Re: SIG Request for Support from Technical Community: Labs and technical documents have been created in isolation so far and don’t tend to connect with projects


VIPIN BHARATHAN
 

Arun SM,

I guess you are referring to Vipin Rathi in your email- 

Labs may become top-level projects like Ursa and Cactus did.
Not all labs want to be top-level projects.

I (Vipin Bharathan) was the sponsor of
inter-carrier-settlements  from telecom-sig for which Vipin Rathi was a maintainer; I had been following the discussion about inter-carrier settlements from the telecom SIG. and I thought it was a worthy project. Inter-carrier settlement was a use-case that was quite active in the UK (independent of the telecom SIG).

nter-carrier-settlements is now archived. 
There was nothing created except for the readme file. Mainly due to the main maintainer being busy with other activity and another one dropping out.

About the licensing issue, I see two projects with no license file, 3 with CC-By-4.0 and of course the one with MIT.
All others (37) have Apache 2.0

Again, to reiterate, the sponsors do not usually engage with the project other than the initial sponsorship.

VipinB 

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


From: tsc@... <tsc@...> on behalf of Arun S M via lists.hyperledger.org <arun.s.m.cse=gmail.com@...>
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2021 2:00 PM
To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...>
Cc: tsc@... <tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger TSC] SIG Request for Support from Technical Community: Labs and technical documents have been created in isolation so far and don’t tend to connect with projects
 
This sounds to me like "I know somebody who the Hyperledger community already knows, that person likes my project so I am proposing it".
I guess the problem Vipin brought up is to make it sound like "I have an idea, let me propose it to Hyperledger labs, if the community likes it then it has potential to become a top level project".
Correct me if I am wrong. This is what I could infer from the SIG members meeting notes.

To simplify the process, we could follow the PR process. The reviewers (stewards or active volunteers) can have direct feedback on necessary parameters.
Brian brought up good points in the earlier thread. The reasons why we cannot simply ignore the concept of a sponsor.

On the point that Vipin brought up - developer pain points, standard process followed etc.
Randomly thinking about these problems, shall we make short videos on explaining them?
Ex: Tell that DCO sign-off is mandatory, show how it looks like and what it means.

Regards,
Arun

On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 2:26 AM Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...> wrote:
As things stand, the role of sponsors is defined with:

"The role of the sponsor is to officially endorse the proposed lab, indicating in doing so that they believe the proposal is worthy of being given a space among the hyperledger labs. Sponsors may also serve as mentors to the project but how much sponsors are involved in the lab beyond its launch is up to them."

See https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/2019+02+14+TSC+Minutes
"Informal decision: no objections so we accept the definition as is."
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM




From:        "VIPIN BHARATHAN" <vip@...>
To:        "tsc@..." <tsc@...>, "bbehlendorf@..." <bbehlendorf@...>
Date:        02/08/2021 09:34 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger TSC] SIG Request for Support from Technical Community: Labs and technical documents have been created in isolation so far and don’t tend to connect with projects
Sent by:        tsc@...



Brian,

I agree that governance should be imposed. DCOs are enforced by the rules setup inside the labs for example.

Sponsors do not do any of the other tasks than "sponsor" the projects, basically a review of the proposal, Lab Stewards do that as well.

In fact we have been having discussions about "processes that encourage contribution; using Git correctly" etc. for all projects, not just the labs. These efforts can be extended to labs as well.
Let us be very clear about what the Sponsors actually do (or don't do) before we say we require them.

Thanks

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



From: tsc@... <tsc@...> on behalf of Brian Behlendorf via lists.hyperledger.org <bbehlendorf=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Sent:
Monday, February 8, 2021 3:05 PM
To:
tsc@... <tsc@...>
Subject:
Re: [Hyperledger TSC] SIG Request for Support from Technical Community: Labs and technical documents have been created in isolation so far and don’t tend to connect with projects

 
There are some basic things we need the developers involved with each effort within Labs to do (for example, using DCOs), and some things they should be doing (using processes that encourage contribution; using Git correctly; etc). Labs that don't do them create operational, reputational, and potentially legal liability for Hyperledger. That liability is on the shoulders of the TSC and Governing Board, who delegate it down to the Labs stewards.

If the Labs stewards are happy policing for and enforcing the things that must be done, and working with communities on the things that should be done, then great. But the point of Sponsors has always been to fan out those responsibilities and efforts to a larger group who could be trusted to perform those roles. Attaching that limit to other maintainers helped ensure it was people who understood those needs and shoulds (though we could always do a better job documenting them). If there aren't enough volunteers for that work, that quite reasonably sets a limit to the number of projects we should have in Labs. It had very little to do with evaluating the quality of a Labs proposal, except to infer that poor quality proposals might not attract a qualified Sponsor.

The TSC can choose to do away with the Sponsor requirement, but not with the responsibilities for governance. If that's preferred, let's just create a page linking to github repositories (hosted by other organizations) of projects we think are doing good things but are otherwise not overseeing.

Brian

On 2/8/21 6:34 AM, VIPIN BHARATHAN wrote:
Currently, there are no asks for the sponsor except to stand behind the process of application, they are not expected to engage beyond that point.

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



From: Arun .S.M. <arun.s.m.cse@...>
Sent:
Monday, February 8, 2021 9:05 AM
To:
VIPIN BHARATHAN
<vip@...>
Cc:
tracy.a.kuhrt@...<tracy.a.kuhrt@...>; lehors@...<lehors@...>; SIG-Chairs@...<SIG-Chairs@...>; tsc@...<tsc@...>
Subject:
Re: [Hyperledger TSC] SIG Request for Support from Technical Community: Labs and technical documents have been created in isolation so far and don’t tend to connect with projects

 
It could be because I don't know about it much further.
Is the sponsor of the project held accountable with additional responsibility?

For example, does it become the sponsor's responsibility to ensure the project follows Hyperledger's guidelines, guide through for a couple of months for best practices etc?
If this is the case then let's discuss how these can be delegated off from the sponsor's shoulder to anybody else in the community.

Regards,
Arun


--
Brian Behlendorf
Managing Director for Blockchain, Healthcare and Identity
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf


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