 Sfodd y bydd y clyw yma, dwi'n gweithio'r lleidio a ddynnu'n gweithio ar Neil McGovern. Hei, hefyd, yma. Rwy'n gweithio'r holl, ac mae'n gofynu. Yn fynd i'r syniad yng nghymru fel y Dpl, Dybym Yn Ym Mhwyllfa Lleidio, Stefano Zacaroli, dyna'n gweithio'r cwestiynau i ddim yn ei ddweud. ac ydych chi'n gwybod am y cwestiynau? Mae'r cwestiynau hefyd yn fath yw'r cwestiynau, mae'r cwestiynau yn fath ar IRC a'r gwahodd, ac mae'n dechrau dwy'r cwestiynau. A'r cwestiynau, mae'n cwestiynau ar yr edrych, ac mae'n cwestiynau allan o'r ddechrau, maith gwybod gan hynny, ac mae'n gweithio'i ddiffrwyddiad. Mae'r ddifrwyddiad arherwydd'r ddiffrwyddiad a'r ddiffrwyddiad yn llwyddiad, It is not my fault. Hmm... Zac you've been around a lot of different people in the community, not just in Debian. And you gave a talk about why you think Debian is still important, still relevant. Why do you think, what is it that you think that Debian adds to the free software community and it's place within that community, First of all, I delivered that talk with the other provocative title, which was something like, Would The Bloody Hell Careers About Debian? And I think the reason why I wanted to do that talk is that a lot of people among us have been doing Debian for so long that we might have forgot why we are doing it. And also the reason for the existence of Debian over time has shifted a bit. So 18 years ago was just one among the other distribution made in a new way, in a collaborative way, but nowadays it's important to define what Debian still has to give. And that's something which I've been telling in most of my DPR talks since they've been elected. What I think we have to give is actually our own governance model, which is, I think, unique among the big distribution, which it's a bit awkward to say, because it's not like the big player and the small player and we are better than the other, it's not like that. But the popularity of a distribution is a thing that exists, and we are for sure one of the most popular distributions. And among them, we are pretty unique in the fact that we are a volunteer-based project, and we have a governance model which is very open, in which it's easy to have an impact on the distributions. So if you're willing to do the work, you can essentially change everything in Debian, and also we are deeply rooted in free software ideals. So if you take these things together, I think we are pretty unique and we should be aware of that, and we should strive to make the project live long and prosper. And how do you think other people see Debian? What's the perception do you think of Debian with not only just the community and other Linux distributions out there, but also the users and people who use us? You mean technically or both technically and socially? So I think we are seen as a distribution which is for hardcore geeks, so for tech savvy users, which maybe are not able to use Debian, and I think we are perceived as a distribution which has some sort of technical entry barrier that you need to go through before being able to use it, that is on a technical level, and on an ideal level I think we might also be seen as some sort of fanatic of free software which are not ready to give some easy stuff to use to people just because it would not fit with some of our ideals, which might be perceived as somehow fanatic. I think that that's not a good... Well, technically it might be a good representation, but I don't think we have set that as a goal. I think distribution is... Debian is the right distribution for people who understand free software ideals, no matter their technical level. So I think we are a good fit also potentially for newbie as long as they get why we are doing what we are doing, I think we are a good match. And then the technical skill which I need to use Debian can be easily learned. And about the fact that we are perceived as difficult to use, I think it's just a matter of the people who are doing Debian that historically are more of the system and the institutional type than of the desktop user type. But I think if we found people that can make Debian easier to use on the desktop, we will have no problem integrating the needed changes in the desktop. Well, we have in the past had the Debian desktop project which we haven't gone very quiet recently. Do you think it's important that this is something we should be concentrating time on in making Debian easier to use? Is it a bad thing that we have a reputation as being a hardcore distro, however undeserved it may be? I think it's something we should work on. So I know we have a Debian desktop mailing list. I confess I've never been involved with that list because it was not my area of interest in the project in the first place. But I know it exists. I know they work on, for instance, the theme. So release after release they work on the visual identity of that Debian release and I think that's something which is very needed, very much needed. And I think we should just advertise it a bit more. We should give a message like, well, you know, Debian is for everybody. So if you are the desktop user type, well maybe you should come to us, join that initiative and make Debian easier to use on the desktop. And I've seen a lot of people in this conference who actually care about that. There is people, I think there is in parallel to this session, which is trying to identify these small things which make it needlessly difficult to use Debian on the desktop. I've seen various people blogging about this kind of stuff. So, yes, it's a direction in which I think we should push. And the way to push for it will be just, you know, attracting people who want to do that. And given that it is still at the moment quite hard, we have the title that Debian is the universal operating system. Does that still hold? So that title, I think it's sort of weird history. So I think it's entered the history of Debian in some weird way, but it's something that I think we start to like. I think it's universal, not necessarily meaning that it's good as it is for every possible use case, but it's universal in the sense that if you want to make Debian useful