W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > April 2022

Re: Migrating supporting repositories to CCG?

From: Mike Prorock <mprorock@mesur.io>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 18:05:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGJKSNR1Dj3DUK6ssNcEkFj=tAXX25KjcT=hqE-Q4hVK5BLyqw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Cc: W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
Excellent question - my gut feel is that the primary work item editors in
this case are sufficient to support a move without full re-approval.  This
is assuming, as is the case here, that these items are directly in support
of or part of an approved work item.  Onus would be on the work item editor
to ensure no objects from work item participants, etc on this.

That is my read, but I would like to see if there is a different take.

Mike Prorock
CTO, Founder

On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 5:18 PM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>

> Hey CCG Chairs (and Emeritus Chairs),
> This question came up during a VC API telecon:
> Can Github repositories that support an existing CCG work item be moved to
> automatically, or does every Github repository need to go through the work
> item process?
> For example, if "Work Item X" is adopted as a CCG work item, then we
> create a
> "Work Item X Use Cases", "Work Item X Test Suite", or "Work Item X
> Developer
> Guide" in personal/corporate Github repositories... do those latter three
> items need to go through the work item adoption process, or can the
> supporting
> items just be moved over to CCG as long as the author and Work Item Group
> agree to move those things over?
> This is of immediate relevance to the VC API group as we have the following
> test suite repositories that we expect to contribute to the CCG over the
> next
> couple of months:
> * Implementations (VC API implementer configurations and
>   authz Github secrets)
> * Assertion libraries (e.g., test VC, Data Integrity, and
>   JWT well-formed-ness (not crypto) checking)
> * Basic VC Issuer API
> * Basic VC Verifier API
> * Cryptosuites (Ed25519, NIST ECDSA, Koblitz ECDSA, VC-
>   JWT, BBS+, etc.)
> * Basic Presentation Exchange
> * Credential Refresh 2021
> * Industry Vertical VCs (Student ID, Permanent Resident
>   Card, Skill, Transcript, etc.)
> Moving every single one of those things through the CCG work item process
> feels like overkill if folks in the VC API group are already doing the
> work as
> a part of the VC API testing initiative.
> The question to the Chairs are, can we just move those test suites into
> CCG,
> or do we need to move every single one of those things through the CCG work
> item process?
> -- manu
> --
> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies (2021)
> https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2022 22:06:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 13 April 2022 22:06:08 UTC