“Recommended” study for keri-devs

[henkvancann]

An idea of Nuttawat Kongsuwan, taken forward by Henk van Cann

Nuttawut: It’s just something that I think would be useful, but not essential, to have.
Henk: A “Recommended” is helpful AND it might guide the discussion with - and input from the Group 2 devs, because they might step in and say “wait you forgot XYZ in the next steps …” or “the order is incorrect, it should be 'ABC'...
Nuttawut: That sounds good. Although everyone will go on different learning paths, it is extremely likely there are going to be significant overlap.
The recommended path could also emerge from the most common overlaps.
The pattern might emerge from the SAID discussion between group 2 developers.

Henk: A rough structure:
0. Study the whitepapers

1. Do the Kent Game
2. Use the KLI command line
3. Set up a KERI-agent
4. Use various API calls
5. Build code that put eventing to work
6. Set up an OOBI to establish trust in the SAIDs

Nuttawut: Well this is my personal learning that is definitely not optimal.

• Reading whitepapers
• Reading all specifications*
• Reading Kent’s tutorials
• Playing with GLEIF-IT qvi-vlei (wrappers of kli commands for vLEI credentials)
• Playing with keripy demo
  This is where I am at the moment. I do not plan to dig deeper into keripy yet. I plan to first learn what are currently available, so my to-do list is
• Learning Sally
• Learning KERIA
• Learning Signifypy and Signify-TS
  '* I mean the specs and Sam and Phil wrote for IETF, including acdc, oobi, cesr, said, etc
  Henk: yes, they’re all grounded in IETF drafts too (I call them White Papers)