Re: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Giorgio Zoppi]

Can be used milagro with react native? I mean the autentication.


2018-03-12 10:13 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:

> Thank you for guidance.  Sorry, I was somewhat confused.
>
> "We" means NTT in this context.
>
> I understand Milagro project has some difficulty in releasing code at the
> official repository.
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
>
> The reason is not clear for me, however, if a new official repository
> resolves the issue, then I think it is a good idea to install it.
>
> For that purpose NTT is willing to work in managements.
>
> Regards,
> Go Yamamoto
>
> -Original Message-
> From: John D. Ament [mailto:johndam...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2018 10:34 PM
> To: d...@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
>
>
> On 2018/03/08 05:20:41, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Who is taking care of management tasks right now?
> > We would like to request the official repository to release our code.
> > If nobody is working for the task, we will take it over.
>
> Who is "we" in this case?
> http://git.apache.org/ shows 11 repositories for Milagro.
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Go Yamamoto
> >
> > -----Original Message-
> > From: Nikolai Stoilov [mailto:nikolai.stoi...@miracl.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:51 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > Hi Go,
> >
> > Regarding management, I can show someone from your side how to fill in
> the
> monthly reports which are required for the project.
> >
> > Nikolai
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 6:24 PM Giorgio Zoppi
> > <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Ok,
> > > just to be proactive, schedule some tickets when you have a plan and
> > > i will able to do a couple of jiras at week,
> > >
> > > 2018-02-19 17:15 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
> > >
> > > > Thanks, Giorgio.
> > > >
> > > > All, let's start planning release the crypto library first.
> > > > I think we can simply start official repository that mirrors
> > > > current crypto code at Miracl's, and then we declare that it is
> > > > the master of the project.
> > > > After that, Miracl's team will pull-request to contribute the
> > > advancements
> > > > at the local repo.
> > > >
> > > > We can start right now.
> > > > Who is managing the official repo right now?
> > > >
> > > > Go
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:00 AM
> > > > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > > >
> > > > If it goes as planner i canhelp and build and test code. Porting
> > > > some
> > > code
> > > > to c++ for the server part.
> > > >
> > > > 2018-02-19 16:53 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
> > > >
> > > > > All,
> > > > >
> > > > > We again request to discuss renewing the roadmap and to start
> > > > > the official repository to share the codes we have worked for
> years.
> > > > > Kelean, what do you think is blocking this obvious task?
> > > > >
> > > > > If this project needs help in management, we are willing to
> > > participate.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Go Yamamto
> > > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: Go Yamamoto [mailto:yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 1:24 PM
> > > > > To: 'dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org'
> > > > > <dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > > > >
> > > > > Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> > > > > I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to
> > > > > present a roadmap.
> > > > > I will be always willing to participate or to help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Go
> > > > >
> > > > > -Original Message--

Re: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[John D . Ament]

On 2018/03/08 05:20:41, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: 
> Hi
> 
> Who is taking care of management tasks right now?
> We would like to request the official repository to release our code.
> If nobody is working for the task, we will take it over.

Who is "we" in this case?
http://git.apache.org/ shows 11 repositories for Milagro.

> 
> Regards,
> Go Yamamoto
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Nikolai Stoilov [mailto:nikolai.stoi...@miracl.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:51 AM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> 
> Hi Go,
> 
> Regarding management, I can show someone from your side how to fill in the 
> monthly reports which are required for the project.
> 
> Nikolai
> 
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 6:24 PM Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Ok,
> > just to be proactive, schedule some tickets when you have a plan and i 
> > will able to do a couple of jiras at week,
> >
> > 2018-02-19 17:15 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
> >
> > > Thanks, Giorgio.
> > >
> > > All, let's start planning release the crypto library first.
> > > I think we can simply start official repository that mirrors current 
> > > crypto code at Miracl's, and then we declare that it is the master 
> > > of the project.
> > > After that, Miracl's team will pull-request to contribute the
> > advancements
> > > at the local repo.
> > >
> > > We can start right now.
> > > Who is managing the official repo right now?
> > >
> > > Go
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:00 AM
> > > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > >
> > > If it goes as planner i canhelp and build and test code. Porting 
> > > some
> > code
> > > to c++ for the server part.
> > >
> > > 2018-02-19 16:53 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
> > >
> > > > All,
> > > >
> > > > We again request to discuss renewing the roadmap and to start the 
> > > > official repository to share the codes we have worked for years.
> > > > Kelean, what do you think is blocking this obvious task?
> > > >
> > > > If this project needs help in management, we are willing to
> > participate.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Go Yamamto
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Go Yamamoto [mailto:yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp]
> > > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 1:24 PM
> > > > To: 'dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org'
> > > > <dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > > >
> > > > Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> > > > I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to 
> > > > present a roadmap.
> > > > I will be always willing to participate or to help.
> > > >
> > > > Go
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
> > > > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > > >
> > > > If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets 
> > > > to me and i will help.
> > > >
> > > > 2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to 
> > > > > participate in the discussion.
> > > > >
> > > > > Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear 
> > > > > how this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> > > > > None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the 
> > > > > project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do 
> > > > > that, but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, 
> > > > > hasn't
> > > been clear.
> > > > > This was one of our pain points along the way.
> >

RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

Hi

Who is taking care of management tasks right now?
We would like to request the official repository to release our code.
If nobody is working for the task, we will take it over.

Regards,
Go Yamamoto

-Original Message-
From: Nikolai Stoilov [mailto:nikolai.stoi...@miracl.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:51 AM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

Hi Go,

Regarding management, I can show someone from your side how to fill in the 
monthly reports which are required for the project.

Nikolai

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 6:24 PM Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Ok,
> just to be proactive, schedule some tickets when you have a plan and i 
> will able to do a couple of jiras at week,
>
> 2018-02-19 17:15 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
>
> > Thanks, Giorgio.
> >
> > All, let's start planning release the crypto library first.
> > I think we can simply start official repository that mirrors current 
> > crypto code at Miracl's, and then we declare that it is the master 
> > of the project.
> > After that, Miracl's team will pull-request to contribute the
> advancements
> > at the local repo.
> >
> > We can start right now.
> > Who is managing the official repo right now?
> >
> > Go
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:00 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > If it goes as planner i canhelp and build and test code. Porting 
> > some
> code
> > to c++ for the server part.
> >
> > 2018-02-19 16:53 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
> >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > We again request to discuss renewing the roadmap and to start the 
> > > official repository to share the codes we have worked for years.
> > > Kelean, what do you think is blocking this obvious task?
> > >
> > > If this project needs help in management, we are willing to
> participate.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Go Yamamto
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Go Yamamoto [mailto:yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 1:24 PM
> > > To: 'dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org'
> > > <dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > >
> > > Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> > > I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to 
> > > present a roadmap.
> > > I will be always willing to participate or to help.
> > >
> > > Go
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
> > > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > >
> > > If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets 
> > > to me and i will help.
> > >
> > > 2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to 
> > > > participate in the discussion.
> > > >
> > > > Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear 
> > > > how this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> > > > None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the 
> > > > project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do 
> > > > that, but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, 
> > > > hasn't
> > been clear.
> > > > This was one of our pain points along the way.
> > > >
> > > > Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have 
> > > > resources to lead the project, but the question is - in a 
> > > > community like this, who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> > > > The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto 
> > > > library, with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when 
> > > > NTT take the leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
> > > >
> > > > We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full 
> > > > unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we 
> > > > figure-out th

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Nikolai Stoilov]

Hi Go,

Regarding management, I can show someone from your side how to fill in the
monthly reports which are required for the project.

Nikolai

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 6:24 PM Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Ok,
> just to be proactive, schedule some tickets when you have a plan and i will
> able to do a couple of jiras at week,
>
> 2018-02-19 17:15 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
>
> > Thanks, Giorgio.
> >
> > All, let's start planning release the crypto library first.
> > I think we can simply start official repository that mirrors current
> > crypto code at Miracl's, and then we declare that it is the master of the
> > project.
> > After that, Miracl's team will pull-request to contribute the
> advancements
> > at the local repo.
> >
> > We can start right now.
> > Who is managing the official repo right now?
> >
> > Go
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:00 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > If it goes as planner i canhelp and build and test code. Porting some
> code
> > to c++ for the server part.
> >
> > 2018-02-19 16:53 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
> >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > We again request to discuss renewing the roadmap and to start the
> > > official repository to share the codes we have worked for years.
> > > Kelean, what do you think is blocking this obvious task?
> > >
> > > If this project needs help in management, we are willing to
> participate.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Go Yamamto
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Go Yamamoto [mailto:yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 1:24 PM
> > > To: 'dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org'
> > > <dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > >
> > > Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> > > I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to
> > > present a roadmap.
> > > I will be always willing to participate or to help.
> > >
> > > Go
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
> > > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > >
> > > If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to
> > > me and i will help.
> > >
> > > 2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to
> > > > participate in the discussion.
> > > >
> > > > Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how
> > > > this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> > > > None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the
> > > > project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do
> > > > that, but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't
> > been clear.
> > > > This was one of our pain points along the way.
> > > >
> > > > Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have
> > > > resources to lead the project, but the question is - in a community
> > > > like this, who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> > > > The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto
> > > > library, with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT
> > > > take the leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
> > > >
> > > > We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full
> > > > unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we
> > > > figure-out the repositories issue.
> > > >
> > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > Simeon Aladjem
> > > >
> > > > On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> > > > We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library
> > > > first, and 

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Giorgio Zoppi]

Ok,
just to be proactive, schedule some tickets when you have a plan and i will
able to do a couple of jiras at week,

2018-02-19 17:15 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:

> Thanks, Giorgio.
>
> All, let's start planning release the crypto library first.
> I think we can simply start official repository that mirrors current
> crypto code at Miracl's, and then we declare that it is the master of the
> project.
> After that, Miracl's team will pull-request to contribute the advancements
> at the local repo.
>
> We can start right now.
> Who is managing the official repo right now?
>
> Go
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:00 AM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> If it goes as planner i canhelp and build and test code. Porting some code
> to c++ for the server part.
>
> 2018-02-19 16:53 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
>
> > All,
> >
> > We again request to discuss renewing the roadmap and to start the
> > official repository to share the codes we have worked for years.
> > Kelean, what do you think is blocking this obvious task?
> >
> > If this project needs help in management, we are willing to participate.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Go Yamamto
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Go Yamamoto [mailto:yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp]
> > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 1:24 PM
> > To: 'dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org'
> > <dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> > I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to
> > present a roadmap.
> > I will be always willing to participate or to help.
> >
> > Go
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to
> > me and i will help.
> >
> > 2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to
> > > participate in the discussion.
> > >
> > > Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how
> > > this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> > > None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the
> > > project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do
> > > that, but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't
> been clear.
> > > This was one of our pain points along the way.
> > >
> > > Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have
> > > resources to lead the project, but the question is - in a community
> > > like this, who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> > > The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto
> > > library, with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT
> > > take the leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
> > >
> > > We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full
> > > unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we
> > > figure-out the repositories issue.
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > Simeon Aladjem
> > >
> > > On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > >
> > > We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> > > We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library
> > > first, and then the authentication server/clients second.  What do
> > > we need to authorize the plan?
> > >
> > > So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no
> > > problems in actual use in our engineering activities.
> > > It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto
> > > library released since the current code does not seem to cover
> > > sub-normal cases necessarily.
> > > It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are
> > > required for the first release, they will at least help further
> > > development activities.
> > >
> > > BTW, our repository contains

RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

Thanks, Giorgio.

All, let's start planning release the crypto library first.
I think we can simply start official repository that mirrors current crypto 
code at Miracl's, and then we declare that it is the master of the project.
After that, Miracl's team will pull-request to contribute the advancements at 
the local repo.

We can start right now.
Who is managing the official repo right now?

Go

-Original Message-
From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:00 AM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

If it goes as planner i canhelp and build and test code. Porting some code to 
c++ for the server part.

2018-02-19 16:53 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:

> All,
>
> We again request to discuss renewing the roadmap and to start the 
> official repository to share the codes we have worked for years.
> Kelean, what do you think is blocking this obvious task?
>
> If this project needs help in management, we are willing to participate.
>
> Regards,
> Go Yamamto
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Go Yamamoto [mailto:yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp]
> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 1:24 PM
> To: 'dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org' 
> <dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to 
> present a roadmap.
> I will be always willing to participate or to help.
>
> Go
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to 
> me and i will help.
>
> 2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to 
> > participate in the discussion.
> >
> > Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how 
> > this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> > None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the 
> > project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do 
> > that, but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't been 
> > clear.
> > This was one of our pain points along the way.
> >
> > Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have 
> > resources to lead the project, but the question is - in a community 
> > like this, who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> > The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto 
> > library, with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT 
> > take the leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
> >
> > We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full 
> > unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we 
> > figure-out the repositories issue.
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Simeon Aladjem
> >
> > On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> >
> > We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> > We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library 
> > first, and then the authentication server/clients second.  What do 
> > we need to authorize the plan?
> >
> > So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no 
> > problems in actual use in our engineering activities.
> > It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto 
> > library released since the current code does not seem to cover 
> > sub-normal cases necessarily.
> > It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are 
> > required for the first release, they will at least help further 
> > development activities.
> >
> > BTW, our repository contains a lot of possible contributions on 
> > test codes.
> > I believe the code will help users and developers if they are merged.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Go Yamamoto
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:29 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > BTW,
> > do you have a roadmap? Do you want to support hardware as well? 
> > IS there  a todo list of things? When do you plan next release?
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Giorgio Zoppi]

If it goes as planner i canhelp and build and test code. Porting some code
to c++ for the server part.

2018-02-19 16:53 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:

> All,
>
> We again request to discuss renewing the roadmap and to start the official
> repository to share the codes we have worked for years.
> Kelean, what do you think is blocking this obvious task?
>
> If this project needs help in management, we are willing to participate.
>
> Regards,
> Go Yamamto
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Go Yamamoto [mailto:yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp]
> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 1:24 PM
> To: 'dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org' <dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to present a
> roadmap.
> I will be always willing to participate or to help.
>
> Go
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to me
> and i will help.
>
> 2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to
> > participate in the discussion.
> >
> > Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how
> > this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> > None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the
> > project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do that,
> > but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't been clear.
> > This was one of our pain points along the way.
> >
> > Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have resources
> > to lead the project, but the question is - in a community like this,
> > who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> > The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto library,
> > with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT take the
> > leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
> >
> > We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full
> > unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we
> > figure-out the repositories issue.
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Simeon Aladjem
> >
> > On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> >
> > We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> > We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library
> > first, and then the authentication server/clients second.  What do we
> > need to authorize the plan?
> >
> > So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no
> > problems in actual use in our engineering activities.
> > It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto
> > library released since the current code does not seem to cover
> > sub-normal cases necessarily.
> > It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are
> > required for the first release, they will at least help further
> > development activities.
> >
> > BTW, our repository contains a lot of possible contributions on
> > test codes.
> > I believe the code will help users and developers if they are merged.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Go Yamamoto
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:29 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > BTW,
> > do you have a roadmap? Do you want to support hardware as well? IS
> > there  a todo list of things? When do you plan next release?
> >
> > 2018-01-30 22:26 GMT+01:00 Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Hello everybody,
> > > is there any way to save just the crypto library inside Apache? The
> > > server  doenst make sense, there is no valuable code.
> > > The crypto library including mpin protocol can be used from other
> > > projects. Currently there is no community.
> > >
> > >
> > > 2018-01-30 22:12 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
> > >
> > >> Simeon,
> > >>
>

RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

All,

We again request to discuss renewing the roadmap and to start the official 
repository to share the codes we have worked for years.
Kelean, what do you think is blocking this obvious task?

If this project needs help in management, we are willing to participate.

Regards,
Go Yamamto

-Original Message-
From: Go Yamamoto [mailto:yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp] 
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 1:24 PM
To: 'dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org' <dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to present a 
roadmap.  
I will be always willing to participate or to help.

Go

-Original Message-
From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to me and i 
will help.

2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:

> Hello,
>
> Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to 
> participate in the discussion.
>
> Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how 
> this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the 
> project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do that, 
> but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't been clear.
> This was one of our pain points along the way.
>
> Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have resources 
> to lead the project, but the question is - in a community like this, 
> who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto library, 
> with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT take the 
> leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
>
> We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full 
> unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we 
> figure-out the repositories issue.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Simeon Aladjem
>
> On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
> We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library 
> first, and then the authentication server/clients second.  What do we 
> need to authorize the plan?
>
> So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no 
> problems in actual use in our engineering activities.
> It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto 
> library released since the current code does not seem to cover 
> sub-normal cases necessarily.
> It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are 
> required for the first release, they will at least help further 
> development activities.
>
> BTW, our repository contains a lot of possible contributions on 
> test codes.
> I believe the code will help users and developers if they are merged.
>
> Regards,
> Go Yamamoto
>
> -Original Message-
>     From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:29 AM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> BTW,
> do you have a roadmap? Do you want to support hardware as well? IS 
> there  a todo list of things? When do you plan next release?
>
> 2018-01-30 22:26 GMT+01:00 Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hello everybody,
> > is there any way to save just the crypto library inside Apache? The
> > server  doenst make sense, there is no valuable code.
> > The crypto library including mpin protocol can be used from other
> > projects. Currently there is no community.
> >
> >
> > 2018-01-30 22:12 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
> >
> >> Simeon,
> >>
> >> In order for that to happen, someone would need to make sure Go
> >> Yamamoto has write access to the repositories.  I'm not sure 
> that has happened.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> On 2018/01/30 14:49:07, Simeon Aladjem 
> <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our perspective
> >> > on
> >> the project.
> >> >
> >> > First of all, we did disengage with the idea to move the Milagro
> >&

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[John D . Ament]

Hello,

And how are you planning to create those repositories?

What about the board reports that have not been received in months?

John

On 2018/02/09 16:31:11, Kealan Mccusker <kealan.mccus...@miracl.com> wrote: 
> Hi Giorgio
> 
> It was designed for the internet of things but we are now using it in many
> settings.
> It is a very easy to understand, side channel resistant library that is
> provided in
> common dev languages.
> 
> What we would like to do, as stated above, is create a number of repos for
> the
> language versions;
> 
> milagro-crypto-c
> milagro-crypto-js
> milagro-crypto-java
> milagro-crypto-go
> 
> Please read the pdf included which has an introduction to the library.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Kealan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   [image: MIRACL Logo]
> <http://www.miracl.com/?utm_campaign=Email%20Signature_source=email_content=email_miracl_logo>
>   *Try MIRACL Trust® in Five Minutes*
> *Download Guide*
> <http://www.miracl.com/try-miracl-trust-in-5-minutes?utm_campaign=Email%20Signature_source=email_content=email_download_guide>
>   |  *Read FAQs*
> <http://www.miracl.com/faqs-miracl-trust?utm_campaign=Email%20Signature_source=email_content=email_read_faqs>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Again which is the target of miracle? How does differentiate this from
> > OpenSSL or Botan for example?
> >
> >
> > 2018-02-09 5:23 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
> >
> > > Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> > > I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to present
> > a
> > > roadmap.
> > > I will be always willing to participate or to help.
> > >
> > > Go
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
> > > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > >
> > > If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to me
> > > and i will help.
> > >
> > > 2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to
> > > > participate in the discussion.
> > > >
> > > > Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how
> > > > this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> > > > None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the
> > > > project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do that,
> > > > but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't been
> > clear.
> > > > This was one of our pain points along the way.
> > > >
> > > > Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have resources
> > > > to lead the project, but the question is - in a community like this,
> > > > who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> > > > The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto library,
> > > > with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT take the
> > > > leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
> > > >
> > > > We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full
> > > > unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we
> > > > figure-out the repositories issue.
> > > >
> > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > Simeon Aladjem
> > > >
> > > > On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> > > > We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library
> > > > first, and then the authentication server/clients second.  What do we
> > > > need to authorize the plan?
> > > >
> > > > So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no
> > > > problems in actual use in our engineering activities.
> > > > It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto
> > > > library released since the current code does not seem to cover
> > > > sub-normal cases necessarily.
> > > > It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Kealan Mccusker]

Hi Giorgio

It was designed for the internet of things but we are now using it in many
settings.
It is a very easy to understand, side channel resistant library that is
provided in
common dev languages.

