Date   

moderated Kubernetes Business Lead

Rachel Wilson <rachel.b2bleads@...>
 

Hi,

 

I’m Curious to know if you’d be interested in acquiring Kubernetes Users List for your sales and marketing initiatives?

 

We also have related technology users like: VMware, Docker, OpenShift, Jenkins, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Platform, Nginx, hadoop, PostgreSQL, Ubuntu, MongoDB and many more...

 

Let me know your Target Geography: ____. And we will get back to you with the counts and pricing for your review

 

Your response will be highly appreciated.

 

Regards, 

Rachel Wilson | Sr. Demand Generation Manager

Santa Clara, CA

 

If you are not interested please reply with “Not Interested” In the Subject Line.

 

 

 


Cross-Community Information Request (5min max)

Juan Caballero
 

Dear Interopers:

This week we are trying to crowdsource a very very high-level chart showing which "wallets" (and other credential-holding and -presenting software) can receive, hold, and present which kinds of credentials.  The link is here and the hackmd file is open, so if you develop or manage a wallet (or wallet-like thing), please help us coordinate this valuable intell for the community! Feel free to forward without reply-alling.

https://hackmd.io/ojCewdzFS2ywINC5Ft9E9A

Thanks,

-- juan and the interop WG chairs


Juan Caballero, PhD.
Communications & Editorial, Decentralized Identity Foundation
Freelance researcher, consultant, and free thinker
Signal/whatsapp: +1 415-3101351
Berlin-based: +49 1573 5994525, CEST/UTC+2
Native: English, Español; Functional: Deutsch, Français, Português


Homework: Fill out the Assessment

Pamela
 

As discussed (and tested) in our last Interop meeting,  please take a few minutes to help us understand where the knowledge is in our group.   

The Cross-Community Familiarity Self-Assessment is meant to identify what we know, what we wish we knew and what we care less about as well as to help us to know who we can go and match up for information sharing.  We hope you can fill this out by Monday so we can share some results in our Wednesday meeting.

Thanks!


Next week's meeting and other ways to participate, prepare, and contribute instead of sending regrets

Juan Caballero
 

Hey Interoperers:

Thanks so much for attending and weathering the choppy zoom waters with us.  We hope the conversation about short-term work items and low-hanging fruit percolates. If you missed the meeting and want to hear about these, check the last 40 minutes of this recording.

We also presented some new reference/education materials, the latest [now hyperlinked!] layering map, and sneak-previewed the working draft of our self-diagnostic questionnaire. On next week's call, we'd like to use half the time to fill out this questionnaire together as "beta testers" (dogfooders?), refining the explanatory texts and, in true espirit d'escalier, making last-minute updates to the map.  The more people fill this out, the better we'll understand the knowledge gaps overall-- and identify teachers who might be interested in virtual coffees or other skillswaps.

The rest of the time, we can hone in one these wallet/VC related work items and think about next steps/first-steps.

Talk soon! Open issues!

-- juan


Juan Caballero, PhD.
Communications & Editorial, Decentralized Identity Foundation
Freelance researcher, consultant, and free thinker
Signal/whatsapp: +1 415-3101351
Berlin-based: +49 1573 5994525, CEST/UTC+2
Native: English, Español; Functional: Deutsch, Français, Português


Re: DIF Interoperability WG - A

Taylor Kendal
 

Haha...blarg is my reaction to all of 2020.
I had to hop onto something else, but just want to make sure I have it right moving forward.

On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 3:22 PM Juan Caballero <caballerojuan@...> wrote:

blargh I guess the original link is best now:

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86569836709?pwd=eDRnK1FaeGRrMVMvNndmbHpNY3loZz09

On 9/23/2020 11:09 PM, Taylor Kendal wrote:
Hey all...

Just tried to hop on and show “host has another meeting in progress”

Also, the invite time (5pm ET) doesn’t coincide with the times in the description. 
  • Meeting A is at 2 pm ET 
  • Meeting B is at 9 am ET
Need help feeling less incompetent if at all possible :)

Taylor Kendal, CPO



-- 
------------------
Juan Caballero, PhD.
Freelance Identity Researcher
https://www.caballerojuan.com 
Signal/whatsapp: +1 415-3101351
Berlin-based: +49 1573 5994525


Re: DIF Interoperability WG - A

Juan Caballero <caballerojuan@...>
 

blargh I guess the original link is best now:

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86569836709?pwd=eDRnK1FaeGRrMVMvNndmbHpNY3loZz09

On 9/23/2020 11:09 PM, Taylor Kendal wrote:
Hey all...

