 We are starting yours. All right, welcome, everyone. This is the last CSC call for this term. And I assume everybody is aware of the antitrust policy notice, as well as the cutoff conduct. We all live by happily. So we have a few things on the agenda. For the most part, I won't talk about the election. Make sure we have our act together, and everybody gets a chance to vote when they should be able to. And then I actually said, hey, I'm looking for some volunteers to work on some of the open issues. But I then realized, well, none of us are sure to be here next week or the following what. So I guess that's a bit of a mood point. So we'll probably skip that today. And for the most part, I would like us to talk about try to do a bit of retrospective about what's going on with the TSC, what we share a little bit, what we think, and have some kind of open discussion. Some of the people who are here today are for sure not going to be here next week or the following one because they are not running again. And so I'd like to get everybody a chance to speak up and see if we can also share some advice to the upcoming TSC if we have any. So with that done, let's get to the TSC election, which we had just started talking about before the recording got triggered. So as we were saying, some people still are struggling getting their ballots. And Dave is struggling getting them their ballots. So what's the status, Dave? Current status is we have 818 total authorized voters. 154 votes have been cast. And if I'm doing my rough math correctly, I think we're just broke through the nope. We're still at 18.8%. So I think we had about 20% eligible voters voting last year. So we're kind of on track to match that again this year. So get out the vote efforts. Call your friends, let them know. If you're a chair of a working group, email your working group and remind them to vote. If you're a maintainer of your project, bring it up in your maintainer's call. That said, we have been having ongoing lead and green deliverability issues with ballots, but it's not terribly bad. It's on the order of one to two a day emailing us back. But I mean, if you assume that that's one out of 10 people that should have gotten ballots that didn't, I mean, this could be a big problem. We could be seeing some non-trivial percentage of the voters not receiving their ballot. Email deliverability is a known problem. And Rai and myself and Brian have already talked about looking at possible solutions in the future. But that won't take effect this year. That'll be something we discussed going into next year's election. So it's really that's the weak link. It's just the email deliverability. So any questions from anybody? So I had one question about the, I know you guys use also the marketing channel to get to the voters. Yeah, we use a marketing cloud. What do you guys do that rather than set up a mailing list? The reason we use marketing cloud is they have better deliverability because it comes through a company that has done a lot to pay money, cut deals, whatever, to get through to ensure deliverability. There's a whole industry around email deliverability and they have a conference every year. And Hyperledger has had a presence at them in the past. So this company has just done more than what we get from, say, groups.io. And the other thing is that it ties into our no opt or opt-out list. So anybody who has made a request to not be emailed. Well, I think that's a problem. Because I for one adopted out and then turned out I didn't know that turning out the Linux Foundation broadcasting channel was going to get me off the Hyperledger stuff. And for something specific as voting, I think it would make sense to create a mailing list that gets set with all the eligible voters at the beginning of the election process and go with this. Because you say it's better deliverability, but the proof clearly is not going against this, right? Right, I mean, we did use a mailing list last year. We did use a mailing list last year and received negative feedback for doing that. There were issues with using the mailing list last year, where, and I can't recall that it was sore off the top of my head. But I remember specifically in one of our conversations about how to fix issues from last year, not having using a mailing list as a way to try to notify voters of things. Well, yeah, I want to address two things. First, Marketing Cloud. I just looked at the statistics and we have a 98% deliverability rate through Marketing Cloud. So that's so that at least the announcements are getting out and the reminders are getting out. We know that. So people should be aware. And then the second thing about the opt-out list, I did get the list of people that have opted out and I personally emailed them. It was 50 some odd people from our community and I went through and hand wrote emails to every one of them just to say, I know you've opted out. This is not a mass mailing. We're in the middle of the election. Just wanted to make sure you knew. And here's what you should do if you want to participate and haven't received a ballot. So that's how we chose to handle it this year. Next year, I think the hope is to have a more integrated LF-wide system for this. But we'll have to look at that when we head into next year's election. Yeah, I mean, all of this, thanks for the feedback. All of this is being captured, right? We're writing down all of our mistakes and we're writing down all of our victories. And so as LF, if they build stuff out, we will be definitely informing their design requirements. And also with regard to people who have had difficulty receiving their ballots, I believe you're on the elections list. So