What we would like to do, as stated above, is create a number of repos for
the
language versions;

milagro-crypto-c
milagro-crypto-js
milagro-crypto-java
milagro-crypto-go

Please read the pdf included which has an introduction to the library.

Regards

Kealan





  [image: MIRACL Logo]
<http://www.miracl.com/?utm_campaign=Email%20Signature_source=email_content=email_miracl_logo>
  *Try MIRACL Trust® in Five Minutes*
*Download Guide*
<http://www.miracl.com/try-miracl-trust-in-5-minutes?utm_campaign=Email%20Signature_source=email_content=email_download_guide>
  |  *Read FAQs*
<http://www.miracl.com/faqs-miracl-trust?utm_campaign=Email%20Signature_source=email_content=email_read_faqs>





On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Again which is the target of miracle? How does differentiate this from
> OpenSSL or Botan for example?
>
>
> 2018-02-09 5:23 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:
>
> > Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> > I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to present
> a
> > roadmap.
> > I will be always willing to participate or to help.
> >
> > Go
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to me
> > and i will help.
> >
> > 2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to
> > > participate in the discussion.
> > >
> > > Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how
> > > this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> > > None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the
> > > project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do that,
> > > but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't been
> clear.
> > > This was one of our pain points along the way.
> > >
> > > Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have resources
> > > to lead the project, but the question is - in a community like this,
> > > who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> > > The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto library,
> > > with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT take the
> > > leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
> > >
> > > We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full
> > > unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we
> > > figure-out the repositories issue.
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > Simeon Aladjem
> > >
> > > On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > >
> > > We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> > > We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library
> > > first, and then the authentication server/clients second.  What do we
> > > need to authorize the plan?
> > >
> > > So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no
> > > problems in actual use in our engineering activities.
> > > It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto
> > > library released since the current code does not seem to cover
> > > sub-normal cases necessarily.
> > > It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are
> > > required for the first release, they will at least help further
> > > development activities.
> > >
> > > BTW, our repository contains a lot of possible contributions on
> > > test codes.
> > > I believe the code will help users and developers if they are
> merged.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Go Yamamoto
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:29 AM
> > > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > >
> > >  

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Giorgio Zoppi]

Again which is the target of miracle? How does differentiate this from
OpenSSL or Botan for example?


2018-02-09 5:23 GMT+01:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>:

> Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
> I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to present a
> roadmap.
> I will be always willing to participate or to help.
>
> Go
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to me
> and i will help.
>
> 2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to
> > participate in the discussion.
> >
> > Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how
> > this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> > None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the
> > project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do that,
> > but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't been clear.
> > This was one of our pain points along the way.
> >
> > Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have resources
> > to lead the project, but the question is - in a community like this,
> > who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> > The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto library,
> > with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT take the
> > leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
> >
> > We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full
> > unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we
> > figure-out the repositories issue.
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Simeon Aladjem
> >
> > On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> >
> > We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> > We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library
> > first, and then the authentication server/clients second.  What do we
> > need to authorize the plan?
> >
> > So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no
> > problems in actual use in our engineering activities.
> > It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto
> > library released since the current code does not seem to cover
> > sub-normal cases necessarily.
> > It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are
> > required for the first release, they will at least help further
> > development activities.
> >
> > BTW, our repository contains a lot of possible contributions on
> > test codes.
> > I believe the code will help users and developers if they are merged.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Go Yamamoto
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:29 AM
> > To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > BTW,
> > do you have a roadmap? Do you want to support hardware as well? IS
> > there  a todo list of things? When do you plan next release?
> >
> > 2018-01-30 22:26 GMT+01:00 Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Hello everybody,
> > > is there any way to save just the crypto library inside Apache? The
> > > server  doenst make sense, there is no valuable code.
> > > The crypto library including mpin protocol can be used from other
> > > projects. Currently there is no community.
> > >
> > >
> > > 2018-01-30 22:12 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
> > >
> > >> Simeon,
> > >>
> > >> In order for that to happen, someone would need to make sure Go
> > >> Yamamoto has write access to the repositories.  I'm not sure
> > that has happened.
> > >>
> > >> John
> > >>
> > >> On 2018/01/30 14:49:07, Simeon Aladjem
> > <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> > Hi all,
> > >> >
> > >> > As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our
> perspective
> > >> > on
> > >> th

RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

Simeon, please tell us whatever you need.
I think it is obvious that the leadership team is responsible to present a 
roadmap.  
I will be always willing to participate or to help.

Go

-Original Message-
From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 8:01 PM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to me and i 
will help.

2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:

> Hello,
>
> Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to 
> participate in the discussion.
>
> Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how 
> this needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the 
> project repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do that, 
> but what needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't been clear.
> This was one of our pain points along the way.
>
> Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have resources 
> to lead the project, but the question is - in a community like this, 
> who is responsible to craft a roadmap?
> The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto library, 
> with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT take the 
> leading role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
>
> We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full 
> unit-test coverage, which we can merge to the project when we 
> figure-out the repositories issue.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Simeon Aladjem
>
> On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
> We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library 
> first, and then the authentication server/clients second.  What do we 
> need to authorize the plan?
>
> So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no 
> problems in actual use in our engineering activities.
> It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto 
> library released since the current code does not seem to cover 
> sub-normal cases necessarily.
> It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are 
> required for the first release, they will at least help further 
> development activities.
>
> BTW, our repository contains a lot of possible contributions on 
> test codes.
> I believe the code will help users and developers if they are merged.
>
> Regards,
> Go Yamamoto
>
> -Original Message-----
>     From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:29 AM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> BTW,
> do you have a roadmap? Do you want to support hardware as well? IS 
> there  a todo list of things? When do you plan next release?
>
> 2018-01-30 22:26 GMT+01:00 Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hello everybody,
> > is there any way to save just the crypto library inside Apache? The
> > server  doenst make sense, there is no valuable code.
> > The crypto library including mpin protocol can be used from other
> > projects. Currently there is no community.
> >
> >
> > 2018-01-30 22:12 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
> >
> >> Simeon,
> >>
> >> In order for that to happen, someone would need to make sure Go
> >> Yamamoto has write access to the repositories.  I'm not sure 
> that has happened.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> On 2018/01/30 14:49:07, Simeon Aladjem 
> <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our perspective
> >> > on
> >> the project.
> >> >
> >> > First of all, we did disengage with the idea to move the Milagro
> >> > Crypto
> >> code elsewhere.
> >> > All the code under the Milagro project refers to the crypto
> >> > repository
> >> that is under Apache, so https://github.com/milagro-crypto doesn't
> >> directly affect the project at the current.
> >> >
> >> > It does contain a more developed version of the original Milagro
> >> > Crypto
> >> code, which will eventually find its way to the project,
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Giorgio Zoppi]

If there is a clear roadmap. You can decide to assign some tickets to me
and i will help.

2018-02-07 10:13 GMT+01:00 Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>:

> Hello,
>
> Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to
> participate in the discussion.
>
> Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how this
> needs to be done from a procedural stand point.
> None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the project
> repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do that, but what
> needs to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't been clear.
> This was one of our pain points along the way.
>
> Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have resources to
> lead the project, but the question is - in a community like this, who is
> responsible to craft a roadmap?
> The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto library,
> with which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT take the leading
> role on the project, they can propose a roadmap.
>
> We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full unit-test
> coverage, which we can merge to the project when we figure-out the
> repositories issue.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Simeon Aladjem
>
> On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
> We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.
> We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library first,
> and then the authentication server/clients second.  What do we need to
> authorize the plan?
>
> So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no
> problems in actual use in our engineering activities.
> It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto
> library released since the current code does not seem to cover sub-normal
> cases necessarily.
> It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are required
> for the first release, they will at least help further development
> activities.
>
> BTW, our repository contains a lot of possible contributions on test
> codes.
> I believe the code will help users and developers if they are merged.
>
> Regards,
> Go Yamamoto
>
> -Original Message-----
>     From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:29 AM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> BTW,
> do you have a roadmap? Do you want to support hardware as well? IS
> there  a todo list of things? When do you plan next release?
>
> 2018-01-30 22:26 GMT+01:00 Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hello everybody,
> > is there any way to save just the crypto library inside Apache? The
> > server  doenst make sense, there is no valuable code.
> > The crypto library including mpin protocol can be used from other
> > projects. Currently there is no community.
> >
> >
> > 2018-01-30 22:12 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
> >
> >> Simeon,
> >>
> >> In order for that to happen, someone would need to make sure Go
> >> Yamamoto has write access to the repositories.  I'm not sure that
> has happened.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> On 2018/01/30 14:49:07, Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our perspective
> >> > on
> >> the project.
> >> >
> >> > First of all, we did disengage with the idea to move the Milagro
> >> > Crypto
> >> code elsewhere.
> >> > All the code under the Milagro project refers to the crypto
> >> > repository
> >> that is under Apache, so https://github.com/milagro-crypto doesn't
> >> directly affect the project at the current.
> >> >
> >> > It does contain a more developed version of the original Milagro
> >> > Crypto
> >> code, which will eventually find its way to the project,
> >> > but in order for this to happen we will need some repository
> >> reorganization, which was communicated in the past, to the best of
> my
> >> memory.
> >> >
> >> > MIRACL is committed to continue and contribute to the Milagro
> >> > Crypto
> >> code, but we were unable to play the leading role

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Simeon Aladjem]

Hello,

Sorry for being out of pocket for a while and not being able to participate in 
the discussion.

