 All right, welcome everybody to the November 16th hyperledger technical oversight committee call. I think all of you have been on the call before, but just as a reminder, two things that we have to abide by. The first is the antitrust policy that is currently displayed on the screen. And the second is our code of conduct, which is linked in the agenda. For announcements today, we have the hyperledger definitely developer newsletter that goes out each Friday. If you would like to include anything in that newsletter, please do leave a comment on the wiki page that is linked in the agenda. The second announcement is that today there is a workshop. I think it happens two hours after this call. If I get my, no, an hour after this call, I think it is. So if you still do want to attend, please do click and register and attend the meeting or the workshop on atomic cross ledger transactions between hyperledger base and corda ledgers using hyperledger cacti v2. And I feel like there was another announcement I was supposed to make, but I cannot remember what it is and I did not write it down. So maybe somebody else might have an announcement and I can think about what that was that I wanted to say. I have nothing. Okay. Well, the other thing that I think I wanted to say didn't come to me either. So maybe it will come to me later. It will. I'll let you guys know what it was. The maybe there's no meeting next week. That's probably what it was. That is probably what it was because that went through my head this morning. So yes, there is no meeting next week. Just as a reminder, we are canceling because next week it is Thanksgiving here in the U.S. And so there's a number of people who will not be on the call anyway. So we canceled the meeting. Thanks. Right. Quarterly reports. So for quarterly reports, we have the same reports on the calendar or on the agenda that we had last year. Last week. Where is my brain this morning? And I don't think there's any new comments that have come out that I have seen. But if there's any comments or questions that anybody would like to bring up now, now is your time to do so. Okay. So we did get the hyperledger bubble report that came in last evening. So if you haven't had a chance to look at that, I know I have not. Please do have a look at the bubble report and provide your comments and feedback to that. And then for next week, we have due the Solange and the transact report. As you may recall, the transact maintainers have not submitted a report for the last two quarters because they have been moving the code into Saatu. So we will probably want to check in with the transact maintainers and see where they're at if they're ready to move the project to an end of life state or or not. So yeah, just I'd like to keep that on the agenda just so that we remember that we need to have a conversation with them every quarter. All right. Any questions on the quarterly reports? No. Okay. So we do have two discussion items today. The first one is maintainer events for 2024. The second is our badging life cycle task force. So for the first item on our discussion, wanted to have a conversation with the folks here on the TOC to talk about, you know, desire to have events for maintainers in 2024, what those events might look like. I know we had some past discussions in the TOC about maintainer events, but I think we were still in kind of the COVID phase of life. So now that we're kind of beyond that, wanted to see what people have ideas around what they would like to see done in 2024. This will obviously help the staff as they put together their planning for 2024 to make sure that we can satisfy the needs of the maintainers. So any thoughts or ideas from anybody on the TOC about the sorts of things that they would like to see, the sorts of things that they thought were useful from past maintainer events that they've been involved in, or yeah, just really any ideas that you might have is what we're looking for at this point. So these are, just to be clear, these are events of groups of maintainers across the project. Is that what you mean? Yes. So in the past, we've had two different types of maintainer events that have occurred at the Hyperledger Foundation. In the early days, we used to have what we called Hackfest. Those were open to more than just maintainers. They were they ended up having a lot of new folks involved, but they were on conference style where the maintainers could get together, discuss whatever it was that they wanted. It's very similar to IWC then in the way that those things happened. And then the last type of event that we had for maintainers, they were called maintainer summits and they were more closed as far as the attendees to really just maintainers and the discussions there were two full. We did have kind of that on conference style, but we also had a bit of specific driven content where we would make sure that the maintainers across different projects knew about each other, knew what the other projects were doing in case there was any sort of collaboration that could happen. And then obviously, there's also the events that happen like the Indie Summit or the Airy Summit and things like that, that haven't necessarily been open to everyone. And so, yeah, I think the question is, do you like any of those type of events? Are there specific things that you would like to see out of events containing maintainers for the hyperledger community? You know, just