 Okay, let's start. Hi everyone. I suppose that many of many people have already seen this presentation, so I will try to go through the slides rather quickly, so that we can have a discussion at the end. So, we started to work at this plan during the late spring, because we realized that it was necessary to improve the way that LibreOffice was released, it was not just released, but described and communicated in the market, as there were and there are some issues around the software and the sustainability of the project. So, we started the plan with some key points. The first one is that LibreOffice is technically the best free office suite around. And that we are also the one that better supports the open standard format for office documents, so DF, which is the only through open standard available in the market today. And we want to improve the positioning of LibreOffice as provided by TDF, but also to support the foundation activities and also support the ecosystem companies. So the objective of the plan is not only to improve the way that we are marketing LibreOffice, but also the way that we are marketing it together with ecosystem companies. Some of these companies release products which are not always branded as LibreOffice, but it's important that they are associated to LibreOffice to strengthen their brand, because we have probably as LibreOffice a better recognition in the market. So, associating for instance, online and mobile products to LibreOffice is, I think, positive for the ecosystem companies that are releasing this product. For instance, we receive several requests from people looking for mobile and iOS version of LibreOffice. And at the moment, there is nothing that there are LibreOffice based product, but not a product that has the LibreOffice name or is associated to LibreOffice if they search for it. Some numbers, so looking at it, developers sponsored by the ecosystem companies provide 68% of all activity and volunteers 28%. And we can probably say that the 68% of provided by ecosystem companies is also can be identified with the biggest feature which has developed. And volunteers activities can be identified with activities on the user interface and localization, quality assurance and activities which are instrumental for the quality of LibreOffice, but are in many cases not directly related to source code development. Based on donation numbers, 90% are from individuals and 10% from small and medium businesses, maybe there is a 1% from large businesses, but it's not visible at all. And based on estimates, less than 5% of LibreOffice Enterprise users contribute in any way to the project. Including buying any kind of product or service from ecosystem companies this is especially bad. If we look at the long term sustainability of the LibreOffice project. The plan does not touch the following point, which is a change of the document foundation status a change of LibreOffice LGPL MPL copy left license a change of features for whatever version of LibreOffice and a newer different or commercial version of LibreOffice from the document foundation. In the slide deck there is no mention of the above points and so this is not for discussion, this is not going to change. And if people have perceived that a label associated with LibreOffice would have been a change in this direction, this is just was just the wrong perception we have explained it multiple times, people have continued to push forward their wrong perception. It's not constructive to discuss on topics that are not under discussion. This some background information so of course since we have launched in 2010 the both the global open source ecosystem. And the office with ecosystem have evolved, especially in the open source ecosystem there have been discussions about the relationship with business using open source without contributing back to open source project there are some extremely large business who are doing this. It is legitimate if you look at the license, it is not legitimate if you if you consider that you are using those software strategically and therefore you should support the development of those software. In 2014 the art fleet bug was a turning point to raise the issue of open source sustainability. There have been discussions in 2016 at the egg ball as published the paper rods and bridges that you'll see unseen labor behind our digital infrastructure, which is more specifically about open source software used in large infrastructure deployments. And in 2019 trees we third as publish a blog post balancing makers and takers to scale and sustain open source, which is more focused on development of end user facing facing software. If you don't know this, these documents, I think they are very interesting because they the ideas in these documents are supporting the entire discussion that we are having. These are some excerpts from trees buitard. I think that people that have seen the the the document I've already are already familiar with that. And I think we there is defines the the two different position on makers and takers. Of course, it even even this is not pleased about the fact that there are many, a very large number of consumers of his product which is Drupal, who are not contributing back in any way to the to the to the system. The ecosystem. I think this discussion is is very interesting of course is not the focus of today, but I think that following the discussion can help in understanding better where we are. In response to the situation there have been some toxic solution, not based on the open source definition. So, two of them were proposed by the either me care. She's a lawyer, and they are the common close license, which was proposed by ready slabs and the server side the public license which was proposed by and it's used by MongoDB. And there are examples of licenses that are not respecting the open source definition, although their ethical principles are have to be respected like the apocratic license. Which is about the ethical use of open source software. But there is a, there is a merit in discussing this kind of evolutions, not the evolution where basically you, you make the software proprietary by maintaining but tweaking the open source license. And then there is a fair source license proposed by the community. All these are not really open source or free software license. As I