Re the repositories reorganization - it hasn't been really clear how this needs 
to be done from a procedural stand point.
None of the contributors have the permissions to manipulate the project 
repositories, and AFAIK, only the project mentors can do that, but what needs 
to be done in order for this to happen, hasn't been clear.
This was one of our pain points along the way.

Re the roadmap - as I already mentioned, MIRACL didn't have resources to lead 
the project, but the question is - in a community like this, who is responsible 
to craft a roadmap?
The discussed direction is to focus the project on the crypto library, with 
which MIRACL and NTT agree, and I guess if/when NTT take the leading role on 
the project, they can propose a roadmap.

We also have a more developed version of the crypto, with full unit-test 
coverage, which we can merge to the project when we figure-out the repositories 
issue.

Kind Regards,
Simeon Aladjem

On 5/2/18, 6:49, "Go Yamamoto" <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.  
We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library first, and 
then the authentication server/clients second.  What do we need to authorize 
the plan?

So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no problems 
in actual use in our engineering activities.
It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto library 
released since the current code does not seem to cover sub-normal cases 
necessarily.
It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are required for 
the first release, they will at least help further development activities.

BTW, our repository contains a lot of possible contributions on test codes.
I believe the code will help users and developers if they are merged.

Regards,
Go Yamamoto

-Original Message-
From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:29 AM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
    Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

BTW,
do you have a roadmap? Do you want to support hardware as well? IS there  a 
todo list of things? When do you plan next release?

2018-01-30 22:26 GMT+01:00 Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>:

> Hello everybody,
> is there any way to save just the crypto library inside Apache? The 
> server  doenst make sense, there is no valuable code.
> The crypto library including mpin protocol can be used from other  
> projects. Currently there is no community.
>
>
> 2018-01-30 22:12 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
>
>> Simeon,
>>
>> In order for that to happen, someone would need to make sure Go 
>> Yamamoto has write access to the repositories.  I'm not sure that has 
happened.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On 2018/01/30 14:49:07, Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our perspective 
>> > on
>> the project.
>> >
>> > First of all, we did disengage with the idea to move the Milagro 
>> > Crypto
>> code elsewhere.
>> > All the code under the Milagro project refers to the crypto 
>> > repository
>> that is under Apache, so https://github.com/milagro-crypto doesn't 
>> directly affect the project at the current.
>> >
>> > It does contain a more developed version of the original Milagro 
>> > Crypto
>> code, which will eventually find its way to the project,
>> > but in order for this to happen we will need some repository
>> reorganization, which was communicated in the past, to the best of my 
>> memory.
>> >
>> > MIRACL is committed to continue and contribute to the Milagro 
>> > Crypto
>> code, but we were unable to play the leading role in the project for 
>> the last year or so.
>> > For this reason, it was proposed that NTT and Go Yamamoto will take 
>> > on
>> the leadership over the project going forward.
>> >
>> > I hope that it clarifies some points, and will help on getting the
>> project out of the mud and to start moving it forward.
>> >
>> > Kind Regards,
>> > Simeon Aladjem
>> >
>> > On 30/1/18, 15:54, "John D.Ament" <johndam...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > 

RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

We have been talking with Simeon and Kealan about the roadmap.  
We think it will make sense if we release the crypto library first, and then 
the authentication server/clients second.  What do we need to authorize the 
plan?

So far the code in the library looks mature and we have found no problems in 
actual use in our engineering activities.
It could be better to work for test codes more before the crypto library 
released since the current code does not seem to cover sub-normal cases 
necessarily.
It does not mean I think the improvements on test codes are required for the 
first release, they will at least help further development activities.

BTW, our repository contains a lot of possible contributions on test codes.
I believe the code will help users and developers if they are merged.

Regards,
Go Yamamoto

-Original Message-
From: Giorgio Zoppi [mailto:giorgio.zo...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:29 AM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

BTW,
do you have a roadmap? Do you want to support hardware as well? IS there  a 
todo list of things? When do you plan next release?

2018-01-30 22:26 GMT+01:00 Giorgio Zoppi <giorgio.zo...@gmail.com>:

> Hello everybody,
> is there any way to save just the crypto library inside Apache? The 
> server  doenst make sense, there is no valuable code.
> The crypto library including mpin protocol can be used from other  
> projects. Currently there is no community.
>
>
> 2018-01-30 22:12 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
>
>> Simeon,
>>
>> In order for that to happen, someone would need to make sure Go 
>> Yamamoto has write access to the repositories.  I'm not sure that has 
>> happened.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On 2018/01/30 14:49:07, Simeon Aladjem <simeon.alad...@miracl.com> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our perspective 
>> > on
>> the project.
>> >
>> > First of all, we did disengage with the idea to move the Milagro 
>> > Crypto
>> code elsewhere.
>> > All the code under the Milagro project refers to the crypto 
>> > repository
>> that is under Apache, so https://github.com/milagro-crypto doesn't 
>> directly affect the project at the current.
>> >
>> > It does contain a more developed version of the original Milagro 
>> > Crypto
>> code, which will eventually find its way to the project,
>> > but in order for this to happen we will need some repository
>> reorganization, which was communicated in the past, to the best of my 
>> memory.
>> >
>> > MIRACL is committed to continue and contribute to the Milagro 
>> > Crypto
>> code, but we were unable to play the leading role in the project for 
>> the last year or so.
>> > For this reason, it was proposed that NTT and Go Yamamoto will take 
>> > on
>> the leadership over the project going forward.
>> >
>> > I hope that it clarifies some points, and will help on getting the
>> project out of the mud and to start moving it forward.
>> >
>> > Kind Regards,
>> > Simeon Aladjem
>> >
>> > On 30/1/18, 15:54, "John D.Ament" <johndam...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Yamamoto
>> >
>> > I believe you're hitting the problem right on the head.  The
>> project was originally founded with a donation from MIRACL.  You can 
>> see that code changes continually go to 
>> https://github.com/milagro-crypto but no changes to Apache hosted git 
>> repositories.
>> >
>> > I understand your frustration, but the implications I am seeing 
>> > are
>> that MIRACL has no interest in working on code within the podling.
>> >
>> > John
>> >
>> > On 2018/01/30 05:17:42, "Go Yamamoto" 
>> > <yamamoto...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
>> wrote:
>> > > Hi John,
>> > >
>> > > NTT is currently using Milagro as a crypto library.  
>> > Retirement
>> of Milagro causes impact on our business, so I would like to ask for 
>> discussion what can we do for supporting Milagro.
>> > >
>> > > As I mentioned last time, we have code that is ready to commit.
>> > > Our repositories have been updated since then.
>> > > However, the way to commit the code to Apache repository is 
>> > not
>> clear for us.
>> > > As far as I recognize it is because the code from MIRACL is 
>> > not
>> placed on the Apache r

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Giorgio Zoppi]

BTW,
do you have a roadmap? Do you want to support hardware as well? IS there  a
todo list of things? When do you plan next release?

2018-01-30 22:26 GMT+01:00 Giorgio Zoppi :

> Hello everybody,
> is there any way to save just the crypto library inside Apache? The server
>  doenst make sense, there is no valuable code.
> The crypto library including mpin protocol can be used from other
>  projects. Currently there is no community.
>
>
> 2018-01-30 22:12 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament :
>
>> Simeon,
>>
>> In order for that to happen, someone would need to make sure Go Yamamoto
>> has write access to the repositories.  I'm not sure that has happened.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On 2018/01/30 14:49:07, Simeon Aladjem  wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our perspective on
>> the project.
>> >
>> > First of all, we did disengage with the idea to move the Milagro Crypto
>> code elsewhere.
>> > All the code under the Milagro project refers to the crypto repository
>> that is under Apache, so https://github.com/milagro-crypto doesn't
>> directly affect the project at the current.
>> >
>> > It does contain a more developed version of the original Milagro Crypto
>> code, which will eventually find its way to the project,
>> > but in order for this to happen we will need some repository
>> reorganization, which was communicated in the past, to the best of my
>> memory.
>> >
>> > MIRACL is committed to continue and contribute to the Milagro Crypto
>> code, but we were unable to play the leading role in the project for the
>> last year or so.
>> > For this reason, it was proposed that NTT and Go Yamamoto will take on
>> the leadership over the project going forward.
>> >
>> > I hope that it clarifies some points, and will help on getting the
>> project out of the mud and to start moving it forward.
>> >
>> > Kind Regards,
>> > Simeon Aladjem
>> >
>> > On 30/1/18, 15:54, "John D.Ament"  wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Yamamoto
>> >
>> > I believe you're hitting the problem right on the head.  The
>> project was originally founded with a donation from MIRACL.  You can see
>> that code changes continually go to https://github.com/milagro-crypto
>> but no changes to Apache hosted git repositories.
>> >
>> > I understand your frustration, but the implications I am seeing are
>> that MIRACL has no interest in working on code within the podling.
>> >
>> > John
>> >
>> > On 2018/01/30 05:17:42, "Go Yamamoto" 
>> wrote:
>> > > Hi John,
>> > >
>> > > NTT is currently using Milagro as a crypto library.  Retirement
>> of Milagro causes impact on our business, so I would like to ask for
>> discussion what can we do for supporting Milagro.
>> > >
>> > > As I mentioned last time, we have code that is ready to commit.
>> > > Our repositories have been updated since then.
>> > > However, the way to commit the code to Apache repository is not
>> clear for us.
>> > > As far as I recognize it is because the code from MIRACL is not
>> placed on the Apache repository.
>> > > Since MIRACL's code also have been updated continuously, it seems
>> this management problem blocks starting the project for years.
>> > >
>> > > I think we can discuss whether NTT team can take over the
>> management of the Apache repository to resolve the problem.
>> > >
>> > > Kind regards,
>> > > Go Yamamoto
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -Original Message-
>> > > From: John D. Ament [mailto:johndam...@apache.org]
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 1:06 PM
>> > > To: d...@milagro.apache.org
>> > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>> > >
>> > > Hi All,
>> > >
>> > > Mid last year [1] I reached out to the project about retirement.
>> At that point, some community members stepped up to help out the project.
>> However, I don't believe its been enough.
>> > >
>> > > Since that has occurred:
>> > > - Milagro has missed reporting periods.  This has included
>> multiple requests for a report by me.
>> > > - Requests for a special report clarifying the move of source
>> code away from the ASF managed repos on github have been unanswered.
>> > > - On list activity has dropped to nearly nothing.
>> > > - Very little commit activity; most of your repositories have not
>> been updated since we last spoke.
>> > >
>> > > At this point, I believe its clear that Milagro should retire.
>> > >
>> > > [1]:
>> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e6a5db6fab6c61156c2101a
>> ae003ed576ddb0e77f3bb2c037b405131@%3Cdev.milagro.apache.org%3E
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Giorgio Zoppi]

Hello everybody,
is there any way to save just the crypto library inside Apache? The server
 doenst make sense, there is no valuable code.
The crypto library including mpin protocol can be used from other
 projects. Currently there is no community.