any sort of ideas of things that might work for you as in as a maintainer as an individual or things that you think might work for your projects that you're involved in. So, yeah, I think at this point, just really looking for different ideas about things that might occur in 2024 to help with the community and specifically the maintainer community. Yeah, I think one part of it could definitely be sort of low effort, high reward, things that projects have found. So things like the, you know, walking through how you can do a make doc site to get much better documentation, samples of, you know, good getting started material and tutorial things, CI, CD things that people have found. So sort of leave it open. But the idea would be things that we've discovered that proved valuable. And here's how we did them, if you will. Not great, kind of a sort of a learning event for the best practices that the different projects have discovered. Yeah, which is the same thing we talked about through this a lot of this year, best practices for automated pipelines, best practices for documentation and things like that. And then with that, the tools that, you know, making sure all the maintainers and all the projects are aware of the tools that Hyperledger has. I mean, there's there's a ton of things and it's hard to know all of them. So I think that's another good topic, a summary of those. So those are just general interest ones. The other one would be overviews of the projects, maybe, or some of the lesser known projects and how, you know, with that idea of leading toward a collaboration across projects, I don't know how much that's needed. I've not participated in such things. So I don't know if it sounds like that has in the past. Yeah, definitely in the early days, I think there was a lot of that. Yeah, I don't know that we're doing as much as we used to. Probably a lot of the the virtual events that are happening are, you know, potentially a little bit deeper dive instead of high level of reviews. But yeah, there's there's probably some some stuff there. So for the the first sort of idea that you had with the the learning events, you think that's better done in person, virtual, hybrid. What was your your thought on that sort of thing? I think I would do it as either a maintainers event where we put together a an agenda, but do it remote or at most tied to some other event. I don't think you could have an in person for that purpose. I don't think that would be powerful enough to draw. But I think it could be, you know, a three hour session, you know, a full a full chunk of day, because you never know what time of day it would be. But chunk of day type where you have a series of of presentations or or or discussions. OK, great. Thank you. Yeah, Marcus. Yeah, so if I remember correctly, I think I attended the hack fest in Amsterdam and also the maintainer meeting. It was either in Toronto or Montreal, I don't remember. But I think both events were great. I mean, meeting so many people, you are, I mean, on a day to day basis, just interact via Discord or or Slack or whatever we use back then. I think this was for many people, such a great experience to to meet the people in person. And I absolutely see big value in that. And I am in the last few years, we did a lot of remote conference style, which I personally hate, but this is only my personal opinion here. So I would really love to see the people again in person. And I mean, have whiteboard sessions, have discussions during lunch, during dinner, having beers together to basically, I mean, build a good foundation people can actually work on. I mean, also having fun together, right. And I don't know, I think, I mean, a hybrid model of this hack fest and maintainer summit would be nice. So for the hack fest, make it open so that also users or potential new maintainers could come and learn about, I don't know, the core technologies or the core code of the different projects, but also get the maintenance room to sit together and basically, I mean, discuss things, which is maybe much easier to discuss in person and things get resolved in a one hour slot rather than discussing it in the form in over two weeks, something like that. So if such an event could happen in person, I would definitely would like that. Right. Thanks, Marcus. Yeah, I completely agree, right? Seeing people face to face interacting with them in a different manner does bring a different sort of connection to the people that you've been working with closely anyway. Right. So I appreciate the thoughts there, Marcus. Absolutely. And I think you see the benefits, the actual benefits of such a meeting after, I don't know, or the first few weeks after such an event because then you start collaborating with the people again using our usual tools and then you will notice, OK, it becomes for some reason much easier now to collaborate. Yeah, probably because you've seen that person and know who they are at a deeper level than you did surface wise with the discord communication. All right. Thank you, Marcus. Bobby. Hi. So again, I didn't run for the TSC next year, TSC next year. So I'm just giving my two cents for whatever it's worth for everybody. But it's definitely worth something, Bobby. Thank you. I honestly do believe in the power of face to face meetings. But in this day and age, those are far and few between and very special. I believe in the interim that I am, again, the hugest proponent