Date   

Re: TSC Call this week or not?

hmontgomery@us.fujitsu.com <hmontgomery@...>
 

I’ll be on a plane and don’t have anything new to discuss either.  Let’s cancel the call.

 

Thanks Arnaud for taking the initiative on this, rather than having a dead call.

 

Thanks,

Hart

 

From: tsc@... [mailto:tsc@...] On Behalf Of mark wagner
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 3:29 PM
To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...>
Cc: hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger TSC] TSC Call this week or not?

 

I have nothing to discuss  and I have no objections to cancelling da call.

 

mark

 

On Mon, Jan 6, 2020, 16:09 Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...> wrote:

Hi all and Happy New Year,

As we closed 2019, I had planned to resume the TSC weekly calls this January 9th. However, I'm not sure there is enough agenda material to justify a call quite yet.
No new quarterly reports have been submitted yet (as expected), and all pending issues are awaiting actions from different parties (repo structure, promoted release, etc). So, I'd like to know if anyone expects to have something ready for the TSC to discuss this week or wants to use the time to bring something up.

Otherwise, I'll cancel this week so people have time until next week to make progress on their action items.
Thanks.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM


Re: TSC Call this week or not?

Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@...>
 

+1

Chris

On Jan 6, 2020, at 6:29 PM, mark wagner <mwagner@...> wrote:


I have nothing to discuss  and I have no objections to cancelling da call.

mark

On Mon, Jan 6, 2020, 16:09 Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...> wrote:
Hi all and Happy New Year,

As we closed 2019, I had planned to resume the TSC weekly calls this January 9th. However, I'm not sure there is enough agenda material to justify a call quite yet.
No new quarterly reports have been submitted yet (as expected), and all pending issues are awaiting actions from different parties (repo structure, promoted release, etc). So, I'd like to know if anyone expects to have something ready for the TSC to discuss this week or wants to use the time to bring something up.

Otherwise, I'll cancel this week so people have time until next week to make progress on their action items.
Thanks.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM


Re: TSC Call this week or not?

mark wagner <mwagner@...>
 

I have nothing to discuss  and I have no objections to cancelling da call.

mark

On Mon, Jan 6, 2020, 16:09 Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...> wrote:
Hi all and Happy New Year,

As we closed 2019, I had planned to resume the TSC weekly calls this January 9th. However, I'm not sure there is enough agenda material to justify a call quite yet.
No new quarterly reports have been submitted yet (as expected), and all pending issues are awaiting actions from different parties (repo structure, promoted release, etc). So, I'd like to know if anyone expects to have something ready for the TSC to discuss this week or wants to use the time to bring something up.

Otherwise, I'll cancel this week so people have time until next week to make progress on their action items.
Thanks.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM


Identity WG call this Wednesday the 8th of Jan, 2020

Vipin Bharathan
 

Hi all,

Welcome back to the regular calls of the IDWG for 2020.
Hope you have all had a well deserved break and and a relaxing New Year in spite of the various developments in the wider world.

When:
8th of Jan 2020- 12 noon EDT (17:00 UDT)
Where:
Call is on hyperledger zoom.

Main events: 
The full Agenda is available here:

Roadmap for 2020
CCPA: Implications for the blockchain and hyperledger

Please join us, your ideas for 2020 for the Identity WG are always welcome. As January is dedicated to Janus, the god of retrospectives and prospectives, we will start with a look back at 2019, with our eyes fully on 2020 as well. 

This is an open call, where all are welcome!
We finished with a bang on December 11th with a talk by Darrell O'Connell on Digital Wallets. We hope to open with interesting talks laid out for the next few months, always topical- focused on hard problems: Digital Identity & the Blockchain.
Let us have some fun!

Best,
Vipin


TSC Call this week or not?

Arnaud Le Hors
 

Hi all and Happy New Year,

As we closed 2019, I had planned to resume the TSC weekly calls this January 9th. However, I'm not sure there is enough agenda material to justify a call quite yet.
No new quarterly reports have been submitted yet (as expected), and all pending issues are awaiting actions from different parties (repo structure, promoted release, etc). So, I'd like to know if anyone expects to have something ready for the TSC to discuss this week or wants to use the time to bring something up.

