Date   
Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Thomas Hardjono
 

I think the whitepaper should callout some the "design principles" of Hyperledger, something that the community is contributing to the world -- beyond the lifetime of the Hyperledger projects. Something that people will recall 20 years from now.

Looking at the long history of the IETF ("...running code and rough consensus) it's worth noting that in the early 1990s even the IETF had to work-out (fight over) some design principles for the nascent Internet routing. One of these is the end-to-end principle, which is now taken for granted.

So in addition to writing code, the Hyperledger community could do well in producing these "design principles of the future blockchain systems".

Some examples (in lay language):

(1) Separation of consensus-making protocol from ledger maintenance mechanisms.

(2) Separation of block syntax from transaction semantics.

(3) Separation of person-identity from transaction-identity.

Etc. etc. Lots more.

I can lend a hand if the TSC needs help writing.


/thomas/




------------------------------------------
Thomas Hardjono
MIT Connection Science & Engineering
connection.mit.edu
------------------------------------------

From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@... [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Mark Parzygnat via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 1:29 PM
To: vipin bharathan
Cc: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...; hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

+1

A benefit of the whitepaper would be to not just call out terms and theories that are equivalent across projects, but include the key differentiators to help guide folks to the appropriate project best suited for their needs and comfort level (code base developed on, link to key feature sets and what they mean as this should be more living documentation than the white paper itself, etc... probably not a difference in target users).

We've all seen newcomers ask, which project is best for me, or what's the difference....
Regards



vipin bharathan via hyperledger-tsc ---10/17/2016 11:48:55 AM---Hi, The issue of whether the Whitepaper is technical enough for people to get

From: vipin bharathan via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
To: Baohua Yang <@baohua>
Cc: hyperledger-tsc@...
Date: 10/17/2016 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
________________________________________



Hi,
The issue of whether the Whitepaper is technical enough for people to get started and build a working prototype or a vision paper is due to the basic tension between the idea of Hyperledger as an umbrella concept and the fact there are at least two (if not three with Iroha) specific projects under incubation.
This is further complicated by the fact that the paper had its genesis in the OBC whitepaper.
So, we have to decide what should the Hyperledger whitepaper cover? (NOT what the Fabric, STL, Iroha or Corda whitepaper cover).
As far as the Hyperledger whitepaper, it could be a vision paper with general architectural principles laid out and enough technical discussion on the various points that are generic to all DLTs. Which means not only the currently incubation DLTs but also any emergent ones . (obviously to a limited extent, as future technical solutions cannot be fully predicted).
Individual DLTs under incubation can have their own technical yellow paper and a whitepaper. The Hyperledger Whitepaper will have a link to a location that have links to Fabric, STL, Iroha whitepapers or include them in the appendix.
Regards,
Vipin

On Oct 17, 2016 11:15 AM, "Baohua Yang via hyperledger-tsc" <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
Love the idea, however, this may results in late WP releasing and more efforts.

On the other hand, the joining of new projects are still happening often, will we wait when it's more stable?

We can certainly add briefs of each existing project's scope, however.

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Sheehan Anderson via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
I agree that the Hyperledger Project Whitepaper should provide enough info to point people in the right direction to get started using the technology. Should each project under the umbrella receive a paragraph where they state their objectives and goals and link to the project’s specific whitepaper? It may be nice to come up with a standard feature matrix that each project could fill out based on the common vocabulary defined in the whitepaper. For example, private/public, smart contracts, consensus algorithm, etc. These may require a living part of the paper so it may make sense to maintain the into elsewhere. What I'd like to see though is a single 'quick overview' of each project without having to delve into each project's individual whitepaper.

-Sheehan

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Richard Brown via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
I agree with the points made below. To my mind, it feels like there should be a logical progression across a series of papers:

• Hyperledger Project Whitepaper (the thing we’re currently discussing I guess!)
o This should be the technical ‘manifesto’ for the Project. What do we believe? What problems are we solving? What are the defining characteristics of the field and the aspects that unite us?
o The reader of this paper should be left understanding exactly what the project is for, what it means for a codebase to be part of the project and where the project is going
o For those who haven’t seen it, we tried to do this – but in a more narrow sense – in the first sections of the introductory whitepaper for Corda (http://r3cev.com/s/corda-introductory-whitepaper-final.pdf). Chapters 2 and 3 (Context and Vision) are our attempt at describing what we think defines the distributed ledger space, what problems this tech can solve and it does so from the context of financial services.
o Perhaps something like that but written more broadly/expansively is called for?
• Whitepapers for specific Hyperledger Project projects
o ie a Fabric whitepaper, an STL whitepaper, etc, etc, etc.
o A reader of one of these papers should come away understanding that platform’s unique objectives, design and architecture.
o The paper should probably reference the overall Project whitepaper but the purpose of these whitepapers is to leave the reader with complete clarity as to the overall design/architecture/purpose/objectives of a particular codebase.


Richard

Richard Gendal Brown
R3 | Chief Technology Officer
City Tower, Floor Fifteen
40 Basinghall Street
London, EC2V 5DE
Cell: +44 776 466 6821
richard@... | www.r3cev.com

Email Disclaimer

From: <hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...> on behalf of Christopher Ferris via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Reply-To: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@...>
Date: Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 16:42
To: Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: "hyperledger-tsc@..." <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Mic, thanks for starting this thread.

Hart, I tend to think that #1 is definitely a target audience, and that #2 is a subset of #1 that will actually get their hands dirty.

So, basically, I think of this as providing the concepts that Mic outlined (I tend to agree that this should be the scope) and that we provide enough meat to point people in the right direction to get started either collaborating or using the technologies we are collectively creating.

It should also be a call to action for others to come play.

Chris

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
Thank you for the objective summary Mic. To follow up on this, I think it’s also important to consider what audience we are targeting. Are we intending the whitepaper for:

1. People who are not currently involved in Hyperledger. In this case, the whitepaper is essentially a technical marketing document designed to drive interest in Hyperledger. We list the features and some of the vision, but keep everything very high-level.
2. People who are getting started using Hyperledger. This was (in my opinion—I obviously didn’t write the OBC whitepaper) the initial conception of the whitepaper, as it focused on basic technical details and features, and was a good first read for a technical person who wanted to understand how Hyperledger worked. However, as Hyperledger has matured and the whitepaper has moved away from the original IBM OBC whitepaper, this is not totally the focus anymore (and doesn’t necessarily have to be), although new Hyperledger users still seem to be the main audience of the current whitepaper.
3. Current Hyperledger developers/users. If this is the case, the document becomes a sort of manifesto, and we would want to focus on high-level architectural requirements, vision, and goals of the project. The whitepaper’s current emphasis on modular structure seems to fall somewhat into this category.

I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer here, and we could obviously mix and match who we are targeting (i.e. some sections target #1, others #2). However, it would be nice to know what the community and TSC think the audience of the whitepaper should be, as the expected audience will heavily impact how we need to rewrite the whitepaper.

Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.
Hart

From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@... [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Bowman, Mic via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:34 AM
To: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Per our discussion in the TSC call this morning about getting clarity for the purpose & objectives of the HLP white paper.

Here are the “candidate” objectives for the white paper we’ve been discussing in the white paper working group. We felt like these reflected the various high level comments provided during the feedback session a couple weeks ago. These are intended as a starting point for the discussion.

• Call for action to back and drive the HLP as the preeminent means for advancing distributed ledger technologies
• Capture the concepts of the 'Umbrella organization' and clarify
• Establish a common vocabulary for discussing technology and usages
• Establish a future vision of HLP… where do we see HLP 1, 2, 4 years from now

_______________________________________________
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


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc




--
Best wishes!

Baohua Yang

https://yeasy.github.io

_______________________________________________
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

Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Mark Parzygnat <markparz@...>
 

+1

A benefit of the whitepaper would be to not just call out terms and theories that are equivalent across projects, but include the key differentiators to help guide folks to the appropriate project best suited for their needs and comfort level (code base developed on, link to key feature sets and what they mean as this should be more living documentation than the white paper itself, etc... probably not a difference in target users).

We've all seen newcomers ask, which project is best for me, or what's the difference....

Regards




vipin bharathan via hyperledger-tsc ---10/17/2016 11:48:55 AM---Hi, The issue of whether the Whitepaper is technical enough for people to get

From: vipin bharathan via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
To: Baohua Yang <yangbaohua@...>
Cc: hyperledger-tsc@...
Date: 10/17/2016 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...





Hi,
The issue of whether the Whitepaper is technical enough for people to get started and build a working prototype or a vision paper is due to the basic tension between the idea of Hyperledger as an umbrella concept and the fact there are at least two (if not three with Iroha) specific projects under incubation.

This is further complicated by the fact that the paper had its genesis in the OBC whitepaper.