for that metaverse library. It has all the information logically set up open 24 seven. It could be done in different languages. It can be done, you know, meeting spaces for maintainers with their information. They can go whenever they want. So again, I believe that this community has such important information. And just to make it accessible for people when they need it, I think is where we should go in the future. And my second thing is I do believe in the badging process. And I think it should be gamified learning. I think we have enough information. I think we have more information that that gamified learning would challenge people to, you know, maybe you get something if you learn about three projects instead of just one or, you know, whatever. So I do believe that we could step it up again, like Stephen said, with the learning section of this and getting the information where it needs to be. So thank you for letting me speak. Yeah, thank you, Bobby. And Bobby, just because you brought it up, you are going to be missed next year at your voice on the TOC. I do hope that you can attend at least some of the meetings, you know, obviously, even though you're not on the TOC, it doesn't mean you can't be here. So please don't hesitate to bring your voice to the community. Well, I intend to definitely keep that hyperledger library operating in the metaverse. And the only way I can be effective of that is if I know what's going on. So you haven't heard the list. Perfect. Very, very good. Very good. All right. Any other thoughts or ideas about things that you would like to see out of the events from 2024? David, Sean, Ray, any particular questions that you have that you might not have been already talked about or things that you'd like to to see if the group might be interested? My main question was the one you already asked about, you know, if you would want to do this in person. And if so, you know, what would be compelling? I think, you know, people have touched on this. But if we did do an in-person one, what what would it need to include to really compel, you know, people to go to it? It sounds like there is definitely a desire for in person is what I heard. And then just, you know, the details, it sounds like maybe we need to do this attached to something else, because maybe there's not enough draw for a standalone. So that that just sort of, you know, is very helpful for our planning to know to know what would it be? What would it need to look like for people to, you know, show up? And attend? Yeah. And if anybody has any ideas of the sorts of things that it could be attached to. Yeah. Well, that might be useful to have attached to. Is there an event we're all planning to be at next year? Right. Well, I guess for many people, we need some kind of business justification to travel these times. I mean, if the TLC, for instance, would say, OK, we do the end of the year project review in person at a maintenance summit. And that would be kind of increasing pressure. Yeah, I mean, that's a good point, Marcus. I mean, it's one thing for you to want to go, but it's another thing for you to get approval internally to go. I guess, yes, there's two layers there. So yeah, what would make it compelling for you to want to go? And then what would make it, you know, justifiable internally to get signed off for? Right. Rama. Just wondering if it's going to be a global program next year, because the world is on the field. Is a good question. I don't actually know the details myself either. You know, I think, as Tracy said, we're in the we're kicking off the 2024 planning process and that has not been finalized. So I don't know the answer. I think maybe one thing we can do either sometime in December or very early January is come back, you know, and report back what our 2024 planning, you know, is so that everybody here is in the loop and we stay coordinated about, you know, what the TOC is planning for next year and what the staff is planning for next year. So, you know, we're happy to do that. Thanks, yeah, I mean, it's also a response to Marcus's question. The global forum is the kind of thing you might get to report. Yeah. Yeah. So as far as global forum is going, yeah, again, I think we can report back on that maybe in a few weeks or very early January and then, yeah, if that's a compelling time to plan for this or if it not, then we could find something else. But the problem I see with the global forum is that this is, I mean, a conference style and I mean, people maybe think, OK, they need to present in order to participate there. I mean, for maintenance in particular and then many companies have the policy. OK, you can only go to conference if you present. Something. But I don't know, maybe then the global forum can the next edition of the global forum could also have a, let's say, let's say maintain a summit included where we do some reporting on projects, something like that. In order to, I mean, trigger really everyone wants to come to the global forum. I mean, the global forum has another interesting aspect that it connects the community with potential clients or more end users from different industries. So this is for the companies, I guess, also a very interesting thing. Yeah, Marcus, I think that's a it's an interesting point, right? I think if you think about the early half fest that we had, you know, some of the concerns there was that the maintainers wanted to actually do some work