you see, it's been a couple of day, people letting us know, hey, I haven't received my ballot and I think I'm eligible. I think I should. And when they have been eligible, Dave has gone and had SIVs resend the ballot to the address. And that seems to have solved it. I don't know of anyone for whom once we did that, they didn't receive the ballot at that point. Well, Chris still hasn't received his and neither has Dan and I manually sent theirs. OK. So I understand, Brian, but I still find this. We have a few days to the end now and there are still people have not received it. And these are the people we hear from. There may be others who won't even bother we won't know, but it's not a very reassuring sign. That's what I'm saying. Well, OK, but as the issues have come up, we have been able to address them. Let's be clear. And we do require people to care enough to if they have not received their ballot to see the notices that we send to let us know that if they've not received it, and I'm not sure what more we can do on this front. Yeah. So I replied to that to the to the elections list and I didn't get a response back. So and since I've been around for a long time, I know how I could have escalated that. But I was kind of curious, you know, what's the experience for somebody in the community that isn't as deeply enraged in the internals? So I this is this is not super secret stuff. This is notices that we send out to that's one reason we use marketing cloud is in the notice that to try to reach even beyond those who filter their personal their list email to side boxes. This is why we've been very transparent about the process throughout throughout this. Sorry if I get a bit defensive on this, but this is not this is not about this is not a process based on secrecy. Or I'm not saying it's based on secrecy. I'm saying I followed the escalation that was in that email, but without effect. And so I I had no ways to escalate around that. But yeah, Brian, I mean, I'm I get every piece of no offense, but spam from Hyperledger that you can possibly imagine on two different emails. So the fact that I haven't gotten a vote, I mean, a ballot this year is despite apparently many attempts seems just I just don't even understand. And it's the same with Dan. I mean, we've both been here since the very beginning. This just doesn't make any sense. Could I interject for a moment? We are using the same voting system that we've used for every TSC election. And I've always gotten my ballots. Right. So I suspect something has changed in terms of like their deliverability or something. But I mean, this is not a systemic change that we have control over. All right. But so, you know, they still worked. There's still room for improvement. Let's just say that way. Yeah, and I think I would like to echo Dan's comment. Right. I think the not getting responses when following the process that was laid out for people is very discouraging for somebody who is not. Maybe this is their first time participating in the election, right? To not see anything come back, you know, for a couple of days or something like that, is is about community, right? It's about how healthy is our community? Is it something that I actually want to be involved in? If I can't get a response from the people who are, you know, running the election, that's that's a concern. And and something that we shouldn't just push off. It's something that we should be thinking about that, you know, as I think it was Chris said, right, or somebody said that. This is like the entry into what it what the community is, right? And and if you can't participate in that, then that's that's just a huge turn off. And, you know, if all are welcome in the hyperledger community, as we're looking at on the screen, right? Then that means that we have to be cognizant of the way in which we respond to people. All right. Thanks, Tracy, for that feedback. But I want to address this. So I have personally responded to every request that came into election over the weekend. I'm busy, so it might have been delayed for a day or two. But I did go through them first thing in Monday morning and I just checked and Dan did not email the election list. Dan ping me directly on chat. And I don't mean to get defensive here, but like I have been on top of this every day. And I'm not taking it personally. I'm just saying we have been following through. I have personally been following through on what we made promises to the TSC about how we were going to resolve these. OK, I understand the importance. And what Tracy is saying is totally right, right? This is the primary entree into the community. This does represent our community. But I don't see this as been a failure, honestly. And I think a lot of these concerns being expressed here are unfounded. I mean, I'm talking to Dan privately right now. It's like, look, I didn't find an email. There's no email from you in the election list. You ping me here on chat. So, you know, everybody who has followed the process has personally received an email from me and I've manually reset their ballots. Now, I can't force their ballot to go through, but I can at least respond and say, look, I manually resented and Chris, the last message I see from you on the elections list was well, from Dave responding, I've resented the email, you know, and through civs and obviously if you haven't not on the elections list, no, I know, but that's what you email to. And so the reply goes to you, CC to the to the elections list. Yeah, it comes from me to you, CC, the election list. Right. So here's my question. You say we have 18 percent response this this current year. And yet you have a number of people that are