Specialized Pathways to DataCap

[kevzak]

Different application pathways by:

• Data Type

  • OPEN PUBLIC
  • COMMERCIAL PUBLIC
  • PRIVATE

• Applicant Type

  • Data Owner
  • Data Preparer
  • Lead SP / Onboarding SP
  • Aggregator / ISV / Proxy Client

Why

• Separating pathways allows more specific requirements per pathway
• Ability to provide different views for each pathway
• Also to potentially allows for different notary views when looking to review applications they can choose by data type in filplus.fil.storage

How

• All applications go through filplus.storage and on the application we add the Data Type and Applicant Type drop downs with specific requirements
  • Example: As we've learned via the E-Fil+ pilot, all PRIVATE datasset applications go through required upfront client/data/SP checks

Blockers, risks?

[orvn]

This makes a lot of sense to me and is a much better user segmentation than just doing things blindly by size.

It has the potential to unify all DataCap applications into a single repo instead of splitting across the filecoin-project/filecoin-plus-client-onboarding and filecoin-project/filecoin-plus-large-datasets repos, if that's something we want (it does feel cleaner).

Segmentation can be done via Github labels as we do now.

All applications go through filplus.storage and on the application we add the Data Type and Applicant Type drop downs with specific requirements

This sounds good. Although we'll probably want to also modify the issue templates to include these fields for direct Github applicants too.

[kevzak]

Thanks for comments, moved this to a proposal: #872