Lets make sure to capture current work efforts. For example, I believe adding JS (and particularly browsers) as critical functionality that is being pursued by LBL.

Another thing that should be on here in my opinion is the libp2p/testplans initial milestone. From a Testground regard this could be framed as "Bootstrap libp2p's interoperability testing story as a way to validate Testground's utility" (and we can link over there for more info on what that specifically means.

I assume this is still in progress and you're still working on it.

For:

• An idea here is to have an index to each milestone (e.g., T1M1 would mean Theme 1 Milestone 1 which is "Milestone 1: We have a stability metrics dashboard" in the current document). You could then have a list of upcoming months (Nov, Dev, Jan, etc.) and what milestones you expect to land that month.

I think go-libp2p is moving in the right direction here: libp2p/go-libp2p#1804

(@BigLep just deleted my previous comment I missed your last example)

I created this spreadsheet to try to organize the info you requested, it's rough but tries to be precise:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PdgVWsiPBB0Qdlx4PPSGpPqAziAhTBP0BvF-XEnPV3E/edit?usp=sharing

Let me know if you think that's the level of precision we want to communicate, else I'll simplify it & port it to markdown. I'll try to match the example in libp2p/go-libp2p#1804.

I'd like to wait for the roadmap to be "ack'd" before creating missing issues,

@laurentsenta : thanks for updating. I worry I confused things by bringing up Gantt charting. That's naturally going to lead to an engineering plan, which is more specific than what is being asked for here. My apologies.

The asks from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XJiFG9tTCDi4RsKEAivHgcXueIqqwhkJDE-OKvy8yec/edit#heading=h.vwnoff9vzgnf include:

1. Your milestone should have a short, descriptive title 
2. Each milestone should have a short description of the milestone’s “done” criteria and why it is impactful for a user population
3. Each milestone should be scoped to a real-world, externalizable deliverable - something that matters to your users or collaborators in a notable way
4. You can only have up to 6 of them over the next 4 quarters, max! 

I think there are two types of "roadmaps" I see being useful for us. In this case we're being asked to focus on "stakeholder roadmap". It will be higher-level than the week-to-week plans that the engineering team is using to drive their execution. We see this with projects like FVM where they have https://fvm.filecoin.io/#roadmap-4 but then also fine-grained detailed planning to hit those milestones. The hat I would wear is: imagine you're someone like Juan or Molly who has been told they have to share tomorrow about what Testground is up to and what users can expect in the next 6 months or if they are trying to summarize the efforts across multiple EngRes teams. You'd want the higher-level items that really matter to collaborators and users.

While https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PdgVWsiPBB0Qdlx4PPSGpPqAziAhTBP0BvF-XEnPV3E/edit#gid=1626775161 looks useful for guiding the engineering team more precisely including getting some good estimating, I think it's too much for the "stakeholder" roadmap. I think the granularity that Kubo and go-libp2p have hit (see https://www.notion.so/pl-strflt/Roadmaps-Private-e408ff30e86c4989a632290e3e2cbfbf#f712904c18cb4bd090cce0c62e783889 ) is closer to what we want.

A couple of other ideas:

1. Consider having an issue for the 2022Q4/2023Q1 roadmap where someone can leave comments and get updates. go-libp2p is doing this here: go-libp2p 2022 Q4/2023 Q1 Roadmap libp2p/go-libp2p#1806
2. Make it clear the current status of the roadmap once this gets merged. We should highlight that this will be getting a lot of review and likely updates in 202210.

Again, apologies for any confusion here. I'm happy to sync up verbally if it helps.

Thanks.

@marten-seemann @BigLep the Roadmap was written to take into account your comments, if the format works for you and you don't see any strong blockers, I'll merge it as is and we can move discussions into #1491.