saying they didn't get a ballot and two, including Dan and myself, who've been around since day one. And I don't understand why haven't we asked everybody who was supposed to get a ballot? Did you get a ballot? And if you didn't, please email the election list or something. Exactly what we do, Chris, we send emails out through Marketing Cloud, we've sent about five I've never seen you leave so far in those emails. We've all seen the original one saying you're going to get a ballot, but I have nothing since then. We've also sent emails to the TSC mailing list. I don't know if we've sent them on the rocket chat TSC channel, but, you know, how many other ways are we supposed to reach people? And the process that we followed has been detailed, you know, it's in tremendous depth on the wiki, right, in a plan approved by the TSC that we were executing against. Yes, I mean, but the the prime is not with the plan. The prime is with the execution that, you know, seems to have some issues because there are people who don't receive the notification, not receive the ballot, and there is a disconnect there. And so I hear you, I mean, you know, I'm not saying Dave is not trying, but at the end of the day, there are still people who haven't received their ballot and that's a problem. That's why there is some, you know, resentment here that I can feel. Right. I mean, the only answer is to stop using email. That's really the only answer. We have to find some other way to communicate with people, but that's the only universal way to communicate with people as of right now. And, you know, we've had updates here on the TSC call every every meeting, every other meeting, like I'm yeah, I'm sorry, I'm normally not defensive. Normally I'm one of the first to put myself under, you know, throw myself under the bus or have our staff take responsibility. And, you know, where there have been execution challenges, I'm going to do that. But, you know, this is this is not this is not. Yeah, this is not fair. I, you know, we're we're listening. We've constantly been adjusting this is why to to to the annoyance of all of you, we make it as process as clear and as as we can be. Yeah, give us some credit. Give us some credit on us. I think the people are working really hard and doing a good job with the tools they have. And I think the main thing here is maybe. You know, the TSC approved some tools that maybe aren't the best. So for next year, you know, I don't want this to reflect negatively on the people doing the work because I think they're working above and beyond to try to make this work. But maybe one of the notes we leave for next year's TSC is revisit how the elections, the tools used in the elections. Yeah, I agree with that. I agree. It's not the plan. I think the plan on the paper we have is good enough. It's that when we try to execute their issues, so we need to try to figure out a better way to execute that plan. And I don't think it's necessarily a person issue either. This is why I've been careful. You know, I'm just saying that at the end of the day, there are people who don't receive their ballots. And and there I know there are some reminders that have been sent. You know, I don't think it's like we all received a question. Did you receive your ballot either? OK. So maybe there's a bit of miscommunication as to what it was sent there. There are messages to the TSC list as well as through sent through the marketing cloud, as well as sent through, you know, we've repeatedly said, if you've not received your ballot, please email elections at list.hyperliger.org. I don't want to spend the whole call on this. So let's move on, guys. As I was saying, the there won't be a TSC call next week. The, you know, with our plan, the TSC election will end this Sunday. Then we have the the chair's election going on for a week. So there is effectively no chair next week. I mean, I can't assume that I'll be there. So, you know, there are but twice as many candidates as there are seats. We all have like a 50 percent chance of being there. So I think it was easier to just say, you know what, we can we can skip one week and we'll resume the following week with whoever is chair can take it on. All right. So there was one quarterly report that was sent out. The Avalon project submitted their quarterly report. They didn't notice. I mean, they didn't highlight any issues for us to discuss. I still wanted to give a chance to anybody, you know, to the TSC members and the project people to raise any thing now. You won't. I noticed most of the most of us have checked the box saying, yes, I've reviewed it. No comments. So I think this is good. We're missing the I mean, the next project report do is we're starting the Q4 cycle and fabric will be first. I'll make sure that it happens for the next TSC call. So with that being done, there was Dan pointed out there was a TSC, there was a pull request to change the TSC document regarding Calvair. It was actually reviewed and accepted by a few of us, approved by a few of us. And just before the call, Ryan actually went ahead and merged it. I don't expect this to be an issue. It just means, you know, we have executed reflecting the decision that was made by the TSC a few weeks ago into the documentation. So we did the TSC election. So, yes, so now that brings us, we have about half an hour left. I wanted to get a chance to, like I said, you know, go around the TSC and, you know, get everybody a chance to reflect a little bit on what they think we have done well and maybe not so well and what the TSC next TSC could do. Please, let's not reopen the election stuff. I think it was already discussed at length. We can note that as Mark