Otherwise, I'll cancel this week so people have time until next week to make progress on their action items.
Thanks.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM


A short page on Interoperability

VIPIN BHARATHAN
 

Hi all,
I have been in several meetings about Interoperability in Hyperledger. As there seems to be limited cross project visibility on this important topic, I created a wiki page listing the projects that I am aware of with links. I did this as a child-page of the AWG.
Please add to this - comment on making this more useful.
This is in the spirit of the holiday season and in celebration of the new year!
Vipin

dlt.nyc
Vipin Bharathan
Digital Transformation Consultant
Financial Services (Blockchain, ML, Design Thinking)
vip@...


Cancelled Event: Technical Steering Committee (TSC) - Thursday, 2 January 2020 #cal-cancelled

tsc@lists.hyperledger.org Calendar <tsc@...>
 

Cancelled: Technical Steering Committee (TSC)

This event has been cancelled.

When:
Thursday, 2 January 2020
7:00am to 8:00am
(UTC-08:00) America/Los Angeles

Where:
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup

Organizer: Technical Steering Committee (TSC)

Description:
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup

Or iPhone one-tap :
US: +16699006833,,6223336701# or +16465588656,,6223336701#
Or Telephone:
Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 877 369 0926 (Toll Free) or +1 855 880 1246 (Toll Free)
Meeting ID: 622-333-6701
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=BYDz1WGXJTTJ_s4_zumD9hqKjJv-Whgs


Cancelled Event: Technical Steering Committee (TSC) - Thursday, 26 December 2019 #cal-cancelled

tsc@lists.hyperledger.org Calendar <tsc@...>
 

Cancelled: Technical Steering Committee (TSC)

This event has been cancelled.

When:
Thursday, 26 December 2019
7:00am to 8:00am
(UTC-08:00) America/Los Angeles

Where:
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup

Organizer: Technical Steering Committee (TSC)

Description:
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup

Or iPhone one-tap :
US: +16699006833,,6223336701# or +16465588656,,6223336701#
Or Telephone:
Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 877 369 0926 (Toll Free) or +1 855 880 1246 (Toll Free)
Meeting ID: 622-333-6701
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=BYDz1WGXJTTJ_s4_zumD9hqKjJv-Whgs


TSC Agenda for Dec 19, 2019

Arnaud Le Hors
 

Hi,

The agenda for this week's call is online. There are several quarterly reports that have been posted, please, make sure to review them before hand if possible.

Based on last week's discussion I will call for a vote on two issues highlighted as such in the agenda. I then want to spend some time discussing further the idea of "Promoted Release".

https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2019+12+19+TSC+Agenda

Thanks.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM


Upcoming Event: DCIWG Quarterly Report reminder - Thu, 12/12/2019 9:00am-10:00am #cal-reminder

tsc@lists.hyperledger.org Calendar <tsc@...>
 

Reminder: DCIWG Quarterly Report reminder

When: Thursday, 12 December 2019, 9:00am to 10:00am, (GMT-08:00) America/Los Angeles

View Event

Description: Reminder: Hyperledger DCIWG Quarterly Update Due #tsc-project-update

When: At the end of the month

View Event

Organizer: community-architects@hyperledger.org

Description: The Hyperledger DCIWG update to the TSC is due at the end of the month.  Please schedule a time to add a review on an upcoming TSC call and please review the update at TSC Project Updates prior to the meeting and add your questions to the update.


Re: TSC Agenda for Dec 12, 2019

mark wagner <mwagner@...>
 

I need to travel to a doctors appointment this morning so I fear I will not be on the TSC Call today.