So, we have to decide what should the Hyperledger whitepaper cover? (NOT what the Fabric, STL, Iroha or Corda whitepaper cover).

As far as the Hyperledger whitepaper, it could be a vision paper with general architectural principles laid out and enough technical discussion on the various points that are generic to all DLTs. Which means not only the currently incubation DLTs but also any emergent ones .  (obviously to a limited extent, as future technical solutions cannot be fully predicted).

Individual DLTs under incubation can have their own technical yellow paper and a whitepaper. The Hyperledger Whitepaper will have a link to a location that have links to Fabric, STL, Iroha whitepapers   or include them in the appendix.

Regards,
Vipin


On Oct 17, 2016 11:15 AM, "Baohua Yang via hyperledger-tsc" <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:

    Love the idea, however, this may results in late WP releasing and more efforts.

    On the other hand, the joining of new projects are still happening often, will we wait when it's more stable?

    We can certainly add briefs of each existing project's scope, however.

    On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Sheehan Anderson via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
    I agree that the Hyperledger Project Whitepaper should provide enough info to point people in the right direction to get started using the technology. Should each project under the umbrella receive a paragraph where they state their objectives and goals and link to the project’s specific whitepaper? It may be nice to come up with a standard feature matrix that each project could fill out based on the common vocabulary defined in the whitepaper. For example, private/public, smart contracts, consensus algorithm, etc. These may require a living part of the paper so it may make sense to maintain the into elsewhere. What I'd like to see though is a single 'quick overview' of each project without having to delve into each project's individual whitepaper.

    -Sheehan

    On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Richard Brown via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
      I agree with the points made below.   To my mind, it feels like there should be a logical progression across a series of papers:

       

      ·         Hyperledger Project Whitepaper (the thing we’re currently discussing I guess!)

              o    This should be the technical ‘manifesto’ for the Project.  What do we believe? What problems are we solving? What are the defining characteristics of the field and the aspects that unite us? 

              o    The reader of this paper should be left understanding exactly what the project is for, what it means for a codebase to be part of the project and where the project is going

              o    For those who haven’t seen it, we tried to do this – but in a more narrow sense – in the first sections of the introductory whitepaper for Corda (http://r3cev.com/s/corda-introductory-whitepaper-final.pdf).    Chapters 2 and 3 (Context and Vision) are our attempt at describing what we think defines the distributed ledger space, what problems this tech can solve and it does so from the context of financial services.   

              o    Perhaps something like that but written more broadly/expansively is called for? 

      ·         Whitepapers for specific Hyperledger Project projects
              o    ie a Fabric whitepaper, an STL whitepaper, etc, etc, etc.  

              o    A reader of one of these papers should come away understanding that platform’s unique objectives, design and architecture.

              o    The paper should probably reference the overall Project whitepaper but the purpose of these whitepapers is to leave the reader with complete clarity as to the overall design/architecture/purpose/objectives of a particular codebase.

       

       

      Richard

       

      Richard Gendal Brown

      R3 | Chief Technology Officer

      City Tower, Floor Fifteen

      40 Basinghall Street

      London, EC2V 5DE

      Cell: +44 776 466 6821

      richard@... | www.r3cev.com

       

      Email Disclaimer

       

          From: <hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...> on behalf of Christopher Ferris via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
          Reply-To:
          Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@...>
          Date:
          Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 16:42
          To:
          Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
          Cc:
          "hyperledger-tsc@..." <hyperledger-tsc@...>
          Subject:
          Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

           

          Mic, thanks for starting this thread.

           

          Hart, I tend to think that #1 is definitely a target audience, and that #2 is a subset of #1 that will actually get their hands dirty. 

           

          So, basically, I think of this as providing the concepts that Mic outlined (I tend to agree that this should be the scope) and that we provide enough meat to point people in the right direction to get started either collaborating or using the technologies we are collectively creating.

           

          It should also be a call to action for others to come play.

           

          Chris

           

          On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:

          Thank you for the objective summary Mic.  To follow up on this, I think it’s also important to consider what audience we are targeting.  Are we intending the whitepaper for:

           

          1.        People who are not currently involved in Hyperledger.  In this case, the whitepaper is essentially a technical marketing document designed to drive interest in Hyperledger.  We list the features and some of the vision, but keep everything very high-level.

          2.        People who are getting started using Hyperledger.  This was (in my opinion—I obviously didn’t write the OBC whitepaper) the initial conception of the whitepaper, as it focused on basic technical details and features, and was a good first read for a technical person who wanted to understand how Hyperledger worked.  However, as Hyperledger has matured and the whitepaper has moved away from the original IBM OBC whitepaper, this is not totally the focus anymore (and doesn’t necessarily have to be), although new Hyperledger users still seem to be the main audience of the current whitepaper.

          3.        Current Hyperledger developers/users.  If this is the case, the document becomes a sort of manifesto, and we would want to focus on high-level architectural requirements, vision, and goals of the project.  The whitepaper’s current emphasis on modular structure seems to fall somewhat into this category.

           

          I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer here, and we could obviously mix and match who we are targeting (i.e. some sections target #1, others #2).   However, it would be nice to know what the community and TSC think the audience of the whitepaper should be, as the expected audience will heavily impact how we need to rewrite the whitepaper.

           

          Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.

          Hart

           

          From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@... [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Bowman, Mic via hyperledger-tsc
          Sent:
          Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:34 AM
          To:
          hyperledger-tsc@...
          Subject:
          [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

           

          Per our discussion in the TSC call this morning about getting clarity for the purpose & objectives of the HLP white paper.

           

          Here are the “candidate” objectives for the white paper we’ve been discussing in the white paper working group. We felt like these reflected the various high level comments provided during the feedback session a couple weeks ago. These are intended as a starting point for the discussion.

           

          ·        Call for action to back and drive the HLP as the preeminent means for advancing distributed ledger technologies

          ·        Capture the concepts of the 'Umbrella organization' and clarify

          ·        Establish a common vocabulary for discussing technology and usages

          ·        Establish a future vision of HLP… where do we see HLP 1, 2, 4 years from now


          _______________________________________________
          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


    _______________________________________________
    hyperledger-tsc mailing list
    hyperledger-tsc@...
    https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc




    --
    Best wishes!

    Baohua Yang


    https://yeasy.github.io

    _______________________________________________
    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



Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Vipin Bharathan
 

Hi,
The issue of whether the Whitepaper is technical enough for people to get started and build a working prototype or a vision paper is due to the basic tension between the idea of Hyperledger as an umbrella concept and the fact there are at least two (if not three with Iroha) specific projects under incubation.

This is further complicated by the fact that the paper had its genesis in the OBC whitepaper.

So, we have to decide what should the Hyperledger whitepaper cover? (NOT what the Fabric, STL, Iroha or Corda whitepaper cover).

As far as the Hyperledger whitepaper, it could be a vision paper with general architectural principles laid out and enough technical discussion on the various points that are generic to all DLTs. Which means not only the currently incubation DLTs but also any emergent ones .  (obviously to a limited extent, as future technical solutions cannot be fully predicted).

Individual DLTs under incubation can have their own technical yellow paper and a whitepaper. The Hyperledger Whitepaper will have a link to a location that have links to Fabric, STL, Iroha whitepapers   or include them in the appendix.

Regards,
Vipin


On Oct 17, 2016 11:15 AM, "Baohua Yang via hyperledger-tsc" <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
Love the idea, however, this may results in late WP releasing and more efforts.

On the other hand, the joining of new projects are still happening often, will we wait when it's more stable?

We can certainly add briefs of each existing project's scope, however.

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Sheehan Anderson via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org> wrote:
I agree that the Hyperledger Project Whitepaper should provide enough info to point people in the right direction to get started using the technology. Should each project under the umbrella receive a paragraph where they state their objectives and goals and link to the project’s specific whitepaper? It may be nice to come up with a standard feature matrix that each project could fill out based on the common vocabulary defined in the whitepaper. For example, private/public, smart contracts, consensus algorithm, etc. These may require a living part of the paper so it may make sense to maintain the into elsewhere. What I'd like to see though is a single 'quick overview' of each project without having to delve into each project's individual whitepaper.

-Sheehan

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Richard Brown via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...dger.org> wrote:

I agree with the points made below.   To my mind, it feels like there should be a logical progression across a series of papers:

 

·         Hyperledger Project Whitepaper (the thing we’re currently discussing I guess!)

o    This should be the technical ‘manifesto’ for the Project.  What do we believe? What problems are we solving? What are the defining characteristics of the field and the aspects that unite us? 

o    The reader of this paper should be left understanding exactly what the project is for, what it means for a codebase to be part of the project and where the project is going

o    For those who haven’t seen it, we tried to do this – but in a more narrow sense – in the first sections of the introductory whitepaper for Corda (http://r3cev.com/s/corda-introductory-whitepaper-final.pdf).    Chapters 2 and 3 (Context and Vision) are our attempt at describing what we think defines the distributed ledger space, what problems this tech can solve and it does so from the context of financial services.   

o    Perhaps something like that but written more broadly/expansively is called for? 