said, you know, as a note for the future TSC is look into the tools being used for the TSC election. But other than that, I just before letting you guys speak up if you look at the backlog. So there are some issues, some of them are fairly recent. There are a couple of like long standing ones. The DCO is in Brian's ballpark. They have to deal with it. The other ones, I mean, the move for Hyperledge Explorer, you know, I have felt several times we should just withdraw it for now until they're ready to come back. It doesn't really hurt to have it there. We know they want to go to active status. So but it and then there's the long term agenda, which, you know, I appreciate Dan said, hey, let's discuss this. And I think it did trigger quite a bit of interesting discussion. Unfortunately, you know, we didn't get to any real conclusion. And I don't know what to do with this. I think it's one of the challenges that the TSC is going to have. And this is, you know, if anything, one of my takeaways, which is a longstanding challenge that we have and is that, you know, there's discussion about can we really steer the hyperledger, right? The projects as a whole or, you know, or not. And there were some very interesting discussions. But at the end of the day, I don't know that we have much power into driving what the projects do. We have some influence in which projects we accept. And when we do with the project that are ongoing, beyond that, it's a bit difficult. We have limited power. I do want to point out that, you know, and this came up as part of the discussion that I was part of in the member during the member summit. You know, it occurred to me that in a way the organization we have the structure we have in hyperledger with the TSC is, you know, designed, better designed for an organization that has, you know, some kind of like overall project we all rally around. And but hyperledger has turned into something that is more Apache like, where we have different projects that are fairly disconnected from one another. Some that can be seen as competing with one another. And in that, in that, given that it makes it kind of hard to have a TSC. If you look at Apache, they don't have anything like the TSC. They don't have an architecture board that says, this is what you're going to do. You know, they have a project committee, you know, project management committee that does the kind of stuff we do. But, you know, they don't claim to steer, first, say the projects. And so, in a way, you know, you could say, well, the it's a bit of a misnomer. And by the way, if you look at other organizations like CNCF, for instance, they don't have a steering committee. They have a technical oversight committee, which I when I heard that, I was like, you know what, maybe that would be a better name. And I don't know if it's worth the expense of renaming ourselves from technical steering committee to technical oversight committee. But I think it might reflect better on what we can actually do and not do. And so I will leave it at this for now. I want to open it to everybody else to get everybody a chance to speak up. Oh, good. Raise your hand to be awesome. Yes, that's a good suggestion. If nobody raised their hand, or meanwhile, what you reflect on this, I will add that there's also another thing is that the, you know, we've talked about the life cycle and the meaning of incubation and active status. CNCF, as doesn't call it, they have incubation as well. And then they go to graduated projects. And it's, you know, not necessarily very different. They have the onset criteria to graduate projects. But it'll occur to me that maybe, you know, if we talk, if we borrow their, their terminology, it would be, you know, less misleading, I don't know, in the end of the day comes down to pretty much the same thing, you know, from an impersonal point of view. But I've always had a bit of an issue with this notion of active, which seems to imply the others are not active, which clearly is not the case, right? Literally, the word active, you know, does not reflect what's going on. But so let's go to the queue. Hey, I suggested this for, well, one of the reasons was that a lot of times we seem to duplicate discussion that's sort of been had in the past, you know, six months or a year ago or something. So I guess I get, you know, I think you've already been doing this. And I want to encourage others to do this as well as to sort of summarize the thoughts on some of the big, the big decisions we've made. Or more importantly, the decisions we haven't made. So we don't sort of re-litigate these continuously. Yes. So thank you. But I would say that, you know, from that point of view, I think one of the achievements we had during that term is we moved on to the TSC decision log, which I think has helped us improve. We have moved our documentation from the wiki to the Github with a consolidated set of governing documents that are easier to find. And, you know, that we keep updating as we make changes. So I think we can also take some pride into, you know, some of the achievements we've made, at least I'd like to think so. Tracy's next. Yeah. So I would agree that we've added some kind of more formal processes, which has helped us. But I think, you know, in some ways, probably hurts us as well. I think that we, you know, have tried to gain some visibility into projects and what they're doing with things like the project reports. But I think the there's still a lack of visibility. I think, you know, that was pretty obvious with the transact discussion that happened. I don't think that we're getting as much information out of those particular project reports as we would want to get. I