Meetings/2020-10-21 solid-team

From Solid Community Group

Solid team call - 2020-10-21

Attendants:

  • Tim B.L.
  • Jeff Z.
  • Vincent T.
  • Sarven C.
  • Nicolas S.

solid.community migration

  • Tim sumarizes the situation: There are 2 historical domains for Solid: inrupt.net, run by a coompany, and solid.community, ran by the community. Melvin has been an involved member of the community since its start, but he unilateraly decided to shut down access to the server. solid.community roughly hosts 50K accounts, making it one of the biggest home of Solid Pods: we have a duty to migrate it for the continuity of service community members are entitled to expect, given we have pushed for usage of solid.community.

Justin and Jackson successfully migrated the disks so that the data is available under a new domain name, solidcommunity.net. Eric Prud'hommeaux also set up a redirection from the previous domain to the new one.

  • Sarven suggests that to avoid this situation from happening again, we should enforce a strict group gouvernance for the new services. Without exception, no service should be entierly under the control of a single individual. That is partly why putting things back the way they were regarding solid.community was not acceptable: the same issue could happen again. The strict group gouvernance should be clearly stated in the Terms and Conditions, along with a privacy noticpolicye, for the new domain. Also, the Solid CG mailing list is not the place to discuss what happened: it is not technically speaking related to the specification. Sarven will send an email to close the discussion, and redirect it around spec issues, regarding e.g. persistence policies, which is relevant in this context.
 Question regarding the privacy policy: Digital Ocean hosts the server in the US, but which state legislation applies specifically ?
  • Vincent raises the question about the community members who were involved with running solid.community.
 Decision: Give them the same level of access on the new server. Their role should be formally described in the community guidelines.

Group status

  • Sarven raises the question of the openness of the Solid team meetings (such as the current one).
 Decision: Meetings should be annouced, and minutes should be public. However, attending the meeting is not completely open: anyone can request the right to attend, but only invitees can attend. This allows this conversation to be among a group of **custodians**, where everyone is up-to-date with the context. Decisions are however public, and open to discussion in the community at large.
  • Sarven raises the question of the distinction between the solidproject org vs the CG. They share members and a code of conduct, but what is the formal relationship ?

Spec update

  • Proposal: a process change should be made to relax the number of reviews required for contribution to the Editor's draft, and only require 2 reviews. The draft should move fast, and it's only after the first draft settles that our current level of review (3 reviews) should apply.
  • Question: how could we increase reach ? The variety of use cases isn't as large as we could have hoped.
    • Jeff suggests reaching out on the forum
    • Sarven notes that there could be an impediment regarding that content on the forum is under a non-comercial license.
    • Tim points out that both the forum and GH are used to share technical content, so ideally they should both use the MIT license. Legally speaking, a license cannot be applied retroactively, so it would only apply from a point in time.
Retrieved from "https://www.w3.org/community/solid/wiki/index.php?title=Meetings/2020-10-21_solid-team&oldid=455"