·         Whitepapers for specific Hyperledger Project projects

o    ie a Fabric whitepaper, an STL whitepaper, etc, etc, etc.  

o    A reader of one of these papers should come away understanding that platform’s unique objectives, design and architecture.

o    The paper should probably reference the overall Project whitepaper but the purpose of these whitepapers is to leave the reader with complete clarity as to the overall design/architecture/purpose/objectives of a particular codebase.

 

 

Richard

 

Richard Gendal Brown

R3 | Chief Technology Officer

City Tower, Floor Fifteen

40 Basinghall Street

London, EC2V 5DE

Cell: +44 776 466 6821

richard@... | www.r3cev.com

 

Email Disclaimer

 

From: <hyperledger-tsc-bounces@lists.hyperledger.org> on behalf of Christopher Ferris via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...dger.org>
Reply-To: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@...>
Date: Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 16:42
To: Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: "hyperledger-tsc@...dger.org" <hyperledger-tsc@...dger.org>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Mic, thanks for starting this thread.

 

Hart, I tend to think that #1 is definitely a target audience, and that #2 is a subset of #1 that will actually get their hands dirty. 

 

So, basically, I think of this as providing the concepts that Mic outlined (I tend to agree that this should be the scope) and that we provide enough meat to point people in the right direction to get started either collaborating or using the technologies we are collectively creating.

 

It should also be a call to action for others to come play.

 

Chris

 

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...dger.org> wrote:

Thank you for the objective summary Mic.  To follow up on this, I think it’s also important to consider what audience we are targeting.  Are we intending the whitepaper for:

 

1.        People who are not currently involved in Hyperledger.  In this case, the whitepaper is essentially a technical marketing document designed to drive interest in Hyperledger.  We list the features and some of the vision, but keep everything very high-level.

2.        People who are getting started using Hyperledger.  This was (in my opinion—I obviously didn’t write the OBC whitepaper) the initial conception of the whitepaper, as it focused on basic technical details and features, and was a good first read for a technical person who wanted to understand how Hyperledger worked.  However, as Hyperledger has matured and the whitepaper has moved away from the original IBM OBC whitepaper, this is not totally the focus anymore (and doesn’t necessarily have to be), although new Hyperledger users still seem to be the main audience of the current whitepaper.

3.        Current Hyperledger developers/users.  If this is the case, the document becomes a sort of manifesto, and we would want to focus on high-level architectural requirements, vision, and goals of the project.  The whitepaper’s current emphasis on modular structure seems to fall somewhat into this category.

 

I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer here, and we could obviously mix and match who we are targeting (i.e. some sections target #1, others #2).   However, it would be nice to know what the community and TSC think the audience of the whitepaper should be, as the expected audience will heavily impact how we need to rewrite the whitepaper.

 

Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.

Hart

 

From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@lists.hyperledger.org [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Bowman, Mic via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:34 AM
To: hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Per our discussion in the TSC call this morning about getting clarity for the purpose & objectives of the HLP white paper.

 

Here are the “candidate” objectives for the white paper we’ve been discussing in the white paper working group. We felt like these reflected the various high level comments provided during the feedback session a couple weeks ago. These are intended as a starting point for the discussion.

 

·        Call for action to back and drive the HLP as the preeminent means for advancing distributed ledger technologies

·        Capture the concepts of the 'Umbrella organization' and clarify

·        Establish a common vocabulary for discussing technology and usages

·        Establish a future vision of HLP… where do we see HLP 1, 2, 4 years from now


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc

 


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc



_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc




--
Best wishes!

Baohua Yang


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Baohua Yang
 

Love the idea, however, this may results in late WP releasing and more efforts.

On the other hand, the joining of new projects are still happening often, will we wait when it's more stable?

We can certainly add briefs of each existing project's scope, however.

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Sheehan Anderson via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
I agree that the Hyperledger Project Whitepaper should provide enough info to point people in the right direction to get started using the technology. Should each project under the umbrella receive a paragraph where they state their objectives and goals and link to the project’s specific whitepaper? It may be nice to come up with a standard feature matrix that each project could fill out based on the common vocabulary defined in the whitepaper. For example, private/public, smart contracts, consensus algorithm, etc. These may require a living part of the paper so it may make sense to maintain the into elsewhere. What I'd like to see though is a single 'quick overview' of each project without having to delve into each project's individual whitepaper.

-Sheehan

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Richard Brown via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org> wrote:

I agree with the points made below.   To my mind, it feels like there should be a logical progression across a series of papers:

 

·         Hyperledger Project Whitepaper (the thing we’re currently discussing I guess!)

o    This should be the technical ‘manifesto’ for the Project.  What do we believe? What problems are we solving? What are the defining characteristics of the field and the aspects that unite us? 

o    The reader of this paper should be left understanding exactly what the project is for, what it means for a codebase to be part of the project and where the project is going

o    For those who haven’t seen it, we tried to do this – but in a more narrow sense – in the first sections of the introductory whitepaper for Corda (http://r3cev.com/s/corda-introductory-whitepaper-final.pdf).    Chapters 2 and 3 (Context and Vision) are our attempt at describing what we think defines the distributed ledger space, what problems this tech can solve and it does so from the context of financial services.   

o    Perhaps something like that but written more broadly/expansively is called for? 

·         Whitepapers for specific Hyperledger Project projects

o    ie a Fabric whitepaper, an STL whitepaper, etc, etc, etc.  

o    A reader of one of these papers should come away understanding that platform’s unique objectives, design and architecture.

o    The paper should probably reference the overall Project whitepaper but the purpose of these whitepapers is to leave the reader with complete clarity as to the overall design/architecture/purpose/objectives of a particular codebase.

 

 

Richard

 

Richard Gendal Brown

R3 | Chief Technology Officer

City Tower, Floor Fifteen

40 Basinghall Street

London, EC2V 5DE

Cell: +44 776 466 6821

richard@... | www.r3cev.com

 

Email Disclaimer

 

From: <hyperledger-tsc-bounces@lists.hyperledger.org> on behalf of Christopher Ferris via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...dger.org>
Reply-To: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@...>
Date: Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 16:42
To: Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: "hyperledger-tsc@...dger.org" <hyperledger-tsc@...dger.org>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Mic, thanks for starting this thread.

 

Hart, I tend to think that #1 is definitely a target audience, and that #2 is a subset of #1 that will actually get their hands dirty. 

 

So, basically, I think of this as providing the concepts that Mic outlined (I tend to agree that this should be the scope) and that we provide enough meat to point people in the right direction to get started either collaborating or using the technologies we are collectively creating.

 

It should also be a call to action for others to come play.

 

Chris

 

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...dger.org> wrote:

Thank you for the objective summary Mic.  To follow up on this, I think it’s also important to consider what audience we are targeting.  Are we intending the whitepaper for:

 

1.        People who are not currently involved in Hyperledger.  In this case, the whitepaper is essentially a technical marketing document designed to drive interest in Hyperledger.  We list the features and some of the vision, but keep everything very high-level.

2.        People who are getting started using Hyperledger.  This was (in my opinion—I obviously didn’t write the OBC whitepaper) the initial conception of the whitepaper, as it focused on basic technical details and features, and was a good first read for a technical person who wanted to understand how Hyperledger worked.  However, as Hyperledger has matured and the whitepaper has moved away from the original IBM OBC whitepaper, this is not totally the focus anymore (and doesn’t necessarily have to be), although new Hyperledger users still seem to be the main audience of the current whitepaper.

3.        Current Hyperledger developers/users.  If this is the case, the document becomes a sort of manifesto, and we would want to focus on high-level architectural requirements, vision, and goals of the project.  The whitepaper’s current emphasis on modular structure seems to fall somewhat into this category.

 

I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer here, and we could obviously mix and match who we are targeting (i.e. some sections target #1, others #2).   However, it would be nice to know what the community and TSC think the audience of the whitepaper should be, as the expected audience will heavily impact how we need to rewrite the whitepaper.

 

Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.

Hart

 

From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@lists.hyperledger.org [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Bowman, Mic via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:34 AM
To: hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Per our discussion in the TSC call this morning about getting clarity for the purpose & objectives of the HLP white paper.

 

Here are the “candidate” objectives for the white paper we’ve been discussing in the white paper working group. We felt like these reflected the various high level comments provided during the feedback session a couple weeks ago. These are intended as a starting point for the discussion.