Just tried to hop on and show “host has another meeting in progress”

Also, the invite time (5pm ET) doesn’t coincide with the times in the description. 
  • Meeting A is at 2 pm ET 
  • Meeting B is at 9 am ET
Need help feeling less incompetent if at all possible :)

Taylor Kendal, CPO



-- 
------------------
Juan Caballero, PhD.
Freelance Identity Researcher
https://www.caballerojuan.com 
Signal/whatsapp: +1 415-3101351
Berlin-based: +49 1573 5994525


zoom link glitch!

Juan Caballero
 

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85134923516?pwd=Q3BVeXNyZEJvNDV0NEdlUFJicXJtUT09#success

--
------------------
Juan Caballero, PhD.
Freelance identity technology researcher & consultant
https://www.caballerojuan.com
Signal/whatsapp: +1 415-3101351
Berlin-based: +49 1573 5994525


Updates from the Interop Group

Juan Caballero <virtualofficehours@...>
 

Hey interopers!

A few quick updates:

  1. The layers+buckets maps of the diversity of SSI implementations across communities is almost done. We'll incorporate today's inputs  by friday and present a final version next week for final comments and...
  2. ...a homework assignment! Next week we'll ask people (over email) to fill out anonymous questionnaires and (optionally of course) send them in.  We're genuinely curious which "buckets" our regular membership knows the least about! This kind of diagnostic exercise will inform...
  3. next week's discussion of what major project to take on first as a group.  Attached is a draft of the options-- to add another, go to the agenda and add a row to the table!
  4. Thursday night or Friday morning depending where you live, there will be a[n English-language] MyData Korea event on human-centric interoperability, as per Adrian's question of where UX and consumer perspectives fit in this group's work. Info here.

Thanks!
__chairs

------------------
Juan Caballero, PhD.
Freelance identity technology researcher & consultant
https://www.caballerojuan.com 
Signal/whatsapp: +1 415-3101351
Berlin-based: +49 1573 5994525


Re: following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

Adrian Gropper
 

I've proposed an additional use case https://github.com/w3c/did-use-cases/issues/101 as an example of human-centered interop.

The issue of security of agents is very important but splitting one's agency among multiple agents begs the issue of having a master agent that controls my sub-agents.

Also, my approach to defining an agent is a semi-autonomous entity that receives external requests and can act on my behalf even if I'm off-line. I expect my agent to be capable of (machine) learning. In order to split the requests, and therefore the learning, among multiple agents, we would have to introduce split or federated learning among the agents and sub-agents in order to avoid a privacy-vs-security compromise.

- Adrian


On Sun, Sep 6, 2020 at 1:04 AM Soma-Patel Anushka <asoma-patel@...> wrote:

Does it only make sense to have 1 agent if we assume that the 1 agent will never get hacked?

 

The reason for this questions is that I have seen security teams advise that people should have different email addresses from which they manage their finances and confidential personal information and another email address for social media etc. etc.

 

apologies if I missed content that has already addressed this

From: interop-wg@DIF.groups.io <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io> On Behalf Of Adrian Gropper
Sent: 04 September 2020 05:05 PM
To: interop-wg@dif.groups.io
Subject: Re: [InteropProject] following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

 

This email originates from an external source. Stop and think before you click!


Another way to bridge the cognitive gap between the standards magicians and the muggles would be to agree that authentication and authorization are indistinguishable to the muggles. If we expect them to embrace SSI, we will probably need to bundle auth'n and auth'z in some way or other.

 

-Adrian

 

On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:27 AM Mike Varley <mike.varley@...> wrote:

Agreed, +1 !

 

Thanks Adrian.

 

MV

 

From: <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io> on behalf of "Daniel Hardman via groups.io" <daniel.hardman=evernym.com@groups.io>
Reply-To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:37 PM
To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [InteropProject] following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

 

I just wanted to say thank you for a very sensible, down-to-earth explanation. Good stuff, Adrian.

