 The recording has started. The floor is yours. Thank you, Ryan. Hello everyone. Welcome to the TSE weekly call. This call is publicly open to anyone to participate and contribute. We do ask that you familiarize yourself with the antitrust policy. The antitrust policy notice is currently displayed on screen if you have the screen. There is also a code of conduct that you should be familiar with. And with that done, you're welcome to participate. So we have a fairly light agenda, although I see people at the last minute adding more announcements, so we'll see. But I think we don't have too much on our plate, so maybe we can have a shorter call. I wouldn't mind. So let's get started with a bunch of announcements. So who wants to get started? Call for mentors and projects. Is Min on the call? I don't see Min. I mean, that's basically it. Yeah, would you put... Yeah, but anybody wants to talk about it, right? I will. It's basically the fact that the mentorship program is getting started now, so the calls open, the emails have been sent out. One of the things that we would really like the TSC to consider is reaching out to everyone in your groups for submitting the mentorship projects, because we're at that point first, where we're doing all the different projects, and you can sit there and see the program description and the schedule posted. So the first push is for the projects, and then later we'll be pushing for the interns themselves and the review of the interns, but this is the time to get a lot of really good stuff done. This is how Dave Huesby got in, a lot of the did work done, some of the ERSA work done, some of the Explorer work done. So if there's anything that you have that's a good project for an intern to do, to do some additional work that maybe your project needs, this is the time to submit those and start working with men on creating one that's a doable chunk of work for an intern. So can I make a request about the the program, and maybe we just take it back to Brian, I don't see him on so maybe he's not here, but one of the things that I found out sort of recently was that the mentors aren't invited to, or they weren't sort of invited to the global forum, you know, where the mentees were. I'm not saying to pay for it, but I do think that it would be nice if it was made clear that, you know, we want to make sure that the mentors and mentees get to meet each other, because I think in many cases that won't have been the case. Just a thought. I like that idea. At least, you know, let them have free admission to the global forum, maybe not pay for the trip. Right. You know, at least to have, I think, you know, in this particular case, it was that, you know, they didn't get a talk accepted, and there was no sort of formal invite that they could show their leadership as to why they should go. I fix that, but I think it'd be nice if that was part of the program. Again, just it can be a paper, you know, nothing more than please do come, right? You know, that you can show your boss. All right. Thank you, Chris. Sounds like a good suggestion. Silona? Do you mean for the next thing, or? No, I wanted to know. I mean, is that, can you convey that back, please, to the team? Yes. I'm writing it down in the notes right now. All right, very good. Thank you. Any other questions on the mentorship program? Or comments? Otherwise, Silona, you can carry on with the SIG and working group. So, the announcement that I put in was talking about the the Hyperledger Global Forum that's happening in March, and especially to the technical community on the fact that we're doing kiosks for the work groups and the projects. This is kind of a time for some of those people that didn't get those talks accepted about their projects or their work groups to be able to have a small lightning talk about it. It's also a time for being able to introduce your project to people. We're also doing Birds of a Feather tables, which is basically a time to be able to lead a discussion at a table during lunch. So, talking to a lot of different people about what some interesting Birds of a Feather might be. I want people to think a little bit beyond just like taking a table for their project for every lunchtime, but it's dead sitting there and thinking of a topic for each day that kind of inspires people to come over and talk to you more about your project. So, you know, like for URSA, one of the things we discussed was not just having a table about URSA, but on one day sitting there saying, you know, why you should incorporate URSA. You know, what are the ways to go through and do it and things of that nature so that you can have a little bit more targeted discussions because otherwise it feels like it's just a table for the URSA people to hang out with and instead it's an invitation from the URSA people to the other projects to come and discuss topics with them. So, we're doing that and then the last one is we're in the process of hiring a professional videographer and his team to come in and record videos on Thursday and Friday. He's also going to be doing some B-roll and stuff on Tuesday and Wednesday, but the focus on that is to be doing introduction videos and so this is a really good time for what I want to do is on YouTube. I would like to have a playlist for the greenhouse where basically each of the different projects, each of the different work groups, each of the different sigs get to come in and record a two to five minute video about who they are and how to get involved so that we have a bunch of different faces, a bunch of different people saying what makes their thing special to encourage people to come and participate and all of those the sign-up pages are linked off of the wiki page that I attached in the notes. All right, thank you. Are we still going to have another like, I remember last year spinning in something that felt like speed dating type of session. That was actually pretty fun to participate in. Yeah, there is one of those. It's the mentor mentee session that's a global forum. I think it's like a clock in the morning on Tuesday, is it? Oh, is that the mentor mentee? Yeah, that's our speed dating thing. Okay. Not to be confused with the summer internship. Exactly. Yeah, okay. Any questions