2018-01-30 22:12 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament :

> Simeon,
>
> In order for that to happen, someone would need to make sure Go Yamamoto
> has write access to the repositories.  I'm not sure that has happened.
>
> John
>
> On 2018/01/30 14:49:07, Simeon Aladjem  wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our perspective on
> the project.
> >
> > First of all, we did disengage with the idea to move the Milagro Crypto
> code elsewhere.
> > All the code under the Milagro project refers to the crypto repository
> that is under Apache, so https://github.com/milagro-crypto doesn't
> directly affect the project at the current.
> >
> > It does contain a more developed version of the original Milagro Crypto
> code, which will eventually find its way to the project,
> > but in order for this to happen we will need some repository
> reorganization, which was communicated in the past, to the best of my
> memory.
> >
> > MIRACL is committed to continue and contribute to the Milagro Crypto
> code, but we were unable to play the leading role in the project for the
> last year or so.
> > For this reason, it was proposed that NTT and Go Yamamoto will take on
> the leadership over the project going forward.
> >
> > I hope that it clarifies some points, and will help on getting the
> project out of the mud and to start moving it forward.
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Simeon Aladjem
> >
> > On 30/1/18, 15:54, "John D.Ament"  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Yamamoto
> >
> > I believe you're hitting the problem right on the head.  The project
> was originally founded with a donation from MIRACL.  You can see that code
> changes continually go to https://github.com/milagro-crypto but no
> changes to Apache hosted git repositories.
> >
> > I understand your frustration, but the implications I am seeing are
> that MIRACL has no interest in working on code within the podling.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On 2018/01/30 05:17:42, "Go Yamamoto" 
> wrote:
> > > Hi John,
> > >
> > > NTT is currently using Milagro as a crypto library.  Retirement of
> Milagro causes impact on our business, so I would like to ask for
> discussion what can we do for supporting Milagro.
> > >
> > > As I mentioned last time, we have code that is ready to commit.
> > > Our repositories have been updated since then.
> > > However, the way to commit the code to Apache repository is not
> clear for us.
> > > As far as I recognize it is because the code from MIRACL is not
> placed on the Apache repository.
> > > Since MIRACL's code also have been updated continuously, it seems
> this management problem blocks starting the project for years.
> > >
> > > I think we can discuss whether NTT team can take over the
> management of the Apache repository to resolve the problem.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Go Yamamoto
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: John D. Ament [mailto:johndam...@apache.org]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 1:06 PM
> > > To: d...@milagro.apache.org
> > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > Mid last year [1] I reached out to the project about retirement.
> At that point, some community members stepped up to help out the project.
> However, I don't believe its been enough.
> > >
> > > Since that has occurred:
> > > - Milagro has missed reporting periods.  This has included
> multiple requests for a report by me.
> > > - Requests for a special report clarifying the move of source code
> away from the ASF managed repos on github have been unanswered.
> > > - On list activity has dropped to nearly nothing.
> > > - Very little commit activity; most of your repositories have not
> been updated since we last spoke.
> > >
> > > At this point, I believe its clear that Milagro should retire.
> > >
> > > [1]:
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
> e6a5db6fab6c61156c2101aae003ed576ddb0e77f3bb2c037b405131@%
> 3Cdev.milagro.apache.org%3E
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[John D . Ament]

Simeon,

In order for that to happen, someone would need to make sure Go Yamamoto has 
write access to the repositories.  I'm not sure that has happened.

John

On 2018/01/30 14:49:07, Simeon Aladjem  wrote: 
> Hi all,
> 
> As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our perspective on the 
> project.
> 
> First of all, we did disengage with the idea to move the Milagro Crypto code 
> elsewhere.
> All the code under the Milagro project refers to the crypto repository that 
> is under Apache, so https://github.com/milagro-crypto doesn't directly affect 
> the project at the current.
> 
> It does contain a more developed version of the original Milagro Crypto code, 
> which will eventually find its way to the project,
> but in order for this to happen we will need some repository reorganization, 
> which was communicated in the past, to the best of my memory.
> 
> MIRACL is committed to continue and contribute to the Milagro Crypto code, 
> but we were unable to play the leading role in the project for the last year 
> or so.
> For this reason, it was proposed that NTT and Go Yamamoto will take on the 
> leadership over the project going forward.
> 
> I hope that it clarifies some points, and will help on getting the project 
> out of the mud and to start moving it forward.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Simeon Aladjem
> 
> On 30/1/18, 15:54, "John D.Ament"  wrote:
> 
> Hi Yamamoto
> 
> I believe you're hitting the problem right on the head.  The project was 
> originally founded with a donation from MIRACL.  You can see that code 
> changes continually go to https://github.com/milagro-crypto but no changes to 
> Apache hosted git repositories.
> 
> I understand your frustration, but the implications I am seeing are that 
> MIRACL has no interest in working on code within the podling.
> 
> John
> 
> On 2018/01/30 05:17:42, "Go Yamamoto"  wrote: 
> > Hi John,
> > 
> > NTT is currently using Milagro as a crypto library.  Retirement of 
> Milagro causes impact on our business, so I would like to ask for discussion 
> what can we do for supporting Milagro.
> > 
> > As I mentioned last time, we have code that is ready to commit.
> > Our repositories have been updated since then.
> > However, the way to commit the code to Apache repository is not clear 
> for us.
> > As far as I recognize it is because the code from MIRACL is not placed 
> on the Apache repository.
> > Since MIRACL's code also have been updated continuously, it seems this 
> management problem blocks starting the project for years.
> > 
> > I think we can discuss whether NTT team can take over the management of 
> the Apache repository to resolve the problem.
> > 
> > Kind regards,
> > Go Yamamoto
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John D. Ament [mailto:johndam...@apache.org] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 1:06 PM
> > To: d...@milagro.apache.org
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> > 
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > Mid last year [1] I reached out to the project about retirement.  At 
> that point, some community members stepped up to help out the project.  
> However, I don't believe its been enough.
> > 
> > Since that has occurred:
> > - Milagro has missed reporting periods.  This has included multiple 
> requests for a report by me.
> > - Requests for a special report clarifying the move of source code away 
> from the ASF managed repos on github have been unanswered.
> > - On list activity has dropped to nearly nothing.
> > - Very little commit activity; most of your repositories have not been 
> updated since we last spoke.
> > 
> > At this point, I believe its clear that Milagro should retire.
> > 
> > [1]:
> > 
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e6a5db6fab6c61156c2101aae003ed576ddb0e77f3bb2c037b405131@%3Cdev.milagro.apache.org%3E
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Simeon Aladjem]

Hi all,

As a part of MIRACL, I feel that I have to provide our perspective on the 
project.

First of all, we did disengage with the idea to move the Milagro Crypto code 
elsewhere.
All the code under the Milagro project refers to the crypto repository that is 
under Apache, so https://github.com/milagro-crypto doesn't directly affect the 
project at the current.

It does contain a more developed version of the original Milagro Crypto code, 
which will eventually find its way to the project,
but in order for this to happen we will need some repository reorganization, 
which was communicated in the past, to the best of my memory.

MIRACL is committed to continue and contribute to the Milagro Crypto code, but 
we were unable to play the leading role in the project for the last year or so.
For this reason, it was proposed that NTT and Go Yamamoto will take on the 
leadership over the project going forward.

I hope that it clarifies some points, and will help on getting the project out 
of the mud and to start moving it forward.

Kind Regards,
Simeon Aladjem

On 30/1/18, 15:54, "John D.Ament"  wrote:

Hi Yamamoto

I believe you're hitting the problem right on the head.  The project was 
originally founded with a donation from MIRACL.  You can see that code changes 
continually go to https://github.com/milagro-crypto but no changes to Apache 
hosted git repositories.

I understand your frustration, but the implications I am seeing are that 
MIRACL has no interest in working on code within the podling.

