|
Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Hi Everyone, On behalf of the whitepaper working group, I’d like to send out two documents: 1. Our working group charter. This should be extremely straightforward. 2. A “skeleton”—or detailed outline—of the whitepaper. This contains what we think the whitepaper should cover in a reasonable amount of detail. We would like to get approval from the TSC on this skeleton in the not too distant future (certainly not tomorrow though) so that we can proceed to the actual writing of the whitepaper without too much fear of demand for large changes down the road. As such, we would appreciate feedback (and sooner rather than later), so if you have time (particularly the TSC members), please take a moment to read this and let us know what you think. Thank you all for your time, and have a great day. Thanks, Hart
|
|
|
Hello Hart,I finally got a chance to read through
the skeleton and I'm happy with what's in it. One question I have though
is whether it should also include a section on standards.As you know there are plenty of organizations
around the world eager to start developing standards for blockchains. This
is something we discussed when the W3C held its workshop last year and
that keeps popping up all over the place as more and more organizations
look into this. So, I'm thinking that it might be useful to have a section
discussing our position on that front.What do people think?Thanks.
--
Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Web & Blockchain
Open Technologies - IBM Cloud
From:
Hart Montgomery via
hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>To:
"hyperledger-tsc@..."
<hyperledger-tsc@...>Cc:
"renat.k@..."
<renat.k@...>, "stefan.teis@..."
<stefan.teis@...>, Nicholas Gaski/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUSDate:
01/12/2017 12:53 PMSubject:
[Hyperledger
Project TSC] Whitepaper WG UpdatesSent by:
hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
Hi Everyone, On behalf of the whitepaper working group,
I’d like to send out two documents: 1. Our working
group charter. This should be extremely straightforward.2. A “skeleton”—or
detailed outline—of the whitepaper. This contains what we think
the whitepaper should cover in a reasonable amount of detail. We
would like to get approval from the TSC on this skeleton in the not too
distant future (certainly not tomorrow though) so that we can proceed to
the actual writing of the whitepaper without too much fear of demand for
large changes down the road. As such, we would appreciate feedback
(and sooner rather than later), so if you have time (particularly the TSC
members), please take a moment to read this and let us know what you think. Thank you all for your time, and have a
great day. Thanks,Hart [attachment "WhitepaperCharter.pdf"
deleted by Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM] [attachment "HyperledgerSkeleton.pdf"
deleted by Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM] _______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc
|
|
|
Mic Bowman
I agree that a paragraph stating Hyperledger’s position on standards would be useful. The more interesting discussion is what that position should be (which I
think is outside the scope of the WP working group). The architecture wg specifically dropped references to standards in favor of “common” technologies.
--mic
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@... [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...]
On Behalf Of Arnaud Le Hors via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 3:18 AM
To: Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Whitepaper WG Updates
Hello Hart,
I finally got a chance to read through the skeleton and I'm happy with what's in it. One question I have though is whether it should also include a section on standards.
As you know there are plenty of organizations around the world eager to start developing standards for blockchains. This is something we discussed when the W3C held its workshop last year and that
keeps popping up all over the place as more and more organizations look into this. So, I'm thinking that it might be useful to have a section discussing our position on that front.
What do people think?
Thanks.
--
Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Web & Blockchain Open Technologies - IBM Cloud
From: Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
To: "hyperledger-tsc@..." <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Cc: "renat.k@..." <renat.k@...>,
"stefan.teis@..." <stefan.teis@...>, Nicholas Gaski/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
Date: 01/12/2017 12:53 PM
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Whitepaper WG Updates
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
Hi Everyone,
On behalf of the whitepaper working group, I’d like to send out two documents:
1. Our working group charter. This should be extremely straightforward.
2. A “skeleton”—or detailed outline—of the whitepaper. This contains what we think the whitepaper should cover in a reasonable amount of detail. We would like to get approval from the
TSC on this skeleton in the not too distant future (certainly not tomorrow though) so that we can proceed to the actual writing of the whitepaper without too much fear of demand for large changes down the road. As such, we would appreciate feedback (and
sooner rather than later), so if you have time (particularly the TSC members), please take a moment to read this and let us know what you think.
Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.
