 A sárga, hogy találom, hogy mi Mindzsor-t, mandatítják valószínűleg a színtetet. Amikor játta is következtek, megyekünk az SN-t, így sosem Fozcs, mint T. Smalovic és kindutási cél, amikor fekondi a színtetet, brackettál. T. Smalovic amikor kérdődik, megpíldi a színtetet, The similarities between the two companies? Not their stickers symbol, of course. But let's talk about their open source. I have been involved with open sourcing much longer than this 21 years. I've end been open sourcing with projects like Velocity, project likes Hibernate or many other years. I tried many many different size frames. I went from small startups to big entapiices. Focsiadásokat együtt rajta, együtt rajta, együtt magyarumokat, itt a FDA, mellett, amenekre títenek, ha észsámos, törül, mint a Fлинtha, de a Flyntha, a Flyntha, a Flyntha, ha egy kívújáját, amit állítottam. A Dartmouth-ségébenlag a Súlyan festivalin nem nem ezt is foglalkontok gyilvánk. Ha együtt, hogy hagyjátunk egy különbözők együtt, de amikor a különbözők betegére, akkor az az első különbözőséget kezdik. De a patreonok, ami az eredik időt, hogy észsik oohújt is zenebb élübg, ami a előleg, hogy kicsi év, amikor különbözőséget, amit gukász beújtunk, Menjünk egyik kérdés, mint az utolját, amit jön a lőkéred, és mindenki is, hogy kérdés vagyunk. Hát, kérdése, hogy kérdése vagyunk. Igen, hogy kérdése vagyunk. Én az utolsó, hogy kérdése vagyunk. Én kérdése vagyunk. Jó életet kéred, hogy kérdése vagyunk, és az utolsó, hogy kérdése vagyunk. Én kérdése vagyunk. És az amikor egy nagyon szép hörőműködésre is lehetnek, hogy egy minden certify-t vagy egy ugyan gittub-t támogatások, és ez egy jó arraok és hörőműködésre. És hogy nem tudsz, hogy ez az egyik minden certify-t, hogy nem tudsz, hogy nem tudsz, hogy egy minden certify-t, hogy egy ugyan certify-t, hogy nem tudsz, hogy nem tudsz, hogy éről egy ugyan certify-t, és egy kérdés, hogy ezek egy kérdés, hogy ezek ezt egy ugyan certify-t, Is ez an important question, to know whether they are going to be used? I think the answer for this is a very complex sentence. Is the foundation architecture aspiration of a pluggable platform. Okay, again. What? What did you just say? So, for me, when you are pluggable, and pluggable in a way, that not only pluggable in an open source component way, but pluggable even in a closed component source way, you don't really know when you start your open source project, whether it's going to be used. And actually that question is not necessarily the important part. Sometimes this open source project is not really for you to figure out people who are going to use it. Rather, and I will talk about some of the other use cases we found, why doing open source is important, what other benefits an open source project might be having. Beside you are able to say that it's a marketing value, it has a hiring value, and it has a usable value, what other big benefits it might have had. And the other thing is your company does not necessarily have to own every line of the code that you have. This is an interesting approach. Is it a problem if I don't own it? Yes, we know about supply chain attacks and the other problems that might come if you don't own every line of the code. But all those problems can be mitigated, it should be mitigated anyway. Because you are going to use open source components anyway. So this has to be looked at. So after these two things I can say that if you're architecture, you plan it to be a pluggable architecture in a way that you are able to allow either an open source or a closed source, even proprietary, even something you might be paying for by a commercial vendor to be able to plug it in. That is really the problem. That is really the solution for this whole problem about whether my project is going to be used. Ok, this problem now aside, let's talk about what I actually came to talk about. Why going open source? Let's say there is a vendor. I'm not going to name the vendor. This vendor really wants to sell their stuff to us. So this vendor came, looked around all the open source projects we have and found a project called desktop JS. Ok, this is not the slide. Sorry. A one slide ad. So being open source meant that vendor could look at the projects that we have and we wrote any red tape. We wrote signing an NDA. They could start integrating with us without waiting for all this to happen. So now comes the actual use case, sorry. So this was, there was this vendor. They tried to sell the control to us. So they looked around and they found a library called desktop JS. Desktop JS is a common API for you to write your application once and to run in different UI containers, whether that UI container is a proprietary one, whether it's an open source one, it's up to you to use it. It allows you to write once and run in any of the container. So what this vendor did, that they presented a sales demo. Why their sales demo they were showing, they actually explained this sales demo is using desktop JS. And we said, oh, that's absolutely cool. Can you give us the URL you are just showing? They give up the URL and during their demo we were able to take their application that they were demoing the control and put it into or internal proprietary solution and try it out. So their sales demo, which was totally isolated from us sales demo, became sales demo, we could very closely interact with it and live with it and it became very close to us very, very quickly. Of course, after that, it was an instant win of both sides. It was an easy choice for us to try and to buy the solution because we already knew it was going to work in our proprietary approach. This is one of the use cases that we have seen. Of course, I didn't come to show you only one use case. I came to show you multiple use cases. So let me talk about one of the other use cases. The other use case is that OSS is a tool to work with the industries. OK, what does it mean? Open sourcing enables you to outsource and buy features of the shelf that gives a commercial momentum for a faster delivery. What does it mean? You can get bonus brownie points for having a project in the open source that is useful for driving the roadmap of some other company than yours by being able to add the use case that the FinServe developers would require. Yes, we are the different FinServe