and get some something accomplished. And sometimes when you had the the users or the the newbies, right, showing up, the first thing that you needed to do was obviously educate people about what the projects were. But at the same time, those events gave us the opportunity to cross paths with people who want it to use it or potential clients, right? Which obviously is a a compelling reason for businesses to want to send their, you know, their maintainers to these different events. So I think, you know, David, kind of the thinking there would be there's got to be a reason that businesses want to send the maintainers to an event and what would those reasons be? And we could maybe do some brainstorming about that sort of thing. I wonder maybe this is not the time to do the brainstorming, but I wonder if maybe doing a multi part thing would maybe it seems like the workshops were really compelling at Global Forum in Dublin. And that would be maybe, you know, that compelling reason. You're you're on the agenda to give a workshop and then people maybe even new people, we could open that up to new people. New people want to go to that workshop. And then before or after those series of workshops, maybe we do the maintainer only part. So that's my thought on brainstorming for a compelling reason. Yeah, I agree. I thought one I hate to say recent, but the event that we had in Basel was really good. You know, it had the right mix of. The member summit was there. The, you know, we had the Global Forum and. It was we had a big buff area, right? So you if you were interested in fabric, you could go sit at the fabric table. It was it was really nice. So kind of that multi part event where, you know, it's more open to the public on a couple of days and then or on a single day. And then the maintainers have like two days where it's more gated. I think that would be really great. Thanks, well, any other thoughts on this topic before we move forward? All right, well, I'm sure this isn't the last time that we'll be talking about events for 2024 and what those look like. But it was a hopefully it was useful. David, Sean, Rai, to get some initial thoughts on this. Yeah, for sure. Thanks for adding it to the agenda. Yeah. All right. So the next item on the agenda is the task force discussion on the badging life cycle. Rama, I think this is off to you now. Thanks, Tracy. So I had mentioned last week that I would have a document for people to vote on. Fortunately, I haven't quite finished it yet. I have made have something to show you. Let me just show you what I have. And I also want to discuss a couple of things. And I can finish the document pretty soon. And then we can go about the voting process. That's right. It's your stream, right? Yes. So one bit of a cop. So I thought it would be best to put this into the TFC repository. So I created a file in the government document folder called logic badging. This is in my book at this point. Ignore this part. This is just notes, which are removed. I'm going to have a list of different badges and classified into either very unimaginative names. Because we have different name suggestions open to it. It's called the life cycle type of badges and quality indicator badges. Just to show you what the shows I'm referring to. Let me go to the... Yeah. So, I mean, here we call the mandatory in optional. But that doesn't really describe the badges, I mean. It's not mandatory to have a badge. Just that the badges we listed here are the ones which are relevant to a project's life cycle, state transition decision. Whereas these badges are not. But both these badges are... Both these kinds of badges are good to have and important to have. So, that's all I'm calling them. Again, if you have any suggestions for what you should call them in the paper, just open to it. And I will... I mean, put list them and that's the needy task. I just haven't got onto it. I made this slightly different diagram. Because what I was trying to do with this was trying to figure out if he had covered all the state transitions in the life cycle. And the diagram by itself, by the way, I added another arrow which I showed in the last time I covered this topic. Maybe that was three weeks ago or something. Which is an arrow from graduated incubation. Note that the life cycle original diagram does not have that arrow from graduated incubation. But during the discussions on the badges task force we determined that it would be good to have such a transition. So, I added one. That's the only one added. And then there's also this sort of a dashed arrow that just comes into the proposal stage. Which is just how it's like a better known qualification for any project to be accepted as a portal. So, I counted 14 arrows. And the collection criteria, collection bucket, each of these is a badge. The green indicates the acquisition of a badge or going from a badge in one station or another. That is, say you have the decentralization badge. You'll have like two parts to it. One is it's either a two plus or a three plus. Which means you're okay with the project being maintained by after two companies or after the institution as long as the incubation stage but you need at least three for the graduate stage. So, that's the decentralized badge. You may just call refer to them as separate badges. And we formally accept this. The red boxes that indicate the withdrawal of particular badge because the criteria for that badge as the project is not meeting the criteria for that particular badge. As you can see, I tried to put the numbers in the different boxes. And of course you can review this. What I wanted to just discuss at this point was that I was able to fit in all the numbers except for 8 and 11. What are 8 and 11? 