-mark


On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 3:57 PM Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...> wrote:
Hi,

The agenda for this week's call is online. There are several quarterly reports that are due and haven't been posted yet though.

https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2019+12+12+TSC+Agenda

Thanks.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM



--
Mark Wagner
Senior Principal Software Engineer
Performance and Scalability
Red Hat, Inc


Re: Upcoming Event: Hyperledger Quilt Quarterly Update Due #tsc-project-update - Thu, 12/12/2019 #tsc-project-update #cal-reminder

David Fuelling
 

Hello TSC,

I have been traveling and will not have the Quilt status report ready this morning - hopefully it will be all right to present to the TSC next week.

Thanks for your understanding,

David Fuelling


On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 12:00 AM tsc@... Calendar <tsc@...> wrote:

Reminder: Hyperledger Quilt Quarterly Update Due #tsc-project-update

When: Thursday, 12 December 2019

View Event

Organizer: community-architects@...

Description: Please review the update at TSC Project Updates prior to the meeting and add your questions to the update.


Upcoming Event: Hyperledger Learning Materials Development WG Quarterly Update Due #tsc-wg-update - Thu, 12/19/2019 #tsc-wg-update #cal-reminder

tsc@lists.hyperledger.org Calendar <tsc@...>
 

Reminder: Hyperledger Learning Materials Development WG Quarterly Update Due #tsc-wg-update

When: Thursday, 19 December 2019

View Event

Organizer: community-architects@...

Description: Please review the update at TSC Working Group Updates prior to the meeting and add your questions to the update.


Upcoming Event: Hyperledger Caliper Quarterly Update Due #tsc-project-update - Thu, 12/19/2019 #tsc-project-update #cal-reminder

tsc@lists.hyperledger.org Calendar <tsc@...>
 

Reminder: Hyperledger Caliper Quarterly Update Due #tsc-project-update

When: Thursday, 19 December 2019

View Event

Organizer: community-architects@...

Description: Please review the update at TSC Project Updates prior to the meeting and add your questions to the update.


TSC Agenda for Dec 12, 2019

Arnaud Le Hors
 

Hi,

The agenda for this week's call is online. There are several quarterly reports that are due and haven't been posted yet though.

https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2019+12+12+TSC+Agenda

Thanks.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM


IDWG call minutes/notes and recordings for Dec 11, 2019

Vipin Bharathan
 

Hi all,

Terrific attendance and great discussion on Digital Wallets with side excursions into ISO 307 etc.

Thanks to Darrell O'Donnell for the presentation and Kelly Cooper for notes.
I have added the audio and video recordings to the minutes.
Until next year.
Hopefully we will start the year off with a bang on Jan 8th with a talk by Kim Cameron.
We need ideas on the format and content of the IDWG in the new year.
Happy new year and a great solstice.


Thanks again,
Vipin


Besu Architecture Overview Presentation - Dec 11th 11 AM PST

Ram Jagadeesan (rjagadee)
 

Folks,

Danno Ferrin and Lucas Saldanha from Consensys will present an overview of the Besu architecture, 11 AM PST, Wed Dec 11th.

Please note that this is a one-off event not in our regular bi-weekly meeting slot.

Here is the proposed agenda:
* Ethereum Basics
- Networking & Gossip
- Block Production
- Consensus (briefly)
* Contract Execution
- EVM
- Account Storage Trie
- State Storage Trie
* Chain Reorgs for non-finalized consensus protocols
  • * EEA Privacy
    - Technical Specification
    - Restricted vs Unrestricted
    * Besu Private TXs
    - Orion/PMT/Privacy Precompile
    - Processing of Private TXs
    * Privacy Groups
    - What are they?
    - Benefits
    * Future work?
    - Handling reorgs
    - ...


Identity WG call tomorrow Dec 11, 2019 (12 noon EST, 17:00 UTC)

Vipin Bharathan
 

Hi all,

Make suggestions or comments on the wiki page or in a response to this email.

The main event is a talk by Darrell O'Connell on digital wallets. This will likely last 30 minutes with adequate time for questions and answers.

Call is on hyperledger zoom.

Please attend to learn about or teach us the latest in Digital Wallets.