said, there might be interesting evolution in considering some of these license for in for an evolution of the open source definition. But of course an evolution that doesn't prevent people to use open source software otherwise it's not open source anymore. The off the street market has changed the desktop productivity is basically flat online mobile productivity is growing. There is a growing attention for the topic of digital sovereignty, which is not related to off the streets but is related to document standards. In the next 10 years, desktop productivity will probably continue to stay flat. My might slightly grow. Based on, for instance, work from home or remote work as there will be an increased number of personal computers using off the streets. As we have seen during the recent lockdown. But this is not significant in terms of market share percentage, while online and mobile productivity will continue to grow. And digital sovereignty will become pervasive is at the moment. I think we have just scratched the surface of the digital sovereignty topic. I see an increasing interest in in this. And I see an evolution, a positive evolution, not only in the in Europe, but also in other geographies. And which are the LibreOffice stakeholders, community member. They have an high personal involvement that in their role, either completely or partial volunteer to for the project they and they give a high project value. So, because it's the project they are contributing to. And then we have the user. They don't have any personal involvement. They use the product as a free. And they also do not consider office read as a as a strategic product because they are a commodity and they've been a commodity for quite a long time. This gives more or less the graphic gives an idea where the involvement versus value are in term of positioning. The LibreOffice project as a is a large community where there are two elements, the volunteers and the ecosystem and these are, there is a super imposition of the two areas, quite large. And I would say is maybe is larger than this maybe smaller than this. This is just an accommodation for the for the graphic. Let's look at development the last two years. These are the companies. Probably people is already familiar with this. And so volunteers and companies which are outside the ecosystem are contributing for around 28%. The other percentage is done by companies in in who belong to the ecosystem and several of them are also members of the advisory board of document foundation advisory board. These are all contribution is not just code. These are based on the dashboard so contribution is are all that are possible to to parts. I think that quite a chunk of localizations are missing. Because we only commits to the to the source code are considered while there are many people who are localizing but are not committing the changes as the changes are committed by one or two people in their community. For instance, if I look at Italy, there is a group of probably around 15 people working at localization and just one person committing because this is a decision of the group. The leader Walter Moora is committing all the changes from all the other people so there is a number of people of core contributors that are providing almost 80% of the the the activity. As I said the activity is not 100% but we are working to to close the gap and and have this contributor on contribution chart to be as close as the reality as possible. Then there is around 25% of regular contributors regular is on a weekly basis so they, they are very close to be core. There is then a large number of casual as more a larger number of casual contributors that are from a monthly to really every now and then contributions. They are contributing only 5% in some cases this is this 5% can be extremely important because in some cases for instance. Some security patches are done by people highly specialized but not contributing on on a regular basis so this kind of graph of charts has to be interpreted with some using some common sense because is not a representation of the perfect representation of the as I said we are trying to improve it. But there are some things that are not represented here and are still very important. So, these are comments on on that. Of course, a consequence of all this is that without contribution from the ecosystem, LibreOffice would not keep up with user expectation. Of course, a contribution from the community are extremely important but this is to say that it is important to have contribution also from commercial companies to the source code of LibreOffice. And also because enterprises ecosystem companies that are selling LibreOffice Enterprise product are paying in fact the majority of the development. So the development is they can pay developers is not that they are paying for any other reason that the fact that they're selling a product gives them money to pay the developers. And of course, it's very important also the percentage of development provided by volunteers. Which is not easy to calculate in terms of value economic value because this is free time of people so the economic value can be extremely high in some cases especially for people that have families and other activities and they are donating to LibreOffice a valuable part of their free time. This is more or less the evolution of LibreOffice ecosystem so between 2010 and 2014 there was a growth of ecosystem companies probably also based on the enthusiasm after the announcement and the fact that at the moment LibreOffice and almost no competitors in that field. And there were from 20 to 60 full time paid developers. So while from 2014 and 2017 some ecosystem companies left and the number of full time paid developers has decreased. And from 2017 to 2020 the number of ecosystem companies is more or less stable. Maybe the number of full time paid developers has decreased a little bit but not as much as it has decreased from 2014 to 2017. Where are we today? The community is growing. We are reaching more and more countries more and more native language community. The ecosystem is not growing as much as the community is probably not as easy as to grow the community to grow the ecosystem but it's something that we should work more at. The relationship between the ecosystem and the community are not ideal and this should be solved in some