for a specific use case, you are free to come, join us and actually do that. That is my own interpretation of universality. But I know there are different notions like everywhere or a lot of other different interpretations. Let's move quickly on to other distributions in the area. What do you think other distributions are doing better than Debian? And which of those things that they're doing should we be doing? So I think we have been the first in doing a lot of stuff in the distribution area, but other have essentially been learning from what we did right and what we did wrong. For instance, I think in terms of governance, we can be way more, I would say, open for instance by setting up governance boards which are not only the DPL role or not only the delegates. So I think that other distributions have been watching what Debian has done and learned from it and established better structure and governance is one of them. What else? So while there are a lot of stuff that they cannot mention at the moment, but I think it's about time for us to stop looking only at Debian and review what other distros are doing and concede that they might have gotten various things right even if they didn't do it the way we are used to. So is that a plea for system D, perhaps? No, not at all. It's not specific to that. I mean, not about technical decision. I'm more concerned about culture and communities. For instance, I think the example of deciding together a code of conduct, it's a good example that many other projects are pushing out. Well, there is one well-known code of conduct which has been pushed rather top down, but then other project has started to think, okay, maybe it's a good idea for us and then this kind of change is something we should look at and learn from that. And not working? Testing? Is that working? Somebody mentioned, was it BDL earlier in the week that it's very difficult to retrofit social codes like a code of conduct? And I think that we were very fortunate in Ubuntu that we were able to set that from the start. And it was always my sense as well that it would be very difficult to retrofit that to Debian. How do you think, or do you think it's at all feasible to make that sort of change post hoc in the Debian community? So, yes, I agree that this particular aspect of Ubuntu governance, I believe it's something that has been learned from the experience in Debian. And I guess that the point is that if you look back 20 years when Debian has been created, I think nobody thought that a community could be big enough to have important social issues. So, if you look at the constitution, they are very tough on the technical committee part. So, there is a body for resolving technical disputes, but there is no provision whatsoever about social issues. And I think it's normal that back then no one was thinking of it. About Debian going that way, well, it's way more difficult to add something like that in an existing project than it is, you know, creating from scratch a new community and sort of imposing that change from day one. So, as a direction, I think it's something we should consider, but it's by no mean easy, because even if, you know, the code of conduct in not only Ubuntu, it has been adopted in another project, it's something that it's opt in essentially. It's a requirement to join the community, but it's an individual step. So, imposing that to an existing community which has been created without that requirement, it's very difficult at the social level. Zach, I'm disappointed by your answer. I don't think it's working. Okay, great. Yeah, I'm disappointed by that answer. I think that you can say what you usually say, which is the democracy will make that happen. And I think that to get a code of conduct, the way it would start would be individuals writing it and opting in for themselves, and everyone else noticing it was a good idea and slowly over 10 years the community moving that direction. Oh yeah, and be bold. Can you summarize the question for me? Yeah, I think it was more a comment. Let's say, why do you think this should be something that you as a DPL push for, rather than the community coming up with it themselves? If the community haven't already decided that they want code of conduct, why do you think that you should enforce that on them? No, not quite. I can answer to that briefly, so I actually don't think it's something that the DPL should put forward. So I think DPL is just coordinating discussions and tensions and desire that exists in the Debian project and actually try to drive them to conclusion, but I don't think it's something that should be pushed specifically by the DPL. But in general, and this is one of the points I made in the opening speech of this conference, I think it's time for Debian to realize that there are auxiliary tasks, which are very much needed to make the Debian project sustainable and in some way professional, not in the company sense, but in a way being efficient in supporting the project itself, and thinking about social issues is one of those directions. So in terms of the other projects and things that are going on, not just other distributions, there's also talk at the moment of project harmony. Which involves copyright assignment. What do you think about that? Is this something that Debian should be looking into? So this is mean. I didn't say I was going to be nice with my question. So there are some advantages in having a single entity having copyright for all specific base of software. But I think there is a huge difference in assigning a copyright to a company and assigning a copyright to some non-profit organisation. So I don't think Debian needs something like that, in particular because we don't do much development in the first place. A lot of the code we write is packaging stuff which do not get linked in software itself. So I don't think we need that. Personally, as a free software enthusiast, I disagree we need copyright assignment in the first place. But this is a personal position. Generally, I don't see the need for us to even have a position on something like that. Emmet, I guess you have a question. OK, so you mentioned