8 is the arrow going from incubation to end of flight and 11 is the arrow going from graduation to end of flight. So, it doesn't fit any of these because when you were discussing the project life cycle we were always thinking about what should happen to a project that's in an incubated or graduated stage should it fail to meet particular criteria and we were always thinking about okay maybe we should go into the government stage or to the deprecated stage. It seems rather drastic to move them directly to the end of life but maybe there's a good reason for that. So, I just wanted to ask if anybody remembers what was part of creating this diagram in the first place what did you think of the criteria to move from incubation to graduate directly to end of flight and if you can't think of any criteria maybe we should remove the arrow and just have the extra step before the project is pulled to end of flight. Sorry, I can't see any... Yeah, so maybe, sorry I didn't raise my hand maybe one of the things that we could think about here is just let's say that you've got a project it does something right let's just call that X and then another project comes along that also does X but does it better and you're like well let's just move our work over to that or let's say that this project shouldn't be used any more in favor of this other project that does whatever we were doing much better that could be one reason that you might move straight from an incubation or graduated to an end of life you know it could be that the maintainers are going away and they don't have any plans to maintain the project moving forward right so they're not even going to maintain security issues or they're not going to do any sort of bug maintenance that would be probably required in the dormant and the deprecated phases right the dormant phase I think says that we're going away but we're still going to be you know doing like the security bug fixes I think the deprecated one is we know that this is headed towards end of life and the end of life we're going to say is in six months or a year whatever that number is and so you know therefore we're going to do that but if the maintainers have completely gone away and there's nobody to come pick it up then it would it should go directly to an end of life state and I think we've had a couple of those projects where we've sent directly from incubation to end of life whether or not we've had any that have gone from graduated to end of life I don't think we have I think most graduated projects have either gone to dormant or deprecated before they go to end of life but yeah I do think that there is at least a potential right that that line should exist but it really has more to do with the fact that there's you know either something better that's come along and I can replace it or that the maintainers have completely gone away No that makes a lot of sense I wasn't actually thinking about projects that just for which there was good reason to just end because of either replacement or because nobody wanted to do anything more anything useful I think then yeah this isn't even a badging criteria I mean at that point it's sort of I think it will be clear to everybody that the project needs to move to EOS I guess the bad that we modeled as top-level versus labs that's the top-level bag we can just say with all top-level batch means either an incubated project an incubated stage or a graduate stage just to complete the picture Does that make sense? No I think that makes sense Hello? Yeah I mean it's a bit of sidetracking maybe but you know when I was looking at this I thought man this is really complicated and you know I went back to the beginning page of this task force which had this parallel graph of you know the life cycle we have and the one that's exist for LF networking and I think there are two aspects to this first by calling end of life end of life we made it like sound like it's not recoverable at least in this world and you know I just went through this with the OpenSSF so it's quite familiar to me if instead it were called archived then that's not necessarily an absolute end you can recover from archived by unarchiving and so I think we have created a deprecated endowment because it seemed so lethal literally to go to end of life that we would need to be very cautious about it and not call it too soon but maybe there is a simple way to simplify this to rename end of life to archive and then we can probably you know simplify this graph get rid of dormant and deprecated because there is no real harm to going to archival even if it's temporary or not yeah sorry no I realize this is not probably a bad badging but I think this graphic really illustrates the complexity of our life cycle and I think you know we should also consider you know possibility of simplifying this no thanks everything you said makes sense I mean we did discuss I mean if you go to the first document I created in the project badging life cycle I tried to raise these points I was asking about enquiring about whether we need all these states and these sort of complex lags and also the end of life as you mentioned