ways. Of course the ideal way would be to sit around the table and in a rather large group and discuss openly about the issues. But this at the moment is not possible but even if it's not possible we should find a way of educating more both sides about the respective expectation. One of the issues is that all the new members in the community or most of the new members in the community are not aware of the roots of the project and they may provide enthusiastic contribution but in some cases they also can create frictions. It's not their fault. The fault is probably that we should mentor or we should devote more time to mentoring people that is new in the community and explain what we expect from community members and what we expect from ecosystem members. So we have to develop a new strategy for the next decade to support the growth of the project. I think there is now a project going on and we should have some new announcement in this area during the next few months. The unique selling proposition of LibreOffice is the best free office suite ever. Baked by a strong community and a strong ecosystem. We provide the standard document format for interoperability and digital sovereignty although this is not understood in the market. On the other hand I see more and more questions rising from the market about the opportunity of continuing to deploy and use the Microsoft Office format. We provide the best of open source. We provide professional support for organization using Office Productivity for Production. So although this also is not extremely well understood by the market so we have a couple of points where we should and we have to improve our communication to the external world. Office suites are mature products so they are a commodity. They will not decline as long as PC exists but they will be increasingly considered a commodity and therefore a collateral product. We have to identify LibreOffice versions. As I said before there are companies that are releasing products based on LibreOffice but not carrying the LibreOffice name. So we have created, we have already started to use an ingredient, a so-called ingredient brand LibreOffice technology. We started with the LibreOffice 7 announcement. And we will move the focus of announcement from specifically the document foundation although we won't forget that we are all part of the document foundation. Also because there is a misunderstanding in some cases and the document foundation is seen as a software vendor so we will try to defocus a little bit from TDF announcement and use more the LibreOffice project announces by saying that the LibreOffice project of course is part of the document foundation. The LibreOffice technology ingredient brand is similar to the concept of Intel Insight. We cannot use of course LibreOffice Insight because Intel has patented the association of Insight to a brand name. But using this ingredient brand can help TDF promote commercial products because just by saying that we promote the LibreOffice technology we are supporting commercial products and by using that name we don't have the risk of being accused of supporting for profit activities. We have also to differentiate the product so the product will use a label. The label is not product name so we are not going to change the LibreOffice product name but we will associate a label. So far we have used the informal Vanilla label to distinguish the LibreOffice released by the document foundation from LibreOffice released by others including Linux distributions. This is something that is still open for decision so there is a discussion going on and the discussion as a deadline on November 15 and if necessary there will be a vote by TDF members about the best choice for this lab label. We will also clarify that this version of LibreOffice is supported by volunteers and is suggested for use by individuals, small organizations and non-profit NGOs. Of course this will not prevent this version being used by enterprises but we will have to use some moral suasion to avoid that enterprises do not ignore completely the need of supporting the ecosystem by using a professionally supported version of LibreOffice and the LibreOffice enterprise is also a label for ecosystem members and the tag will be that it is professionally supported and suggested for production environments in enterprises and large organizations. So of course this alone doesn't guarantee that all enterprises and large organizations will switch to this but we have to educate them and convince them that they have to look at the ecosystem for their needs. From my experience, the two or three larger migrations that I've contributed to in Italy have always ended up in having a contract with one of the ecosystem companies because we insisted with them and we insisted in some cases for months. We always remember to these companies that they have to buy something or at least to talk to ecosystem companies to find a solution for their needs. The solution as in some cases, for instance for the Italian Ministry of Defence, they have chosen to have the enterprise solution for a percentage of their users. Those who are using LibreOffice on a daily basis and still use the free version for another percentage, but at least they are investing money in the LibreOffice ecosystem. And we have to provide a consistent message to that. These are some examples of course. This is also open for discussion and for suggestions by the ecosystem members, individual members or companies. Once we have decided the name, we will improve the download page and we will create a LibreOffice community section on the website. We have a lot of community developed support resources and they have to be more popular than they are today. Many people have suggested to use the community label. Community Edition is just a buzzword. It's not absolutely decided that it's going to be called Community Edition or X Edition. It was a term used during the discussion. In many cases, the Community Edition is the feature limited version of open core projects. So I see a risk on using Community as a label because LibreOffice is a full feature version, so we should avoid using a name which especially amongst the users, not in the open source community, but amongst users of the product. And we should always remember that LibreOffice is the open source project, probably with