briefly, but how do you think the DPL can guide to the project? Can guide to the project? How do you see your rollers basically steering the project around or do you just see yourself, your rollers being there to facilitate what the project wants? I have an interesting discussion with the DDA Rabu on this point which was, if you look at the constitution, there is written that the DPL essentially guide the discussions but should not use his position to, you know, favour his position, take advantage of his position to impose his own view on the project. So I think it's really sort of a secretary role in which you keep track of what the project needs to discuss and you start to propose the discussion, see what people stay and actually say, OK, I believe that the consensus is this or is that, or I believe we do not have consensus at all. But the distinction is quite blurry because at the same time, I personally don't want to censor myself and not expressing my view just because I am the DPL. So it's kind of middle ground on that front. OK, Emmet. In terms of the amount of DDs we have now, the DD population has shrunk due to inactivity or more precisely quite sharply because we picked up on the inactivity before. How would you encourage new people, others who perhaps haven't been interested in Debian before or involved at all to get involved? I know you mentioned the sort of management and other tasks we have, but would it be quite difficult for Debian to see our reputation as a hardcore distribution to push that? OK, so I think we need a sort of strategy in where we are going to pick new people that would like to join Debian. Part of the strategy I've been trying to pursue in that direction is actually going to derivatives, explaining what Debian is about and explaining that if they share the value of Debian, they could contribute to Debian directly and benefiting not only the derivative they started from, but also Debian and also free software as a whole. I think that sort of strategy has worked quite well because if you look at the flow of new developers in Debian, quite some of them come from derivative distribution. Of course a lot comes from Ubuntu because it's the most popular derivatives we have and also the one which reaches out to a very large public. So that's I think part of the strategy we should pursue. Another is making clear what are the areas of contribution you can work on in Debian. For instance, if people think that Debian do not need web skills or graphic arts, well you will not be able to attract those kind of people. So I think we should make it clear on our website or in general in our documentation what are the areas in which you can work in Debian, what are the areas in which your contributions are welcome and as a separate step which we have already taken making clear that all this kind of contribution mattered to become part of Debian and this is something we have done. You can become a Debian developer as long as you share the value of Debian and as long as you are ready to make commitment in contributing Debian in the long run. Rhonda. There is a question related from ISC from Keviks about how to get more people involved in Debian. I know you covered that in one of your talks that we are doing quite well but it doesn't probably look like that to the outside. It's always better to have more people around. Part of the answer is what I was saying. Clarify on our documentation now to join Debian in which area you could work, like divide peer profiles. Are you a developer, a pure software developer? Those are the development tasks we need. Are you an artist? Those are the things we need. This is the first step. Another one is actually giving credit to all the kind of contribution we have in Debian. Long time ago we used to have a page which was the list of package maintainers. We still have it but it is now polluted by all the teams. The maintainer field is now more and more often associated to a team which is great but makes it a bit difficult to know who is working on what. I think we need a central place in which you see all the people contributing to Debian, not only the Debian developers but also people committing to some alias project, translators, porters. You see that this person is doing this, this and that in Debian. In a central place that would be a very good step forward to give credit to people working on Debian and motivate people even if it is only on an ego basis. You see my name is on that page. I am doing this, this and that for Debian. Although the number of Debian developers themselves has gone down slightly recently, do you feel that the amount of people contributing to Debian has increased especially since Ubuntu and the other derived distributions? The figure of existing developers is an interesting figure because a couple of years ago Dam started doing a run to see who is inactive and to remove them for the project which I think is a healthy thing to do. Then we had the drop of like 100 people and then in the press they were saying the Debian project is dying, they are losing a lot of people where it was simply bringing the figures back into a good representation of reality. So very few projects out there have the history of Debian. Very few for the first project has been around for 18 years. So we have a problem of turnover and actually making a saying to another of people going away and new people joining. This is something not many projects out there have. I think the flow of new people is pretty steady. So I think all in all we have quite healthy to a number of people. It's difficult to keep that in being matching the reality of people actually working on Debian. But overall I'm pretty happy about the flow of people coming in and going out of Debian. I do want to just ask about the make up of those people. The diversity of developers is quite poor in Debian and to be fair it's not just Debian, it's free software and computer science in general. Specifically with regards to gender diversity so the overwhelming amount of males in the project and also the BME diversity. So it's quite still centred on European and North American developers