 Okay, so we were discussing the workgroup charters, so next week we can hopefully talk about discussing, maybe even vote on the requirements, which I think may be the last one. We were having a discussion last week, and I don't know if Morali's on or Jim, but there was discussion last week about the guys in the various fabric SDK projects figuring out whether there's still a need for a working group, or if it's really just sort of an umbrella project of fabric. And I don't know, is either Morali or Jim on and have you guys had that discussion? It sounds like not. So what we should do with this, Todd, is I'll send a note to the Manly Lester of Mine people. Sounds good. About that, and we can deal with that next week as well. Okay, and Todd tells me that we do have been on now, so we are at CORE, is that right? Correct, yep. Okay, hopefully everybody that was previously on is back. Oh, and I lost the agenda, so Todd, could you display that again? We had discussed last week about archiving all of the slack history from the public channels into an archive repository, and so I think we just need to take a quick vote on that in a moment. And then Todd's got a discussion for the internship program, and I think we should maybe think about potentially setting up some sort of a small temporary working group to review proposals and have the TSC, you know, give recommendations to the TSC. Next week we'll hopefully be a very busy week because Tamash was going to give a presentation on the GSL today, but he needs a little bit more review, and he wants to make sure that it's the best that it can be, so he's asked for another week. And then we have a request that Gary Singh sent to the mailing list yesterday, requesting exit from incubation status for hyperledger fabric, and that Google Doc is, again, it was sent to the list, it's linked in there from the agenda. There are some missing people from the TSC, and I feel awkward about asking for a discussion and a vote, given that some key participants are missing, and so I think we'll defer that for next week, but I would encourage people to review the proposal, and if there's comments, questions or concerns, do that on email, and hopefully then we can either come to the meeting next week with specific things to discuss or, if necessary, we can work in the interim to try and approve the request. Anything else that anybody needs to or would like to add to the agenda? Okay, hearing none, I guess that's it. Access planning, so. Yep. So, like Chris said, I think we're looking at East Coast in the April timeframe and then likely June in Beijing, we'll have some other activities happening in Beijing in June as is. LinuxCon Beijing is happening for the first time this year. We'll be having a Hyperledger track at that, potentially a Hyperledger developer day, something like that, so we're looking to take you back onto that. But for either of those dates or locations, if you have venue space and are potentially interested in hosting, please get in touch with me as soon as possible. I would like to get these nailed down pretty quickly here so people can make travel plans and these arrangements if necessary. What is the date for the LinuxCon in Beijing? One second, I'm going to have a look. And somebody is typing on a very loud, clicky keyboard. Let's see, it is June 19th. Oh, no, sorry, it is on the second. It looks like June 19th and 20 is when that's happening. All right, I know I've made a commitment to be in Brussels on the 28th. I just want to make sure it wasn't conflicted. Okay, I think Brussels is my 2020 Europe. I believe so, yeah. All right, so, you know, as Todd said, if anybody has any facilities, so we're thinking, is this New York? Or how about Boston? That's another possibility and then we can get Greg to actually come to one of those. Yeah, I think folks were fairly open on that. It just sounded like East Coast generally. So New York, Boston, Jersey City, what not, all around there is good. Okay, so again, if anybody has some possible space, I think the criteria is we need to have space for about 75 to 100 people. How many did we have at the last one? Do we have the final talent? Yeah, we, there were 80 plus that registered. I think the max we had at any given time was around 70-ish. Yeah, okay. All right. So that's the access planning. And I think, you know, in all fairness, I think we should probably look to try and nail down early April date within the next week or so. Is it, Todd, could you put a doodle poll up at least so we can pick a date? Yeah, sure thing. And that would be good. Okay. We talked about the charters and we've already covered that. So then the other one is the creative slack archive repository based on the, again, the archive discussions. You know, the question is, do we do this and bother or with the, you know, is everything in the archives ephemeral and therefore my bother? I guess is really the question before us here. Yeah, I think there was a question about how much can we archive or just whatever we currently have then probably it's not as useful. Well, I mean, if there was a question about how far, apparently it's all of it. Right? I mean, you know, while the history was dropping off and you couldn't search in Slack while we were all very active there because there's a 10,000 method search limit for the freemium account. When you do leave, you get all your history back. So it's all there. Oh, in that case then it's useful because I do have some stuff that I wanted to, just like last week and of course there's no way we can get to it. So if we could get that then that would be very, very useful. Okay. So I agree with this. Yeah, the question may be raised on it can tell me, but when I try to actually browse through the Github repo where the archive has been put, I couldn't actually see the documents. It's when I go to like the fabric dev, the channel archive, the HTML version at least it says, sorry about that, but we can't show the files that are that big. So I don't know, is there another way I'm supposed to access the HTML version? If you uploaded a document, you're talking about uploading documents and stuff like that. No, I'm about just looking at the archive. Oh, really? So I think we should, and so I don't know, Rai, are you on? I see Rai in the participants list on the meeting. Maybe he can tell us more about what exactly is there, what are we supposed to be able to do with what's there? There you go. I hear you. That's surprising. So there is the JSON export, and all I did was use a tool to combine the JSON files and produce HTML. So if the HTML is too large to load, I guess I could break it into smaller pieces. I'm not sure what file is too big to load. Well, it's a GitHub limitation, I guess. I mean, how are you supposed to access this? Is there a different URL I'm supposed to use? Let's be clear. I'm going to put it in the chat. There's a URL I'm looking at there. I put it in the go to meeting chat. Can we just clone this locally? Yeah, you can. Like you don't need to browse