developers that we have to be taken consideration and many of the vendors doesn't really understand that, doesn't really get what FinServe developers are different. So let me show you that use case now. Brian Ingenito and myself, we wrote a US strategy which have been presented through one of the open source project called Compose. We actually sit down with one of the vendors and discussion based on this open source project and the whole US strategy we presented there resulted in one of the vendors pivoting of their solution. And this is big. Actually, let me use a quote from actually the VP of director of the project management from the company. Morgan Stanley helped influence us on the importance of having a strategy of hybrid style application that merge web technologies and native technologies. We, who are just a customer of that company, we were able to influence their strategy, their long time strategy by us open sourcing some of our strategical thinking. The other companies, mostly tech companies who have been doing this, I did actually work with tech companies who produces their internal strategic meetings to YouTube. We are not there yet. We are okay producing our US strategy to there. This is already a big thing. This cooperation actually resulted in a video showcase with that particular company, which was a very wide viewership on YouTube. So we feel like it's a win-win for both sides. They have been able to tell that they have been working with us and we have been able to tell that they are doing something that's going to be usable for us. This was another thing, another use case for us. Let's me talk another completely different use case now. When you are going open source, it does enable you to look at step augmentation a different way. And I'm not speaking about trying to hire people from Fiverr or something to do your work. No, no, no, but still gives you a different way, a different approach to start working with companies that are in a different situation. So because going this open source eliminates all the needs of onboarding, eliminates all the needs of overhead, many cases the management overhead and so on, and does result in immediate participation of those step augmented people in your processes. I'm going to bring an example for this as well. This is going to my use case 3. So let me talk about turntable. Turntable is a company which is in Ghana, in Acca, and they are doing enterprise quality driven software consultancy there. Of course anyone can work with them, but to do that you have to go to all the red tape and the processes and everything, and correct me if I am wrong, most companies does not have a working relationship with Ghana, the country. And it's not like working with a company in the UK. It's going to be usually much harder than just, hey, I need a consultancy resource here and there. So what we did, that we are working with them because this is an opportunity to give back. Ghana is a place that you would like to give back. And if you are working in open source, this giving back is actually much easier. They have been working with us on a project called Crossroads, and actually based on the success of this project, now we are doing two more projects with them, also happening in the open source. So this is actually a big opportunity for us, because this gives us really a kind of both feeling the giving back and getting quite the resources in this way. There is still more. There are some more benefits. If you are going open source, this usually means that you are using open source and or standard tooling. If you are in using GitHub, let's say one of the open source vehicles that many people are using, this will mean that you are going to use the standard tooling that is available for us. You are not going to use your company's internal tooling or internal approaches. This means that you are going to be more standard than even possible. It will allow you to keep yourself outside of the bindings that could have there to use your internal tooling. This is good, I'm telling you. By using this kind of off-the-shelf infrastructure pieces and GitHub, in our case, we are able to swiftly both adopt and leverage the industry wide DevOps tooling ourselves. This is, for us, one of the fourth benefit next to the obvious ones, which is we are doing something that people are going to use. We are doing something which might be a hiring vehicle. We are doing something which does have a marketing value. This thing that it is allowing us to make sure that we are going to do something which is standard, which is something probably OSS as well, and not going to bind us or block us or get us into a lockdown situation. It will help us there. As originally in this session was going to be a lightning talk, a 10-minute lightning talk, I actually here to answer any of your questions there. I know this is a 30-minute session, but originally, as I mentioned, it was for 10 minutes. I'm open for any questions on our approach. You can see our web page and or you may address where you can ask questions about this. And again, sorry if you were hoping to hear about blockchain or legend. That's in the other room. Yeah, sure. The question was what is the biggest challenge adapting open source? It went in stages. First, this was the usage of open source. Many companies still don't really have a process for doing it. And actually having someone who is your head of open source is really help. That's probably was one of the first thing in Grapp's presentation. There was this slide about how many companies do have a head of open source and not every company was able to say, yes, we do have a head of open source or actually some companies. We do have, but I don't know who he is. So actually starting from that first, get to the point where you are able to use open source. That's really the point one. The second point is actually the legal. So actually there is as part of this whole Finos Foundation, there is a smaller group, which is talking about these legal challenges. And those are actually probably the biggest one. What are the paperwork needed to be able to go open source? Whether you are able to go open source natively or you are going to use some of the solutions which enables you to go like in a sandbox, first semi-open source