as a percentage. How would you like to see that change? Is there anything specific you would like to do to try and address that? That's a very difficult problem. It's absolutely a problem for us. I think we tend to be a sort of, well not only us as you said, several free software projects tend to be monocultures and monoculture are generally bad because you don't have many different views represented. I think we should aim for diversity on every level. First of all gender diversity which as you said is very low. In that specific aspect I think we should compare however with the diversity that exists in general in computer science and free software. But the problem is that even if you compare to the gender diversity you have in computer science and in IT in free software it's way lower than that. So it's even more of a problem. Also I think Debian is representative of a general figure in free software so I don't think we are doing necessarily worse than other free software projects. And I'm very proud that initiative like Debian Women was one of the first initiative to actually increase diversity in free software and I'm very happy about that. So it is a big problem having low diversity. I'm not exactly sure of how to take all that. So I think that accepting as developer people doing other stuff than packaging was a good step. So that's a topic in which I welcome every input you can have because it's really something we need to work on. Now moving slightly on, we have recently had a distinct lack of GRs in the project. I think the last one was very consensual anyway. It was essentially sure we do this thing which everyone seems to agree with and it was about putting a stamp on it. Why do you think that we haven't had anything as divisive as previously? So my view on GR is that we should not use them for technical stuff. So we should use them for general direction, political direction, philosophical direction of the project but we should really not use them for technical stuff because we know from experience of standardisation body which has existed since 20 to 30 years that consensus and working code is a better way to take large decision than voting because it's very prone to, I wouldn't say populism but it's very prone to asking non-informat judgement on specific technical issues. I think the fact that we have had not many GRs lately it's a good sign. It's a sign that we are making consensus actually work even if we are a very big project and even if we always have someone who will disagree with everything. So I think one of the most interesting questions I've been asked in interviews was like so you will be representing a project of 1,000 developers with 2,000 different opinions so it's true but working on consensus is better than voting on every single issue. The walls on the political direction, I mean when you were elected you had a majority of 380, you were also the only one standing which always helps if you are seeking election as a politician, I know that, that's very useful. I felt like a dictator at that moment. Do you think that a possible factor in why people don't run anymore is that the DPL role has got too large? I'm scared by that so it seems to me that people have been happy with some of the things which I've been doing and of course I appreciate that but I do feel bad about the fact that no one is willing to, you know, in that election being the only candidate has been pretty sad for me because I feel like, you know, if someone does a good job at that then no one else feels entitled to step in and that's not particularly good because I think we need to sort of train generation of DPL as long as we have this role that's something we should do to control. So, yeah, well, I'm not sure what to do to train that but I am a bit scared about that specific aspect. So people, come on, step in, run for DPL in the next elections. Is there any other reason you think why people haven't stood till last time? I'm not sure. So even though it sounds like self praise I think that's a likely reason because I think I've made a mistake in, you know, making clear that I would be running again too early. I should have done that probably the very last minute. But yes, what you said is right. So it might be a sort of a scary role. So that's another problem. So the question is, is it sustainable as a role to have a project big like Debian and having, asking a volunteer to do that. Is it sustainable or not? That's a good question. I don't have a good answer at the moment. Will you run again? I can't pretend I didn't answer the question. Of course. Colin. So you've said in the past that you've been fortunate that your employer has supported your work as DPL. Do you feel that's essential nowadays? I think it is not necessarily essential in terms of work time because, well, the DPL role you can stretch or enlarge what the time you spend on it quite flexible manner. So if you have a lot of time, you can do a lot of work. If you have less time, you will do less. But I think it's very important at, how to say, responsibility level. As a feeling responsible and feeling you have enough energy to work on that. So for me it's been very important to know that in theory I could have, you know, stretched my work time to work a bit on DPL time. Even if I didn't necessarily use that often. But knowing that the possibility was there at a psychological level has been very important for me. So in the lack of any other questions, will you run again? I don't think so. So I think it's something that you need to have a lot of enthusiasm to do. I'm still very enthusiastic about what I'm doing now but I'm not sure I will have enough enthusiasm to do that for another year. So at the moment I don't think so. Two years does seem to be sort of the limit that people come to. Because I know certainly it can be very hard to keep that going over the long term. Do you think there should be a enforced maximum two-year limit on DPLs to prevent someone thinking that they could do more when they can't? So are you mean as a self-defense measure? I don't know. It's very personal. How do you take this kind of stuff? So I'm not