for Osilo now? Yeah, one question. Hi, Selene. I know we're going to chat tomorrow as well, but two things. One, on the on the kiosk, what is the staffing level? Should we be trying to man project kiosks or the kiosks for the whole time? No, we're only basically having the kiosks being open during the breaks because we realize that that's too hard on some of the smaller projects. So that was one of the things that we talked about on that is that it's a little bit too difficult to have that. So instead, that's why we're doing the presentations because it's it's just too much to man booth 24, the entire event because then you can attend the sessions and you can't do all of these other different things. It's not really big enough for that yet. Okay, perfect. Another question. On the birds with feather tables, particularly breaking up the projects, and there's a proposal for a cross-project one. I know Sean is on this call at the moment. He's working now with a grant on a Solidity compiler that compiles various eWASM targets and there's various bits of WASM work going on in borough. So it might be interesting to have a table that talks about some of these emerging WASM targets that can be run in different chains, which would include include fabric and sawtooth if they've upgraded on borough at least. That's perfect for the boff tables, Silas. That's exactly the kind of thing that I'm looking for is for those types of crossovers and those types of kind of a little bit more specific topics that ends up engaging the developers more to come over and say, oh, you're talking specifically about this thing. I really want to know more about it. I also think it helps people know more about the different projects too when they sit there and say, oh, okay, we're having a WASM discussion where you know someone wants to sit there and talk about a particular consensus algorithm that they're looking at and things of that nature where they can sit there and or even talking about specific interoperability between certain projects like X4 or any of those, I think that's exactly the type of thing that I'm looking for. Cool. All right, thank you. Anything else? Think of this as your little bitty bit of un-conferencing time. All right, Erie Nhan, let's keep on moving. I think, Dan, you inserted the DCI survey stuff. Yeah, so we mentioned this last week that we've launched the survey. We were planning on sending out a notice to all the mail lists but there's some obstacles to doing that and some reasons that it would be negative to do that. So what we're asking instead now is that if you are a chair of a working group or CIG or you are a maintainer of a project, if you could notify your respective group. I put some example texts, so it should be easy to just cut and paste that into an email and send that to your own list or you could speak to that during your next meeting. And if I kind of run down the list of participants in this meeting, we've of course got pretty good coverage over all the projects. So, you know, Gary's at the top of the list there, so Gary if you wouldn't mind sending that on to the the fabric list and Ruan, I see you on there, if you wouldn't mind sending that to the saw tooth list. Bobby, we spoke yesterday, so I won't run down the whole list here but I think you all know who you are and in many cases there's just one of you from one of the projects or working groups. So if you could just self assign yourself that little task of pushing out that email that would really help what we're trying to do in the DCI working group. Any questions? Are these are just being collected for something the purpose? This is our main way of measuring the community health at this time. So there's demographics in there and feedback about your experiences in engaging in development and forums and events. What we want to do with that is be able to see where we're weak or identify where we have problems that we were unaware of. Thank you. Man Dan, I'll do this for you because I'm impressed in the way you presented this. You sounded like very professional. I'm seriously impressed, I was still engaged, I forgot you assigned something to me. All right, thank you Dan. Let's keep on moving then. That's it for the announcements. Looking at the quarterly reports, I put back the identity working group because VP was on the call last week and I wanted to give a chance to say anything but I see he's not there either. So I don't know if anybody else wants to speak up about the identity working group. I didn't see any further comments or questions on the report. So it's kind of the last chance but if anybody has anything, now is the time to speak up about the identity working group report. Otherwise, there was also a report from the SoTooth project that was published. Thank you for doing that. I looked at it yesterday. I don't think there was anything salient that ought to be brought up to the TSE. So unless there is anything anybody wants to bring up now, we'll just leave it at that. So the only one thing and I didn't add a comment, I thought about it a couple of times and then chose not to but if you go back a second to the end, I think it showed that there's like 104 commits for the last quarter. That's not a lot. Yeah, I can go back and double check those numbers. Yeah, I mean it just seems really, really low. So the previous two, I don't know if that's just looking at one repo and not all of them. Yeah, I'll double check that that went across all the repos. I do know that. It seems like not a whole lot of activity. I know you had a release and so forth but it doesn't show. Yeah, this is Mark Dan. I went through the different repos. I may not have captured it correctly. I know you've run reports in the past. I might have missed something on that but you know even though it shows even that lower number of commits, we did have some fairly significant ones especially as it kind of indicates near the top from the the ellipsa tooth and stuff like that. And then the release. So I mean that might be part of it as well but if you want to double check Dan make sure I didn't miss it. I didn't have your your magic reporting at my fingertips when I did it yesterday. Oh, okay. Yeah, I've got a script. I can run for that. Okay. All right, thank you. Anything else? If not, I guess we can move on. I won't say anything else about the upcoming report so that then highlight that we have a list and online. So please keep an eye on that and see if your project is due for a report. On the discussion topics, I thought you were going to add in the repo. Yeah, so I wasn't sure if your response was kind of... Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I think we have a chance that we can talk about it. So let's get after. I'd like it. Okay, first I wanted to resume the discussion we had last week on the replacement of the major releases with promoted releases. And there was quite a bit of discussion. I let it drag on a bit because we didn't have much else on the agenda anyway and I thought we could maybe make some progress. At the end of the call I have to admit I was a bit confused and started wondering whether even though I had liked the idea initially whether we were going on the wrong path there and especially because it seemed to be hiding processes where we do not have one today and you know there was this kind of mismatch between how things have been working, where I heard I mean we've said like communication when it comes to marketing, marketing doesn't ask us permission and I don't expect them they will and then Dave said well for the security artists I can't afford to wait for the TSC to give this green light so I always anticipate I'm glad so far I've been always right and but so you know I was like okay maybe maybe that's really the problem is not so much in how we define promoted releases and what comes with it so these notions and I had so I updated the the proposal with a cleaner definition of what a promoted release is based on input from I think initially Tracy had some input on the TSC channel and then Hart submitted some text to the comment I kind of chewed on this and put together something that was a bit more concise but is very much in the spirit of what had been discussed and then the key thing was you know in the original proposal I had suggested we just keep the approval of a promoted release to the TSC which kind of implies there's a formal process somebody else a project has to go through they want a promoted release they have to come to the TSC the TSC go through some review check that the criteria have been met and then say yes or no and then I figured well maybe we don't need that last part and which would be at odd with how things have been working anyway and so what I propose is now what I changed the proposal to say basically is to say the list of criteria that we narrated from first major release remain the same and but they're really to be used by the project to know when they are entitled to a promotion of their release and then we don't have to have this vetted by the TSC actively through some you know review and explicit approval but that can be left to the team to figure out and you know I think it's in line with how things have been done and I mean I haven't heard anybody say this process has been abused we need to put an end to it and I'm all for lighter process where possible so I have I got the feeling that maybe that would solve the problem and so the proposal remains to change major releases to promote release with the added benefit that you know project can have major releases independently of their status so they specifically you know any incubation you can have promoted release for major releases or not it could be a minor release that this gets decided to be promoted and so it kind of untie those two things which was the main idea initially and but again we just don't have an explicit approval from the TSC for promoted release so that's the fundamentally what you know I updated the proposal to try and convey and we can discuss with the you know the text that I put in actually conveys that properly or not but I hope it does but that's the crux of it and since I only did that yesterday I'm sorry but I'm kind of sick so I haven't had much time to work on this earlier on but so I didn't want to put it as a formal decision to be made now although it seems to feel like okay this is the right thing to do I'm happy to have a vote but otherwise I just wanted to put it as a discussion item to see if that kind of addresses every pain points or if I miss something that we need to discuss further so any reactions that works for me so who's deciding so this is so the the hyperledger staff just decides what's a promoted release essentially yes and the marketing team and yes the staff I mean the projects have to request it of course right I mean that's typically how it's been done okay can we say that in the proposal then that the projects request it that the projects request it from the hl staff yes I guess we can add that explicitly if you think that's necessary to me it's just a little bit confused now because it still reads that we're replacing the term that is a milestone that the TSC decides upon but then we're getting rid of the TSC decision point right but I think that the you know we we do have criteria that you need to go through and do a security audit and so forth and but we're leaving because those are staff functions the scanning and the security report audit you know requests and so forth are all part of this and the marketing part is all covered by the staff that we sort of I think we provide that as sort of guidance to salon and team to make sure that all those things were done but you know to heart's point I think adding you know an explicit statement that you know project teams you know maintainers or whatever should request of staff for a promoted release I think that makes sense so would the TSC still be approving the first trying to avoid saying these exact terms so active we prove active and incubating that's right once the project is active it's assumed I mean because one you know part of the discussion that we had you know back in the day was that a lot of the criteria were overlapping and then heart pointed out where they were a little bit inconsistent which right which led to this whole discussion right so we you know we have some criteria for becoming active right go with it once you're there then you should be doing all the right things