don't know about any of you, but I was surprised by Silas's email to the TSC mailing list. Given the past project reports, right, nothing had necessarily led itself up to that. So we weren't seeing some of the things that are happening. And I think we're in a place where it's a bigger challenge for the entire community when it comes to the fact that we're now very virtual, right? There's no more face to face. There's no more hackfest. There's no more maintainer summits. There's no more, you know, conferences that we can get together and have conversations. And I think we need to find a better way to bring the projects into these meetings to ensure that, you know, there's visibility of what's happening in those projects, not only by the TSC but by other members of the community. I think it's a it's a hard challenge for us to think about the long term framing when we don't necessarily have a good insight into into what's going on, right? I think it's really hard for us to do technical oversight in that that manner, right? Or or staring when it's hard to know what's going on. And I, you know, I think we've also had a few challenges this year with bringing in Basu, right, bringing in a brand new project, having them go through the process and see where the challenges are that, you know, a lot of us in the community, since we've been here for a while, don't see. And I think these voices and adding these new voices to the community is a really, really good thing, right? I think being able to take a step back and reflect on where we're at and understand where we want to go is is really key to to making sure that, you know, this community stays healthy and that we are adding to the portfolio the sorts of things that enterprises are looking to add. So that's my two cents. Thank you, Tracy. Mark. Hi. Thank you for the opportunity to speak, Mr. Or no, so I think that we need to do well, the next TSC needs, I mean, we're really at a crossroads, right? So right now I view the TSC is fairly compartmentalized within Hyperledger. We don't really work with a marketing team. We sort of ignore SIGs and it seems like a lot of people would hope they just go away, but I think there's a lot of great work going on in the SIGs. And also work with a board more. You know, I know you you attend the board meetings and you give updates on what we're doing. But there's almost we're sort of like our own standalone thing that's not really connected to other things within Hyperledger outside of the projects. So I think we, you know, we really need to work to get a healthy Hyperledger again. You know, work with the marketing committees. I think some of the struggles we have with project status relate to, you know, how the outside world views our projects, you know, which project should I pick for my solution? You know, how do we how do we know that there's only three or four people on it versus a hundred? You know, and Gary sort of elaborated on how he went through some of that with open source projects. But I think in general, the first thing the technical steering committee should do is work with a governing board and really figure out what the role is. So we are staring committee. Are we an oversight committee? Because we seem to try to do a lot of things. And I'm not sure we do many of them well. So I think, you know, that that's sort of where we need to go. Thank you. All right. Thank you. I have to say I often present about Hyperledger and I always say the technical steering committee oversees the projects. So I never say it steers any of the projects. Troy, Troy disappear. He's there. He's just Troy. Troy is twice gone, but yes. Sorry. I hope I'm OK. So I'll just say a few good things that I thought this year and maybe a couple of challenges. So I think first up, I actually think the agenda was quite well done and I think the meetings were nicely focused on that agenda. So I think thanks to Arno for that. I did feel like the discussions in the TSC were collegial and that I had the feeling that, you know, the members really do care about the community. So I thought that was really good as well. And, you know, I did think the reports were providing a decent summary of what's going on going on across the community and it's very helpful because you can't be really more involved seriously in a couple of projects. I think there's a few challenges in my mind. I think one of them I hesitate to say it because we already mentioned it, but probably there is more time spent talking about elections and voting than maybe expected. And I think to echo other people, maybe the additional role of the TSC could be a bit more clear. If I summarizing what I was observing while being a member, I think we were talking about elections, reviewing reports and maybe reading project proposals as a focus. And I know there was, you know, definite work on improving process and these kind of things. That's all good. But if there's roles beyond of the TSC beyond that, that would be nice to be more clear. And I think from the project perspective, you know, having more focus on maybe out of the box use cases so that you can just, you know, use a project. And I know Indy does that a little bit with, you know, a focus on decentralized identifiers and more focus on project extensibility might lead to more cross-project work and the ability to do features either beyond the interest of maybe core maintainers of the current project or work on it in your own ecosystem. Those would be helpful things in my mind. All right. Thank you, Troy. Chris. Yeah, I mean, I echo I think a lot of what Mark said. I mean, I think the meetings have been well run. I do think, though, that, you know, we tend to. Sometimes