sure a strict role will help. And also there are a lot of people making the analogy to state constitutions and the Debian constitution and say why there is no hard limit on the number of time. But actually DPL is not that much power technique. It's just a coordinator and someone who could use moral persuasion to convince people to do something or something else. I don't think there is a need to put any strong barrier to avoid abuse of power or whatever. So on to a couple of easier questions now I suppose. What's the proudest thing you've done as DPL? I get asked that question fairly often and I fail to have an answer. I think even if it's not something which is very visible it's like streamlining a bit their role. So trying to be very transparent on what I do and being regular and sending updates to the project it might be a thing which is not that important but I think people really appreciate that and you need to be able to show that when you have not worked for a given period of time people should know about that and they should not assume that given you have not been communicating you have been doing secret stuff or all this kind of stuff. So I think that streamlining their role a bit showing that it is possible to have periodic updates every month or so I think that's, I'm very proud of that. What decision would you make differently if you were given another chance? Okay, so in a couple of occasions I've been asked to try to solve conflicts and in some occasions I've been replying too quickly to support one position or the other so I don't have a specific example to mention but it's something, there are a couple of occasions which have not been particularly happy about how quickly I reacted, giving the impression that I was in support of one position or another and another one, which is something which I'm trying to work on is communicate more often, like blog more often which seems like a silly thing but in the world we live in giving your opinion and show that you are present in a given discussion on some Damian-related issue or some free-soft-related issues is fairly important too to play the role that Damian I think has to play And how do you think it's possible to separate out the role as what you think and what the DPL thinks and again what the project thinks? That's pretty tough, so in the publicity buff we have had, I recommend, not in the publicity buff in the publicity talk the press team made clear that every single developer when he's asked an opinion the people asking the question wants that opinion to be the opinion of the Damian project so if you have the head of the Damian developer and you say something, people want to take that as the opinion of the Damian project as you can imagine when they ask that to the Damian project leader is even worse so I think that personally is one of the words that I've used the most in when people were asking me questions so I try to say ok this is my personal position but it's very difficult if people want to make the headline Damian thinks that they will make the headline Do you think it is possible to separate those roles? Not really because as someone pointed out in the past few days the DPL is the only elected body we have in Damian so one way or another the view of that person are representative of the view of the project so I don't think it's really possible a final question What are you wearing under your kilt? There is only one thing you can wear under your kilt and you know that So I should have a... Thanks We should have about 10-15 minutes left for questions from the floor which we do so I did time it correctly Do we have any questions? We have one there first Does it work? So there is a question from ISC related to your... The Kilt? No No, not related to the Kilt Previous project leaders had seconds in command and as far as I remember you don't go high and do you think that having a second in command could make it easier to run for DPL for another year? No, I don't think so So there is a need of splitting the task and not doing everything by yourself because if you do everything by yourself the chances of burning out are very high but when I have had that need I've tried to establish something more persistent for the future than just having a second in charge which will last only for this term So what I've been trying to do is there is a need to work on specific tasks let's try to establish some position that will last in the Debian project so that other people in the future can benefit from that without having to rethink about it every single year on the other hand the problem of doing that is that delegation tend to be more sticky than they should be so this is part of the governance problem I was mentioning so I would really like Debian to have some sort of governance body which are open and can be reviewed periodically and can have some to and over within themselves but even if there is this problem I prefer to have some stable structure to be created than to have just you know an assistant that will last only one term and then need to be recreated the next year I think there was another question Steve, in the front Oh I think you were, whatever So maybe put you on the spot can you name any other people in Debian who you would like to see stand for DPL I can but they will not do that here Any other questions? Nobody has any other questions This is your chance the DPL is on the spot here Andrew Do you think that eventually the DPL will receive a stipend for their work or something to enable them to work more on Debian while out of the DPL and not need to hold down a job or be paid by an employer while out of the DPL? I've heard it quite badly Do you think that the DPL should receive a dividend or allowance or something that would enable them to work more full time on Debian rather than also have to concentrate on a job? No I don't think so I think it would not be healthy in term of taking a step in I want to do that on a purely voluntary basis so I don't think that would be healthy In that case Does that limit the ability of people who might be suitable to be DPL to people whose employers are happy for them to take