- Hyperledger taxonomy and revised greenhouse graphic for review
Re: Hyperledger taxonomy and revised greenhouse graphic for review
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Potential members, end-users, and developers are all going to be very different audiences. For the moment, it is probably pretty critical to keep planting more library projects and not make them invisible before they get longer roots. Maybe at the garden shows you don't necessarily show off the fertilizer unless your business is selling fertilizer to the gardeners. Maybe you cut off the stem and just hope the roots survive.
I won't speak for others, but I wasn't advocating for explicitly showing dependencies. Moreso just that it's a logical stack in some senses.
My point is just like "Functional Capability" driven frameworks (Aries, Grid, Indy) sit on top of "Ledger Implementations", which in turn use "Common Libraries". "Developer Tools" can be used to build/test other "Functional Capabilities". Maybe Quilt sits above it all??) Even if this stuff doesn't [yet] interoperate very well, a coherent visual / mental model on "how it all maybe kinda could" or even just "this thing is lower level than these other things" seems worthy of consideration.
Also - and I get I probably don't understand the audience this is really intending to reach/educate/inform - but NASCAR'ing up the greenhouse feels like it runs the risk of overwhelming the casual Enterprise info-seeker. I'm a huge fan of Transact, but at some point it may make sense not to include low level library components on primary diagrams?
Still at 2-cents.
Join firstname.lastname@example.org to automatically receive all group messages.