in the release process)
CF: Maybe a release yardstick for something that we are going to consider being ready for primetime. But, exit from incubation should not be predicated on if something if “release ready”
Hart: People are worried that outsiders will equate “maturation” with a product that is ready to use; someone might use it before it is ready.
Brian B: These observations are very insightful. Separate out 2 things -- maturity and ongoing health of community (that is this exit criteria) put out a release that represents the community. As well as ongoing reporting process that should go up to TSC (releases, new contributors, code quality, bugs outstanding, not just metrics, but also narrative). Being able to respond to security notices and respond timely. Separately, question of code maturity and labeling, would like to see consistent naming protocol (developer preview, alpha, beta, production, etc.)
RGB: this is very helpful. Does ASF have a document that we could use so we don’t have to reinvent?
Brian B: Yes, here. Hyperledger Project may want to add release taxonomy.
CF: Fabric team was hoping to cut a release, don’t need to call it anything. Would like to demonstrate that you can produce a release as a team (established process, etc.) Do we need to wait until we see release criteria, or can we just release and call alpha?
Brian B: Don’t want to hold up a release for taxonomy… but taxonomy doesn’t take long to do. Might also be useful when making release to highlight key things (i.e. if performance may be a concern)
CF: Call to action -- can people weigh in with comments in the Google doc so we don’t have to wait for a weekly call.
ACTION: Arnaud to take another pass on exit criteria and send to list.
ACTION: Brian to pull together first draft of release taxonomy in parallel to exit criteria
[June] Recap later in TSC Meeting
[July] Review 2 options (week of 7/25)
[August] Virtual (http://doodle.com/poll/r4ftyyvshef2rn6z)
[September/October] Discuss Amsterdam at ABN AMRO (http://doodle.com/poll/y9h2e497essf9pg9)
Lots of interest in area -- IBM NL, Holland Fintech Community, Blockchain initiative of the Dutch Government, Amsterdam City and the Tech University of Delft. Good network and lots of blockchain contributors in Amsterdam (incl Ethereum).
Sibos, Geneva, September 26-29
From the Marketing Committee: "This is a significant marketing opportunity and as such we are creating a Sibos prep SWAT team consisting of events, marketing, PR and technical participants -- looking for several volunteers. Topics for which a strong technical point of view will be required include whether we can have a Hyperledger demo there, and if so, what and how?"
If you are interested in participating, please send a note to tbenzies@... and gwallace@....
Virtual Hackathon Update (Dan Middleton)
HIP identifier: Proposal to include chaintool project repository in hyperledger/fabric (Greg Haskins)
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)