Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 11, 2023. It is now read-only.

Adding meeting notes for 2018-11-26 #3

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 3, 2018
Merged

Adding meeting notes for 2018-11-26 #3

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
78 changes: 78 additions & 0 deletions meeting-notes/2018/2018-11-26--ipld-sync.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
# 🖧 IPLD Bi-Weekly Sync 🙌🏽 2018-11-26

- **Lead:** @vmx
- **Notetaker:** @aschmahmann
- **Attendees:**
- @aschmahmann
- @daviddias
- @mikeal
- @warpfork
- @mgoelzer
- @bigs
- @stebalien
- @vmx
- **Recording:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZxoQQnhmD4
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for uploading the recording. I created a playlist with all the IPLD Calls to make them easy to find:

Playlist url https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=103DT-im1_M&list=PLuhRWgmPaHtRfR6VhISbSiPJ87rsN3Pb9



## Agenda

- General
- Start recording
- Start live stream
- Find a notetaker
- Ask everyone to put their name into the list of attendees
- Ask everyone to put their items that they've been working on the past two weeks (should be done prior to the meeting)
- Ask for last minute agenda items
- This meeting
- Announce https://github.com/ipld/team-mgmt/
- JS API specs update ready for review:
- https://github.com/ipld/js-ipld/pull/185
- https://github.com/ipld/interface-ipld-format/pull/50

## Notes

@stebalien
Please comment on mentioned issue if you're interested.
Some thoughts on moving CIDs to multiformats from IPLD, but likely doesn't make a huge difference.

@warpfork IPLD interfaces not used very actively in Go projects yet. Want project suited to be beta user / driver for go-ipld-prime development. Maybe start go-unixfsv2 repo.


@daviddias
- Why is unixfsv2 dragging? Why are so many people assigned?
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There was a question on the call on "what does it mean that we have multiple people assigned". This was what I was seeing:

In IPLD OKRs

image

In JS IPFS OKRs

image

//cc @mikeal @vmx @achingbrain @warpfork @Stebalien

Copy link

@Stebalien Stebalien Dec 6, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree there needs to be precisely one owner. This clearly isn't working.

Copy link
Contributor

@mikeal mikeal Dec 6, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is the problem with having different people assigned to the spec and the implementation in each language? At the very least we should expect that the implementation in each language would have different assignees.

BTW, the draft spec has landed (not 100% finished but there are additional threads about those issues) and a standalone JS implementation has been updated to the latest spec.

Update: sorry, I didn't see that very tiny screengrab from JS IPFS OKR's. Not sure why @achingbrain was assigned that but you can mark it as complete next week when the directory PR lands (it's currently just waiting for any final objections).

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The issue is that having multiple people ultimately responsible for the same task diffuses responsibility. Nobody knows who's actually responsible for what so everyone works on things they know they're solely responsible for.

Really, we should probably have "owner" and "assigned".

This clearly isn't working.

This was too harsh. You're right, progress is being made. At the end of the day, I think the correct assignment here is:

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not involved that much as I didn't really see the need so far. I trust @mikeal @warpfork and @achingbrain enough that they'll make the right decisions :)

- IPLD when it started had a lot of interest in suggestions from contributors. We should go back and take a look at some of the previous ideas and issues and see how relevant they are, so can loop these contributors and ideas back in.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added multiple references to ipld/ipld#56


@aschmahmann Working on synchronizing versioned graphs. There is also some discussion on an API for versioned graphs https://github.com/ipfs/dynamic-data-and-capabilities/issues/50.

@mikeal 1) Use CBOR, 2) look at and post specs to replication repo https://github.com/ipld/replication/

@mikeal There is no canonical format for IPLD nodes. Converting between JSON-LD and the CBOR equivalents is managed by the developers. --@mikeal did I get this right?

@daviddias There is a lot of conversation about the IPLD DAG HTTP/RPC API https://github.com/ipfs/interface-ipfs-core/issues/81#issuecomment-277271941. DAG CBOR has less defined structure then the older Protbuf implementation, so there are some things to still work out.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@Stebalien when you have a moment, please review https://github.com/ipfs/interface-ipfs-core/issues/81#issuecomment-277271941. I believe it is the same thing you were proposing, just that you were proposing to encapsulate everything in a JSON object and that comment is proposing to pass that information through args or headers.


@volker When we talk about the HTTP API we assume it's a JSON API. Does it have to be JSON or can it be something else?
- @stebalien we can't currently just send raw data because we can't send metadata in headers (not supported by our HTTP/RPC API). JSON makes this easier though.

@warpfork it would be nice to have more people dedicated to IPLD, especially since there is insufficient people in Go land to review @warpfork's code.
- @daviddias utilizing older Git issues and publishing specs will help get people involved in reviewing code.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@warpfork check in and invite everyone from ipld/ipld#56 and the previous IPLD deep dives ipfs/team-mgmt#484

I'm sure multiple people will be delighted to learn that IPLD is becoming its full org with a fully dedicated team :)

//cc @nicola, @lgierth, @hermanjunge, @Kubuxu, @pgte, @wanderer, @kumavis, @jonchoi, @jonnycrunch, @b5, @mildred, @davidar, @davidad, @krl et al :D



### Two-week Update

@vmx
- JS IPLD API specs

@warpfork
- Done:
- go-ipld-prime has mutable arrays now
- Questions:
- do we have some upcoming projects (alpha or betas) that would be good fits to drive go-ipld-prime beta? preferably non-core so we can burn in slowly.
- Next:
- moar go-ipld. tests mutable maps, test deeper structures; need toTokenStream...
- todo:self: comment on unixfsv2 about union mechanism
- maybe time to start a go-unixfsv2 repo as that beta user of go-ipld-prime?

@stebalien
- Next:
- Push on CIDs as peer IDs (https://github.com/libp2p/specs/issues/111)