 

·        Call for action to back and drive the HLP as the preeminent means for advancing distributed ledger technologies

·        Capture the concepts of the 'Umbrella organization' and clarify

·        Establish a common vocabulary for discussing technology and usages

·        Establish a future vision of HLP… where do we see HLP 1, 2, 4 years from now


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc

 


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc



_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc




--
Best wishes!

Baohua Yang

Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Sheehan Anderson
 

I agree that the Hyperledger Project Whitepaper should provide enough info to point people in the right direction to get started using the technology. Should each project under the umbrella receive a paragraph where they state their objectives and goals and link to the project’s specific whitepaper? It may be nice to come up with a standard feature matrix that each project could fill out based on the common vocabulary defined in the whitepaper. For example, private/public, smart contracts, consensus algorithm, etc. These may require a living part of the paper so it may make sense to maintain the into elsewhere. What I'd like to see though is a single 'quick overview' of each project without having to delve into each project's individual whitepaper.

-Sheehan

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 9:36 PM, Richard Brown via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:

I agree with the points made below.   To my mind, it feels like there should be a logical progression across a series of papers:

 

·         Hyperledger Project Whitepaper (the thing we’re currently discussing I guess!)

o    This should be the technical ‘manifesto’ for the Project.  What do we believe? What problems are we solving? What are the defining characteristics of the field and the aspects that unite us? 

o    The reader of this paper should be left understanding exactly what the project is for, what it means for a codebase to be part of the project and where the project is going

o    For those who haven’t seen it, we tried to do this – but in a more narrow sense – in the first sections of the introductory whitepaper for Corda (http://r3cev.com/s/corda-introductory-whitepaper-final.pdf).    Chapters 2 and 3 (Context and Vision) are our attempt at describing what we think defines the distributed ledger space, what problems this tech can solve and it does so from the context of financial services.   

o    Perhaps something like that but written more broadly/expansively is called for? 

·         Whitepapers for specific Hyperledger Project projects

o    ie a Fabric whitepaper, an STL whitepaper, etc, etc, etc.  

o    A reader of one of these papers should come away understanding that platform’s unique objectives, design and architecture.

o    The paper should probably reference the overall Project whitepaper but the purpose of these whitepapers is to leave the reader with complete clarity as to the overall design/architecture/purpose/objectives of a particular codebase.

 

 

Richard

 

Richard Gendal Brown

R3 | Chief Technology Officer

City Tower, Floor Fifteen

40 Basinghall Street

London, EC2V 5DE

Cell: +44 776 466 6821

richard@... | www.r3cev.com

 

Email Disclaimer

 

From: <hyperledger-tsc-bounces@lists.hyperledger.org> on behalf of Christopher Ferris via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org>
Reply-To: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@...>
Date: Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 16:42
To: Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: "hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org" <hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Mic, thanks for starting this thread.

 

Hart, I tend to think that #1 is definitely a target audience, and that #2 is a subset of #1 that will actually get their hands dirty. 

 

So, basically, I think of this as providing the concepts that Mic outlined (I tend to agree that this should be the scope) and that we provide enough meat to point people in the right direction to get started either collaborating or using the technologies we are collectively creating.

 

It should also be a call to action for others to come play.

 

Chris

 

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org> wrote:

Thank you for the objective summary Mic.  To follow up on this, I think it’s also important to consider what audience we are targeting.  Are we intending the whitepaper for:

 

1.        People who are not currently involved in Hyperledger.  In this case, the whitepaper is essentially a technical marketing document designed to drive interest in Hyperledger.  We list the features and some of the vision, but keep everything very high-level.

2.        People who are getting started using Hyperledger.  This was (in my opinion—I obviously didn’t write the OBC whitepaper) the initial conception of the whitepaper, as it focused on basic technical details and features, and was a good first read for a technical person who wanted to understand how Hyperledger worked.  However, as Hyperledger has matured and the whitepaper has moved away from the original IBM OBC whitepaper, this is not totally the focus anymore (and doesn’t necessarily have to be), although new Hyperledger users still seem to be the main audience of the current whitepaper.

3.        Current Hyperledger developers/users.  If this is the case, the document becomes a sort of manifesto, and we would want to focus on high-level architectural requirements, vision, and goals of the project.  The whitepaper’s current emphasis on modular structure seems to fall somewhat into this category.

 

I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer here, and we could obviously mix and match who we are targeting (i.e. some sections target #1, others #2).   However, it would be nice to know what the community and TSC think the audience of the whitepaper should be, as the expected audience will heavily impact how we need to rewrite the whitepaper.

 

Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.

Hart

 

From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@lists.hyperledger.org [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Bowman, Mic via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:34 AM
To: hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Per our discussion in the TSC call this morning about getting clarity for the purpose & objectives of the HLP white paper.

 

Here are the “candidate” objectives for the white paper we’ve been discussing in the white paper working group. We felt like these reflected the various high level comments provided during the feedback session a couple weeks ago. These are intended as a starting point for the discussion.

 

·        Call for action to back and drive the HLP as the preeminent means for advancing distributed ledger technologies

·        Capture the concepts of the 'Umbrella organization' and clarify

·        Establish a common vocabulary for discussing technology and usages

·        Establish a future vision of HLP… where do we see HLP 1, 2, 4 years from now


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc

 


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Richard Brown <richard@...>
 

I agree with the points made below.   To my mind, it feels like there should be a logical progression across a series of papers:

 

·         Hyperledger Project Whitepaper (the thing we’re currently discussing I guess!)

o    This should be the technical ‘manifesto’ for the Project.  What do we believe? What problems are we solving? What are the defining characteristics of the field and the aspects that unite us? 

o    The reader of this paper should be left understanding exactly what the project is for, what it means for a codebase to be part of the project and where the project is going

o    For those who haven’t seen it, we tried to do this – but in a more narrow sense – in the first sections of the introductory whitepaper for Corda (http://r3cev.com/s/corda-introductory-whitepaper-final.pdf).    Chapters 2 and 3 (Context and Vision) are our attempt at describing what we think defines the distributed ledger space, what problems this tech can solve and it does so from the context of financial services.   

o    Perhaps something like that but written more broadly/expansively is called for? 

·         Whitepapers for specific Hyperledger Project projects

o    ie a Fabric whitepaper, an STL whitepaper, etc, etc, etc.  

o    A reader of one of these papers should come away understanding that platform’s unique objectives, design and architecture.

o    The paper should probably reference the overall Project whitepaper but the purpose of these whitepapers is to leave the reader with complete clarity as to the overall design/architecture/purpose/objectives of a particular codebase.

 

 

Richard

 

Richard Gendal Brown

R3 | Chief Technology Officer

City Tower, Floor Fifteen

40 Basinghall Street

London, EC2V 5DE

Cell: +44 776 466 6821

richard@... | www.r3cev.com

 

Email Disclaimer

 

From: <hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...> on behalf of Christopher Ferris via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Reply-To: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@...>
Date: Thursday, 13 October 2016 at 16:42
To: Hart Montgomery <hmontgomery@...>
Cc: "hyperledger-tsc@..." <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Mic, thanks for starting this thread.

 

Hart, I tend to think that #1 is definitely a target audience, and that #2 is a subset of #1 that will actually get their hands dirty. 

 

So, basically, I think of this as providing the concepts that Mic outlined (I tend to agree that this should be the scope) and that we provide enough meat to point people in the right direction to get started either collaborating or using the technologies we are collectively creating.

 

It should also be a call to action for others to come play.

 

Chris

 

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:

Thank you for the objective summary Mic.  To follow up on this, I think it’s also important to consider what audience we are targeting.  Are we intending the whitepaper for:

 

1.        People who are not currently involved in Hyperledger.  In this case, the whitepaper is essentially a technical marketing document designed to drive interest in Hyperledger.  We list the features and some of the vision, but keep everything very high-level.

2.        People who are getting started using Hyperledger.  This was (in my opinion—I obviously didn’t write the OBC whitepaper) the initial conception of the whitepaper, as it focused on basic technical details and features, and was a good first read for a technical person who wanted to understand how Hyperledger worked.  However, as Hyperledger has matured and the whitepaper has moved away from the original IBM OBC whitepaper, this is not totally the focus anymore (and doesn’t necessarily have to be), although new Hyperledger users still seem to be the main audience of the current whitepaper.

3.        Current Hyperledger developers/users.  If this is the case, the document becomes a sort of manifesto, and we would want to focus on high-level architectural requirements, vision, and goals of the project.  The whitepaper’s current emphasis on modular structure seems to fall somewhat into this category.

 

I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer here, and we could obviously mix and match who we are targeting (i.e. some sections target #1, others #2).   However, it would be nice to know what the community and TSC think the audience of the whitepaper should be, as the expected audience will heavily impact how we need to rewrite the whitepaper.

 

Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.

