Re: Rollover of projects tied to a single other project (was Re: [Hyperledger TSC] TSC Agenda for Aug 20, 2020)


Arun S M
 

Hi,

I wanted to join these discussion threads for a while now, and feel like this is a best topic to start on.

The proposal looks good and in my opinion, this is a solution to the aftermath problem. I would like to take a step back and discuss what led us to such scenarios. I have jotted down a few thoughts on it in the comment section. The approach is to reform the project lifecycle and distribute responsibility of a project to a diverse set of people, rather than just relying on project maintainers. Happy to discuss more live on the call.

Regards,
Arun

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 1:20 AM Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...> wrote:
Hi Hart,

I think that makes sense. As I said on our last call, I would also expect the TSC to talk to the maintainers of the project before making any decision for that matter.
I have now drafted a proposal which states that explicitly. I invite everyone to check it out and comment:
https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Rollover+of+projects+tied+to+a+single+other+project

Regards. I hope everything is fine with you too.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM




From:        "hmontgomery@..." <hmontgomery@...>
To:        Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...>, "Technical Steering Committee (TSC)" <tsc@...>
Date:        08/27/2020 11:48 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger TSC] TSC Agenda for Aug 20, 2020
Sent by:        tsc@...




Hi Everyone,

If we are going to continue the discussion on projects that end up being tied to a single framework (which it looks like people wanted to do), can we (as a TSC) formally solicit the opinion of the maintainers of those projects?  In the discussions we've had so far (well, at least in this iteration of the extended "subprojects" debate) we haven't heard from anyone who is a maintainer in these projects.  It would be nice to hear the reasons why they are independent projects, and why they want to stay that way (assuming they do--but maybe they don't; for instance, if the "parent" project doesn't want them).  This would give us a lot of perspective on this issue, as I think none of the "home" projects of any of the TSC members are any of the projects we've discussed as one of these "tied to a single framework" projects.

What does everyone think about this?  If there is still momentum for this discussion (and the vote last week seemed to indicate that there was, even accounting for the "coffee" voters), I think it would be useful to decide on a list of projects that we consider falling into this category, and then asking what the maintainers of those projects think.

I hope everyone is doing OK in these difficult times.  Thanks for your time, and have a great day.

Thanks,
Hart


From: tsc@... <tsc@...> on behalf of Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...>
Sent:
Tuesday, August 18, 2020 11:37 PM
To:
Technical Steering Committee (TSC) <tsc@...>
Subject:
[Hyperledger TSC] TSC Agenda for Aug 20, 2020

 
Hi all,

We only have one agenda item so if anyone wants to add anything please go ahead. In any case, I'd like to continue the discussion we started last week with regard to how we manage projects that end up being tied to a single framework.


https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2020-08-20+TSC+Agenda

Please, note that several quarterly reports are due.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM



Join tsc@lists.hyperledger.org to automatically receive all group messages.