Thanks,
Vipin


Re: Volume II--Administrivia

VIPIN BHARATHAN
 

Hart,
As usual you are very thorough.
This proposal gells with the IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) regime of W3C CG participation and is simple to implement.
Thanks

dlt.nyc
Vipin Bharathan
Digital Transformation Consultant
Financial Services (Blockchain, ML, Design Thinking)
vip@...


From: tsc@... <tsc@...> on behalf of hmontgomery@... via Lists.Hyperledger.Org <hmontgomery=us.fujitsu.com@...>
Sent: Saturday, December 7, 2019 4:54 PM
To: tsc@... <tsc@...>
Cc: tsc@... <tsc@...>
Subject: [Hyperledger TSC] Volume II--Administrivia
 

Hi Everyone,

 

Sorry to spam you all again, but I wanted to address some more issues and concerns about our processes.  Most of this is in light of our discussion over email and in the TSC meeting last week. I have two main points I’d like to address:  centralizing our governing documents, and fixing some stuff around the LFID usage (which relates to DCO, TSC voting, and community metrics.  I’ll address these in sequence.

 

Governening Documents:

 

It’s been brought up repeatedly that our governing documents are hard to find, don’t mesh well together, and in some cases are contradictory.  New people or projects looking to find the proper way to do something are often left confused.  As I pointed out in my long email last week, even major things like the criteria for a 1.0 release are not consistent across all of our documents.  In many cases, they are not in a place that’s easy to find or locate, either.  It would be great if we could address these problems—if it’s hard for Hyperledger dinosaurs to find and make sense out of these things, then it’s absolute terror for newbies.

 

So, with this in mind, I’d like to propose the following:  we merge all of our governing documents into a single “Hyperledger TSC Constitution.”  We use numbering and lettering for different “articles” of the said constitution, like the style of the Hyperledger charter (https://www.hyperledger.org/about/charter, in case you are curious).  This will require some work to put everything in place and number and itemize everything, but I think it will be well worth it in the long run.  We would also require future changes to adhere to this indexed style.

 

Keeping our rules in this form would have many benefits.  Everything would be in one place, so it would be easy to find (obviously we could break down things into different documents if we wanted to do so, but the indexing would be consistent through different documents and all documents would need to be stored in a common repo).  It would be easy to keep track of changes and new rules, and we would have less chance of having duplicate/inconsistent rules (like for the active status exit criteria and the 1.0 release).  When we wanted to refer people to rules, it would be of the form “see rule 3.b.ii” rather than “spend 15 minutes fruitlessly searching for a document on the wiki.”

 

Does this make sense?  I view this as a no-brainer and something we should absolutely do.  Maybe there is a better way to lay things out, but having a centralized, indexed, and ordered set of rules makes a ton of sense.

 

LFID Usage:

 

In light of the DCO discussion at this week’s TSC meeting, I think it makes sense to discuss how we handle identity at Hyperledger.  I’d like to make a constructive suggestion, which I encourage people to take apart.  I’m not confident what I’m proposing is the best way to do things, but I’d love to spur some more discussion on this.

 

An idea:  suppose we make the LFID the root of all activity at Hyperledger.  When you sign up for an LFID, you list all of your relevant information (i.e. company) and sign whatever legal documents you need with respect to say, DCO.  For legal purposes, we probably need real names (which we don’t ever make public).  We also require people to list their github ID.

 

When people contribute code (which can happen under github), we run a check to make sure that their github ID is associated with a LFID in good standing (i.e. DCO stuff is OK).  This probably can just be handled by only giving permissions to people with LFIDs, although I don’t know what the best solution is here—I’m not a github wizard like some people on this list are.  While this adds an extra onerous step for contribution (you need an LFID and to answer/sign some stuff), I’m not sure we’ll be able to avoid something like this once we get new DCO requirements.  I would be surprised if we can continue to do DCO without some real-world tie to people.

 

The advantages of this would seem substantial:

 

1.       We would have infrastructure in place to handle whatever requirements we needed to handle DCO stuff.  From my (mostly uneducated on this topic) point of view, it looks like we’re going to have to do something like this anyway if we get new requirements for handling DCO stuff (which also seems likely).  I cannot say for certain on this either, but it might also make it possible that we don’t have to sign individual github commits if this is the case, which would be nice.