Hart

 

From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@... [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Bowman, Mic via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:34 AM
To: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Per our discussion in the TSC call this morning about getting clarity for the purpose & objectives of the HLP white paper.

 

Here are the “candidate” objectives for the white paper we’ve been discussing in the white paper working group. We felt like these reflected the various high level comments provided during the feedback session a couple weeks ago. These are intended as a starting point for the discussion.

 

·        Call for action to back and drive the HLP as the preeminent means for advancing distributed ledger technologies

·        Capture the concepts of the 'Umbrella organization' and clarify

·        Establish a common vocabulary for discussing technology and usages

·        Establish a future vision of HLP… where do we see HLP 1, 2, 4 years from now


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc

 

[Hyperledger Project TSC] Minutes / October 13th, 2016

Todd Benzies <tbenzies@...>
 

Hyperledger Project

Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting

October 13, 2016 (7:00am - 8:00am PT)

via GoToMeeting


TSC Members

Arnaud Le Hors

Yes

Binh Nguyen

Yes

Christopher Ferris

Yes

Dan Middleton

Yes

Greg Haskins

Yes

Hart Montgomery

Yes

Mic Bowman

Yes

Murali Krishna Katipalli

Yes

Richard Brown


Sheehan Anderson

Yes

Tamas Blummer

Yes


Resources:


Agenda

  • Quick updates

  • Iroha (Makoto Takemiya) Proposal & Source

  • Java Chaincode demo (Satheesh Kathamuthu, DTCC)

  • Incident procedure in code of conduct (Arnaud)

  • Numbering scheme for HIP

  • WG Updates


Action Item Review

  • December Hackfest

    • Looking to hold a Hackfest in New York on Decemeber 5th & 6th, if you have space to host this, please contact Todd (tbenzies@...)

  • wiki.hyperledger.org migration

    • Restricted editing access on the Github wiki -- please put all future updates on wiki.hyperledger.org and continue to migrate your old content over.

  • Communication Tools - evaluating discuss.hyperledger.org (please create your account, if you have not already)

    • More achievable than Slack, not necessarily looking to get rid of Slack

    • Discourse is better for threading and archiving

    • There may be some things we can do to integrate

    • Brian B:  Would love to see if Discourse is an appealing alternative to email.  Could also explore alternatives to Slack (like RocketChat).  But, let’s first get through Discourse evaluation task.

    • CF:  If there are other ideas or other tools -- please let us know!

  • Whitepaper WG update (Dave Voell)

    • A few weeks since whitepaper walkthrough -- seeking guidance from the TSC and technical community on aligning the overall vision/objectives for this paper.

    • With the message that Hyperledger is more towards “umbrella org,” need to incorporate this into the overall direction of paper.

    • Mic:  Want a commitment from the TSC on the set of objectives for the whitepaper.

    • DRAFT:  https://wiki.hyperledger.org/groups/whitepaper/whitepaper-wg

    • Brian B:  Where do you prefer comments?

      • Mic:  First we need to establish objectives, as opposed to comments on the doc.

      • Muali:  suggest to add this as a topic at the members meeting, too.

    • TSC thread has started on this topic

    • Encourage all to attend the next meeting:

      • October 19th at 1:00pm ET

      • United States Toll free: 1 866 215 2642

      • United States International direct: +1 617 597 5043

      • Passcode: 9324 9799#


HIP:  Iroha (Makoto Takemiya)

  • Proposal

  • Source

  • Mic:  What are the objectives for modularity?

  • MT:  Current draft is very rough… we want to make each piece less dependent on each other.

  • Mic:  To what extent has current code base been tested and how to describe maturity?

  • MT:  Current is still very rough -- has been tested with some use case partners in Japan.  But, this is an advantage to bring into incubation stage at this point.

  • Hart:  Like vision of modular components.  At what point do you expect to achieve modularity?  Early on or do you want to have a complete ledger and then focus on modularity.

  • MT:  Want feature-complete version first.  At API level already looking at ways to bring things together.  Create cross-chain transactions between Iroha and Fabric (can do with STL, as well).

  • VOTE:  Unanimously approved.


Java Chaincode demo (Satheesh Kathamuthu, DTCC)

  • Satheesh Kathamuthu provided a demo of Java Chaincode

  • Recording


WG Updates

[please send over via email]


Actions

  • December Hackfest preparation

  • wiki.hyperledger.org migration

  • Communication Tools

  • Topics for next week:

    • Numbering scheme for HIP (Vipin)

    • Incident procedure in code of conduct (Arnaud)

--
Todd Benzies
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)
Skype: tbenzies

Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Agenda for October 13th, 2016

Christopher Ferris
 

Just a reminder, if the WG leads could send a short update for their respective WGs that would be appreciated.

Chris

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Todd Benzies via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
  • Quick updates
  • Iroha (Makoto Takemiya) Proposal Source
  • Java Chaincode demo (Satheesh Kathamuthu, DTCC)
  • Incident procedure in code of conduct (Arnaud)
  • Numbering scheme for HIP
  • WG Updates

--
Todd Benzies
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)
Skype: tbenzies

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Christopher Ferris
 

Mic, thanks for starting this thread.

Hart, I tend to think that #1 is definitely a target audience, and that #2 is a subset of #1 that will actually get their hands dirty. 

So, basically, I think of this as providing the concepts that Mic outlined (I tend to agree that this should be the scope) and that we provide enough meat to point people in the right direction to get started either collaborating or using the technologies we are collectively creating.

It should also be a call to action for others to come play.

Chris

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Hart Montgomery via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:

Thank you for the objective summary Mic.  To follow up on this, I think it’s also important to consider what audience we are targeting.  Are we intending the whitepaper for:

 

1.        People who are not currently involved in Hyperledger.  In this case, the whitepaper is essentially a technical marketing document designed to drive interest in Hyperledger.  We list the features and some of the vision, but keep everything very high-level.

2.        People who are getting started using Hyperledger.  This was (in my opinion—I obviously didn’t write the OBC whitepaper) the initial conception of the whitepaper, as it focused on basic technical details and features, and was a good first read for a technical person who wanted to understand how Hyperledger worked.  However, as Hyperledger has matured and the whitepaper has moved away from the original IBM OBC whitepaper, this is not totally the focus anymore (and doesn’t necessarily have to be), although new Hyperledger users still seem to be the main audience of the current whitepaper.

3.        Current Hyperledger developers/users.  If this is the case, the document becomes a sort of manifesto, and we would want to focus on high-level architectural requirements, vision, and goals of the project.  The whitepaper’s current emphasis on modular structure seems to fall somewhat into this category.

 

I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer here, and we could obviously mix and match who we are targeting (i.e. some sections target #1, others #2).   However, it would be nice to know what the community and TSC think the audience of the whitepaper should be, as the expected audience will heavily impact how we need to rewrite the whitepaper.

 

Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.

Hart

 

From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@lists.hyperledger.org [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Bowman, Mic via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:34 AM
To: hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Per our discussion in the TSC call this morning about getting clarity for the purpose & objectives of the HLP white paper.

 

Here are the “candidate” objectives for the white paper we’ve been discussing in the white paper working group. We felt like these reflected the various high level comments provided during the feedback session a couple weeks ago. These are intended as a starting point for the discussion.

 

·        Call for action to back and drive the HLP as the preeminent means for advancing distributed ledger technologies

·        Capture the concepts of the 'Umbrella organization' and clarify

·        Establish a common vocabulary for discussing technology and usages

·        Establish a future vision of HLP… where do we see HLP 1, 2, 4 years from now


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

hmontgomery@us.fujitsu.com
 

Thank you for the objective summary Mic.  To follow up on this, I think it’s also important to consider what audience we are targeting.  Are we intending the whitepaper for:

 

1.        People who are not currently involved in Hyperledger.  In this case, the whitepaper is essentially a technical marketing document designed to drive interest in Hyperledger.  We list the features and some of the vision, but keep everything very high-level.

2.        People who are getting started using Hyperledger.  This was (in my opinion—I obviously didn’t write the OBC whitepaper) the initial conception of the whitepaper, as it focused on basic technical details and features, and was a good first read for a technical person who wanted to understand how Hyperledger worked.  However, as Hyperledger has matured and the whitepaper has moved away from the original IBM OBC whitepaper, this is not totally the focus anymore (and doesn’t necessarily have to be), although new Hyperledger users still seem to be the main audience of the current whitepaper.

3.        Current Hyperledger developers/users.  If this is the case, the document becomes a sort of manifesto, and we would want to focus on high-level architectural requirements, vision, and goals of the project.  The whitepaper’s current emphasis on modular structure seems to fall somewhat into this category.

 

I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer here, and we could obviously mix and match who we are targeting (i.e. some sections target #1, others #2).   However, it would be nice to know what the community and TSC think the audience of the whitepaper should be, as the expected audience will heavily impact how we need to rewrite the whitepaper.