the largest number of users around or one of the open source project with the largest number of users around. And which in many cases is not comparable in terms of numbers with the number of real users of users of the majority of open source project. Of course there is a brand Iceberg and the different relationship we have with the brand gives us a different perception of the code, the name that we should use. But we should remember that this is a name or a label that will help users in understanding which kind of version of LibreOffice they have to deploy is not something that has to please community members. It has to improve the positioning of LibreOffice in the market, which are two different objectives. For LibreOffice Enterprise, they will probably, we have already registered some of this, they are not active yet, but we are ready to have a specific website where we can promote all LibreOffice business related products. We have a LibreOffice Enterprise ecosystem linked in page. All project members are encouraged to become members of this page. This page is something where we would like to see announcement of all the ecosystem members. So starting from TDF to ecosystem companies to developers of extensions to people that is writing manuals or guides or I don't know what documents to help people use LibreOffice. It's a page to show that the ecosystem is dynamic and moving fast. Of course the LibreOffice, the ecosystem members should work to do with the TDF to make the best use of the LibreOffice ecosystem label. And this of course is not something that we can influence as TDF, but we are absolutely positive in working together with the companies to provide a solution to the current situation and improvement of the current situation. Okay, this is already clear. And as an example, we can, the product announcement can be XOffice is a product of the LibreOffice Enterprise family or something like that. And in this way we would associate the brand names of ecosystem companies and the LibreOffice brand with a mutual advantage. LibreOffice Online is a challenge, we know that there have been evolution recently. I think that we still have to find a win-win solution and what as the current situation is not a win-win solution for anyone. So let's try to find a win-win solution, which is good for everyone. Of course the naming should be similar to what is proposed for the desktop version to have consistency as well. And these are of course the same slide as before, these are examples. LibreOffice Mobile, there are a version of LibreOffice Mobile that all versions basically are not using the LibreOffice name. And I think that this is a pity we should have a way of having these products being recognized to be LibreOffice Mobile versions. Because we receive quite a large number of inquiries and therefore being able to make it clear that when people are looking for instance at app stores for mobile applications, if we use the LibreOffice technology tag somewhere, it will be easier to find this product and it will be easier for users that want to deploy LibreOffice on mobile to adopt one of these products. And this again is an example of what could be used. To support all this, we should develop testimonials and case studies. We have never worked so far with ecosystem companies on this, but I think that once we have the appropriate areas where we can publish these stories, we should work with them. And we should also work with join up to have these testimonials used and linked on the European Union open source resource database because this would give visibility and would especially at political level in the European Union. Last thing, we have seen that work from home has been a positive thing for LibreOffice. There is a general consensus on the fact that the number of people working from home will increase over the next few years. The pandemic has been an accelerator and as demonstrated to many companies that were not confident on this model that this is a sustainable model for many businesses. So as the impact of having work from home is a positive impact on the fixed expenses of large companies. There will be an uptake of work from home in general. And also school will implement something which is similar from work from home in a, in a, in some way. Just to support the, the, the concept of work from home. The number of laws specs PC sold during the, the, the lockdown has increased in a huge way in Italy we are working with a small Italian PC company, Microtech, they are, they, they are installing LibreOffice on all their, on all their machine, including Windows machine. And just before probably they were lucky because just before the lockdown they announced 199 euro laptop, Windows laptop, 199 is end user priced. And thanks to that laptop during the next, the following six months, which means from March to September, their increase in the market has been over 1000%. They, they were the probably they were nowhere in the, in the, in the list of Italian PC manufacturer and now they are number 10, and they've sold something like 60,000 of these low spec PCs, while their record for on, for previous years was to sell 12,000 PCs in 12 months. So, this is a proof that work from home is a positive trend and we can leverage because of course LibreOffice can find a place in on that. So we, I think we, we can launch a work from home campaign, maybe immediately after the announcement of 7.1, which is combining the effort of TDF and ecosystem companies to have results that are positive for everyone. Businesses are planning a similar campaign so why we should ignore the opportunity, of course, might not be easy to, to, to develop such a campaign but I think we can have very good results. The timeline for this, we will announce and the finalized strategy in January 2021. We have already started to implement non controversial elements like LibreOffice technology. We will also work with the certification group to improve the mark, the certification marketing strategy, and we will announce the new strategy in the upcoming months. And I think as this plan as which was was born to solve a specific project objective as demonstrated that there is a lot of interest around the marketing and the future of LibreOffice. I think that this should be, should become an ongoing effort. I personally would like to start working more closely