John

On 2018/01/30 05:17:42, "Go Yamamoto"  wrote: 
> Hi John,
> 
> NTT is currently using Milagro as a crypto library.  Retirement of 
Milagro causes impact on our business, so I would like to ask for discussion 
what can we do for supporting Milagro.
> 
> As I mentioned last time, we have code that is ready to commit.
> Our repositories have been updated since then.
> However, the way to commit the code to Apache repository is not clear for 
us.
> As far as I recognize it is because the code from MIRACL is not placed on 
the Apache repository.
> Since MIRACL's code also have been updated continuously, it seems this 
management problem blocks starting the project for years.
> 
> I think we can discuss whether NTT team can take over the management of 
the Apache repository to resolve the problem.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Go Yamamoto
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: John D. Ament [mailto:johndam...@apache.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 1:06 PM
> To: d...@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Mid last year [1] I reached out to the project about retirement.  At that 
point, some community members stepped up to help out the project.  However, I 
don't believe its been enough.
> 
> Since that has occurred:
> - Milagro has missed reporting periods.  This has included multiple 
requests for a report by me.
> - Requests for a special report clarifying the move of source code away 
from the ASF managed repos on github have been unanswered.
> - On list activity has dropped to nearly nothing.
> - Very little commit activity; most of your repositories have not been 
updated since we last spoke.
> 
> At this point, I believe its clear that Milagro should retire.
> 
> [1]:
> 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e6a5db6fab6c61156c2101aae003ed576ddb0e77f3bb2c037b405131@%3Cdev.milagro.apache.org%3E
> 
> 
> 

Re: RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[John D . Ament]

Hi Yamamoto

I believe you're hitting the problem right on the head.  The project was 
originally founded with a donation from MIRACL.  You can see that code changes 
continually go to https://github.com/milagro-crypto but no changes to Apache 
hosted git repositories.

I understand your frustration, but the implications I am seeing are that MIRACL 
has no interest in working on code within the podling.

John

On 2018/01/30 05:17:42, "Go Yamamoto"  wrote: 
> Hi John,
> 
> NTT is currently using Milagro as a crypto library.  Retirement of Milagro 
> causes impact on our business, so I would like to ask for discussion what can 
> we do for supporting Milagro.
> 
> As I mentioned last time, we have code that is ready to commit.
> Our repositories have been updated since then.
> However, the way to commit the code to Apache repository is not clear for us.
> As far as I recognize it is because the code from MIRACL is not placed on the 
> Apache repository.
> Since MIRACL's code also have been updated continuously, it seems this 
> management problem blocks starting the project for years.
> 
> I think we can discuss whether NTT team can take over the management of the 
> Apache repository to resolve the problem.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Go Yamamoto
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: John D. Ament [mailto:johndam...@apache.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 1:06 PM
> To: d...@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Mid last year [1] I reached out to the project about retirement.  At that 
> point, some community members stepped up to help out the project.  However, I 
> don't believe its been enough.
> 
> Since that has occurred:
> - Milagro has missed reporting periods.  This has included multiple requests 
> for a report by me.
> - Requests for a special report clarifying the move of source code away from 
> the ASF managed repos on github have been unanswered.
> - On list activity has dropped to nearly nothing.
> - Very little commit activity; most of your repositories have not been 
> updated since we last spoke.
> 
> At this point, I believe its clear that Milagro should retire.
> 
> [1]:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e6a5db6fab6c61156c2101aae003ed576ddb0e77f3bb2c037b405131@%3Cdev.milagro.apache.org%3E
> 
> 
> 

RE: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

Hi John,

NTT is currently using Milagro as a crypto library.  Retirement of Milagro 
causes impact on our business, so I would like to ask for discussion what can 
we do for supporting Milagro.

As I mentioned last time, we have code that is ready to commit.
Our repositories have been updated since then.
However, the way to commit the code to Apache repository is not clear for us.
As far as I recognize it is because the code from MIRACL is not placed on the 
Apache repository.
Since MIRACL's code also have been updated continuously, it seems this 
management problem blocks starting the project for years.

I think we can discuss whether NTT team can take over the management of the 
Apache repository to resolve the problem.

Kind regards,
Go Yamamoto



-Original Message-
From: John D. Ament [mailto:johndam...@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 1:06 PM
To: d...@milagro.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

Hi All,

Mid last year [1] I reached out to the project about retirement.  At that 
point, some community members stepped up to help out the project.  However, I 
don't believe its been enough.

Since that has occurred:
- Milagro has missed reporting periods.  This has included multiple requests 
for a report by me.
- Requests for a special report clarifying the move of source code away from 
the ASF managed repos on github have been unanswered.
- On list activity has dropped to nearly nothing.
- Very little commit activity; most of your repositories have not been updated 
since we last spoke.

At this point, I believe its clear that Milagro should retire.

[1]:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e6a5db6fab6c61156c2101aae003ed576ddb0e77f3bb2c037b405131@%3Cdev.milagro.apache.org%3E

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Patrick Hilt]

I agree that Slack is too restrictive... I think I mentioned that in my
previous email. TBH, we should get rid of the Milagro Slack channel... I do
think it would be good to have a realtime communication channel but I guess
email / mailing list would be a start.

One more comment, from the MIRACL side, I'm planning for our Labs team to
(continue) to contribute to Milagro and help move it forward.

Just to reiterate, we need a clean starting point in the official Milagro
repo. To get there, we need to "audit" where code is currently located and
what code it is based on.

Finally, just one more question... again... someone in this thread said
earlier that a lot of Apache projects use GitHub which is something I think
we'd prefer for Milagro as well. Is there a "recommended" way of using
GitHub rather than the Apache git repo directly?

Thanks,
Patrick


On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Nick Kew  wrote:

> On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 08:41 +, Nikolai Stoilov wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Just to add a couple notes, the slack that was set up for the project is
> > https://milagro.slack.com/
>
> Two quite serious problems with that one.
>
> > I don't know why it isn't referenced on the project's website, but it
> > allows for people with emails @miracl.com, @apache.org, @milagro.io, @
> > ntti3.com, @po.ntts.co.jp, @lab.ntt.co.jp, @mulodo.com to sign
> themselves
> > up.
>
> That is fine for people already involved, but does nothing to
> open it to interested outsiders - including those who might,
> if made welcome, become the core developers of the future.
> It's too exclusive.  Even saying "just ask to join" can be
> a hurdle to the initially-timid.
>
> > Also, there is a slack bot installed that sends all conversations as
> > emails
> > to a selected address.
>
> Yes, I've seen that.  It's very inhibiting.  There are occasions
> when it makes sense (e.g. to archive a formal meeting), but for
> general chat it's the last thing you want!  And I'd hate to try
> and dig through interactive chat to *find* anything!
>
> That inhibition is probably why I've *never* seen traffic on
> the channel!
>
> --
> Nick Kew
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Nick Kew]

On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 08:41 +, Nikolai Stoilov wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Just to add a couple notes, the slack that was set up for the project is
> https://milagro.slack.com/

Two quite serious problems with that one.

> I don't know why it isn't referenced on the project's website, but it
> allows for people with emails @miracl.com, @apache.org, @milagro.io, @
> ntti3.com, @po.ntts.co.jp, @lab.ntt.co.jp, @mulodo.com to sign themselves
> up.

That is fine for people already involved, but does nothing to
open it to interested outsiders - including those who might,
if made welcome, become the core developers of the future.
It's too exclusive.  Even saying "just ask to join" can be
a hurdle to the initially-timid.

> Also, there is a slack bot installed that sends all conversations as
> emails
> to a selected address.

Yes, I've seen that.  It's very inhibiting.  There are occasions
when it makes sense (e.g. to archive a formal meeting), but for
general chat it's the last thing you want!  And I'd hate to try
and dig through interactive chat to *find* anything!

That inhibition is probably why I've *never* seen traffic on
the channel!

-- 
Nick Kew

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[John D. Ament]

Go,

On 2017-06-29 19:00 (-0400), Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@ntti3.com> wrote: 
> John,
> 
> If you are looking for persons who are to blame, probably you will find me 
> one of them.

I'm by no means trying to find people to blame.  My objective is to look at 
each podling out there and make sure it's viable enough to be a project.

> 
> I believe we all of us want to make this project fruitful and successful.
> So I will explain the reason why, since it will be useful to identify what we 
> should discuss/learn/install to solve the problem.
> 
> First, we made https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT not intended to be a fork 
> of incubator-Milagro, but a fork from
> Miracl’s original repositories. https://github.com/miracl
> It is because NTT have been working together with Miracl to develop the very 
> first version of public Milagro.
> 
> We supposed our code is merged at Miracl’s repo and pushed to the 
> incubator-milagro.
> However, as far as I know, Miracl had a difficulty because of unfortunate 
> significant changes.
> 
> Probably we should have communicated in this ML that we need to rethink who 
> will make the initial commit, looking at the repo with no initial commitment 
> for months.
> My apologies, we could talk better if I were more experienced in Apache 
> projects.

This is actually an incredibly useful explanation.  Thank you for it.  So with 
Miracl not supporting the work, do you feel comfortable as an individual 
committing to the ASF hosted repository instead of the github repository 
created by NTT?  If not, what could we do to help you get there?

> 
> Regards,
> Go Yamamoto
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 27, 2017, at 5:28 PM, John D. Ament 
> <johndam...@apache.org<mailto:johndam...@apache.org>> wrote:
> 
> Go,
> 
> 
> 
> On 2017-06-25 23:31 (-0400), Go Yamamoto 
> <yamamoto...@ntti3.com<mailto:yamamoto...@ntti3.com>> wrote:
> Right.  This is an issue on openness.
> 
> We are willing to follow the openness.
> For example, our code is open on the internet.
> https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
> 
> It looks like you've forked Milagro on your company account.
> 
> However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are to 
> be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the merge.
> 
> This is odd to me.  Why do you require a second set of eyes to merge?  You 
> are a committer on the project.  Feel free to commit straight to master.  
> Granted, I'm not sure if there was an agreed upon workflow.
> 
> Do you have pull requests open?
> 
> 
> Please advise us how we should communicate.
> 
> I would recommend just sending emails to dev@.  See who responds.
> 
> 
> NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to 
> contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea.  We also think the 
> current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
> 
> With the notes about Miracl, are there any other contributors interested in 
> the project?
> 
> 
> I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue board 
> in GitHub.
> All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all 
> the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
> 
> Go
> 
> ____
> From: anthony shaw <anthonys...@apache.org<mailto:anthonys...@apache.org>>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org<mailto:dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
> Cc: d...@milagro.apache.org<mailto:d...@milagro.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> 
> Hi Go,
> 
> I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
> on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
> not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
> 
> You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
> 
> The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
> (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
> 
> Regards,
> Anthony Shaw
> 
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@ntti3.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree we need to discuss.
&g

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

I think Nick’s comment is a good point to restart.