the task on and consequently does that mean that possibly those employers are in fact sponsoring Debian by supporting the DPL in that way for a year or two? Yes it surely does limit the set of possible candidates and that's actually the reason why in several countries around the world elected bodies have higher salary than the average and the argument they use is that that enables even less wealthy people to do that. At the same time it's for me having Debian as a volunteer project is something that matches my view of society. So a society in which you have a job but you also take a step forward and try to help in your spare time the society to run properly and to run smoothly together So for me it's really a challenge to have Debian succeed even if we are not paid for doing what we do and we have no guarantee to succeed but for me it's something that it's a battle that they want to see Debian fight. While the microphone is going back we have the Debian project who makes Debian GNU Linux and hopefully K through VSD soon as well How much do you think Debian should try and take a political role in influencing not only societies but also within the sort of free software world how much we should be advocating for that and how much also do you think Debian should be pushing for other ideals for example freedom of speech freedom of association and other human rights. That's an interesting question I think that we have a role so the Debian project is an association of people that have a mission of creating a free operating system the best possible operating system and I think that everything that touches that specific role is something which we should be entitled to make position statements or the like. An example is if software patents are something that arm creating a free software operating system and they do, it's something on which we should have a position and we could send out statement on why this kind of stuff hindered the creation of a free operating system I don't think we should move past the border of creating an operating system like human rights or green energy or whatever and we sometimes have the tendency of doing that but you should keep in mind that we have a specific mission and not try to stretch it to other stuff. So I've met one person at DebConf a few years ago who specifically did not want to join Debian because we have a project leader Do you think Debian needs a project leader and any other comment on that? I don't know who that person is but he has my sympathies I would prefer to see Debian not having a project leader I would prefer Debian to have a sort of board like many other free software project have and having that board having roles for election in the board and having that board express a sort of director or representative of Debian or something like that that's not that much different from having a leader and having an opinion more open and even less scary for the representative of the project. You are running for a second year Sledge was doing it for two years too there were some discussions going on over the times that the voting overhead with nomination period platform and all this is quite an issue and there were discussion going on with extending the term so what's your opinion of potentially extending it? So one year is definitely too short for value things the first thing is learning the job which is something we can improve by writing down some documentation, some best practices or the like and something that I've been planning to do since a long time even though I haven't yet managed to actually do that another thing which requires time is actually getting to know the people you will relate to like representative of other big free software projects or representative of other entities which you have to deal with like SPI or any other trust organization so all this stuff requires time and in my experience a good slice of the first year can be spent in doing that and in getting up to speed in working efficiently with those people two years is a better time frame to be ideal but at the same time if you are saying that there all is already a bit scary as it is extending the period to years will make it even more scary so I have sympathies with an idea of having a two years period with an easy way out in the middle like by default we have an action unless a given number of people says you know what we are fine like this and you just continue by default something like this so we might find some middle ground and I don't think I will push that myself because I don't think the priority of this is very high but if someone else want to propose a constitution change in that direction talk to me I will be happy to have and there's a question just behind as well so if one of the big obstacles for getting other people to apply to be DPL is the well one of the big obstacles in terms of doing the job is learning the job is it possible to have every month training period that's open to volunteers inside Debian to work with you and have you assigned them tasks so they understand the process even outside of the election I've actually been trying to do that I've been called for volunteer to work on DPL related tasks and my idea was to actually do two things at once one is the training but not training it's not like I am entitled to train them but showing what is about being a DPL and also of the interested people forming a sort of informal board which meets every month or something like that on IRC and discuss what we need to do so that at the same time it will give training and also more openness in what is going on but in fact I got only two people who applied and get a list of the thing which I have on my to-do list which can be outsourced and then in the end nothing has happened so I'm trying if someone is willing to apply and help out and discover what is about there is plenty of work to be done and I'll be happy to work with anyone who wants to do that I think we got probably time for one more question if anyone has them okay well it just remains to say thank you very much to Stefano here and hopefully we'll hear a lot more from you in the future thanks a lot