with developers to see if there are features that are requested by end users and could be developed within the scope of the document foundation. Distance, distance learning needs a better improved presentation module. So further development of Impress are absolutely within TDF scope mission status or whatever you want. But only by having a development and marketing working together which doesn't mean that developers have to do what marketing is telling them but is that we have to listen to each other, which is something that we have not done very well during the last 10 years. We can define a plan for the evolution of LibreOffice which is better for anyone and is a plus for the, for the project. So I finished thank you. There are, there is time for discussion questions and I hope everything was clear and my, my talk was, was rather clear. And I will shut up now, but I don't hear anyone raising ends. So I imagine people are going through the slides and let everything settle down a bit and just maybe to emphasize again that the discussion about that is taking place in the public marketing list. There's concrete timelines for all the documents, all the discussion is taking place in private, not in public, of course, and that you can take part in that if you want to read through some of the slides, if you want to read through some of the documents that is all available. I think it's quite a lot of information you need to process and parse. So feel free to participate in a public discussion. Just as I would add a last remark from myself. At the moment, I'm not participating to the discussion on the marketing list. But this is on purpose. Because I would like to, I think I've, I've already written and talked too much in this. So I want to see all the others, what they're saying. And so I gave myself kind of veto to to discuss unless someone asks a specific question until the end of October then I have 15 days where I will become an active part of the discussion. Of course, I, I can agree or disagree with, with, with positions, but I, I think that only by working together, we can find a solution which is positive for everyone. And I think that we can really find something that is answering all the, the needs. And as usual, I think that if I could see 80% of what I desire being satisfied I would be extremely happy. And I know that I have to give up 20% because otherwise we will never, or at least 20% otherwise. We will never get along on a common path. Yeah, Christine. Good job. Thank you for your speech. I just had a question about if, if you'd had any discussions with any of the ecosystem companies about Libre offices, expectations on contributions and, and if so how those discussions when basically the ecosystem companies are part of the community so we have ongoing discussions with them. Of course, the discussion happened at different levels. So on between individuals or between organizations. But I think that what we should aim at and I'm confident because the, the, the interest that has been raised and I mean just by the fact that 32 people are listening to this talk is confirms that there is interest. The interest that has been raised by this open discussion on marketing that we never had before. I think that confirms that there is, there is a lot of ground to go for the, the project in terms of marketing to help each other. With each other, I say to help ecosystem companies with commercial objective and ecosystem members with volunteers objectives to reach a consensus on on something that will allow both parts to create and develop and sustain a better product. So I think it's a, it's a challenge is not might be not completely easy, but I think we have to accept the challenge and, and start working together a lot better than we did in the past. Great. Thanks. Any other question. I mean, no disagreement on any disagreement on what I said, I'm amazed. It's been like a month to go for discussions and no sure, but I give people the time, but I think there's, there's no no definite outcome done yet. We presented the status quo and you saw there are quite some discussions happening. Also, for example, in the last board call, and on other venues, and as such. So, it needs some time to settle the go to especially during a really packed conference week. So, I take this as a summary of the ideas of the problems we try to address. And then let's take that forward also on the list. Yeah, sure. Of course, the, the, the flights will be available after the conference in, we will publish them on, I think, somewhere I still don't know where but I, we will make it clear where people will be able to access the slides. So, what's the plan about repo office online. As I said, I mean, I don't have plans. I think we should discuss to have a plan. At the moment we don't have a plan. We are, we are taking decisions which are not part of a plan. Of course, they are part of a plan but not of a common plan. They are part of a of a plan by one of the components of the entire picture. So, I think that about online, we are missing the a common plan. And I don't know what can be the outcome of a common plan, because if I provide my ideas that would be my ideas and, and, and of course I would like to avoid that at the moment. I think that everyone has ideas. And so let's discuss this. I think we have to find a solution, which is better than the current situation and it's better than the previous situation, because both the current and the previous ones are not optimal ones as I said, I don't think that the current situation is a win win situation as it as the previous situation was not a win win situation. Therefore, I think that I can make my, I can put my ideas on the plate, but I would like to see other people otherwise it's not a discussion, it's a solo talk. Yeah, I'm was somehow surprised that in the first lockdown, there was no initiative to get online more prominent to schools and organizations. And so most of these organizations picked up teams office office 365, whatever, and of course zoom and we were not able to gain any market share. I think that's possibly a mistake. I think we did grow in market share a fair bit as LibreOffice online derivatives. But I don't know about market share we grew in terms of a number of seats and next cloud and then cloud and various other companies were driving LibreOffice online based