and when everything is okay, then actually doing the real commit, doing the real PR, doing the real change in the outside open source world. So actually that I think is the biggest challenge to have someone at a firm who is designated as the head of open source and do have actually the tools to achieve what he wants. So that person do have access to the legal resources, to the technical resources. So it's able to do this. No, no, no, they are not working free. So they are consultancy resources. We are paying them as consultants. The giving back is really enabling them to work with a company like Morgan's Telling. Normally a company like Morgan's Telling would need such a red tape and such processes for hiring a company from Ghana that would be open source is the vehicle there. Yeah, open source is the vehicle because we are able to tell them you are going to work on open source. Therefore, most of the red tape we would otherwise imply on you because you would be able to log in to our systems. You would be able to make changes. You need the mandatory trainings and most of them doesn't really apply to them because they are not going to log in to our system. They are not going to make changes to our systems. They would work on an open source project. Sure, more questions? Yeah, so the question was about how this work with an open source, a company like this and going to the public cloud can work together. They don't have to work together hand in hand. If they happen together, it's actually a big boost for the whole project. They don't have to. The project that we did work is actually a specialized build tool that we created, not cloud specific. And the new projects that we are working on also not cloud specific tools. These are more about desktop development tools that they are working on. If we would have these projects connected with the public cloud, a different problem would arise how they are going to have and who would be paying for the subscription in the public cloud. If your company is paying for the subscription, that means actually then you again fall into the whole red tape situation because if they are using your subscription, all the liabilities actually is going to be yours and not theirs. So I can see benefits going to the public cloud there, but also at the same time I can see why it might actually not really help you, rather the opposite. Of course, the question was what is the future stages open source. I am not the head of open source at Morgan Stanley. I do see the head of open source at Morgan Stanley in the room. So I will be very careful in the next few sentences I am going to make. So as I mentioned, we already have more than certified projects on open source. We are actually looking into increasing these numbers and where we are increasing we are not shooting for the numbers. We are shooting for the quality, so we are definitely not looking for the quantity. What we are trying to do, we are trying to get into areas we haven't been involved yet. So we are looking at things that we haven't been done in the open source world, whether it is in areas like desktop computing or whether it's... So areas that we haven't done yet. And we feel like that we do have the competitive advantage that we can turn into an open source project. Also, going back to the use cases, many of the cases we see a value of going open source there, where it would help us working with other vendors. So that's really... We are trying to move open source more as a vehicle for many of the use cases you have seen. Instead of just being able to say, it is open source now, because that's not really a value anymore. Everybody is doing that. No, it's actually different. So when we are owning, fully owning a project in some way that's easier, because then we control everything. We control the license, we control who can contribute to it, we can control everything. If you are actually contributing to someone else's open source project, you do provide the PR, and what happens if someone takes your commits, not your PR, just your commits, so your legal disclaimer is missing them, and takes those commits and merge it. Now, what does it mean from your legal perspective? They didn't merge your PR, so your disclaimer is not part of their code base, but they did pick your commits. So, yes, it's very nice to be able to contribute individual pieces to other projects, but generally, it might be from the governance point of view, it actually might be a harder one. And actually, I don't know whether you have met the toxicity sometimes you find in open source projects, especially maintained by smaller, not companies, maintained by individuals. It might be not even a good experience for your people. Yeah, that's the other point, yeah. So, yes, many cases we actually contribute to external projects just in this year. I think we are close to 200 now just this year, but in some way we might prefer actually open sourcing projects ourselves because that process just from the government's perspective and just from the level of anxiety, the people who are doing it might be an easier one, I would say. So, we have been using open source for quite a while. That has been always the case. Actually, we started first contributing PR, so we started that way, that there were a few cases. We said, oh, that project is very nice. We need one extension point that's missing for them. Let me just add the ability to add one extension point to that project. We figured out what is the process for doing that. We did it, we learned from the process this way. Then came the point where we figured out that it might be valuable for us to start contributing back full projects. So, we started actually from, hey, this project needs one small thing for us to be perfect. And usually this was just an extension point that we put our proprietary plugable part in it. I think back to one of my slides when I was talking about the whole plugable infrastructure point. I don't know whether I fully answered your question. I mean, we kept ourselves to the open source guidelines and how a fork process is happening. So, the answer is yes. We don't see the full room. We don't see whether there are any more hands. But if there are no more hands, then I would like to thanks everyone for coming and joining me. Thank you.