 

Thank you all for your time, and have a great day.

Hart

 

From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@... [mailto:hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Bowman, Mic via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:34 AM
To: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

 

Per our discussion in the TSC call this morning about getting clarity for the purpose & objectives of the HLP white paper.

 

Here are the “candidate” objectives for the white paper we’ve been discussing in the white paper working group. We felt like these reflected the various high level comments provided during the feedback session a couple weeks ago. These are intended as a starting point for the discussion.

 

·        Call for action to back and drive the HLP as the preeminent means for advancing distributed ledger technologies

·        Capture the concepts of the 'Umbrella organization' and clarify

·        Establish a common vocabulary for discussing technology and usages

·        Establish a future vision of HLP… where do we see HLP 1, 2, 4 years from now

[Hyperledger Project TSC] white paper objectives

Mic Bowman
 

Per our discussion in the TSC call this morning about getting clarity for the purpose & objectives of the HLP white paper.

 

Here are the “candidate” objectives for the white paper we’ve been discussing in the white paper working group. We felt like these reflected the various high level comments provided during the feedback session a couple weeks ago. These are intended as a starting point for the discussion.

 

·        Call for action to back and drive the HLP as the preeminent means for advancing distributed ledger technologies

·        Capture the concepts of the 'Umbrella organization' and clarify

·        Establish a common vocabulary for discussing technology and usages

·        Establish a future vision of HLP… where do we see HLP 1, 2, 4 years from now

[Hyperledger Project TSC] Agenda for October 13th, 2016

Todd Benzies <tbenzies@...>
 

  • Quick updates
  • Iroha (Makoto Takemiya) Proposal Source
  • Java Chaincode demo (Satheesh Kathamuthu, DTCC)
  • Incident procedure in code of conduct (Arnaud)
  • Numbering scheme for HIP
  • WG Updates

--
Todd Benzies
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)
Skype: tbenzies

Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] hyperledger-tsc Digest, Vol 9, Issue 11

Todd Benzies <tbenzies@...>
 

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the note -- all really great questions.  At this juncture, we are simply evaluating Discourse (discuss.hyperledger.org) as a potential solution (we are not forcing an abrupt end to Slack, nor definitively moving forward with Discourse).  We feel that it is important for the technical community to be able to "kick the tires" and test out a platform's functionality.

But, given the limitations of Slack (and sometimes mailman lists) as raised by many in the technical community, we are hopeful to find a suitable solution to resolve any concerns.  Discourse is not necessarily meant to replace Slack in its entirety, but there are many discussions happening on Slack (or mailman lists) that likely make more sense on a different platform (from searchability, transparency, and ease of engagement from the broader community).

The initial discussion started in a variety of places, but was more formally raised in the Technical Steering Committee call in early September (and has remained on the weekly agenda, since).  If you are not already participating in these calls, please do -- they are open to all.  (Call-in details at https://github.com/hyperledger/hyperledger/wiki/Technical-Steering-Committee).

The main concerns with Slack are a 10,000 message limit (which has made a vast amount of historical context unavailable), a paid platform that is unaffordable, as well as poor search functionality (and lack of threading).  Discourse seemed to solve many of these concerns which led to us setting up this test instance.  Obviously the real-time chat functionality of Slack remains important.


Ultimately we are trying to find a steady-state suite of tools to enable the community to operate efficiently and transparently, as well as create an environment that is easy for newcomers to navigate and get up to speed.

Please have a look at Discourse and let us know both the good and bad on the thread mentioned above.  We really value the feedback from the technical community.  We will also discuss this in this week's TSC call.

Regards,

Todd

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Mark Morris via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...> wrote:
Where can I find the genesis thread or conversation that started this abrupt suggested move to this Slack alternative called Discourse? True we need to replace Slack. We are not making a knee-jerk or biased decision are we? Because there are several alternatives and competitors to Slack. I've been away for a few days, so I ask, was this move put to the community for discussion prior to selecting this Slack alternative (I cannot find any prior conversation)? Was there a list and community voting? Or was this decided by the maintainers and Hyperledger authoritative members? I am asking these questions because I want to understand how decisions are made and where the proposals like these come from. I just want to understand the decision making dynamics within Hyperledger. Thanks.


On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 7:00 AM, <hyperledger-tsc-request@lists.hyperledger.org> wrote:
Send hyperledger-tsc mailing list submissions to
        hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        hyperledger-tsc-request@lists.hyperledger.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        hyperledger-tsc-owner@...perledger.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of hyperledger-tsc digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Evaluating Discourse as a Slack   alternative (Todd Benzies)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:38:56 -0700
From: Todd Benzies <tbenzies@...>
To: hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org,
        hyperledger-discuss@...rledger.org
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Evaluating Discourse as a Slack
        alternative
Message-ID:
        <CAP31P8uc7v5fnJSDHfzC8r5SWi2S8bApHder+P17XKahscrd3g@...ail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Given the limitations of Slack as raised by the Community, we are
evaluating moving to Discourse as an alternative.  As such, if you have not
already, please create an account at check out
http://discuss.hyperledger.org/.

--
*Todd Benzies*
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)
tbenzies@...
Skype: tbenzies
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/attachments/20161010/78cda2ae/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...ger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


End of hyperledger-tsc Digest, Vol 9, Issue 11
**********************************************


_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc




--
Todd Benzies
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)
Skype: tbenzies

Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] hyperledger-tsc Digest, Vol 9, Issue 11

Mark Morris <markamorris2003@...>
 

Where can I find the genesis thread or conversation that started this abrupt suggested move to this Slack alternative called Discourse? True we need to replace Slack. We are not making a knee-jerk or biased decision are we? Because there are several alternatives and competitors to Slack. I've been away for a few days, so I ask, was this move put to the community for discussion prior to selecting this Slack alternative (I cannot find any prior conversation)? Was there a list and community voting? Or was this decided by the maintainers and Hyperledger authoritative members? I am asking these questions because I want to understand how decisions are made and where the proposals like these come from. I just want to understand the decision making dynamics within Hyperledger. Thanks.


On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 7:00 AM, <hyperledger-tsc-request@...> wrote:
Send hyperledger-tsc mailing list submissions to
        hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        hyperledger-tsc-request@lists.hyperledger.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        hyperledger-tsc-owner@lists.hyperledger.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of hyperledger-tsc digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Evaluating Discourse as a Slack   alternative (Todd Benzies)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:38:56 -0700
From: Todd Benzies <tbenzies@...>
To: hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org,
        hyperledger-discuss@lists.hyperledger.org
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] Evaluating Discourse as a Slack
        alternative
Message-ID:
        <CAP31P8uc7v5fnJSDHfzC8r5SWi2S8bApHder+P17XKahscrd3g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Given the limitations of Slack as raised by the Community, we are
evaluating moving to Discourse as an alternative.  As such, if you have not
already, please create an account at check out
http://discuss.hyperledger.org/.

--
*Todd Benzies*
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)
tbenzies@...
Skype: tbenzies
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/attachments/20161010/78cda2ae/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@lists.hyperledger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


End of hyperledger-tsc Digest, Vol 9, Issue 11
**********************************************

[Hyperledger Project TSC] Evaluating Discourse as a Slack alternative

Todd Benzies <tbenzies@...>
 

Given the limitations of Slack as raised by the Community, we are evaluating moving to Discourse as an alternative.  As such, if you have not already, please create an account at check out http://discuss.hyperledger.org/.

--
Todd Benzies
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)
Skype: tbenzies

Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?

Mark Parzygnat <markparz@...>
 

Just a thought

I'd propose a 'test' hackathon in Dec based on the roadmap the community should be a phase of hardening the code, so while most are working in test driven development mode. I think it would make sense and be a great opportunity to build more complex test structures, education, and even doc.

-Mark


Brian Behlendorf via hyperledger-tsc ---10/05/2016 12:18:40 PM---Let's talk about all the options on tomorrow's TSC call. I know others will be travelling in from

From: Brian Behlendorf via hyperledger-tsc <hyperledger-tsc@...>
To:
Cc: "'hyperledger-tsc@...'" <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Date: 10/05/2016 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...





Let's talk about all the options on tomorrow's TSC call.  I know others will be travelling in from out of town so finding something that works for most is key.  Maybe another city near NYC, like Philly or DC.  But it'll partly depend on whether we can find a space in time.

Brian

On 10/05/2016 01:02 AM, Binh Q Nguyen wrote:
      since it'll be Winter, i was wondering if any chance in Charlotte, NC? it's a banking hub, not big as NY, but perhaps many Fabric developers could attend to help out since only a short driving distance from Raleigh area.