Thanks,
Hart
[attachment "WhitepaperCharter.pdf" deleted by Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM] [attachment "HyperledgerSkeleton.pdf" deleted by Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM]
_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc
|
|
|
Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Hi Mic, and Arnaud, Thanks for the feedback. Has the TSC (or Hyperledger community in general) even decided upon a position about standards? I’m not aware of any position, other than the fact that using the word “standards” seems to be like using “Voldemort” in the Harry Potter universe. If we have a position, I do think it would be great to include. However, as Mic points out, it seems radically outside the scope of the whitepaper working group to decide this, and until we have a position, I am of the opinion that it should probably not be in the whitepaper (feel free to provide arguments otherwise though). We can certainly discuss this in the working group meeting next week as well, but I think it’s probably best to leave out of the skeleton until we figure out a definitive position. Thanks, Hart
From: Bowman, Mic [mailto:mic.bowman@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:02 AM
To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...>; Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: RE: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Whitepaper WG Updates I agree that a paragraph stating Hyperledger’s position on standards would be useful. The more interesting discussion is what that position should be (which I think is outside the scope of the WP working group). The architecture wg specifically dropped references to standards in favor of “common” technologies. --mic From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@... [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Arnaud Le Hors via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 3:18 AM
To: Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Whitepaper WG Updates Hello Hart,
I finally got a chance to read through the skeleton and I'm happy with what's in it. One question I have though is whether it should also include a section on standards.
As you know there are plenty of organizations around the world eager to start developing standards for blockchains. This is something we discussed when the W3C held its workshop last year and that keeps popping up all over the place as more and more organizations look into this. So, I'm thinking that it might be useful to have a section discussing our position on that front.
What do people think?
Thanks.
--
Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Web & Blockchain Open Technologies - IBM Cloud
From: Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
To: "hyperledger-tsc@..." <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Cc: "renat.k@..." <renat.k@...>, "stefan.teis@..." <stefan.teis@...>, Nicholas Gaski/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
Date: 01/12/2017 12:53 PM
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Whitepaper WG Updates
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
Hi Everyone,
On behalf of the whitepaper working group, I’d like to send out two documents:
1. Our working group charter. This should be extremely straightforward.
2. A “skeleton”—or detailed outline—of the whitepaper. This contains what we think the whitepaper should cover in a reasonable amount of detail. We would like to get approval from the TSC on this skeleton in the not too distant future (certainly not tomorrow though) so that we can proceed to the actual writing of the whitepaper without too much fear of demand for large changes down the road. As such, we would appreciate feedback (and sooner rather than later), so if you have time (particularly the TSC members), please take a moment to read this and let us know what you think.
Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.
Thanks,
Hart
[attachment "WhitepaperCharter.pdf" deleted by Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM] [attachment "HyperledgerSkeleton.pdf" deleted by Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM] _______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc
|
|
|
Middleton, Dan <dan.middleton@...>
Hi Hart,
At the outset of Hyperledger we deemed this space too immature for standards. Rather than standards, Hyperledger intends to build useful technologies deferring
standardization until adoption can be used as an effective indicator in the process.
That is my recollection, at any rate, but it would be good to discuss this normative-reference-topic who-must-not-be-named in the TSC call.
Thanks,
Dan
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@... [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...]
On Behalf Of Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 18:49
To: Bowman, Mic <mic.bowman@...>; Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...>
Cc: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Whitepaper WG Updates
Hi Mic, and Arnaud,
Thanks for the feedback. Has the TSC (or Hyperledger community in general) even decided upon a position about standards? I’m not aware of any position, other
than the fact that using the word “standards” seems to be like using “Voldemort” in the Harry Potter universe. If we have a position, I do think it would be great to include. However, as Mic points out, it seems radically outside the scope of the whitepaper
working group to decide this, and until we have a position, I am of the opinion that it should probably not be in the whitepaper (feel free to provide arguments otherwise though).
We can certainly discuss this in the working group meeting next week as well, but I think it’s probably best to leave out of the skeleton until we figure out
a definitive position.
Thanks,
Hart
I agree that a paragraph stating Hyperledger’s position on standards would be useful. The more interesting discussion is what that position should be (which I
think is outside the scope of the WP working group). The architecture wg specifically dropped references to standards in favor of “common” technologies.
--mic
From:
hyperledger-tsc-bounces@... [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...]
On Behalf Of Arnaud Le Hors via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 3:18 AM
To: Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Whitepaper WG Updates
Hello Hart,
I finally got a chance to read through the skeleton and I'm happy with what's in it. One question I have though is whether it should also include a section on standards.
As you know there are plenty of organizations around the world eager to start developing standards for blockchains. This is something we discussed when the W3C held its workshop last year and that
keeps popping up all over the place as more and more organizations look into this. So, I'm thinking that it might be useful to have a section discussing our position on that front.
What do people think?
Thanks.