get a little bit too bogged down on, you know, some of the points like Troy was making. But it is important. And yet it seems like we had to go through and completely, you know, rethink it or, you know, redo it and here we are. Right. So I do think we need to. We need we need to somehow rather fix that. And I'm not sure I know what the answer is, but it's been very frustrating. I will say that, you know, again, if you take a look at the, you know, the SWAT, if you were participating in the SWAT analysis and so forth. And I know that will get published at some point, Brian, but I really do think that there's some important feedback there that the TSC needs to to consider. And we really haven't done that in the past, but, you know, a lot of it is about focus. A lot of it is about, you know, some of the points that Troy was just touching on in terms of use cases and understanding, you know, which project should I use to do what? That isn't very clear. But again, I don't want to get, you know, we we we hashed over this a while back where, you know, it really isn't fair to try and sort of say, you know, come, you know, pigeonhole a project to a particular use case or something like that, or try and say, this one's better for that or the other thing. I don't think that's appropriate. But, you know, at the end of the day, and I've been trying to sort of push for this for a long time, we really need to get to a point where we are a community and not just a collection of projects. And I don't know what that's going to take. The TSC was supposed to be that vehicle, maybe that it's expanded. That'll help engage more of the projects in the TSC and in those kinds of discussions. But I, you know, it still feels very disconnected to me. And I don't know how to fix that because everybody every project has got its own. Sort of, you know, mission from GAD and they have to, you know, keep executing because they're delivering product around it or whatever. And there's not a lot of time to sort of. Pull your head up and look sideways. And we need to figure out how to fix that because otherwise I'm not sure how this. I'm not I'm not sure what the role of the TSC is. Maybe we should just have TSCs for each project. I don't know. But yeah, that's that's my thought. All right, thank you. Just to bounce back on this, I mean, this, you know, there are other projects in the Linux Foundation that do have this kind of like, you know, different levels of governance structure. And, and, you know, I was looking at edge computing, for instance, where they have different projects that are fairly disconnected, then they each of them have a TSC. And of course, at that level, you know, it makes it easier to actually steer something. But just, you know, I think, you know, in general, it's good to look at what's going on around and see if there aren't solutions that maybe we could borrow from other projects around us. Gary is next. Oh, thank you, Arna. So, yeah, I mean, a couple of things. So one, I think, I think as the year went on, I think the meetings got, I don't know, I think it felt like we were talking about some things of more substantive things. And maybe it was because of the aforementioned, we spent a lot of time on elections. And that's fine. I think as this may be the only time, so I'll have it recorded for posterity. I think Arna O did an excellent job leading the meetings. It's probably the first day or last time I made a compliment in, but I thought you did a good job. And I think, you know, I think, you know, getting the agenda is going to facilitate people through that. I think that was all good. I thought overall, the community felt, I mean, the TSC felt pretty good. I mean, like collaborative, I think a lot of people spoke, people more, some people got engaged across the opinion. So I went back to what we were looking for. You know, I mean, you know, people talk about things like, we do a lot of stuff on inclusion, diversity, whatever I think, you know, one thing about inclusion is actually has nothing to do with race, whatever. It's really do make people, you know, well, they feel comfortable speaking, right? And I think, I think I felt pretty good that the TSC was became like that. It wasn't dominated by any small group of people. I think, you know, I'll reflect on some of the comments that I'm about to rehash some of the ones that I think, you know, and I'm not actually like, you know, picking on Tracy or even you've been on Chris on the side. Everybody says the word community. And, but I think what's happened is, like to me, and I know you said this before too, like what is the hyperledger community? Well, I think maybe there needs to be a separation between community and projects, you know, if the community mission is to champion the use of, you know, the use of blockchain for things beyond, you know, whatever public, it was for enterprises, right? That was the original mission, right, in the statement, right? Was, you know, and maybe it's changed, right? But if it changes, then we should change the mission or more clearly do that. And then I think align, you know, things to it, right? And I don't think you're ever going to have, I'm not sure like you mean, I'm not, you know, there's not a picking on like Chris's comment, but I'm pretty sure that whether it was conscious or subconsciously, you know, or it was a conscious decision that people just tacitly accepted, we aren't about creating a single thing from a project or product perspective. That shift sailed. So, you know, I don't know that someone who want to change it back to that, okay, but I don't think that that's the goal, at least not in my, I don't think that's thing, but I don't