      - Binh


"Haskins, Gregory via hyperledger-tsc" ---10/04/2016 05:17:44 PM---> -----Original Message----- > From: Haskins, Gregory

From:
"Haskins, Gregory via hyperledger-tsc" <hyperledger-tsc@...>
To:
"'Brian Behlendorf'" <bbehlendorf@...>, "'hyperledger-tsc@...'" <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Date:
10/04/2016 05:17 PM
Subject:
Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
Sent by:
hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...







> -----Original Message-----
> From: Haskins, Gregory
> Sent: 04 October 2016 11:08
> To: 'Brian Behlendorf'; '
hyperledger-tsc@...'
> Subject: RE: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> I am based in MA so NYC is fairly easy trip for me.  I should be able to make it.
>
> -Greg
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
> > [
mailto:hyperledger- tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of
> > Brian Behlendorf via hyperledger-tsc
> > Sent: 04 October 2016 09:17
> > To:
hyperledger-tsc@...
> > Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
> >
> > We're having a good time here at the Amsterdam Hackfest, with about 50
> > attendees and some good (raw!) conversation.
> >
> > Our next scheduled Hackfest would be early December.  We are planning
> > a Hyperledger Members' meeting in NYC around that time, December 7th
> > and 8th.  While I'd love greater geographic diversity, there are
> > clearly many of us in NYC or could get there more easily, especially
> > given end of the year travel budgets.  If we had a hackfest on Dec 5th
> > and 6th, how many of you could attend?
> >
> > It would be great to have a critical mass of TSC members in addition
> > to wider community participation.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> > --
> > Brian Behlendorf
> > Executive Director at the Hyperledger Project
> >
bbehlendorf@...
> > Twitter: @brianbehlendorf
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > hyperledger-tsc mailing list
> >
hyperledger-tsc@...
> >
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


Please read these warnings and restrictions:

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the ordinary user of the e-mail address to which it was addressed. It may contain legally privileged and/or CONFIDENTIAL information.

The unauthorised use, disclosure, distribution and/or copying of this e-mail or any information it contains is prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, constitute a criminal offence.

If you have received this e-mail in error or are not an intended recipient please inform London Stock Exchange Group (“LSEG”) immediately by return e-mail or telephone 020 7797 1000.

We advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient of this e-mail should ensure that it is virus free. We do not accept responsibility for any virus that may be transferred by way of this e-mail.

E-mail may be susceptible to data corruption, interception and unauthorised amendment, and we do not accept liability for any such corruption, interception or amendment or any consequences thereof.

Calls to London Stock Exchange Group may be recorded to enable LSEG to carry out its regulatory responsibilities.

London Stock Exchange Group plc

10 Paternoster Square
London
EC4M 7LS

Registered in England and Wales No 05369106

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list

hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


--
Brian Behlendorf
Executive Director at the Hyperledger Project
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf
_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


[Hyperledger Project TSC] Minutes / October 6th, 2016

Todd Benzies <tbenzies@...>
 

Hyperledger Project

Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting

October 6, 2016 (7:00am - 8:00am PT)

via GoToMeeting


TSC Members

Arnaud Le Hors

Yes

Binh Nguyen


Christopher Ferris

Yes

Dan Middleton

Yes

Greg Haskins

Yes

Hart Montgomery

Yes

Mic Bowman

Yes

Murali Krishna Katipalli

Yes

Richard Brown

Yes

Sheehan Anderson


Tamas Blummer



Resources:


Agenda

  • Action Item Review

  • HIP:  Iroha (Makoto Takemiya)

  • Java Chaincode demo (Satheesh Kathamuthu, DTCC)

  • WG updates


Action Item Review

  • Hackfest/Hackathon readout from EU (Chris) and ongoing planning (Todd)

    • Held a Hackathon (competition style with prizes) and a Hackfest (working on Hyperledger codebase, help onboard new people, architectural issues, etc.) in Amsterdam this last week, hosted by ABN AMRO

    • Hackathon -- 20 teams of 5-6 each.  12 “geniuses” from HLP technical community, judges including Brian/Chris.  36 hour event.

    • Applications ranging from mobile voting app, healthcare records, insurance for delayed flights, fintech,etc.

    • Use cases here

    • CF:  would be useful to develop “Hackathon in a box”

    • Mic:  talked about having a public test network up -- would be great to have a place to showcase the best applications that come out of these

    • Hackfest -- roughly 60 attended.  Saw some new participants F2F (SWIFT, Accenture, CLS, Santander, etc.), as well as some more people to STL

    • December -- hold a Hackfest?  Should it be in New York?

      • General consensus was that New York on December 5th & 6th in advance of Members Summit is doable.  Todd to look for space and connect back up with TSC before confirming anything.

  • Chris Ferris to pull together thoughts on snapshot release in Hyperledger Release Taxonomy v0.4 and circulate via email

    • VOTE:  Unanimously approved

  • Finalize wiki.hyperledger.org migration plan in 10/6 TSC call

    • Update since TSC call:  plugins have been installed

    • No major objections at this point, start migration early next week.  Need to lock Github wiki prior to migration.

    • Plan to leave the pages that Georg has migrated to Dokuwiki and continue to build from there.

    • Todd to migrate TSC info, WG owners to migrate their own info.

  • Communication Tools (Brian/Todd) - pushed to next week

  • Numbering scheme for HIP (Vipin) - pushed to next week


HIP:  Iroha (Makoto Takemiya)

  • Proposal

  • Source

  • Discussion recording

  • As we ran out of time on this call and several TSC members had to drop (no longer had quorum), please continue Q&A via mailing list and we will revisit this topic in next week’s TSC meeting.


Java Chaincode demo (Satheesh Kathamuthu, DTCC)

  • Pushed to next week


WG Updates

[please send over via email]


Actions

  • December Hackfest preparation

  • wiki.hyperledger.org migration

  • Communication Tools

  • Agenda topics for next week:

    • Iroha proposal

    • Java Chaincode demo (Satheesh Kathamuthu, DTCC)

    • Numbering scheme for HIP (Vipin)

    • Incident procedure in code of conduct (Arnaud)

--
Todd Benzies
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)
Skype: tbenzies

Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] hyperledger-tsc Digest, Vol 9, Issue 6

Ann Reynolds <ann.f.reynolds@...>
 

I can do it.
Rgds,
Ann Reynolds
ann.f.reynolds@...
908 456 3968

On Oct 5, 2016, at 4:02 AM, hyperledger-tsc-request@... wrote:

Send hyperledger-tsc mailing list submissions to
hyperledger-tsc@...

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
hyperledger-tsc-request@...

You can reach the person managing the list at
hyperledger-tsc-owner@...

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of hyperledger-tsc digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Re: December Hackfest in NYC? (Arnaud Le Hors)
2. Re: December Hackfest in NYC? (Tom Menner)
3. Re: December Hackfest in NYC? (Binh Q Nguyen)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 20:19:50 +0200
From: "Arnaud Le Hors" <lehors@...>
To: "'Brian Behlendorf'" <bbehlendorf@...>,
"'hyperledger-tsc@...'"
<hyperledger-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
Message-ID:
<OFBAA5B446.9E17926A-ONC1258042.00550410-C1258042.0064B162@...>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I think I'd be able to make it.
--
Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies -
IBM Cloud




From: "Haskins, Gregory via hyperledger-tsc"
<hyperledger-tsc@...>
To: "'Brian Behlendorf'" <bbehlendorf@...>,
"'hyperledger-tsc@...'"
<hyperledger-tsc@...>
Date: 10/04/2016 05:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...





-----Original Message-----
From: Haskins, Gregory
Sent: 04 October 2016 11:08
To: 'Brian Behlendorf'; 'hyperledger-tsc@...'
Subject: RE: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?

Hi Brian,

I am based in MA so NYC is fairly easy trip for me. I should be able to
make it.

-Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
[mailto:hyperledger- tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of
Brian Behlendorf via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: 04 October 2016 09:17
To: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?

We're having a good time here at the Amsterdam Hackfest, with about 50
attendees and some good (raw!) conversation.

Our next scheduled Hackfest would be early December. We are planning
a Hyperledger Members' meeting in NYC around that time, December 7th
and 8th. While I'd love greater geographic diversity, there are
clearly many of us in NYC or could get there more easily, especially
given end of the year travel budgets. If we had a hackfest on Dec 5th
and 6th, how many of you could attend?

It would be great to have a critical mass of TSC members in addition
to wider community participation.

Brian


--
Brian Behlendorf
Executive Director at the Hyperledger Project
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc

Please read these warnings and restrictions:

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for
the ordinary user of the e-mail address to which it was addressed. It may
contain legally privileged and/or CONFIDENTIAL information.

The unauthorised use, disclosure, distribution and/or copying of this
e-mail or any information it contains is prohibited and could, in certain
circumstances, constitute a criminal offence.

