[WIP] Initial Roadmap

[mikeal]

Initial roadmap, adapted from early OKR's and vision statements.

[warpfork]

Do we want to put something in here about the Data Model spec being landed, specifically?

[mikeal]

Which one? The basic one is part of the spec refactor that is already there. The future type system one is not there cause I dont know what @stebalien's timeline is for that yet.

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018, 4:55 PM Eric Myhre <notifications@github.com wrote:

Do we want to put something in here about the Data Model spec being landed, specifically?

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ipld/roadmap/pull/1#issuecomment-436464396, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAACQ4YYKM07Fc0Z4n9yPQnDe0fOO3r-ks5usi9ogaJpZM4YRkXm .

[mikeal]

@vmx what do you want me to write in for GraphSync?

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 12:48 AM Volker Mische <notifications@github.com wrote:

@vmx commented on this pull request.

Looks good, thanks for writing this up. I've just two minor comments.

In README.md https://github.com/ipld/roadmap/pull/1#discussion_r231419878:

IPLD Project Roadmap

-## Q4 2018 +# IPLD Vision + +Create the internet of data-structures.

Just want to double check if "internet" is intentionally lowercase or not.

In README.md https://github.com/ipld/roadmap/pull/1#discussion_r231420526:

@@ -1,7 +1,32 @@ -# IPLD Roadmap

IPLD Project Roadmap

Should we remove this line completely, it looks strange to me having some text before the headline.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ipld/roadmap/pull/1#pullrequestreview-172384908, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAACQ00D-KHZwrXT03XZ-ihlXdXUIcGYks5usp5HgaJpZM4YRkXm .

[vmx]

@mikeal I need to put more thought on this. I haven't had a closer look at Juan's proposal yet, I just watched the talk. At the moment I lean towards just putting our proposal (once it's out) on the roadmap. I don't want to commit to Juan's proposal.

[mikeal]

@vmx I'm starting to think that we should pull back a little bit and re-scope all of this under the umbrella of "IPLD Graph Replication."

Graph replication should be in the vision statement and then we can break out specific projects for graph replication targeted at specific use cases.

Calling all of these competing proposals "GraphSync" without a clear problem statement anywhere is highly problematic. If it turns out that two of these proposals are great approaches but for different use cases we may actually want to have projects to implement both, but without an umbrella like "replication" we can't find the commonalities between them.

[vmx]

Not sure where to put it. I'm also involved in the JS IPFS Core roadmapping. There I've put in an item about adding search to the npm on IPFS project. This is basically https://github.com/ipld/ipld/issues/43. Perhaps we should link it in our roadmap once the JS IPFS Core one is finialised.

[mikeal]

I think we should merge this and begin iterating on it with additional pull requests for specific things like GraphSync.