 

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 4:12 PM Adrian Gropper <agropper@...> wrote:

Imagine ... Human-centric interop in the SSI sense is simply the ability for my one chosen agent to act as my agent with the vast majority of services... Human-centered interop means that my one agent gets to be successful dealing with almost all of the service providers...

This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipients and may be privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under law. Any distribution, printing or other use by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, and permanently delete this email and its attachments.


Old Mutual Limited is a proudly Level 1 empowerment contributor company in terms of the Amended BBBEE Financial Services Sector Code - Long-Term Insurance.

Please see https://www.oldmutual.co.za/about/bee-and-bee-certificates to view our current BBBEE rating certificate.

Please see https://www.oldmutual.co.za/disclaimer to read the Old Mutual legal notice.


Re: following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

Soma-Patel Anushka
 

Does it only make sense to have 1 agent if we assume that the 1 agent will never get hacked?

 

The reason for this questions is that I have seen security teams advise that people should have different email addresses from which they manage their finances and confidential personal information and another email address for social media etc. etc.

 

apologies if I missed content that has already addressed this

From: interop-wg@DIF.groups.io <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io> On Behalf Of Adrian Gropper
Sent: 04 September 2020 05:05 PM
To: interop-wg@dif.groups.io
Subject: Re: [InteropProject] following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

 

This email originates from an external source. Stop and think before you click!


Another way to bridge the cognitive gap between the standards magicians and the muggles would be to agree that authentication and authorization are indistinguishable to the muggles. If we expect them to embrace SSI, we will probably need to bundle auth'n and auth'z in some way or other.

 

-Adrian

 

On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:27 AM Mike Varley <mike.varley@...> wrote:

Agreed, +1 !

 

Thanks Adrian.

 

MV

 

From: <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io> on behalf of "Daniel Hardman via groups.io" <daniel.hardman=evernym.com@groups.io>
Reply-To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:37 PM
To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [InteropProject] following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

 

I just wanted to say thank you for a very sensible, down-to-earth explanation. Good stuff, Adrian.

 

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 4:12 PM Adrian Gropper <agropper@...> wrote:

Imagine ... Human-centric interop in the SSI sense is simply the ability for my one chosen agent to act as my agent with the vast majority of services... Human-centered interop means that my one agent gets to be successful dealing with almost all of the service providers...

This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipients and may be privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under law. Any distribution, printing or other use by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, and permanently delete this email and its attachments.


Old Mutual Limited is a proudly Level 1 empowerment contributor company in terms of the Amended BBBEE Financial Services Sector Code - Long-Term Insurance.

Please see https://www.oldmutual.co.za/about/bee-and-bee-certificates to view our current BBBEE rating certificate.

Please see https://www.oldmutual.co.za/disclaimer to read the Old Mutual legal notice.


Re: following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

Adrian Gropper
 

... continuing along this tack of bundling auth'n and auth'z from the user's perspective...

When dealing with a typical service provider, Alice experiences two separate phases: registration and requests. The registration phase is only between her and the service provider. They are the only two parties. Alice discovers the service, decides to become a customer, and registers with the service. The service might be a lab, a dating app, or a bank. Alice is typically online at the registration phase. She makes decisions like which email to use as her identity and whether to use strong or weak credentials for convenience. She often establishes a mechanism for payment at registration time. Under the covers, there's some auth'n and some auth'z.

The request phase comes later, and Alice is often not online at the time. The two parties are Bob, the requesting party, and the service that Alice is registered with that has to decide whether or not to honor Bob's request. In this case, we have some auth'n (who's Bob?) and some auth'z (by something that Alice and the service agreed on at registration time.)

My point is that human-centered interoperability lies at this nexus where Alice has negligible friction and high trust at registration time combined with appropriate transparency and notice, and never any surprises when it comes to how the service and Alice's registered agent deal with requests by the Bobs.

- Adrian


On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 11:04 AM Adrian Gropper <agropper@...> wrote:
Another way to bridge the cognitive gap between the standards magicians and the muggles would be to agree that authentication and authorization are indistinguishable to the muggles. If we expect them to embrace SSI, we will probably need to bundle auth'n and auth'z in some way or other.

-Adrian

On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:27 AM Mike Varley <mike.varley@...> wrote:

Agreed, +1 !