solution left and right. So, you know, I think that's clear. The good thing is that that resulted in not just more users, but more funding to improve the software. And I think it's very important we don't focus on growing our user base of the cost of funding any work on it. I think that's an addition from my side, Lota speaking here. Dennis, perhaps you have observed that there were since February March when the lockdown came in. There are also discussions on these issues, which lead us led us lead us to the marketing activity plans. So, as you have observed that there were such discussions for coming with such a marker plan. And we want to have a holistic plan for it within these LibreOffice online decisions or packages and so on. So, and then discussing this and now with with decisions from from parts of the community, we are at a new point of this discussion. So we need some more time to discuss this. And everybody is is is part of this discussion and should bring in ideas, but I advise not to to do something hectic. Do not the same thoughts as others do and think about moves and think about decisions and take all in this discussion and and no plague mailing no argumenting in the sense of if you do that I will do that this will be not good. And I'd love to continue the discussion but I have a talk on the history of prehistory prehistory of LibreOffice, just right now. So I shall head into that, but thanks to a good present. Okay. Okay, because this was, this was just a guy I want to ask something. First of all, I'm really pleased to see the idea of use of centric marketing, dripping in the argumentation of the new market market plan. What, what I presumed all the time was looking at the numbers you have in the collaboration is doing most of the code commitment at all. So, maybe this is wrong, but those code commitments collaborative and those developments and code development collaborative. They decide not by themselves what they do, but I think the most of the code decisions are made by customers who just come along and say hey, here's a bug and you have to have a service agreement and go on and fix it. Or we like to have this new function and we will pay you about six euros a dollar for that implemented. And I, I always had, had the picture that most, not all of course, but most of the development and most of the code collaborative brings into the project comes out of those activities. And so you could say most of the code comes out of user centric needs because users, users obviously need that so much they pick a laboratory to do it. So maybe this is, this is just a short circuit or short thought but this is always the construction I had in my head for that. And by this is also also an idea which I missed totally in all this discussion. They get money from their customers to do that much Cody. This is what they are paid for. And this is the business model of Collapora, of course. So, I'm a little bit, let's say, I draw a little bit back on the argumentation they do so much for the code base they have to be respected more or they have to have more. I'm not sure this is this is an aspect I, I miss in the discussion a little bit. But maybe I'm wrong. I don't know. I just don't know. And because I would have loved to have Mike here. Okay. I don't think if the idea is clear I had something now, maybe someone. Anyway, I agree with you on, yes, of course, companies like Collapora, they, they are paid by customers. But of course, but we have a larger end user base than just Collapora customers. And as I said, improving impress doesn't seem to be the objective of many paying customers of Collapora. And there might be a reason because presentations are probably niche application. So there is a lower request. While impress needs probably some love. And maybe we could either present a plan of user center feature and ask companies they're willing to put some money on on that. See if this user centric or requested feature are in line with TDF mission. And if we talk about education impress is definitely something that is used for distance learning. We want to make a better LibreOffice for distance learning, we can probably invest money, TDF money on this topic. I don't know. I mean, I think let's be open in the discussion. The fact that we have never had a user base marketing is because we were organized in a different way. But I, if after 10 years we realize that this organization has also created some issue. So maybe let's change slightly this organization gives some space to end user base marketing, at least in terms of discussions and then we'll see what happens. Maybe we fail completely or maybe we are successful. I don't know. But let's try. But what I see is at the moment discussion shifting from not growing the user base by features the users like to have, but growing the community. And this implies, of course, at least some amount ignoring those users, which are in terms of your presentation, just take it. And, and putting the focus on makers. And this is this is totally other direction to move. So this is also discussion we have to have. Yeah, but if we don't have users, then we will not have a community over the long term. If we have if we have half users we have now we would have also the same community. Probably yes. Relatively robust model. Yes, but if we increase the number of users and I don't see any, any reason why we shouldn't not increase the number of user. And maybe we can, we can become stronger in terms of community as well. I don't know. I mean, we, we have 10 years of history behind our shoulders and we have been rather, you know, blocked on on a model. And I think it's time to review the model, and it's time to start discussing on many point of view, including the fact that developers are developing features but sometimes they may not have the, the, the good, the, the right idea about the future of the product and developing feature by opportunity which means I develop only the feature that I'm paid for is maybe it's not the best solution. Okay, I think I have to leave to look at the other stuff otherwise my recording that I don't know if it works but will crash. I'll see you in the next video even gently. Thank you for listening everyone and see you as soon as possible. Really, apart from Emiliano that I can see you're close to Milano, but all the others are more difficult. Bye bye.