--
Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Web & Blockchain Open Technologies - IBM Cloud
From: Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
To: "hyperledger-tsc@..." <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Cc: "renat.k@..." <renat.k@...>,
"stefan.teis@..." <stefan.teis@...>, Nicholas Gaski/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
Date: 01/12/2017 12:53 PM
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Whitepaper WG Updates
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
Hi Everyone,
On behalf of the whitepaper working group, I’d like to send out two documents:
1. Our working group charter. This should be extremely straightforward.
2. A “skeleton”—or detailed outline—of the whitepaper. This contains what we think the whitepaper should cover in a reasonable amount of detail. We would like to get approval from the
TSC on this skeleton in the not too distant future (certainly not tomorrow though) so that we can proceed to the actual writing of the whitepaper without too much fear of demand for large changes down the road. As such, we would appreciate feedback (and
sooner rather than later), so if you have time (particularly the TSC members), please take a moment to read this and let us know what you think.
Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.
Thanks,
Hart
[attachment "WhitepaperCharter.pdf" deleted by Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM] [attachment "HyperledgerSkeleton.pdf" deleted by Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM]
_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc
|
|
|
How does this sound for some language
around standards?
Hyperledger projects are free to implement standards defined by
external standards bodies, so long as there are no IP encumbrances
involved in that implementation that go beyond the standard
Hyperledger licenses (e.g. Apache). It is also acceptable for
developers working on Hyperledger code to represent themselves as
Hyperledger developers when interacting with external standards
bodies. Occasionally, ad-hoc interfaces may arise within
Hyperledger that seem appropriate to elevate as a formal or
cross-industry standard, in which case any developer may feel free
to promote that standard to the relevant external standard body,
ideally with (but not requiring) TSC endorsement.
Brian
On 01/26/2017 06:44 AM, Middleton, Dan via hyperledger-tsc wrote:
Hi
Hart,
At
the outset of Hyperledger we deemed this space too immature
for standards. Rather than standards, Hyperledger intends to
build useful technologies deferring standardization until
adoption can be used as an effective indicator in the
process.
That
is my recollection, at any rate, but it would be good to
discuss this normative-reference-topic who-must-not-be-named
in the TSC call.
Thanks,
Dan
Hi
Mic, and Arnaud,
Thanks
for the feedback. Has the TSC (or Hyperledger community in
general) even decided upon a position about standards? I’m
not aware of any position, other than the fact that using
the word “standards” seems to be like using “Voldemort” in
the Harry Potter universe. If we have a position, I do
think it would be great to include. However, as Mic points
out, it seems radically outside the scope of the whitepaper
working group to decide this, and until we have a position,
I am of the opinion that it should probably not be in the
whitepaper (feel free to provide arguments otherwise
though).
We
can certainly discuss this in the working group meeting next
week as well, but I think it’s probably best to leave out of
the skeleton until we figure out a definitive position.
Thanks,
Hart
I
agree that a paragraph stating Hyperledger’s position on
standards would be useful. The more interesting discussion
is what that position should be (which I think is outside
the scope of the WP working group). The architecture wg
specifically dropped references to standards in favor of
“common” technologies.
--mic
From:
hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
[mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...]
On Behalf Of Arnaud Le Hors via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 3:18 AM
To: Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Whitepaper WG
Updates
Hello
Hart,
I
finally got a chance to read through the skeleton and I'm
happy with what's in it. One question I have though is
whether it should also include a section on standards.
As
you know there are plenty of organizations around the world
eager to start developing standards for blockchains. This is
something we discussed when the W3C held its workshop last
year and that keeps popping up all over the place as more
and more organizations look into this. So, I'm thinking that
it might be useful to have a section discussing our position
on that front.
What
do people think?
Thanks.
--
Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Web &
Blockchain Open Technologies - IBM Cloud
From:
Hart
Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
To:
"hyperledger-tsc@..."
<hyperledger-tsc@...>
Cc:
"renat.k@..."
<renat.k@...>,
"stefan.teis@..."
<stefan.teis@...>,
Nicholas Gaski/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
Date:
01/12/2017
12:53 PM
Subject:
[Hyperledger
Project TSC] Whitepaper WG Updates
Sent
by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
Hi
Everyone,
On
behalf of the whitepaper working group, I’d like to send out
two documents:
1.
Our working group charter. This should be extremely
straightforward.
2.
A “skeleton”—or detailed outline—of the whitepaper.
This contains what we think the whitepaper should cover in
a reasonable amount of detail. We would like to get
approval from the TSC on this skeleton in the not too
distant future (certainly not tomorrow though) so that we
can proceed to the actual writing of the whitepaper without
too much fear of demand for large changes down the road.
As such, we would appreciate feedback (and sooner rather
than later), so if you have time (particularly the TSC
members), please take a moment to read this and let us know
what you think.
Thank
you all for your time, and have a great day.
Thanks,
Hart
[attachment
"WhitepaperCharter.pdf" deleted by Arnaud Le
Hors/Cupertino/IBM] [attachment "HyperledgerSkeleton.pdf"
deleted by Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM]
_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc
_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc
--
Brian Behlendorf
Executive Director, Hyperledger
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf
|
|
|