think that that's very clear. So to me, then it would be like, what do you have the, you know, TSC do, right? If you wanted to get, because the one thing missing about, you know, TSC says technical steering committee. We don't really do much technical here. And I know Arnaud will say, Arnaud's always been serious like, hey, what do you have for a topic, Gary? And I'm like, well, nothing. But so I can take my time on that too. So I mean, Arnaud's pretty fair about that. But, you know, maybe we need to talk about, so if you go back to the original mission of enterprise blockchain, and I think Tracy said this when you mentioned like, what other things are maybe missing? So if we're supposed to be, you know, multiple project technology or whatever, I don't think it's necessarily the job of the community or the TSC to justify what each project does, to talk about each project, to discuss like every project. I think projects need to talk about their project, each project, because that's what should happen, right? I think we can have people who facilitate getting people in contact with the right, you know, projects. It's like, hey, I wanted to work on this and I don't know that and I think we do a good job there. If we want to have, so that's where, I guess I'll leave it at that, but maybe the job here isn't so much about this goal of there's never going to be, I don't think we're on a mission to have a unified stack of technology or a whole bunch of stuff that works together. I don't, I just don't, unless we restate that as a goal, I don't see it happening. I think the more goal is, you know, it's a place where people bring technology for, or that they think can help, you know, on enterprise blockchain or what it may be. And maybe that's how we have to, you know, redefine the qualifications of what things people will evaluate as projects. Is this a tech, is this a type of technology that we need? Is this a problem area that we're not addressing? If it is addressing an area, is it okay to bring it, right? Is it one of those areas we focus on? So I'll stop there if that makes sense, but that to me just seems like the mission has changed from what was originally founded way back when. And I don't think that all of the organization has come along with it. All right, thank you Gary. Nathan is next. I'll echo the sentiments that we've gone through a maturing process with our know-it-the-helm in terms of helping us to do a lot of things better. In particular, I think the project report changes to where we're not doing an interactive readout, but we have written reports that we all have committed to reviewing before the meetings has helped tremendously. It's made us a lot more efficient and it's opened up space and opened up space that maybe we haven't used as well as we wish now that we look it back at the year. I think that we tend to remember and think a lot about the administrative minutiae and the kind of the legislative quibbles that we end up having on the TSC. And it's kind of, the burden needs to fall on us to try to fill that time with more technical topics. I kind of like what this long-term agenda WikiEntry talks about in terms of maybe moving or bringing back some of the architectural discussions that are in some of the working groups back into the TSC as a way of kind of bringing some of those discussions to the forefront of maybe the, and getting more mind share beyond those who normally can attend some of those other working group calls. I think there's a lot of other ideas like that that we could work on to try to better facilitate the community, especially where some of the tools we used to use to do this were primarily the hackfests and some of the in-person meetups that some attempts were made at restructuring maybe some successfully and some not so successfully. So I think that's something that's on us to try to set an agenda that's not just reactive but that's doing a better job of facilitating the contributors instead of just writing down rules or setting down train track in terms of guardrails trying to pursue what is it that they would find the most helpful? Cause like others have said in this commentary, everyone could just take their code and go do what they want. I mean, it's all open source license. We could all go our separate ways if that's what was the most useful but I firmly believe that that's why everyone's here at Hyperledger is because there are things here that are useful that are extremely helpful towards getting things done and doing what we want to accomplish. And our job as TSC is to try to maximize that. And then Arnold comes back and says, so where are the agenda items to help us support this? And that's exactly what we need to hear and we need to step up and do a better job of. All right, thank you. Dan. Yeah. I was told that there would be cake. Mark, ask if there would be cake. Oh, okay. I feel like that wasn't communicating very well. You can have your cake and eat it too, Dan, but not real cake. Oh, geez. Well. It's all right, Dan. Didn't mean to get your hopes up. So I think I just want to say thanks to Arnold for running everything for the year. I know it's, at least I've found it difficult in the past to make sure that there is a well-structured and useful agenda and I know it takes a lot of work to do. So I appreciate him doing that. And I think part of me stepping away is that I've had a lot of opportunity to influence direction here. And I hope that the next group that comes in, whether that's people who have had that opportunity and they're bringing that experience forward or it's people in the community who haven't been involved yet that, if you're coming into the TSC, that you're doing