-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 446
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
docs: 2018 Q3 OKRs #207
Merged
Merged
docs: 2018 Q3 OKRs #207
Changes from 11 commits
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
75a37e2
docs: 2018 Q3 OKRs placeholder
daviddias ca0ecf8
docs: first draft
daviddias 9338d0d
Update OKR.md
daviddias 0bc197f
Update OKR.md
daviddias 51ca8a1
Update OKR.md
daviddias 268f70d
Update OKR.md
daviddias d162a94
Update OKR.md
daviddias 01b2047
Update OKR.md
daviddias bb89f6b
adding 3 more KRs
daviddias df33aae
Update OKR.md
daviddias 8a5b265
Update OKR.md
daviddias 5e8f5b6
Update OKR.md
daviddias File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ | ||
| # Quarterly Objectives and Key Results | ||
|
|
||
| We try to frame our ongoing work using a process based on quarterly Objectives and Key Results (OKRs). Objectives reflect outcomes that are challenging, but realistic. Results are tangible and measurable. | ||
|
|
||
| ## 2018 Q3 | ||
|
|
||
| **All pieces are there. Ship Peer & Content Routing + IPNS** | ||
|
|
||
| - Delegated Peer Routing is completed - @jacobheun | ||
| - Delegated Content Routing is completed - @jacobheun | ||
| - DHT interops with go-libp2p - @vascosantos | ||
| - NAT Traversal is implemented in js-libp2p (for at least TCP) - @jacobheun | ||
| - IPNS works over PubSub (+ go-libp2p interop) - @vasco-santos | ||
| - IPNS works over DHT (+ go-libp2p interop) - @vasco-santos | ||
|
|
||
| **libp2p debugging and interop testing is not painful** | ||
|
|
||
| - Error handling is done correctly and error codes are part of the API - @jacobheun | ||
| - libp2p and libp2p-switch become full state machines - @jacobheun | ||
| - libp2p has a network visualization tool - @vasco-santos | ||
| - js-libp2p has a daemon with a RPC API and a client library - @jacobheun | ||
| - We get the RPC API standardised so that go-libp2p and rust-libp2p can implement it as well - @jacobheun | ||
| - Write the first set of interop tests that tests - @jacobheun | ||
|
|
||
| **libp2p is seen as the go to p2p networking stack** | ||
|
|
||
| - js-libp2p releases get proper fanfare - @diasdavid | ||
| - kick off the js.libp2p.io Welcome page - @diasdavid | ||
| - Onboard 3 new full time contributors - @diasdavid | ||
|
|
||
| Once these OKRs are finished, you will be able to find them on the [2018 Q3 libp2p OKRs Spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HTXfgR5FyPTFhsTkFPRThkeMvHvCgJOaAs7BSl_vQ_0/edit#gid=1241853194) | ||
|
|
||
| ## Previous Quarters | ||
|
|
||
| For the quarters before 2018 Q3, js-libp2p shared their KRs with the [IPFS OKRs](https://github.com/ipfs/js-ipfs/blob/master/OKR.md). | ||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's continue discussing the OKRs over the markdown, taking inspiration from the notes already shared in this thread.
I've defined 3 main objectives so far (rewording is welcome if you see the need) for this quarter which capture the most requested and needed features and bug fixes.
Let's shoot to get the final list of KRs by Wednesday, final review on Thursday and ship it on Friday.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@diasdavid should we add
IPNS parity and interoperability with go?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Absolutely @vasco-santos, good call!
I've updated the OKRs list and started assigning some based on previous work. Please review:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe that we can achieve this list!!
I would like to take the lead on
DHT interops with go-libp2p.By the way, is there any issue for the network visualization tool? I think I would like to go with it as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you think it's worth having a 'technical debt' section? There was something about speeding the tests up here a minute ago but it seems to have been removed.
Feature parity with the go API would also be a good thing to shoot for.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
With this, I assigned the remaining to @jacobheun, hope you agree. I do think that we need to find more stuff to keep @jacobheun busy, otherwise he will be done in the first couple of weeks :D
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cool, thanks @diasdavid ! Then we sync about the tool 🙂
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oops, yes. I've added the comment there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@diasdavid haha, yes I'm good with taking the rest. I know NAT traversal was part of q2 but I'd like to make sure that gets done, as I think it's important to making libp2p the painless go to in p2p.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
rad!! And you are right, let's add NAT back in.