 

Thanks Adrian.

 

MV

 

From: <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io> on behalf of "Daniel Hardman via groups.io" <daniel.hardman=evernym.com@groups.io>
Reply-To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:37 PM
To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [InteropProject] following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

 

I just wanted to say thank you for a very sensible, down-to-earth explanation. Good stuff, Adrian.

 

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 4:12 PM Adrian Gropper <agropper@...> wrote:

Imagine ... Human-centric interop in the SSI sense is simply the ability for my one chosen agent to act as my agent with the vast majority of services... Human-centered interop means that my one agent gets to be successful dealing with almost all of the service providers...

This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipients and may be privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under law. Any distribution, printing or other use by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, and permanently delete this email and its attachments.


Re: following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

Adrian Gropper
 

Another way to bridge the cognitive gap between the standards magicians and the muggles would be to agree that authentication and authorization are indistinguishable to the muggles. If we expect them to embrace SSI, we will probably need to bundle auth'n and auth'z in some way or other.

-Adrian


On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:27 AM Mike Varley <mike.varley@...> wrote:

Agreed, +1 !

 

Thanks Adrian.

 

MV

 

From: <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io> on behalf of "Daniel Hardman via groups.io" <daniel.hardman=evernym.com@groups.io>
Reply-To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:37 PM
To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [InteropProject] following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

 

I just wanted to say thank you for a very sensible, down-to-earth explanation. Good stuff, Adrian.

 

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 4:12 PM Adrian Gropper <agropper@...> wrote:

Imagine ... Human-centric interop in the SSI sense is simply the ability for my one chosen agent to act as my agent with the vast majority of services... Human-centered interop means that my one agent gets to be successful dealing with almost all of the service providers...

This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipients and may be privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under law. Any distribution, printing or other use by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, and permanently delete this email and its attachments.


Re: I'm a doctor, my medical society is embracing SSI, what are they telling me to do?

Adrian Gropper
 

Hi Michael,

Truu is a reasonable solution. I wrote a proposal for a more decentralized version for the recent DHS SVIP program. It was rejected so I just posted it for discussion in our SSI community. In the proposal, I suggest the post office role (using existing certified mail) as well as typical notaries using a notary wallet (how is a notary wallet going to be different from a postal worker's wallet?). https://www.dropbox.com/s/09gz5ihq0rjfncf/Trustee%20Notary%20-%20DHS%20SVIP.pdf?dl=0

The real question for all of us is: How many SSI-enabled wallets do we expect each person to have? If everyone, be they doctors or farmers, has one, two, or three wallets (for backup) what becomes Truu's business?

- Adrian


On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:52 AM Michael Shea <mxs1066@...> wrote:
Hi Adrian,

Have you taken a look at Truu?  I know that they are doing something similar with the NHS.

Michael S.


Re: I'm a doctor, my medical society is embracing SSI, what are they telling me to do?

Michael Shea
 

Hi Adrian,

Have you taken a look at Truu?  I know that they are doing something similar with the NHS.

Michael S.


Re: following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

Mike Varley
 

Agreed, +1 !

 

Thanks Adrian.

 

MV

 

From: <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io> on behalf of "Daniel Hardman via groups.io" <daniel.hardman@...>
Reply-To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 at 6:37 PM
To: "interop-wg@DIF.groups.io" <interop-wg@DIF.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [InteropProject] following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

 

I just wanted to say thank you for a very sensible, down-to-earth explanation. Good stuff, Adrian.

 

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 4:12 PM Adrian Gropper <agropper@...> wrote:

Imagine ... Human-centric interop in the SSI sense is simply the ability for my one chosen agent to act as my agent with the vast majority of services... Human-centered interop means that my one agent gets to be successful dealing with almost all of the service providers...

This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipients and may be privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under law. Any distribution, printing or other use by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately, and permanently delete this email and its attachments.


Re: following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

Daniel Hardman
 

I just wanted to say thank you for a very sensible, down-to-earth explanation. Good stuff, Adrian.


On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 4:12 PM Adrian Gropper <agropper@...> wrote:
Imagine ... Human-centric interop in the SSI sense is simply the ability for my one chosen agent to act as my agent with the vast majority of services... Human-centered interop means that my one agent gets to be successful dealing with almost all of the service providers...