that because you've got some energy and some excitement about setting some direction and addressing some of the issues that we've all been talking about here. And so, I look forward to those people being successful in that role. That's all I've got. All right, thank you, Dan. I see no other hands up. There are a few people who haven't spoken. I don't want to put you on the spot. It's okay if you don't want to say anything. We have a few minutes left. I don't know. I do want to say one thing, of the top of my head out of all the things that were talked about, the reports, I do agree that I think having them be handled mostly offline is definitely streamlining the calls. At the same time, I do think we need to do a better job because back to what Tracy was saying, we seem to not have a clear picture on the actual status of those projects, at least in some cases. And so, I think this would be our recommendation for the next TSC, in my opinion, is to have another look at the report and see what can be done to improve them. And for instance, and I think I've touched on this in the past, but we never really implemented it, is the link to the insights. I think we have this tool now, and I think it would make sense to have a link to the insights page, corresponding to each project from the report, so you can actually see what's going on with some of the GitHub repo and so on. That would be helpful. And I don't know if there's other ideas that could practically improve this, but I think this is definitely an area we should improve on. Chris. Yeah, I just wanted to comment on the points that Gary made in thinking about it. So, yeah, I agree. We're never gonna get back to what I... The original purpose was to build one thing and have a community and an ecosystem of stuff around ship is sailed. And I agree with that, but my point on the community is really that we aren't sharing, we aren't learning from each other, we aren't sort of realizing, oh, we're both going off and building the same piece of capability. How could we build it in such a way that it could be useful in multiple contexts? We had a couple of fits and starts with that, with like Transact and so forth, but they didn't pan out because, again, it's not really a community, it's just a collection of stuff. And I think, if I think about what the community is supposed to be, it should be that we should be learning from one another. And yeah, maybe it's, oh, and here's a better way of doing something, that's fine. But this isn't, it just doesn't have that feel, doesn't have that feel. And part of it is maybe because this past year, we couldn't be getting together for quarterly meetings because I thought that the one we had in October was actually really pretty good and pretty productive, but not being able to follow up on that, I think has been a shame. But I still think that we need to figure out, and maybe it's Fisher-Cut-Bait, maybe we figure out there is never gonna be a community, there's never gonna be any kind of collaboration between the different groups and they're all off just doing their own thing. And if that's the case, I guess, then maybe we need to change how we position it and market it. Yeah, so on that point, I do want to remind people that we have made a decision for the RFCs in the projects to be publicized outside of the project. And I don't think this is really happening. So maybe we need the TSE needs to take another look at this and see how this can be better implemented. And I do also think that the lack of contributors meeting or access, whatever we call that doesn't help for sure. But there are certain tools we could use that would work offline that we are not necessarily using properly, at least not to the full extent to facilitate this kind of cross-projects collaboration. And as an addict, I want to say about this idea that we're not gonna converge over one project. I can say that in one of the member submit session I was on, somebody said, why can't we just all converge towards Bezu? And I was taken aback by the question and I realized, okay, that's not going to happen. And at the same time, you have people who are indeed completely unaware of the other projects. I had somebody said, you know, I just discovered all these other projects. I came for this project. I mean, this project actively working and using this and following the developments, but I didn't know about any of the rest. And so I think there are a lot of people with blinders and then it would be good to see if we can try to at least, you know, get some of this off so that there is a bit more of a general community working together, even if there's still different projects and that for the most part they are not converging. All right, we're almost out of time unless anybody has any final words they are burning to say, I think we can close on this. I'm going to thank you for your leadership over the last year and I wish you well in the future. Thank you, Mark. Thank you all. I actually want to thank everybody here on behalf of the Hyperledger community, whichever that is, right? I think, you know, I know for one that, you know, it's been an honor to serve. And I think, you know, some of you guys are not going to be there anymore for sure. And I'm thinking of people like Dan and Chris who've been there from the beginning and Chris in particular, I don't know if everybody is aware, we all, Chris, you know, the fact that Hyperledger is even here because he's the one who called Jim Zayden five years ago, a bit more now I think, to get the whole thing started. And so I think he deserves a lot of thanks. So with that being said, I'm ready to close the call. Thank you all. Talk to you soon, I hope.