docs(reports): 2024 Annual Hyperledger Bevel Report

[suvajit-sarkar]

Combined report for Bevel and Bevel-Operator-Fabric

[swcurran]

Hyperledger Bevel 2024 Annual Review Notes (from Stephen and Marcus)

Project Health

• Insights data
  • Generally positive metrics for the year 2023, with moderate increases in each of commits, issues, pull requests, and forks. Down a bit (~7%) on contributors (overall and new), as mentioned in the Annual Report.
    • I think more telling is the goals set for 2023 and their achievement, later in the report.
  • Contributor dependency was noted in the report as a challenge, and that is born out in the metrics
    • 55% of the code activities performed by 4 people, and about 42% by two people.
    • 75% of the activity from the lead organization on the project, Accenture. That said, there were contributions from a total of 35 organizations over the year.

Maintainer Diversity

• There are maintainers from three organizations, with the three organizations topping the organizational activity leaderboard. Nice to have a few more maintainers from other entities.

Project Adoption

• Adoption information looks good. Project is in use by a number of different enterprises.

Goals

• 2023 goals were completed — nice work on completing the v1.0 release, and the non-code efforts on growing the community.
• 2024 goals have been defined that seem consistent with what I have been hearing from the Indy/Aries community — the shift to using Helm charts, and Kubernetes deployments.

Help Required

• While there is a general request for the other projects to update their documentation to include Bevel, it might be a good idea for the Bevel maintainers to proactively add pointers to Bevel capabilities in the documentation of the other project via pull requests. Even a couple of lines in the readme, including a pointer into the relevant (nice!) Bevel documentation might be useful. That might also trigger invites for Bevel experts to present at a Project call/meetup.
• Does the project see contributions from other project maintainers to enable new platforms/features? For example, do you see help from Fabric maintainers to integrate Fabric 3.0?
• There is a need to increase the maintainer diversity on the project. The project is looking for help on this. Since most of our projects need help on this, would it be worth putting together a task force to document guidelines for how to increase maintainer diversity?

Project Lifecycle Stage Recommendation

• Project recommends remaining in the incubation stage. Continuing to increase the maintainer diversity would help in enabling the transition to “graduated.”

Other Notes

• Conformance to the repository structure guidelines - (for core repository)
  • README.md and docs look really good, nice job!
  • Missing SECURITY.md file and the CHANGELOG.md has a different name.
  • MAINTAINERS.md doesn't include scope per the suggested format (most projects haven't done this yet)
  • No NOTICE file (Note to TOC - is this really important?)
  • CONTRIBUTING.md contains some broken links
  • Other than the notes in the Annual Report, is there a Bevel Roadmap?