Technical Planning Meeting [Sept 20th, 2019]

[BelfordZ]

When: Friday Sept 20th 1pm PST
Where: Link will be posted 10m before meeting.

Please tag anyone who may be interested. If the opener of an issue cant make it, we will move the issue discussion to the following meeting.

Schedule:

1. Lobby wait for people 10m
2. go through open issues on spec
3. sweeping initiative updates
4. project updates
5. OpenQuestion time

[BelfordZ]

@rmedaer #226
@dazraf #211
@AArnott #190
@gregdhill #228

[AArnott]

Will this meeting require software to be installed?

[BelfordZ]

@AArnott Thanks for the question.

Originally we have been using zoom. Zoom allows you to phone into the meeting using your regular phone if you don't wish to install any software.

[BelfordZ]

Zachary Belford is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Topic: OpenRPC TSC
Time: 1PM PST

Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/998827760

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,998827760# US (San Jose)
+19292056099,,998827760# US (New York)

Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
Meeting ID: 998 827 760
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/acvNI5f9B

[BelfordZ]

For all further meetings, you may use the url meeting.open-rpc.org

The DNS record r propermagatin atm

[BelfordZ]

Thanks everyone who joined!
(lmk if I miss anyone)

@AArnott @shanejonas @stevanlohja @zcstarr @rmedaer @gregdhill @devonwesley

Main things to address before next meeting:

1. Every issue deserves some discussion, some more than others, but that doesn't mean everyone needs to care about all discussions. We need a solution for respecting peoples time / schedules. I propose that we order issues in the following manner: We first group the issues that have not been discussed in a previous meeting, and sort them by date opened. for each new issue, the opener spends 5m giving intro. We then start questions for max of 10m. This means the max time for any new issue is 15m. Since many will not take this long, and since we want to allow people to join specifically at the time they need to be there to discuss the issue, we need something to fill the time for issues which are discussed more quickly. Perhaps we use this time for new intros and short demos, or maybe we just leave it open. Let's put together a draft for how these meetings are to be structured, since this very quickly seems like it's going to become a core part of contributing / making a fundamental change to the spec

2. There exists a major issue with the spec which seems to be the root of params field could be a restricted JSON schema instead of custom contentDescriptorObject #226 - No conclusion to be drawn ATM. Apply hammock-driven development, sit back with some cheetos and dr peps, give'r a good think before next meeting. Thank you @rmedaer for your patience and thorough explanation of the issues you've faced.

3. To make for a great ecosystem and community, it's key that we all derive an appreciation for anyone who spends a part of their lives reading about JSON-RPC, OpenRPC, or any of this. Even more so we must appreciate those who go the next step, such as yourselves, and write out their thoughts here too. With that said, please open as many issues as you can logically separate - it makes us all feel really good. The angrier the better - it just shows how close to being objectively good to the picky customers we really are.

4. follow my own questionnaire for defining the eternal governance laws of the OpenRPC. This is successful if bus factor is reduced to org members / org members -3 (at least 3 members need to not get hit by this incredibly dangerous bus)

If anyone has any notes please add them.

I'll post the next meeting time on the weekend sometime. We are going to constrain meetings to weekdays only. This might mean we need to shorten the range of 'weekday' to be Tuesday-Thursday inclusive (to accommodate unfortunate reality that the earth is not flat).

[AArnott]

I don't mind meeting again. The scheduling of the meetings may be challenging. I know much bigger projects that manage issues without meeting at all just by discussing on the issues themselves. I am totally open to that approach.

[dazraf]

Hi, Thank you so much for setting this up! I joined for a bit but had to look after our kid who was sick with flu. Very interesting call. I liked what I heard on the principles for staying true to json-schema - hope I heard that right. Will we explicitly support https://json-schema.org/understanding-json-schema/reference/combining.html <https://json-schema.org/understanding-json-schema/reference/combining.html> ? We've found these declarations very useful when exposing the public types from our services and providing clarity to our clients. Btw, a small note about x-streaming-* extensions - hopefully in the next month I should be able to start work on it full time (we've been caught up with clients and the madness that is conference season). Would be great to collaborate with everyone here to review spec proposals. Looking forward to the next call. All the best, Fuzz

…

On 20 Sep 2019, at 22:44, Zachary Belford ***@***.***> wrote: Thanks everyone who joined! Main things to address before next meeting: Every issue deserves some discussion, some more than others, but that doesn't mean everyone needs to care about all discussions. We need a solution for respecting peoples time / schedules. I propose that we order issues in the following manner: We first group the issues that have not been discussed in a previous meeting, and sort them by date opened. for each new issue, the opener spends 5m giving intro. We then start questions for max of 10m. This means the max time for any new issue is 15m. Since many will not take this long, and since we want to allow people to join specifically at the time they need to be there to discuss the issue, we need something to fill the time for issues which are discussed more quickly. Perhaps we use this time for new intros and short demos, or maybe we just leave it open. There exists a major issue <#229> with the spec which seems to be the root of #226 <#226> — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#227?email_source=notifications&email_token=AABLSWH4ZJUYAOSKMGYEXNTQKU74TA5CNFSM4IYNSHDKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD7H6QBQ#issuecomment-533719046>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABLSWCOHOFN4FLSHKGTURTQKU74TANCNFSM4IYNSHDA>.