If you have received this e-mail in error or are not an intended recipient
please inform London Stock Exchange Group (?LSEG?) immediately by return
e-mail or telephone 020 7797 1000.

We advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient of
this e-mail should ensure that it is virus free. We do not accept
responsibility for any virus that may be transferred by way of this
e-mail.

E-mail may be susceptible to data corruption, interception and
unauthorised amendment, and we do not accept liability for any such
corruption, interception or amendment or any consequences thereof.

Calls to London Stock Exchange Group may be recorded to enable LSEG to
carry out its regulatory responsibilities.

London Stock Exchange Group plc

10 Paternoster Square
London
EC4M 7LS

Registered in England and Wales No 05369106

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/attachments/20161004/8cb79af6/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 14:20:30 -0400
From: Tom Menner <tmenner@...>
To: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
Message-ID: <36b818f2-ff78-c38f-d3e2-3613e9065c15@...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

Hi Brian -

As you know IBM is sponsoring a hackathon in NYC this coming weekend,
ostensibly on the IBM platforms (LinuxOne and Bluemix), but we are also
taking care to advertise this as a Hyperledger-related project. We had
huge interest in this hackathon and had to turn many registrants away,
so I do think that a Hyperledger HackFest in December would be
well-attended by the wider community at least.

Tom Menner
Senior Solution Architect for Payments, Blockchain, B2B and Digital Commerce
IBM Commerce
tmenner@... / @tmenner #blockchain



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 10:02:37 +0200
From: "Binh Q Nguyen" <binhn@...>
To: "Haskins, Gregory" <GHaskins@...>
Cc: "'hyperledger-tsc@...'"
<hyperledger-tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
Message-ID:
<OF6B2C89F4.019B53F8-ONC1258043.002BE925-C1258043.002C2FB1@...>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

since it'll be Winter, i was wondering if any chance in Charlotte, NC?
it's a banking hub, not big as NY, but perhaps many Fabric developers could
attend to help out since only a short driving distance from Raleigh area.

- Binh



From: "Haskins, Gregory via hyperledger-tsc"
<hyperledger-tsc@...>
To: "'Brian Behlendorf'" <bbehlendorf@...>,
"'hyperledger-tsc@...'"
<hyperledger-tsc@...>
Date: 10/04/2016 05:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...





-----Original Message-----
From: Haskins, Gregory
Sent: 04 October 2016 11:08
To: 'Brian Behlendorf'; 'hyperledger-tsc@...'
Subject: RE: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?

Hi Brian,

I am based in MA so NYC is fairly easy trip for me. I should be able to
make it.

-Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
[mailto:hyperledger- tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of
Brian Behlendorf via hyperledger-tsc
Sent: 04 October 2016 09:17
To: hyperledger-tsc@...
Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?

We're having a good time here at the Amsterdam Hackfest, with about 50
attendees and some good (raw!) conversation.

Our next scheduled Hackfest would be early December. We are planning
a Hyperledger Members' meeting in NYC around that time, December 7th
and 8th. While I'd love greater geographic diversity, there are
clearly many of us in NYC or could get there more easily, especially
given end of the year travel budgets. If we had a hackfest on Dec 5th
and 6th, how many of you could attend?

It would be great to have a critical mass of TSC members in addition
to wider community participation.

Brian


--
Brian Behlendorf
Executive Director at the Hyperledger Project
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc

Please read these warnings and restrictions:

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for
the ordinary user of the e-mail address to which it was addressed. It may
contain legally privileged and/or CONFIDENTIAL information.

The unauthorised use, disclosure, distribution and/or copying of this
e-mail or any information it contains is prohibited and could, in certain
circumstances, constitute a criminal offence.

If you have received this e-mail in error or are not an intended recipient
please inform London Stock Exchange Group (?LSEG?) immediately by return
e-mail or telephone 020 7797 1000.

We advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient of
this e-mail should ensure that it is virus free. We do not accept
responsibility for any virus that may be transferred by way of this e-mail.

E-mail may be susceptible to data corruption, interception and unauthorised
amendment, and we do not accept liability for any such corruption,
interception or amendment or any consequences thereof.

Calls to London Stock Exchange Group may be recorded to enable LSEG to
carry out its regulatory responsibilities.

London Stock Exchange Group plc

10 Paternoster Square
London
EC4M 7LS

Registered in England and Wales No 05369106

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/attachments/20161005/799bdf37/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.hyperledger.org/pipermail/hyperledger-tsc/attachments/20161005/799bdf37/attachment.gif>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


End of hyperledger-tsc Digest, Vol 9, Issue 6
*********************************************

Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?

Brian Behlendorf
 

Let's talk about all the options on tomorrow's TSC call.  I know others will be travelling in from out of town so finding something that works for most is key.  Maybe another city near NYC, like Philly or DC.  But it'll partly depend on whether we can find a space in time.

Brian

On 10/05/2016 01:02 AM, Binh Q Nguyen wrote:

since it'll be Winter, i was wondering if any chance in Charlotte, NC? it's a banking hub, not big as NY, but perhaps many Fabric developers could attend to help out since only a short driving distance from Raleigh area.

- Binh

"Haskins, Gregory via hyperledger-tsc" ---10/04/2016 05:17:44 PM---> -----Original Message----- > From: Haskins, Gregory

From: "Haskins, Gregory via hyperledger-tsc" <hyperledger-tsc@...>
To: "'Brian Behlendorf'" <bbehlendorf@...>, "'hyperledger-tsc@...'" <hyperledger-tsc@...>
Date: 10/04/2016 05:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
Sent by: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...







> -----Original Message-----
> From: Haskins, Gregory
> Sent: 04 October 2016 11:08
> To: 'Brian Behlendorf'; 'hyperledger-tsc@...'
> Subject: RE: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> I am based in MA so NYC is fairly easy trip for me.  I should be able to make it.
>
> -Greg
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: hyperledger-tsc-bounces@...
> > [
mailto:hyperledger- tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of
> > Brian Behlendorf via hyperledger-tsc
> > Sent: 04 October 2016 09:17
> > To: hyperledger-tsc@...
> > Subject: [Hyperledger Project TSC] December Hackfest in NYC?
> >
> > We're having a good time here at the Amsterdam Hackfest, with about 50
> > attendees and some good (raw!) conversation.
> >
> > Our next scheduled Hackfest would be early December.  We are planning
> > a Hyperledger Members' meeting in NYC around that time, December 7th
> > and 8th.  While I'd love greater geographic diversity, there are
> > clearly many of us in NYC or could get there more easily, especially
> > given end of the year travel budgets.  If we had a hackfest on Dec 5th
> > and 6th, how many of you could attend?
> >
> > It would be great to have a critical mass of TSC members in addition
> > to wider community participation.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> > --
> > Brian Behlendorf
> > Executive Director at the Hyperledger Project
> > bbehlendorf@...
> > Twitter: @brianbehlendorf
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > hyperledger-tsc mailing list
> > hyperledger-tsc@...
> >
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc


Please read these warnings and restrictions:

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the ordinary user of the e-mail address to which it was addressed. It may contain legally privileged and/or CONFIDENTIAL information.

The unauthorised use, disclosure, distribution and/or copying of this e-mail or any information it contains is prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, constitute a criminal offence.

If you have received this e-mail in error or are not an intended recipient please inform London Stock Exchange Group (“LSEG”) immediately by return e-mail or telephone 020 7797 1000.

We advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient of this e-mail should ensure that it is virus free. We do not accept responsibility for any virus that may be transferred by way of this e-mail.

E-mail may be susceptible to data corruption, interception and unauthorised amendment, and we do not accept liability for any such corruption, interception or amendment or any consequences thereof.

Calls to London Stock Exchange Group may be recorded to enable LSEG to carry out its regulatory responsibilities.

London Stock Exchange Group plc

10 Paternoster Square
London
EC4M 7LS

Registered in England and Wales No 05369106

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-tsc mailing list
hyperledger-tsc@...
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-tsc





-- 
Brian Behlendorf
Executive Director at the Hyperledger Project
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf

[Hyperledger Project TSC] Agenda for October 6, 2016

Todd Benzies <tbenzies@...>
 

  • Action Item Review
    • Hackfest/Hackathon readout from EU (Chris) and ongoing planning (Todd)
    • Chris Ferris to pull together thoughts on snapshot release in Hyperledger Release Taxonomy v0.3 and circulate via email
    • Finalize wiki.hyperledger.org migration plan in 10/6 TSC call
    • Communication Tools (Brian/Todd)
  • HIP:  Iroha (Makoto Takemiya)
  • Java Chaincode demo (Satheesh Kathamuthu, DTCC)
  • WG updates

--
Todd Benzies
Senior Program Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1 (415) 412-0310 (m)
Skype: tbenzies