and we don't need that criteria we just really need the you know you got to have a license scan security audit Can I this is Angelo can I just have a comment to better understand what especially the last the last paragraph so when we say that promoted releases are not limited to major releases anymore even that we are now changing the meaning of we do changing the meaning of major release so major release before was something for hyper ledger now well it's because of what is now for hyper ledger yeah Angelo it's because of the semver technically you know semver defines you know the the the numerology there as if you get a you know the first significant digit is a new number that's a major release but it could be that you really just had a breaking release you had to make an api change to fix a bug or whatever you don't really want to sort of you know go to town with marketing and everything else you just want to make sure that the community of people that are using it realize oh there's a breaking change in here potentially however there are also circumstances where you use the significant digit really as a marketing tool right and that was another part of the discussion where when you get to some sort of milestone and you want to sort of emphasize that right you know that you give it a new number like windows three you know and or windows 10 right but i mean windows seven went you know to 10 right it's just a number right but it was Marcos this i guess okay just when we it was what the means major release with this one with lower letters so first of all there's a difference between major release with lower letters a major release with capital letters just in passing the the sentence to me sounds okay which may which major releases which concept we are referring to when we say promoted releases are not limited to major releases because major releases has an understanding for a hyper ledger as it is now but there's also another understanding the one that you were describing i yeah let me explain angelo the lower case versus uppercase major release i think at least my initial thought was okay we're replacing something that is labeled as major release with capitals currently it's that's the way it's documented so this gets replaced with promoted releases with capitals once you've done that there's no notion of major release with capitals and so i just talked about major release with that capitals all perfect no no this is it's clear this clear so the major release with all low letters is exactly the concept that chris was explaining so that to me is clear and for me it's fine this formulation and by the way so to clarify on or add to what chris was saying one example for instance where you might want to have promoted release on a minor release is in case of a new lts so in fabric we had 1.4 was lts so you could say a fabric 1.40 and maybe we'll have fabric 2 i don't know 0.2 or something like this going to be a new lts maybe we want to have promotion about that and it's not a major release per se so there are cases like this and part of the goal here is to really untie those two things so that there is more flexibility for projects to decide where it gets promoted but doesn't but so then back to your point i don't know if you're satisfied with what chris said i mean i no i'm fine i'm fine i'm fine it's it's all clear and the formulation is fine i mean i get the full meaning i want just to clarify this point the difference between capital letters and low letters but it's clear now the difference okay thank you and and dan are you yeah well i'm just weighing in my head whether it's a better use of the tsc to be involved in these milestones or if it's better to stand apart from them yeah i mean i saw a question about what what is the role of of the steering committee i feel like if the steering committee isn't going to be involved in this i kind of wonder why it's part of the project lifecycle it feels outside of the true project lifecycle right which is proposal incubation active end of life because you can promote releases at any point along that then right because we obviously promote it when it gets accepted into incubation we're saying that it can be promoted during incubation when it goes active i doubt we'll probably promote it at end of life but you know well okay so let's kind of wait the alternative if we follow that thought then the alternative is to just drop this notion altogether and leave it to the staff entirely to figure out the promoted releases the problem i think is we had people felt pretty strongly that they should because of the resources or the expense associated with this it should be limited to active projects i don't know how we capture that desire from the tsc unless we have that formally defined somewhere i think it's actually it's sort of in the charter i don't have to go back and look at the language explicitly but i think it says something in the charter that active projects are the ones that get you know the support you know i think you know again we were faced with the explorer team looking for a 1.0 because they didn't feel like you know as a zero dot something that they were getting the attention that the project possibly deserved in terms of its maturity from a technical perspective and so they wanted to go to 1.0 right and frankly if you know brian and and emily and jessica decide that you know it would be a good thing to sort of highlight the fact that there's this project and it could use some love then that should be okay right and you know i don't know that's my thinking all right anybody else otherwise i'm happy to you know let everybody think about this till next week and then we can have a more formal vote i don't mean to rush anybody into a decision here right i just overall think that the technical steering committee should be steering the direction not doing the oversight very very hard governance you know we're a steering committee let's steer set the direction and let things go i kind of like that mark okay what does that translate to mark though in this case and i'm trying to interpret what we're just saying i know i have some guidelines right we set guidelines we we we steer the the technical direction of hyper ledger then we have