Solid 29th August 2019

Process Proposal

• Ruben said that TimBL reviewed and ok'd it. As well as editors roles. Editors: Ruben, Kjetil, … https://github.com/solid/process/blob/master/editors.md#editorial-team

Update from panels

• Dmitri: Each panel doesn't have fromal or informal process, eg. how do we handle pull requests. In Data Interoperability panel we decided to take lightweight process: PR waits for a week giving everyone time to review, with 2 positive reviews and no objections it can get merged afterd that week period.
• Mitzi: Panel repos act as drafting space, in the end it will still need to go through editorial process when submited to main spec repo.
• Michiel: How editors relate to panels? I understood that panels act as topic experts and editors act as release managers. For example Kjetil acts as editor for authorization but doesn't participate in app authorization panel.
• Mitzi: We need 3 editors to agree. They can also change proposed text.
• Michiel: Who do we consider subject experts, panel members or the editors? Would it make sense that all panel members become editors?
• Michiel: Grouping editors by topic suggests that they act as experts on that topic.
• Dmitri: Ruben brought objection to global editors approach. Given that one doesn't need to be expert on all the topics.
• Mitzi: We should work with what we've got. We can add panel member as editor to specific area. We are still not in standard body, at some point we may need to go through formal recomendation track process.
• Pavlik: We could propose one active panel member to also act as editor for that subject.

Minutes from panels

• Authentication: https://github.com/solid/authentication-panel/pull/13/files
• Data Interoperability: https://github.com/solid/data-interoperability-panel/blob/master/meetings/2-08262019.md#minutes
• App Authorization: https://github.com/solid/app-authorization-panel/pull/25

Data Interoperability

• Jay: We discussed lightweight process, as Dmitri mentioned. We also talked about 'pod management' mechanism.

Authentication

• Pavlik: We discussed Micheal's proposal
• Jackson: We currently have separate auhorization server.
• Dmitri: Both, Michael's proposal gives RS to chose its authorization server. Now we rely on IDP to act as authorization server.
• Jackson: We have external discussion with OpenID Connect expert. We will need to have some modifications based on his feedback. Inrupt pays for his consulting work.

App Authorization

• Dmitri: We discussed Michael's proposal for 'permission escalation'. In short when app requests resource but app dosen't have permission to access it, what should happen. We can compare it to requesting access in google docs.

• Dmitri: I see some order dependency between panels, one panels need to finish their work for other panels to move forward.

• Mitzi: We should pay attention to Data Transfer Project, did anyone check out their github repo and made contact?

• Dmitri: We discussed it during Data Interoperability Project. Maybe someone could make a quick research just to check what kind of data they export? We already know they do contacts, but what else? I've looked at the repo last year and also talke to some of the participants.

• Mitzi: I think we should start building personal relationships.

• Dmitri: Maybe we could setup a call with them? I might have contact to some of the people.

• Pavlik: I hope we can settle on tools we use for meetings. HackMD for notes etc.

• Jackson: Explaining how we ended up with Zoom, GoToMeeting and Hangouts

• Dmitri: Gitter for conversations, HackMD for notes, and various for video calls.

• Mitzi: At some point we should build solid apps for all that.