Breaking tasks down into sub-areas makes sense. But also means people wanting to start their own further sub-projects or sub-committees, should at least get a response from those in that higher sub-committee.
If we want smart contracts to be a success in industry, manufacturing, (as well as other sectors like finance or legal) then integrating them into the equipment / infrastructure will be essential.
Some of these PLCs can be pretty “functional prog”, which feeds nicely into Haskell strategy; but there needs to be templates provided etc.
A couple of weeks ago, I posted … “I am posting in General, so “Smart Contract for Industry” can be moved to a better sub-branch for development and governance in this specific area. (SCADA-PLC) Smart-Contract ADA Paid Leased Capex (Automation for Industrial Process Manufacturing)
((SCADA-PLC) Smart-Contract ADA Paid Leased Capex (Automation for Industrial Process Manufacturing))”
I had one reply, but not from anyone “official” or active in any sub-committee.
Community engagement is key. Especially as many may soon be in some second lockdown, eager to learn new skills, maybe the promised Plutus programmers? “Swords to Ploughshares” (both cutting edge’)