a little favor of the pirates of the Caribbean is that a statement in support of the proposal that's all for no one to know i don't i don't think you agree i'm trying to understand what mark is saying seriously like last week i don't know what a years means and what a no means but i think i don't know the technical steering committee should be involved in deciding what's what gets promoted and what doesn't i don't see that as our role so the proposal says that then i'm for the proposal i mean say nice i think we might have a role anybody else just think we might have a role in assessing whether a project meets our standards and that's what this milestone would would you feel more comfortable dan if part of the process aside from requesting the staff to promote a release um that there would also be notification to the tsc of the intention and it's not a mother may i it's um you know assuming that you know the staff follows through we're requesting this to be promoted and if the tsc members want to sort of say hey wait a minute you know they can do that at their peril i mean maybe that's the answer i don't know yeah that that might be it all right guys so again the week is up please feel free to comment we'll look at it again next week unless somebody you know raises some major objections or requests for change i my plan is to put it for vote next week and see what happens so that's the end of the official agenda but in preparing for the agenda i mean yesterday i was i reached out to chris and says so what's up with the repo structure and he he kind of made a joking response which left me confused as to whether it was really for prime time or not but it sounds like chris would be happy to bring it up now so yeah i apologize but i was juggling 15 different things so i didn't get a chance to look back at our chat but um yeah i mean i made a proposal um that i don't you know again i think you know i just wanted to sort of raise awareness i you know sending it around the horn and try to get people to see it but i don't know if they did because there weren't any comments but essentially i'm proposing that we use the tool that rye um found at the to-do group that called repo linter that goes through and it checks to see do you have all of the things that the to-do group recommends as best practice for your open source project and that looks at things like do you have a license and is it a valid license and do you have um you know uh contributing guidelines do you have maintainers list and so forth and um and so it does a pretty good job of that there's a couple of things i think it needs to be tweaked like for instance when i ran it against fabric it didn't find the azure pipelines yamble file because it was looking me in a different place than where we had it and so we may need to do some little tweaking there and then there was a requirement for a notices file and i think that you know certainly notices is probably something we want to add but even apache doesn't uh require it um it's it's strongly recommended but um that said and there was something else that it was looking for that i think we could uh oh it was it was looking for the presence of uh issue and pull request templates which is a good idea but i don't know if it's recommended uh required but i think that if we could you know sort of net out to my proposal of the things that would be required we could use that and the community architects or the maintainers of projects could run it against their um tool they could put it into their ci for that matter to make sure that they have all the things and um and that takes care of that piece of it and then the the sort of the possibly the more difficult piece was the code of conduct piece in terms of what is in the code of conduct i think right now it's looking for an email um and that was something we have to work through uh because we were basically pointing to a wiki that has the email um at least in in the fabric project but then we have basu and others that have a slightly different code of conduct and so i think getting to agreement on what is the code of conduct for hypervisor projects is a separate issue that you want to probably keep separate so okay chris yeah um do you think it's uh i i'd like to i think propose that we create a lab that forks the repo linter and then we can make the modifications to the oh it's actually it the modifications are just a configuration file yeah but i don't know the last time i looked at it you couldn't specify which configuration file it was only one configuration file right so i'm thinking that if we had a hyper ledger specific one i think there was a flag but i i'll double check you may be right yeah i mean i can't remember it's been a while since i actually played with it i'll i'll take another look i thought there was a flag that you could specify which one as there is a default one and then there's actually another one in there but so so i mean maybe it's worthwhile that's just then to create the um the configuration file if that's the option right now have a hyper ledger configuration file that we then uh come to agreement on yeah so i remember seeing a couple of comments from dan i believe who is disputing some questioning some of the the requirements there yeah there that's i did mention that i mean it's it's currently listed in there and it'll give you an x if you don't have one i agree most of the larger projects probably do want one um but even the patchy does not require it um it's recommended and you know when you put something out as a product then your product team will work with legal to get the right notices and license and everything else i'm sure they do but um i mean it's a bit of work though to put one in there and i guess you can just put a file in there and say yeah we're working on it i don't know so this is dan from hyper ledger basu um i want to echo Dan Middleton's last comment i do think that at least security code of conduct should be required content and i almost wonder if license since we specified apache too if you should also require license to have not just present but specified content content uh yeah we we do i think that's configurable because there is a check for the license so i think sometimes