META-ISSUE: Metagov Prototype enhancements about gateway

[thelastjosh]

I think we should distinguish between monitoring/logging of tools and their configurations (which I think we should refer to as "logging") and integrations with specific packages+software that track community behavior and present it to communities, in the sense of ModPol "monitors". They should both be target enhancements, but the latter can be accomplished through targeted integrations and/or through collaborations with data scientists + academics like Seth.

[shaunagm]

I like your terminology. I think we ought to have an in-depth discussion about monitoring before settling on the ideal way to facilitate it and incorporating it into either our short or long term plans.

[thelastjosh]

This is really good. I'll add "package multiple services + installations into a shared, simplified install" to the enhancement list. This was originally Phase 2.

…

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:37 PM Miriam Ashton ***@***.***> wrote: This is a meta-issue for the Big™️ things that we've considered adding to the Metagov Prototype, but were deferred from the initial prototype phase (Jan-June 2021). Metagov Enhancements Ideas for how to make Metagov Prototype a more *useful* tool. Hypothesis is that these enhancements will increase chances of adoption. We're early in the learning phase! - User identity in Metagov, maybe roles, maybe relationships between people, maybe groups - Account linking across platforms - Expose schemas through the API (so PolicyKit can support no-code policies by generating forms from jsonschemas, for example) - Better more consistent error handling. Define an error response that is consistent, so the Driver can handle them and potentially surface them to the user. - Monitoring / logging (*oversight*) - Add plugin abstraction for ”notifying users” (*communicative governance*) - Add support for "widget plugins" - Supporting polling (in addition to webhooks) for "listener" Plugins - Plugin composition - Approach for "governing metagov" - Add abstraction over governance processes, for example "voting process" that can be swapped out Productionizing Metagov Ideas for making Metagov "production-ready." - Figure out how upgrades will work. If there's a running instance of Metagov and we want to update to add a new plugin (requires running Db migration for proxy model), update a plugin in a way that changes the API for example changing input/output of an action (yikes! Driver will need to change at the same time). - Versioning APIs - Security - ensuring separation of data between communities - Test coverage and CI. - A loooot more. Come back to it. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#21>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACHA5PCDFT2QRTCTW7H65O3TIXOFHANCNFSM42554JKQ> .

-- http://www.joshuatan.com/research/

[thelastjosh]

I've written a new use-case focusing on the "software bundle" enhancement above: https://discourse.metagov.org/t/metagov-as-software-bundle/93/

Posting Slack conversation here, for context.

Miriam Ashton Apr 14th at 2:59 PM
@josh I feel like Slack might be easier than git –– can you say more about this comment?
I’ll add “package multiple services + installations into a shared, simplified install” to the enhancement list. This was originally Phase 2.
All plugins are included with metagov; what do you mean by “packaging” services? Install to what? It may have been originally planned for phase 2, but that was before we had any idea what metagov was going to be, so I’m not sure if it still applies :thinking_face:
4 replies

Josh 1 day ago
Yeah fair enough, the basic idea was that installing Metagov would automatically create a SourceCred install, a PolicyKit install, an OpenCollective registration, a Loomio registration, etc.

Miriam Ashton 1 day ago
Oh wow I see. There are certain things the people just have to do manually, because auth and security 🙂
Like a human needs to go into OpenCollective to create a new collective, and they need to create a new API Key for metagov in the Open Collective UI. We can’t magic those things away sadly.

Josh 1 day ago
We can get started with things like SourceCred and PolicyKit where we have more control. Then we can negotiate with services like Open Collective to build support for an automated placeholder registration. If it helps supplement their pipeline, I think we may able to convince them to support that.

Shauna Gordon-McKeon 22 hours ago
Josh can you explain what you mean by "installing Metagov would automatically create a SourceCred install, a PolicyKit install, an OpenCollective registration, a Loomio registration, etc."
Do you mean that when I, a server host, install metagov, it would create accounts on SC, PK, etc? Or that when a user creates a community on my server it would automatically create other communities?
Maybe you could explain by writing out a super simple use case? Just, explain what you imagine happening as a narrative.

[shaunagm]

I feel like the community wasn't super enthusiastic when I brought this up before, but I think we should do what we can to support monitoring. Not sure how much of that will be in Metagov vs individual drivers, but a topic to at least think about here.

I know that's on your other doc, but I'm adding a comment here as this is, I think, the canonical place to track suggested enhancements?

[gigxz]

Add core capabilities for monitoring/logging, so that the Driver can expose tools for governance oversight.

This is in here! I am enthusiastic about it, though the implementation details are still hazy to me. I wrote that the Driver would expose tools but it could be Metagov as well. Yeah I think we should use this as a place to track enhancements because it is more public. (Actually, I'd prefer if it was somewhere multiple people can edit. Let me know if you have a suggestions/preference for where to track these things).