Re: following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

Adrian Gropper
 

Imagine a perfect marriage. You would share all of your most intimate policies with your partner so they could act as your agent anytime, anywhere. You would only have one partner, because you would have no reason or logic for partitioning your intimate policies among multiple partners. The outcome of an outside request to your one partner would be equivalent to a request to you, no matter what.

I would probably choose a different partner than you would. Everyone would be able to choose a different kind of partner, although in reality, there might only be a hundred different basic personality types of partners and the rest of the diversity would be customization around the margins. However, from the perspective of the outside world (requesting parties and other processors of personal data) almost all of the hundred personality types would be equivalent. They would all come through the same size doors, communicate in the local language, behave similarly with respect to payment for services, etc.. With minor exceptions, 95 out of the 100 personality types of agents would be accepted by the service provider without fuss. We call the other 5% nutcases and they don't mind because they know who they are.

Human-centric iterop in the SSI sense is simply the ability for my one chosen agent to act as my agent with the vast majority of services. I get to choose from 100 types of agents each type serving tens of millions of individual people with just a minimum of customization on the margins. Any individual can choose any of the 100 types and most of them will be satisfied with the ability of their agent to serve as proxy for whatever the world throws at them.

In this vision, and in our SSI jargon, I might have two or five wallets even though I have only the one agent. The wallets have biometrics, they might break, they could be lost or stolen. But still only one agent. If the agent breaks or leaves you, then maybe you pick a different personality type agent next time. If you grow to dislike or distrust your agent, then, at approximately the cost of a house, go find another one.

Human-centered interop means that my one agent gets to be successful dealing with almost all of the service providers that want to process data about me no matter what the purpose or domain of that processing. When I approach a service provider or they approach me, I identify myself with a DID (maybe a peer DID minted explicitly for them) and I also register with them my current agent. 95% of the time, I expect the service provider to honor my agent, otherwise they don't get my business. If my 95% expectations are not met, then I might think of getting a different agent.

Human-centered interop means that 95% of the time a service can work with the agent associated with the (DID) identifier no matter what the DID method, comms language, or the application domain (healthcare, finance, commerce,...). From this perspective, VCs, crypto, wallets, directories, storage, don't matter to interop because successful agents and service providers will deal with those details or go extinct.

Adrian


On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 4:05 PM sankarshan <sankarshan@...> wrote:
I realize that Adrian's original proposal was having some form of
"parallel" track. My own opinion is that the human/user perspective
may be strengthened if included into the technical aspects. It is more
germane to interoperability when the impact|consequences|effects of
the technology choices validated through interop is factored in.

The suggestion is likely going to muddle up the structured approach
(in the whimsical app/service) however, for each of the items in the
bucket an enumeration of the end-user experience may be something for
the group to consider while building up measurements of the range of
interoperability.

/s




following up on Adrian's remark about user/human centric parallel track as part of InterOp discussions

sankarshan
 

I realize that Adrian's original proposal was having some form of
"parallel" track. My own opinion is that the human/user perspective
may be strengthened if included into the technical aspects. It is more
germane to interoperability when the impact|consequences|effects of
the technology choices validated through interop is factored in.

The suggestion is likely going to muddle up the structured approach
(in the whimsical app/service) however, for each of the items in the
bucket an enumeration of the end-user experience may be something for
the group to consider while building up measurements of the range of
interoperability.

/s


Re: DIF wide infrastructure

sankarshan
 

[responses in-line]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 18:35, Balázs Némethi <balazs@...> wrote:

Dear all,

There has been a lot of requests and early discussions about the tech/tool stack we should use in DIF.

The goal would be to agree on a set of tools and products that we use for managing the WGs.
Currently, we are using a mix of Slack, Google, Zoom, Otter, GitHub, Notion, Hacke.md, and Groups.io to track and manage meetings. I is a mixed patchwork that is hard to track and especially hard to follow as a (potential) new contributor

Since I know that we have a lot of personal preferences, I would like to make sure that everyone can voice their choice, and we come to a consensus that everyone supports.

Could you share if you have a preferred method or framework? If so, please reply to this email.