through github.com. No, so the difficulty is that it is, the native format is just a bunch of JSON. It's all in there. If you go to the raw directory, and so the HTML directory, you'll see exactly what the export is, and it's pretty brutal. So I'm thinking, Rai, that maybe the thing to do is not a GitHub repo, but actually just to host the HTML with an index. My hope was that at some point there would be a better way. The tool to do this raw to HTML is not great. And I was hoping that at some future date, someone would have a better tool. We can go ahead and find a way to host it. Well, I'm just thinking, I mean, because just hosting the raw HTML, you don't get HTML rendered when you open that up. You actually have to, you have to tell, you don't have to fake it out somehow. So I think if we just hosted this through, you know, Antonics or something. Does Nexus let us host just HTML? Completing about the size of the file. That's why it's showing raw 4.28 megabytes. Yeah, it's a big file. Which is why it's a shame that we don't have access to it. But I think, you know, going back to the question on the agenda, I'm totally in favor of restoring these archives and making them available. I mean, so, but in its current form, it's not quite, you know, as useful it could be, let's say. Yeah. Okay, well, let me try to refactor this in some way that it's better to use and I can look into getting it into Nexus. You know, I would really like to make the raw archives easily available. It is only, whatever, 70-ish megs of stuff. So it wouldn't put any big strain on our Nexus setup, but... I think it's GitHub, which is complaining. Not because it's too big. Yes, I agree with that. All right, so, Rai, let's work on figuring out a way just to host the HTML. We can keep the files around in Nexus or whatever. I mean, in fact, we could keep that repo as is for, you know... Or that, yes, right. But you need to find a different way to access the HTML so that you can actually see the rendered HTML, that's all. Right, right. Okay. Okay. Cool. Okay, so then the last step, so we'll defer any formal vote or anything. I think everybody is generally in favor of the idea of keeping the archives, especially if it is all the way back. So we just need to find a good way to do that. And then finally is the internship program. So, Todd, do you want to remind people about what this is about? Yep. And then let's have a discussion about how we manage the process. So just as a quick overview again, we have funding to host six interns. We called for mentors over the last few weeks. Who would volunteer to help mentor the interns as well as provide some project suggestions that the interns could work on. We received 12 proposals, which is fantastic. Happy to see that. But we are only able to bring on six interns. So what we need to do as a next step is figure out a format just to whittle down the 12 mentors and projects that we have down to six. And then from there, it'll be pretty easy. We will launch this on our internship portal that the Linux Foundation has across all projects and start calling for the interns to apply for this. So I think the only question at this point is just to figure out the best format to whittle down the proposals, whether the TSC reviews them, whether we just form a small lightweight group of people interested in reviewing those. But defer to this group on how best to whittle those down before we post this publicly and call for people to apply. And Todd, this is Leonard. To make it more democratic, we don't just quote on it and whittle it down to a short list. And then you can take that to a select group within the TSC to make that final decision. Just a thought. So, I mean, we could, but then that sort of means that everybody has to look at all of them. And what I was thinking of would be more along the lines that we would have a smaller group that would do the work of looking at all 12 proposals and coming back with a proposal for the TSC to approve. I mean, we could do them all. We could review each one as a group here and discuss them all. I'm just thinking that would take a little bit more time for everybody as opposed to maybe getting a group of four or five of us together to do that. Let me ask this. Are there any volunteers for pulling together a small group of us to review the proposals? Volunteers? Well, I think in the vote and sort of reps that we have on the call in addition to any of the non-votein members, I think I would be interested. Leonard, can you just send me your email or post it into chat? Do that, man. Any others? If we don't, then what we'll end up doing is... We're all going to be doing this. It looks like Victor is happy to review as well from the chat window. There's a heart as well. That's five. That sounds good. Cool. Again, if anybody else would like to, again, I'm happy to have others. Okay. I can get a note off to the people that raised their hands, and then that will just include what the proposals were so people can review them. Why don't we try to get that done before the TSC call next week just so the TSC can then approve the six, and then we'll get that posted just after next week's call to have interns apply. Does that work? All right. Let me just check my calendar here. So very quickly, how about Tuesday morning, 9 o'clock? What do we have? Victor, we have Bawa, me, Leonard. You're in the U.K., right? No, I'm actually in Canada just across the border. Oh, you're in Canada? Oh, okay. So we could actually go a little bit later, and then that way, Hart would not have to wait after the cracker before dark. Yeah. I visit occasionally. But again, I'm mindful of the fact that we have two in Beijing, which is what, 12 hours now, or is it 13? What time is it there now? Okay, ouch. Hart, would you be okay with 9 a.m. Eastern? He fell off his chair. It wouldn't be optimal. Okay. Okay. Chris, is the idea for everyone to discuss in this call, or do you want folks to review independently? Well, I think we should review ahead of time, not review them on the call, and then we can have a short call. Why don't we do that? How about 9.30? That would be... Okay. Have a half an hour call, 9.30, and we'll just go through and hash through any concerns. So we won't be reviewing them, you know, one by each on the call, but we will go through and do a pre-review and then come prepared to make decisions. Sound reasonable? Yes, it does to me. Could you send out a calendar invite at the end, Todd? Yes, will do. Thank you. Awesome. All right. Thank you, guys. And then with that, again, so next week we're going to have a busy week. We'll have the request to exit incubation for fabric. We'll have the digital assets discussion on the global synchronization log, and we'll have the intern program sorted out and voting, and we'll hopefully have something to talk about with regards to the requirements working group and fabric. So busy week next week. All right. Thanks, everyone. I'll give you half an hour back. Oh, have a great day, everyone. Thanks. Thanks, Chris. Bye.