Page Comparison

...

Agenda

Previous Action Items

From Earlier Meetings

•  Former user (Deleted): schedule session to review APIs
•  Former user (Deleted): schedule discussion on future plans and how we manage contributions plus major design decisions (like a move to Electron). We should discuss future support arrangements, i.e. we shouldn't all need to make the same security patch.
•  WilliamS to coordinate a review of the current WG charter (with assistance from any/all interested WG members), and proposed changes will be presented back to the WG at a future meeting

From Last Meeting

•  Gareth Davies and Former user (Deleted) to catch up for coffee and discuss the Minuet discoverability API (please confirm that I captured this action accurately!)

Meeting Notes

• TBD

New Action items

•  TBD

• Minuet open sourcing
  • No update - Gareth Davies and WilliamS are working this internally
• ScottLogic / Colin Eberhardt
  • FinServ Systems Integrator / consultancy based out of the UK - Peter Monks spoke with Colin 3 or 4 weeks ago, and they're interested in participating in the working group, perhaps in a non-voting advisory capacity.
  • Are we interested in having them join the group, in some capacity?  If so, we need to sort out how the mechanics would work wrt their non-membership (which would need to happen at a board level).
    • WilliamS in spirit, yes - we want anyone who's interested and motivated to be able to contribute, while not undercutting the value of Foundation membership
    • Former user (Deleted) we would like to get more expertise in the group, especially if they're willing to contribute code / projects
    • Should we ask Colin to make a business case?
      • WilliamS there are different ways to contribute, and as long as we can articulate how they're going to contribute there are other avenues (e.g. contributing projects) that don't involve membership
      • Former user (Deleted) I like the idea of asking them how they're thinking of contributing
  • Peter Monks I think we have two basic options:
    
    • Ask the board to approve Colin in a one-off, "introductory" role
    • Wait for the board to restructure the membership tiers, then push for Colin / ScottLogic to become a member and fully participate
  • Decision: wait for restructured membership tiers, and request that Colin / ScottLogic join as a Foundation member
• Symphony on Electron:
  • Former user (Deleted) and Gareth Davies met last week to discuss how the group might get Symphony running on Electron
  • Proposal: 1 month project to build POC of Symphony running on Electron, developed in the open in the Foundation Github organisation
  • WilliamS: GS legal might have some concerns
    
    • Gareth Davies: I've checked internally and this may still be possible, using personal infrastructure for development.  A process is forming around this.
  • Former user (Deleted) anyone who participates in this initiative is going to need sign off from their employer, and there will be greater or lesser amounts of hoop-jumping involved depending on the firm.  Right now this will be difficult due to the lack of the Minuet source code anyway.  It sounds like GS are keen, with some hoop jumping involved.  We (Credit Suisse) are also interested, and will have some level of hoop jumping too.  There will likely also be some Foundation hoop jumping.
  • Nick: do we have access to the necessary Minuet code?
    • Gareth Davies yes, and we only need the Symphony javascript package - instructions were added to the notes last week (see "Symphony AppBridge JavaScript Package" below)
  • Gareth Davies two things:
    • getting over this hoop of being able to contribute
    • there is some progress in this space, but it will take a few weeks.  I feel we just need to push and build up some momentum.
  • Former user (Deleted) other members - thoughts?
    
    • Nick: if we're talking about an Electron POC, then we should also do a POC on OpenFin (perhaps v6, which is Electron based)
    • Former user (Deleted) I'd like to do a POC on raw Electron, and I'd be very happy for you guys to do it on top of OpenFin as well
    • Nick: doing this on Electron would not be a big deal - there's nothing earth shattering about doing this - it's fairly standard stuff.  What I'm more concerned about with Electron is architecturally how we'd secure Electron, especially given Symphony's app model, which involves pulling arbitrary content from the web into Electron. The Electron team have said this is fundamentally insecure.
    • Former user (Deleted) I think for this POC this is exactly the kind of thing we want to test out and write down.  But more importantly showing some progress, creating a project etc., of any kind, is a win.
    • Nick: but I don't think putting Symphony on top of Electron is a challenge.  Doing so securely is.
    • WilliamS but the goal of the group was to innovate on top of Minuet, which hasn't been possible yet due to the status of the contribution.  Now we're looking for alternatives to focus on.
    • Former user (Deleted) the group's charter has two goals:
      
      • Minuet (which is stalled)
      • Standardising fintech containers - the proposed POC(s) would build towards this goal
    • WilliamS documenting gaps would be an interesting outcome, which might lead to an interesting discussion around how those gaps might be solved.
    • Nick: I don't think we should be trying to prove basic capabilities of Electron that can be seen in the Electron docs / capabilities
      • We're working with the Electron team and other teams in the space, and I think we need to go into this with eyes wide open
    • WilliamS there's a difference between talking about something and getting our feet wet.  This proposal lets us create something in an organised, open source fashion, and it tests buy-in and accountability.  Any one individual could make a lot of progress on this, but we don't want to run projects that way - this lets us answer questions like how do we do this as a group?  How do we get buy-in?  What are the Symphony hoops?  What are the firm hoops?  Ultimately we should be working towards a framework that lets us contribute to the open source foundation.  This is partly the essence of what this POC could gain us - we'll learn about the process directly and identify how we can streamline it, so that future contributions are easier.
      
      • Maybe we want to create an RFP for Electron and one for RFP and we form project teams around that.
        
        • Peter Monks: yep this would involve creating JIRA(s) in the CONTRIB project, for ESCo approval.  Once approved, the Foundation can quickly turn around the infrastructure (Github repos etc.), grant project ownership to the project teams, and from that point forward the project teams are in full control.  The Foundation's intent here is to keep the barriers to contribution as low as possible, especially during a project's incubation phase (where rapid innovation / experimentation is key).

Symphony AppBridge JavaScript Package

As discussed here are the steps for those who want to look at the AppBridge JavaScript used by Symphony.  

1. Find the Symphony.pgx file on your machine
2. Rename Symphony.pgx to Symphony.zip
3. Unzip
4. In the file there is a background.js which is what gets bootstrapped on startup.
5. There is also a appbridge.js which contains the web to native interop code - this gets loaded in to the DOM at startup.  Note - not all methods are used but it will still give you an indication of how Symphony is using the container.

New Action items

•  Notify Colin that the group, while excited to have his expertise on the group, would prefer to wait until he and/or ScottLogic are a Foundation member (which may depend on the proposed additional membership tiers) - Peter Monks
•  Send email to group describing what we want to do and asking for volunteers for the POC projects (pre-requisite: folks must have permission from their firms to contribute) - Former user (Deleted)
•  Once POC project team(s) are identified, create CONTRIB JIRAs for the POC(s) - TBD