New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SD-JWT-JS: initial proposal #20
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Ace Shim <ace@hopae.io>
Thanks, @pensivej for the project proposal. For our next TAC meeting on the 18th, we will most likely have a full agenda already with the Android Identity Library proposal and a discussion about project technical charters. If these both go quickly, we may be able to squeeze you in, but I am just not sure. |
|
||
# External Dependencies | ||
|
||
TBD |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we wait for the dependencies list before evaluating this proposal, or does this TBD
refer to the future?
Are we aware of the licenses of these dependencies and their compatibility or possible collision with Apache 2.0?
|
||
# Current Code of Conduct | ||
|
||
none |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it OK if we use the LFEU code of conduct (found at https://linuxfoundation.eu/en/policies)
|
||
# Source Control | ||
|
||
none |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe here goes OWS's GitHub repository
|
||
# Issue Tracker | ||
|
||
none |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Same as for the "source control". Will we use GitHub?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should clarify better what TBD
means as part of this process. Are tasks that should be finished before the evaluation of the project by the TAC, or tbd
refers to tasks the maintainers will handle after the adoption?
I think we need more information, especially pointers to the existing code, in order to form an opinion. |
If this is a brand-new project with no code, this is okay too. Just provide that information in the proposal. We can always create the repository within OWF to allow for the project to be started. |
@tkuhrt Yes, this is a brand-new project with no existing code. I will add that information in the proposal. |
How this library compares to the rest |
I am trying to understand the proposed project. We use a series of questions internally when evaluating projects. Apologies if it sounds formal but I know OWF keen to drive discussion between meetings so we all have a clearer understanding of the scope and intent of a project. On the call today was Scott nicholas from Linux Foundation Europe. He went through project set up and top tips to get the basic things in place. An example was the Technical Charter Template https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Sxnktu3d_xLFSZmAmSFbUp1Y1s1E36YvNDupY2AmigU/edit and the IP clauses in Governance documents. My questions if you could help me understand
Many thanks |
Hi @skounis ,
For other two, there are commits up-to date but I think having production-ready and actively maintained sd-jwt-js (or ts) within OWF is important. |
Hi @davidejalexander ,
Because we didn't have time to investigate other existing implementations in depth and it's only a month of work (based on other existing repositories). So better build from scratch than discover if we can start from somewhere else.
Yes, there are 2 existing open source libraries. One is https://github.com/berendsliedrecht/sd-jwt-ts which has 0.1.0 released today, and another is by Meeco https://github.com/Meeco/sd-jwt. Both seems available for basis, but as I mentioned above, we chose build over investigate (and get permissions maybe?).
I don't think there are many ways to implement this differently since it's reference implementation. We are not going to.
Yes. We have a project that is due Feb 2024. We plan this to be fully implemented in production ready state by end of this year. We used did-jwt and did-jwt-vc before for our wallet but plan to change this time.
We will start working on from mid-November and release 0.1.0 by mid-December.
We are the team who built the wallet used by government, with 43 million users daily, and using did-jwt and did-jwt-vc. We know how to build wallet and its components. Also we have dedicated resource for providing building blocks for OWF.
We will provide open-sourced react-native wallet project containing this by mid 2024. We will continuously maintain this in production level and make sure this works at scale by providing exhaustive test cases. We will keep our eyes on any updates in IETF or W3C standard updates and make sure this stays up-to-date. |
APPROVED with six yea, one absent at November 1, 2023 meeting |
@pensivej : Can you rebase this branch so that we can merge it? |
I have created a Discord channel #sd-jwt-js, as well as a GitHub repo for the project: https://github.com/openwallet-foundation-labs/sd-jwt-js. I have added a couple of initial issues for repository setup of required files. |
No description provided.