Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Drummond Reed

Saved on

compared with

New Version 4

changes.mady.by.user Oskar van Deventer

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

TimeAgenda ItemLeadNotes
2 min
  • Start recording
  • Welcome & antitrust notice
  • New member introductions
  • Agenda review
Leads
  • Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.
  • New Members:
1 minReview of previous action itemsLeads
  •  ACTION: Drummond Reed to post a GitHub issues asking about any other preliminary configuration steps we need to take for the repo.
  •  Daniel Hardman to post a discussion about what should be OUT of scope — the "negative space" and Michael Herman to contribute about what is in scope and out of scope as well as a discussion to determine the audience for the TSP specification.
  •  ACTION: Drummond Reed to produce a second version of Andor Kesselman's diagram with updates to the labels that correspond to the official names for certain stages according to our ToIP Foundation charter (which is based on our Joint Development Foundation legal roots at the Linux Foundation).
  •  ACTION: Drummond Reed to discuss with Wenjing Chu and Darrell O'Donnell whether we can make TSPTF meetings happen for three out of every four weeks (instead of the current two) by only calling Technology Architecture Task Force meetings as needed.
    • DONE — The meeting schedule has been revised. See the ToIP Calendar.
  •  ACTION: ALL - contribute to our first four Github Discussions or start a new one on any topic you believe we should be discussing at this stage.
1 minLeadership updateLeads

Samuel Smith has volunteered to join Daniel Hardman, Wenjing Chu, and Drummond Reed as a co-lead of the TSPTF. You can read more about Sam here and more about KERI, CESR, and ACDC here.

40 minsTSP Proposal #1: Sam SmithSamuel Smith 

Sam will present his proposal for the TSP design. As a pre-read, please watch this 1-hour recording of Sam presenting the Hourglass Model to the TSWG APAC meeting last week.

Notes about Sam's presentation:

  • -
15 minsQ&A on the aboveAll

Questions and answers:

  • -
1 min
  • Review decisions/action items
  • Planning for next meeting 
Leads

Screenshots/Tables/Diagrams (numbered for reference in notes above)

#1

Stage

Activity

Exit Criteria

Initiation

Introduce members; agree on vision, mission, process, and tools

Consensus on vision, mission, process, tools

Problem Definition

Stakeholders propose use cases to build a map of what problems they need to solve for whom

Consensus on the problem map

Requirements

Extract and enumerate specific requirements from the problem map

Consensus on requirements

Design Principles

Develop the principles that need to guide/govern design of the solution

Consensus on design principles

Proposals

Members submit proposed solution designs

No further proposals

Consolidation

Members identify common elements and seek to develop a consolidated proposal

Consensus on contents of first Working Draft

Working Drafts †

A cycle of publishing Working Drafts, raising and resolving issues, and agreeing on revisions

Consensus on first Public Review Draft

Public Review Drafts

Same as Working Draft stage except with public review

Consensus (or vote) on WG Approved Draft

WG Approved Draft †

WG decision to submit for SC approval

Consensus (or vote) to submit for SC approval

ToIP Approved Draft †

SC decision to approve as ToIP Deliverable

Consensus (or vote) to approve

† Denotes the official name for a stage defined in the Linux Foundation Joint Development Foundation process document.

...