when we have compatible licenses then those get listed in a way that we couldn't necessarily have a single file that shared across the projects but otherwise the apache file is already a standard file so if i'm not mistaken that rye if you're on yeah there you are you're still here yeah i'm here i'm i'm not saying anything security did you but you did security didn't you i i did uh yeah i kind of sprayed security dot md everywhere um it's the same everywhere and i got feedback on the wording not being fully awesome and i haven't done round two okay because i wanted to have the same totally not awesome file everywhere instead of getting it you know diverge another thing i do when i create these repos is i add the apache to file from github i just click the it's apache to license and add it to the to the repo but i have i have noticed so number one nothing that we do is looking at those files to make sure that that file is the same um and i've seen a couple times where people will bring in code that tries to modify that and it's always you know just like line endings or something like that right and so yeah i i don't really care a lot about keeping that file and you know totally perfect but we're not watching it either so someone could come in there and replace the license with gpl and so and well you think you are because when when you do the license scan that pops up right in fact we found one just here today but that's not real time right no it's that's right i mean it'd be nice if the whole thing was real time sure um then there's then there's the the other issue which i think was what dano was getting at uh which was the the the difference between the the bezu coc and the hyperlider coc and i think that's you know that's another issue i don't know bezu i'm all for aligning it i just want to do the change once so we can get by and from all the maintainers once and it'd be nicer if there was a single this is the file you put in and this is what's covered with it so i'm you know i'm not you know stuck in the mud about we have to do our code of contact i'm fine with that but i want a standard template that we go through once so we don't have to go through it every time there's a minor change we could do that right right now it's in it's actually in the in the the wiki it's one of the tsc documents the one that marneau coin set every morning uh that we get together but like the literal file what i said i want a file that we put in the file that we have in the fabric is just a a thing that says our code of conduct is over here please look you know i don't know but as far as a repo i don't think a pointer to a wiki was really sufficient i think it should be embedded in the history of it here is the statement of our code of conduct follow this for people who randomly browse it they're more likely to actually read that then they click on the link to a wiki that's what i was wanting is an actual here's the boilerplate like you do with the lepachi license tech this you would need to put in your repo is part of it so dano um the code of conduct hasn't been changed in a long time and it's actually given to us by um linux foundation legal so if you did want to copy and paste it out of the wiki um you know like have the link and then have a copy and paste i think that should be okay because of the fact that like i said it doesn't change often it's it's a linux foundation um thing and so it doesn't actually go through that very often it hasn't changed since i've been here yeah i don't think the lf doc i've been here about five years and i don't think the lf doc has changed the only thing that has changed uh was the more explicit uh wording around uh it's not it's not even in this document it was uh event doc being a specific thing so yeah but there's no like you know this is the file the text format like you again with the patchy license that says you know put this file in i would just have to copy it and format myself to my city uh i i don't we could do a dot github file i yeah i hear i hear what you're getting at and i think that is a perfect uh a perfect thing to do is to have like one file and everyone agrees to it and when you make a new repo it shows up along with the other boilerplate files yep yeah that makes sense all right guys i think we don't need to get into more gory details now it sounds like we have a pretty promising uh path forward on this issue i'd be happy to let the group the task force figure out the last few details and then have a formal decision made next week if possible is there anything any reason not to proceed as such so was there an action then to set up an example repo as a lab that has the decided no what tracy was suggesting was would that we fork the to do groups project and modify that to meet our needs i i took sort of an action to explore that because i think you can just set the property for what you want to use as your config yeah so we probably want to run this through the project maintainers so that they're not blindsided by it and they'll be more accepting of it i i could agree with that so if we've got that config file set up somewhere for them and everybody can see that it doesn't make the the world burn down i could also run it against all the project repose and come back with a report that says here's what it found when i you know and then we can share that and have the broader discussion i guess well that would be super nice of you yeah all right very good i'm glad who's who's at chris ferris's house right now it's definitely not gary it must not be crazy we haven't heard any doctor marking there's no that's right yeah okay so i just want to remind y'all that i'm taking notes and i'm putting that down okay so committed all right so that's the end of the agenda we have a few minutes left i'm happy to close early obviously but if there's anything else anybody wants to bring up before we close so now it's time to speak up i don't think you're really happy to close early because you said this earlier and you didn't close yeah well but that's how it is all right with that and if all we have is gary giving me a hard time i'm going to close it now for sure i succeeded all right thank you all for joining then talk to you again next week thanks gary bye