My proposal would be the following:

Wiki and meeting minutes to be tracked by Notion.so (it offers clear access and sharing control over comments) - example from Interop WG - while also provides a visually pleasing interface that is simple to read for those who are not used to GitHub/hackmd like structure

DIF has a full team setting with unlimited users that we can use
hackmd offers anonymized commenting, so the proposal by the Interop Group works for non-IPR protected meetings; however, for IPR protected workgroups, that is a potential issue.
GitHub is easy to use for most developers who are familiar with it, but since DIF also works with non-devs I believe a more straightforward interface and usability could work better.
I am guessing that the type or form of content which belongs to the
(Notion) Wiki and GitHub will become clearer as we work-up towards
planned activities. My personal take is that if we can collectively
collaborate on specific priority assigned work items, it would help us
make informed decisions on tools and also how to enable oversight and
management of progress of those work items.

IM: Slack (Is currently an IPR issue as anyone who has access to slack can participate in any WG channels) - to use private channels for the WGs. WG chairs and admins are allowed to add new members.

Daniel and Sam offered to develop a tool that automatically bans folks who would ba added not by the chairs/admins to such channels. Until that tool is done, chairs must lookout who is accessing the channels.

Repo management: GitHub to manage repos using the topic tags, so it is clear what repo belongs to whom
VoiP and transcription: zoom + otter for meeting minutes.

W3C CCG is developing a toolset using Jitsi and other products, but until those are not battle-tested, DIF is not considering transferring to that.

I am open to change my mind but please suggest a process and not only name a tool that you would use.

Could I invite all of you to the DIF internal governance call on the 4th of September? At 8 am PST/11 am ET/5 pm CET?
I would request that we include the UTC time as a practice. TZs are
offsets to UTC and while I can do the mental math for PST --> IST
(UTC+0530) it would be more practical to have the UTC time included in
the listing.


Re: DIF wide infrastructure

Balázs Némethi
 

  Hi All, 

This was meant for an other channel you are all welcome to reply and support the efforts to create a stack of tools! :) 

Best regards,  


On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 3:05 PM Balázs Némethi <balazs@...> wrote:
Dear all,

There has been a lot of requests and early discussions about the tech/tool stack we should use in DIF. 

The goal would be to agree on a set of tools and products that we use for managing the WGs. 
Currently, we are using a mix of Slack, Google, Zoom, Otter, GitHub, Notion, Hacke.md, and Groups.io to track and manage meetings. I is a mixed patchwork that is hard to track and especially hard to follow as a (potential) new contributor

Since I know that we have a lot of personal preferences, I would like to make sure that everyone can voice their choice, and we come to a consensus that everyone supports. 

Could you share if you have a preferred method or framework? If so, please reply to this email. 

My proposal would be the following: 
  • Wiki and meeting minutes to be tracked by Notion.so (it offers clear access and sharing control over comments) - example from Interop WG -  while also provides a visually pleasing interface that is simple to read for those who are not used to GitHub/hackmd like structure 
    • DIF has a full team setting with unlimited users that we can use
    • hackmd offers anonymized commenting, so the proposal by the Interop Group works for non-IPR protected meetings; however, for IPR protected workgroups, that is a potential issue.
    • GitHub is easy to use for most developers who are familiar with it, but since DIF also works with non-devs I believe a more straightforward interface and usability could work better.
  • IM: Slack (Is currently an IPR issue as anyone who has access to slack can participate in any WG channels) - to use private channels for the WGs. WG chairs and admins are allowed to add new members.
    • Daniel and Sam offered to develop a tool that automatically bans folks who would ba added not by the chairs/admins to such channels. Until that tool is done, chairs must lookout who is accessing the channels. 
  • Repo management: GitHub to manage repos using the topic tags, so it is clear what repo belongs to whom 
  • VoiP and transcription: zoom + otter for meeting minutes. 
    • W3C CCG is developing a toolset using Jitsi and other products, but until those are not battle-tested, DIF is not considering transferring to that. 
I am open to change my mind but please suggest a process and not only name a tool that you would use.

Could I invite all of you to the DIF internal governance call on the 4th of September? At 8 am PST/11 am ET/5 pm CET? 

I am looking forward for your opinions and to discuss it next Friday, 

best regards,

--

Balázs Némethi
Operations @ DIF


--

Balázs Némethi
Operations @ DIF