(1) communication channel beyond ML
As far as I know Slack will not allow guests by self enrollment.
If the only problem is in openness, then how about using a Slack bot that makes 
public archive?

(2) source code management
We prefer a version control system integrated with an issue tracking system.
As Patric commented, GitHub and JIRA will be a popular choice, and we strongly 
prefer them.
Anthony suggests a contribution workflow with them.  For me it looks very 
attractive idea for practice.


Regards,
Go Yamamoto


On Jun 28, 2017, at 1:47 AM, Nick Kew > 
wrote:

On Mon, 2017-06-26 at 11:49 +0200, Patrick Hilt wrote:
Dear all,
It's clear there is a need to discuss. Unfortunately Miracl has gone
through a range of changes which impeded our support for Milagro. However,
we still do believe that Milagro is a viable project and would like to see
it succeed, albeit with a more focused scope. Looking at the news, it
certainly seems a necessity to have an official, open crypto focused
project.

Agreed there. The question is not whether it's a good project, but
whether it's an *Apache* project.  I should be sorry to see it retire,
but I think if it's to stay, it needs some more committment from
the project team.

Miracl's support for Milagro does raise an issue here.  One of the
most important characteristics of an Apache project is that it is
NOT so dependent on any single company as to dry up if that company
focuses elsewhere.

Overall, I totally agree with Go. We need to find a way to communicate and
manage a project that works for the contributors. Our "issues" are
particularly around real-time communication and GitHub integration (i.e.
having bi-directional sync'ing with Apache Git in place, which we've tried
to find about a while back).

I would echo what Anthony said in reply to Go, and add a few points.

Real-time communication channels like Slack are great, up to a point.
But they don't provide the same browsable, reviewable record as
an email archive (even if publicly archived, real-time chat is
too noisy).  And Milagro's slack is in private company space
most of which is no longer open to me, let alone to a newcomer
who would like to lurk quietly before mustering the confidence
to participate.

Regarding Github integration, that situation has advanced during the
time Milagro has been incubating.  The project might like to raise
the question again on general@incubator.  Along with the relationship
of Apache and Github JIRA: my current impression is that the github is
the more active, though still low-volume.


Along those lines, I'd be happy if we could have some guidance from the
community.

As for "reviving" and moving forward I'd like to propose we
1. determine communication channels beyond just the mailing list; the
Milagro Slack channel is not viable imho, since people with random email
domains can't add themselves. So we 'd need something else... again, input
here would be much appreciated!

IRC is a popular baseline.  Lots of Apache projects use Freenode.
Other channels are also acceptable: can Slack not be configured
to permit guest users?

2. determine how we're going to manage source code and stick with that
(github vs. git); from my perspective I have a strong preference for
github. So any info on bidirectional sync or best practises / approaches
from other Apache projects would be hugely appreciated

general@incubator would be a good place to raise that.  My own exposure
to full github integration is from Trafficserver, which was one
of the Apache projects to trial it.  When Milagro first entered
the incubator, infra were clear: it wasn't yet being rolled out
beyond the trial projects.

3. take stock of where we are currently in terms of contributors, pending
code, etc.

Indeed.  How has staff turnover at Miracl affected the roster?
In an ideal world it shouldn't, except insofar as new developers
may be recruited to relevant work.

4. chart a course forward in small incremental steps based on the above

We have a chicken-and-egg here.  An active and healthy community
draws interest.  The hard part is to bootstrap that community.

Currently we have a codebase that draws some interest, generally
through github, but at a modest level.  The individual who provides
fast and excellent replies to most of the github issues has (I think)
never put in an appearance at Apache.

I believe it would be useful to do 3. and 4. in-person / in-call, at least
partially.

Happy to give it a try, with a couple of reservations:
(a) Concern that it might reinforce a top-down process that works in
a company context but the team needs to get away from at Apache.
(b) A hint of deja-vu.

[Go wrote re: merge of NTT codebase]
Please advise us how we should communicate.

This mailinglist is always the primary channel for project
communication.  Issues raised by a large volume of NTT code
to merge with the current (Miracl) 

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

John,

If you are looking for persons who are to blame, probably you will find me one 
of them.

I believe we all of us want to make this project fruitful and successful.
So I will explain the reason why, since it will be useful to identify what we 
should discuss/learn/install to solve the problem.

First, we made https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT not intended to be a fork of 
incubator-Milagro, but a fork from
Miracl’s original repositories. https://github.com/miracl
It is because NTT have been working together with Miracl to develop the very 
first version of public Milagro.

We supposed our code is merged at Miracl’s repo and pushed to the 
incubator-milagro.
However, as far as I know, Miracl had a difficulty because of unfortunate 
significant changes.

Probably we should have communicated in this ML that we need to rethink who 
will make the initial commit, looking at the repo with no initial commitment 
for months.
My apologies, we could talk better if I were more experienced in Apache 
projects.

Regards,
Go Yamamoto



On Jun 27, 2017, at 5:28 PM, John D. Ament 
<johndam...@apache.org<mailto:johndam...@apache.org>> wrote:

Go,



On 2017-06-25 23:31 (-0400), Go Yamamoto 
<yamamoto...@ntti3.com<mailto:yamamoto...@ntti3.com>> wrote:
Right.  This is an issue on openness.

We are willing to follow the openness.
For example, our code is open on the internet.
https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT

It looks like you've forked Milagro on your company account.

However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are to be 
pushed to incubator-milagro.
One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the merge.

This is odd to me.  Why do you require a second set of eyes to merge?  You are 
a committer on the project.  Feel free to commit straight to master.  Granted, 
I'm not sure if there was an agreed upon workflow.

Do you have pull requests open?


Please advise us how we should communicate.

I would recommend just sending emails to dev@.  See who responds.


NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to 
contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea.  We also think the 
current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.

With the notes about Miracl, are there any other contributors interested in the 
project?


I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue board in 
GitHub.
All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all the 
changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.

Go


From: anthony shaw <anthonys...@apache.org<mailto:anthonys...@apache.org>>
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org<mailto:dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org>
Cc: d...@milagro.apache.org<mailto:d...@milagro.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

Hi Go,

I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.

You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.

The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
(and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro

Regards,
Anthony Shaw

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@ntti3.com> wrote:

I agree we need to discuss.

I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
level of activities.

I do not think Milagro is inactive.   We NTT have been trying to
contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
code that wait for discussion on merge.

The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.   For
example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
lists.   As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those
channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces.  As the
result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
channels.  That is the problem.

I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an
Apache way.  I agree it makes sense.  However, we are not simply accustomed
to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN.  Should we
learn to?  To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style.  That is
the point.

To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
is fruitful and productive.

I 

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Nick Kew]

On Mon, 2017-06-26 at 11:49 +0200, Patrick Hilt wrote:
> Dear all,
> It's clear there is a need to discuss. Unfortunately Miracl has gone
> through a range of changes which impeded our support for Milagro. However,
> we still do believe that Milagro is a viable project and would like to see
> it succeed, albeit with a more focused scope. Looking at the news, it
> certainly seems a necessity to have an official, open crypto focused
> project.

Agreed there. The question is not whether it's a good project, but
whether it's an *Apache* project.  I should be sorry to see it retire,
but I think if it's to stay, it needs some more committment from
the project team.

Miracl's support for Milagro does raise an issue here.  One of the
most important characteristics of an Apache project is that it is
NOT so dependent on any single company as to dry up if that company
focuses elsewhere.

> Overall, I totally agree with Go. We need to find a way to communicate and
> manage a project that works for the contributors. Our "issues" are
> particularly around real-time communication and GitHub integration (i.e.
> having bi-directional sync'ing with Apache Git in place, which we've tried
> to find about a while back).

I would echo what Anthony said in reply to Go, and add a few points.

Real-time communication channels like Slack are great, up to a point.
But they don't provide the same browsable, reviewable record as
an email archive (even if publicly archived, real-time chat is
too noisy).  And Milagro's slack is in private company space
most of which is no longer open to me, let alone to a newcomer
who would like to lurk quietly before mustering the confidence
to participate.

Regarding Github integration, that situation has advanced during the
time Milagro has been incubating.  The project might like to raise
the question again on general@incubator.  Along with the relationship
of Apache and Github JIRA: my current impression is that the github is
the more active, though still low-volume.


> Along those lines, I'd be happy if we could have some guidance from the
> community.
> 
> As for "reviving" and moving forward I'd like to propose we
> 1. determine communication channels beyond just the mailing list; the
> Milagro Slack channel is not viable imho, since people with random email
> domains can't add themselves. So we 'd need something else... again, input
> here would be much appreciated!

IRC is a popular baseline.  Lots of Apache projects use Freenode.
Other channels are also acceptable: can Slack not be configured
to permit guest users?

> 2. determine how we're going to manage source code and stick with that
> (github vs. git); from my perspective I have a strong preference for
> github. So any info on bidirectional sync or best practises / approaches
> from other Apache projects would be hugely appreciated

general@incubator would be a good place to raise that.  My own exposure
to full github integration is from Trafficserver, which was one
of the Apache projects to trial it.  When Milagro first entered
the incubator, infra were clear: it wasn't yet being rolled out
beyond the trial projects.

> 3. take stock of where we are currently in terms of contributors, pending
> code, etc.

Indeed.  How has staff turnover at Miracl affected the roster?
In an ideal world it shouldn't, except insofar as new developers
may be recruited to relevant work.

> 4. chart a course forward in small incremental steps based on the above

We have a chicken-and-egg here.  An active and healthy community
draws interest.  The hard part is to bootstrap that community.