yeah the LS graph just has been archived maybe we can call it suspension life and I'm asking this question about whether we should have an arrow from this state what do we call it back to the polls Tracy yeah I know I like this idea I don't know that you have around kind of combining these three states if you will into like an archive state I do think that it will make things easier not only in this life cycle but also as we think about these badges and the transitions between them right I think we see a lot of things on this like four and six right if you think about four and six they could very well be well I guess they'll still be four and six but I think there's ways to go from that archive back to an incubation state and there's there's you know even though we don't really show that because we basically say it has to go back through the proposal state again you know which is a line that's somewhat missing here I guess if you will but I think there's you know there's ways that even then the spadging could potentially be simplified to reflect you know we won't have all these numbers and have to think very hard about this I think the other piece of this that comes to mind is that there has been a lot of confusion for people who weren't involved in the original discussions about this life cycle about what's the difference between dormant and deprecated and end-of-life and what you know do I go do I have to go to dormant before I go to deprecated do I have to go to deprecated before I go to end-of-life do you know what's what is this certain life cycle that I could follow and so I think that yeah I like I like the suggestion I guess is what I'm trying to say so Tracy what do you think we should then go back and maybe make this make a simpler life cycle diagram and then come back to the budget yeah I do think that could that would work Rama okay do you think we should merge all these three into one or do you think okay I mean if end-of-life is just meant to be an archival state run like a death state then yeah we can probably merge them all I mean if end-of-life is meant to be something more drastic then you can probably and so I think my earlier thought was you can probably merge these two dormant and deprecated I mean that could be an option and then I don't know maybe end-of-life becomes yeah I don't know it's you know is there really a need for an end-of-life I think is the the question or is it just everything is archived and then at some point if somebody decides you know what I want to bring this back then it would come back I think it serves to remember what you know why we have added those right and so we have specific scenarios where we say okay now we're in you know where do how do we capture this state but I again I think you can get re merge all of this if you will into one archived because all the other ones are kind of because we were afraid to call it end-of-life when people said but I might come back like dormant right we had a specific case where somebody said oh I'm not going to be able to work on this for the next six months or a year just put us on the pause and if you had archived you can say okay no worries we'll archive your project for now and when you come back we can easily unarchive it so this is why I mean I think the other cases become moot we don't need those other states I think we can address all the scenarios we address by adding those by if we had first renamed end-of-life archived or deprecated archived and you get rid of end-of-life it all comes down to the same the graphic is going to get simplified in the same manner I agree okay so Tracy then you think you should that should be the next step then maybe yeah combining compose the diagram combining these three into one and then create a much simpler diagram yep I think so thanks Argo okay I had one more question so I had some list of criteria for evaluation and decisions for either issuing a bag or withdrawing a bag so I thought this could also be done using PR because we use PRs for so many other things if we require a bag the project maintenance must submit a request to the TOC via full request and only the TOC may issue a bag by approving this kind of PR this is a question for Esmeralda and should we all vote for it as well as we do any comments on these two everybody think is it's fine to have a bad issuance process via PR and second question should we all vote on it as well or just approve the PRs might be approved or there are certain badges that we think can be automated and is this yeah some of the can be yeah some of the can be to create an action to check for the presence of a particular file and also sort of cosmetic check to see whether it has something substantial some of them we cannot we don't have to decide right now I'll keep this up here and people can think about it that's all the discussion points I had so now I will fix this document and then just submit a PR so next week of course I think we don't have a meeting for time being right and I will be away the following week as well so I'll be back the first week of the month that's I think the 7th anything else or I'll stop sharing any other topics for today that anybody would like to discuss no okay well then we will see you again in two weeks when we come back on the 30th and I hope that those in the US have a great holiday week and yeah for everybody else just a great couple weeks before we meet again thanks everyone thank you