2.       Having a tie between contributor and LFID (with proper information on the people behind the LFIDs) would enable easy collection of contributor statistics, which we could then publish.  This would seem to benefit the collective community quite a bit.  If people are worried about privacy, we could torture the LF staff and require them to publish differentially private community statistics (which would be a funny measure of community support—if your community can’t be differentially privatized effectively, an individual is too dominant!).

3.       We could handle TSC elections by LFID.  While it wouldn’t totally prevent election fraud (someone could still have their whole company sign up), it would stop people from spamming anonymous github IDs and raise the bar for shenanigans a little bit.  It would presumably also make elections easier to manage for the LF staff.

4.       We would still allow people to remain externally anonymous.  The only public-facing thing would be the github ID, which could be pseudonymized if people wanted.  This would give people the ability to avoid unwanted spam and comments (although, it wouldn’t protect you from emails like this!).

 

Again, this second section is a lot of speculation on my part.  I’d be curious to hear if people thing this is right, wrong, crazy, or have better suggestions.

 

If you’re here, thank you for suffering through yet another long email.  I’d love to hear suggestions and criticism, so please feel free to speak up.  Thanks a lot for your time, and I hope that everyone is having a wonderful weekend.

 

Thanks,

Hart

 


Identy WG report on PDS/IdH/EDV call Dec 6, 2019

Vipin Bharathan
 

Hi all,

What does the subject line mean?

Let me try expanding it.
PDS= Personal Data Store
IdH=Identity Hub
EDV=Encrypted Data Vault

All relate to a similar concept- Data (and claims) about a subject stored in an adequately protected location; under distributed control (includes delegation) to be used in various contexts.

What this meeting was about?
Many bodies (standards or implementation or both) are working on parallel problems about PDS/idH/EDV. In order not to diverge too much and create conflicting and competing standards and implementation, these parties (DiF, W3C, Solid, Aries/Indy, other experts) are hammering out a consensus(that word again) about where to house the standardization and implementation efforts. About 60 people were involved in the calls.

What did they achieve so far?
  1.  The agreed to work together
  2.  They will house the calls in DiF, which will be open to the entire community (not just to paying members of DiF)
  3.  DiF will also house the reference implementation and test suites. Reference does not imply preferred.
  4.  Since this is about the data storage, all questions on the user-facing front end as well as schemas for storage and the communication between the various parties are out of scope. However, they will support already existing efforts in these areas.
  5. The IPR (Intellectual Property Rights)  starts with the agreement in W3C Community groups (that anyone can join), thus the openness. There are some questions to be answered about the IPR in DiF which is housed under a different IPR regime.
When I used the word hammering, I meant it almost literally. It is great to witness compromise; especially for those of us who are outside the windows looking in.

What is missing?
The IPR stuff- the ED of DiF (Rouven Heck) will see how the DiF IPR can be integrated to the W3C CG IPR and how everyone can work together. There are documents that can bootstrap the effort, implementation of certain components exist. All of these will feed into the effort.

Why is it relevant to the Identity WG and Blockchains?
Since this is about the idea of how data repositories on Identity are specified and implemented, this falls under IDWG. Blockchains enter in two ways- for peer to peer access to the truth about the repository; to be used as the identity solution for other use cases. Right now we are interested parties, not direct participants. Any individual or enterprise can join the new effort.

What is in the short term for us, the Identity WG?
We have worked closely with the Indy/Aries community; and hosted presentations on related topics; including the DiF/Aries paper on HUBS vs wallets.
This Wednesday (the 11th) we will have a presentation from Darrell O'Donnell on digital wallets. Which are the means with which interaction with the repository will happen.
We had presentations on the Digital Locker in India (which is similar to a personal wallet). This is already in production with a billion plus users. Control and governance of this is not as distributed as a democracy deserves; there are steps being taken to get more privacy and freedom from surveillance on this platform.

Comments and responses are welcome...
Thanks,
Vipin

1101 - 1120 of 3893