Currently we have a codebase that draws some interest, generally
through github, but at a modest level.  The individual who provides
fast and excellent replies to most of the github issues has (I think)
never put in an appearance at Apache.

> I believe it would be useful to do 3. and 4. in-person / in-call, at least
> partially.

Happy to give it a try, with a couple of reservations:
 (a) Concern that it might reinforce a top-down process that works in 
 a company context but the team needs to get away from at Apache.
 (b) A hint of deja-vu.

[Go wrote re: merge of NTT codebase]
> > Please advise us how we should communicate.

This mailinglist is always the primary channel for project
communication.  Issues raised by a large volume of NTT code
to merge with the current (Miracl) codebase might be a very
good start to substantive activity here!

Both Miracl and NTT may need to make efforts to resist a
natural temptation to make decisions in private and only
communicate to the list once decisions are made!

-- 
Nick Kew

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Patrick Hilt]

Dear all,
It's clear there is a need to discuss. Unfortunately Miracl has gone
through a range of changes which impeded our support for Milagro. However,
we still do believe that Milagro is a viable project and would like to see
it succeed, albeit with a more focused scope. Looking at the news, it
certainly seems a necessity to have an official, open crypto focused
project.

Overall, I totally agree with Go. We need to find a way to communicate and
manage a project that works for the contributors. Our "issues" are
particularly around real-time communication and GitHub integration (i.e.
having bi-directional sync'ing with Apache Git in place, which we've tried
to find about a while back).

Along those lines, I'd be happy if we could have some guidance from the
community.

As for "reviving" and moving forward I'd like to propose we
1. determine communication channels beyond just the mailing list; the
Milagro Slack channel is not viable imho, since people with random email
domains can't add themselves. So we 'd need something else... again, input
here would be much appreciated!
2. determine how we're going to manage source code and stick with that
(github vs. git); from my perspective I have a strong preference for
github. So any info on bidirectional sync or best practises / approaches
from other Apache projects would be hugely appreciated
3. take stock of where we are currently in terms of contributors, pending
code, etc.
4. chart a course forward in small incremental steps based on the above

I believe it would be useful to do 3. and 4. in-person / in-call, at least
partially.

Cheers,
Patrick



On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@ntti3.com> wrote:

> Right.  This is an issue on openness.
>
> We are willing to follow the openness.
> For example, our code is open on the internet.
> https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
> However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are
> to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the
> merge.
>
> Please advise us how we should communicate.
>
> NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to
> contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea.  We also think
> the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
>
> I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue
> board in GitHub.
> All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all
> the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
>
> Go
>
> 
> From: anthony shaw <anthonys...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Cc: d...@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> Hi Go,
>
> I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
> on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
> not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
>
> You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
>
> The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
> (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
>
> Regards,
> Anthony Shaw
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@ntti3.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree we need to discuss.
> >
> > I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> > level of activities.
> >
> > I do not think Milagro is inactive.   We NTT have been trying to
> > contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> > code that wait for discussion on merge.
> >
> > The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.
>  For
> > example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> > lists.   As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in
> those
> > channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces.  As the
> > result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> > channels.  That is the problem.
> >
> > I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not
> an
> > Apache way.  I agree it makes sense.  However, we

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Giorgio Zoppi]

Hello everybody,
it is a pity. it seems to me, that's a kind lack of leadership and missed
communcation on this.
BR,
Giorgio

2017-06-26 5:31 GMT+02:00 Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@ntti3.com>:

> Right.  This is an issue on openness.
>
> We are willing to follow the openness.
> For example, our code is open on the internet.
> https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
> However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are
> to be pushed to incubator-milagro.
> One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the
> merge.
>
> Please advise us how we should communicate.
>
> NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to
> contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea.  We also think
> the current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.
>
> I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue
> board in GitHub.
> All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all
> the changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
> It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.
>
> Go
>
> 
> From: anthony shaw <anthonys...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
> To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
> Cc: d...@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> Hi Go,
>
> I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
> communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
> issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
> on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
> not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
> likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.
>
> You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
> decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.
>
> The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
> (and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro
>
> Regards,
> Anthony Shaw
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@ntti3.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree we need to discuss.
> >
> > I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> > level of activities.
> >
> > I do not think Milagro is inactive.   We NTT have been trying to
> > contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> > code that wait for discussion on merge.
> >
> > The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.
>  For
> > example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> > lists.   As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in
> those
> > channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces.  As the
> > result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> > channels.  That is the problem.
> >
> > I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not
> an
> > Apache way.  I agree it makes sense.  However, we are not simply
> accustomed
> > to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN.  Should we
> > learn to?  To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style.  That is
> > the point.
> >
> > To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> > is fruitful and productive.
> >
> > I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT,
> and
> > I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to
> contribute.
> >
> > Go
> > 
> > From: John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> > To: d...@milagro.apache.org
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling.   You've
> > been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no
> on
> > list activity nor commits happening.
> >
> > John
> > 
> > This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> > been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> > protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> > message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or
> otherwise
> > use this message or its attachments. Please notify the se

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

Right.  This is an issue on openness.

We are willing to follow the openness.
For example, our code is open on the internet.
https://github.com/CertiVox-i3-NTT
However, we have difficulty in merging the code with other forks that are to be 
pushed to incubator-milagro.
One of the reason is lack of the communication channels that decide the merge.

Please advise us how we should communicate.

NTT would like to contribute open source projects and have decided to 
contribute to Milagro project because we support the idea.  We also think the 
current situation is undesirable, and wish to change too.

I think we need an open ticketing board like by Jira or a shared issue board in 
GitHub.
All the problems in the project are shared and acknowledged there, and all the 
changes will be merged/rejected by ordinary pull-requests by git.
It is the best way we know, however, I am always willing to learn.

Go


From: anthony shaw <anthonys...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:40:24 PM
To: dev@milagro.incubator.apache.org
Cc: d...@milagro.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

Hi Go,

I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.

You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.

The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
(and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro

Regards,
Anthony Shaw

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto <yamamoto...@ntti3.com> wrote:

> I agree we need to discuss.
>
> I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> level of activities.
>
> I do not think Milagro is inactive.   We NTT have been trying to
> contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> code that wait for discussion on merge.
>
> The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.   For
> example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> lists.   As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those
> channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces.  As the
> result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> channels.  That is the problem.
>
> I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an
> Apache way.  I agree it makes sense.  However, we are not simply accustomed
> to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN.  Should we
> learn to?  To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style.  That is
> the point.
>
> To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> is fruitful and productive.
>
> I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and
> I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.
>
> Go
> 
> From: John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> To: d...@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> All,
>
> I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling.   You've
> been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
> list activity nor commits happening.
>
> John
> 
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> 
>

This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been 
sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If 
you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you 
are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its 
attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and 
permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty 
that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[anthony shaw]

Hi Go,

I thought this project was dead as well, your comment "we prefer
communicating using Slack and Hangout", probably highlights most of the
issue. This is not about preference, it's about openness; if you need to be
on the core team or part of NTT to be involved in the conversation, this is
not an open-source project at all. It's "source open" as Scott Hanselman
likes to say, your source code is on the internet, that's it.

You have to have an open and active community, otherwise if/when NTT
decides to pull funding from Milagro, the project dies.

The ASF does not enforce use of SVN, actually, most projects are now on Git
(and mirrored to GitHub). The Milagro project is untouched
https://github.com/apache/incubator-milagro

Regards,
Anthony Shaw

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Go Yamamoto  wrote:

> I agree we need to discuss.
>
> I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the
> level of activities.
>
> I do not think Milagro is inactive.   We NTT have been trying to
> contribute the code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of
> code that wait for discussion on merge.
>
> The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.   For
> example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing
> lists.   As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those
> channels, and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces.  As the
> result the activities are not visible from the projects' official
> channels.  That is the problem.
>
> I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an
> Apache way.  I agree it makes sense.  However, we are not simply accustomed
> to write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN.  Should we
> learn to?  To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style.  That is
> the point.
>
> To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project
> is fruitful and productive.
>
> I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and
> I would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.
>
> Go
> 
> From: John D. Ament 
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
> To: d...@milagro.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro
>
> All,
>
> I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling.   You've
> been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
> list activity nor commits happening.
>
> John
> 
> This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has
> been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally
> protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
> message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise
> use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately
> by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> NTT I3 makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.
> 
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

[Go Yamamoto]

I agree we need to discuss.

I think the critical problem is in communication, not necessarily in the level 
of activities.

I do not think Milagro is inactive.   We NTT have been trying to contribute the 
code for more than a year, and still we have 10Ks lines of code that wait for 
discussion on merge.

The problem is in the communication styles that divides the project.   For 
example, we prefer communicating using Slack and Hangout, not in mailing lists. 
  As far as I understand, most of technical discussions are in those channels, 
and the code is stored and merged in GitHub spaces.  As the result the 
activities are not visible from the projects' official channels.  That is the 
problem.

I know one would say that is not an Apache project and the style is not an 
Apache way.  I agree it makes sense.  However, we are not simply accustomed to 
write codes communicating by mailing lists and using SVN.  Should we learn to?  
To be, or not to be, or to look for a balanced style.  That is the point.

To start the discussion, I believe we can agree we all hope this project is 
fruitful and productive.

I think Milagro still has a promising scope and good use cases in IoT, and I 
would like to continue leading the NTT's engineering team to contribute.

Go

From: John D. Ament 
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:25:15 AM
To: d...@milagro.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] Retire Milagro

All,

I'd like to bring up the idea of retiring the Milagro podling.   You've
been incubating for about 18 months and from what I can tell there is no on
list activity nor commits happening.

John

This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been 
sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If 
you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you 
are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its 
attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and 
permanently delete this message and any attachments. NTT I3 makes no warranty 
that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.