Hyperledger Project

Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting

July 21, 2016 (7:00am - 8:30am PT)

via GoToMeeting

TSC Members

Resources:

• Github:  www.github.com/hyperledger

• Wiki:  https://github.com/hyperledger/hyperledger/wiki

• IRC:  #hyperledger on freenode.net (has Meetbot)

• Public lists:  lists.hyperledger.org

• Slack:  https://slack.hyperledger.org/ (self-generated invites)

• Information on the TSC Members can be found at https://www.hyperledger.org/about/tsc

• Meetings:  https://github.com/hyperledger/hyperledger/wiki/PublicMeetingCalendar

Agenda

• Action Item Review

• WG Updates

Action Item Review

• Hackfest preparation and updates (Todd)

• July 26-27, San Francisco register / agenda (draft)

• August 24-25, virtual (confirmed)

• October 3-4, Amsterdam (tentative)

• Adjust exit criteria using term “active” and bring forward for approval next week (Arnaud)

• TSC Vote:  7 yes, 2 abstain (Richard and Ajit)

• APPROVED

• Update Project Lifecycle and other reference documents to use term “Active” (Arnaud)

• Arnaud:  Done.  Tried to catch all of these, but there may be more.  The LIfecycle doc has been updated and refers to the right name, may need to catch a few straggling areas.

• Maturity of software discussion (Jeremy & Bill) - PPT deck

• CF:  What does the LF Kernel do?  Anything we can learn from there?  Also, what does Core Infrastructure Initiative (CII) do?  We haven’t engaged with them yet.  But, probably a good deal we can learn.  Lastly, once we start putting out releases that people are using, we’ll need to add some sort of vulnerability process in place so that people can privately report vulns to be explored and remediated.

• RGB:  Let’s ask ourselves what is different/special about this space for blockchain -- this is about building shared agreements, coming to shared consensus.  Multiple orgs and people deploying an application or solution on top of this software -- what agreements have to be in place with those people.  Also, what extent is the code expected to dominate.  Finally, maturity -- how are the ledgers used for the given use cases.

• Ram:  This came up in Arch WG, as well.  What security reviews need to happen on Hyperledger implementations.  Security review by security research community as well as code audit.  Need to be addressed head-on.  Not sure which forum.

• CF:  Yes, worthwhile to take on those aspects.  re: Security, should also talk with Christopher Allen and Identity WG as they will have a lot of expertise on those topics.

• Review Hyperledger Release Taxonomy v0.2 and look at semver (Brian)

• BrianB:  Please go look at semver.org if you haven’t already.

• CF:  Still some need to have a tag to indicate how ripe something is, besides just a number.  A taxonomy like that is important, to compliment semver itself.

• BrianB:  Will make a few amendments to this doc and we can review at Hackfest.

• Review “contributor” list in preparation for the TSC election (Todd)

• Election timeline

• Contributor list (if you are not on this list, but should be, please email tbenzies@...)

• BrianB:  Contributions to wiki -- may have been separate from WG or code commits

• CF:  I’ll explore to see who made contributions, may not be straightforward… can see if there is an API to use

• Revise Hyperledger Explorer proposal and bring back to the TSC next week for review/approval. (Chris)

• Tabled until next week.  Pardha and Dan are reviewing proposal written by Chris.  WIll be brought forward next week.

WG Updates

• Requirements WG (Oleg Abdrashitov)

• Please update via email

• Architecture WG (Ram Jagadeesan)

• Finished first work item -- only pending item is to finish documentation.  Functionality breakup between consensus layer and business logic layer -- get started at F2F next week.  Next major topic is security functions, outstanding item to figure out where security reviews should be dealt with.  Planning to have a long session in F2F -- 6-8 hours, putting together agenda for that and will send a Doodle poll.

• Whitepaper WG (Dave Voell)

• Good progress -- met yesterday, not enough members for quorum.  Quite a bit of changes since last draft, most sitting… need quorum to review.  There is a new glossary that has been applied.  Hart has done a lot.  New suggestions that have been reviewed and look good -- should be ready to publish next draft… looking like we can call this first one 1.0 as we have addressed most, if not all, input.  Next week hope to have quorum to accept suggested edits.

• Identity WG (Christopher Allen)

• Please update via email

• CI WG (Chris Ferris)

• Jenkins up and running for x86.  For Fabric, should be able to transition off Travis fairly soon.  For S/390 have a little bit of cross-compiling issues to work through.  Hopeful to get to point that this is integral part of build and notifications.  For now, just ignoring, in terms of merges.  Ongoing work to integrate OpenPOWER.  If interest to adding additional architectures, get in touch with Chris or Ry and look to integrate other archs for builds.  Jira and Gerrit are both up and running.

Actions

• ACTION:  Hackfest preparation and updates (Todd)

• ACTION:  Continue “maturity of software” discussion (Jeremy &* Bill)

• ACTION:  Review Hyperledger Release Taxonomy v0.2 and look at semver (Brian)

• ACTION:  Pull a list of wiki contributors to add to TSC election list (Chris)

• ACTION:  Clean up “contributor” list in preparation for the TSC election (Todd)

• ACTION:  Revise Hyperledger Explorer proposal and bring back to the TSC next week for review/approval. (Chris)