 All right, anyway, I think I got everybody let's go ahead and get started First off thank you to everybody for the flurry of activity relative to or related to all the AIs we had You can see from all the ones that are crossed off. We actually went through quite a few There's still some that are left open, but the list is shrinking fast. So thank you guys for working on that. I appreciate it First up is a new Yes, so about the action items. I have one that's You know produce a common presentation Can we take it off of this list if I open a issue and get up? Sure. Yeah, just some some way to track it. It's all as needed. Yes. Okay. Great. Thanks. Yep. Yep Yeah, I guess I should ask are there any questions about the AIs? Or any comments people want to make I Forgot that I had the first one, but the second one is open This one Is this a did I miss that? Oh, you commented on the PR. Oh, did I? Okay, then do I Let me move it up here and Cross it up then. Thank you, sir. Um, if you give me if you get a chance. Can you put a link here to the PR? Just hope you'll have it. Thank you very much All right Next Community time so for those of you who were not at the face-to-face or and who may not have had a chance to read the meeting minutes We decided that we wanted to do a little bit more of an outreach to the community. So people who are not regular to this phone call But who do want who want to provide feedback or input in terms of their use cases or use of cloud events? And so this is just an opportunity for people who don't know usually join our phone calls who are Who are basically what caught people, you know, but in the broader community to bring up any issues comments concerns, whatever To the group at large Hopefully we just won't take up too much time That's why we're going to schedule 10 minutes if it turns out we have a lot of feedback from a lot of people Which is actually a good thing that may end up having a dedicated phone call But for right now we want to start with just 10 minutes on the weekly call to see what kind of feedback we get Unfortunately, I don't see anybody new on the call So but let me ask the question or is there anybody on the call who isn't a regular but is from the community Who would like to bring up a topic for discussion? All right Okay, we'll move on then. I suspect we may need to Broadcast this out to the broader community. I do think I sent a note out about this though Yeah, that was kind of putting people on the spot there. Maybe there might be something at the end Yeah, that's fine. You can circle back around at the end. Yep So if anyone has anything to to talk about as a user of cloud events not necessarily just a spec writer But someone who may have a use case or may have tried it or is it working with an implementation? Yep All right, and if I forget please remind me to go back around to the end of the call All right next up. I had an action item to ask about stickers and t-shirts So I did reach out to Dan con and he told me that next week We should be giving me a a coupon code in order for us to order stickers I don't know whether that's an unlimited number of stickers or not But when I get the coupon code I'll let you guys know so we should be able to get some stickers fairly soon t-shirts, unfortunately The CNCF will not pay for those because we are just a sandbox project We have to be a little bit higher on the totem pole in order to get them to pay for t-shirts for us However, he did point me at a particular company which I assume he's using the past because he recommended them so What we should probably do is at some point discuss whether we wanted to get together As a group to order t-shirts because I assume the more you order the cheaper it actually is So I'm not going to put anybody on the spot right now in terms of whether they actually want to Fork up or put up money to actually buy some t-shirts So think about it and now next week's call I'll do a straw poll or some kind of poll to see who's interested actually buying t-shirts to see what kind of order we can put together So at the face-to-face, I believe Austin brought up the fact that we needed to or we should consider changing the logo possibly update the font etc should that gate stickers and or t-shirts I would have thought so because that makes the t-shirts a bit um like Um unnecessary at that point I mean it depends how long the logo is going to take but let's say we had it One of the things we could do is to create a uh an illustrator file and put that in the github repo and then depending on how Coordinated we can be with ordering. I know when we've ordered t-shirts at The my for an event they can be as little as six six to nine dollars per piece Maybe that people could order their own if it's easier Yeah, well, so let's let's back up a sec. Um, Austin, I know you had you had actually mentioned that Have you made any progress on that? Have you reconsidered? Do you still want to do it? What's the current status you're thinking there? um Let's do this. I would love to take a shot at this time is just uh Time is just hard to find as always I say give me a week to submit a pr and if I can't come up with anything Um, then let's just move forward and order some stuff And if I get the pr and then we should look at it as a group and you know, I'll try and provide a few options if we like them You know, we'll vote on them. If not, then, uh, you know, we'll just move on with what we have Okay, does that sound fair to everybody? All right, not hearing any objections. You have a week. Here we go. Cool. Thank you, sir All right, uh moving forward then doodle polls. Austin, do you want to talk about the sdk discussion doodle poll and resolution? Sure thing. Um, we're doing a discussion to discuss the We're doing a separate conference call to discuss the design of the cloud events sdk There's a lot of interest in this it turns out there are a lot of companies and individuals already working on this So we put up a doodle poll to vote on when the best time would be right now It looks like monday is the most optimal time. So I think we're just going to go ahead and go with that um Have you closed out the poll yet? I think I think we'll we'll probably close it out right now and just stick with the monday So I guess this is more of a heads up that we're going to do the call on monday and the time is 8 a.m Pacific and I'll close the poll right now. But if you're interested in sdk design For cloud events, there's a github issue I think maybe duck could put it in the uh In the dock here. Yeah And there's a google dock with some proposals already I'd say don't pay attention to dugs times on his on the doodle biddy show different time zone different time zone this time. Yes So i'm gonna close it out now We're on for 8 a.m on monday and there's a google dock in there with some ideas already If you want to just start contributing some stuff and you could follow along our progress in the github issue So austin, what's the relationship between the google dock versus the issue issue two three two The google dock is really just a scratch pad that we'll use during the meeting and we'll kind of dump our Um conclusions into the issue Got it. Okay. All right. Any questions comments on that? And you'll send out the invite or something like that right to the mailing list. Everybody knows about the meeting Yeah, I I would like to be at that meeting. I didn't see the um the doodle bug or whatever it's called. Um I may I'm going to be traveling on monday and going to be in eastern europe. So I don't know what time that is that Um, I might not be able to make it but I would have liked to have been there Hey, alex, we'd love to have you and I think this is going to be the first of many Um, and we're going to do our best to surface all of our conclusions and discussions Um right after the meeting. So you'll be able to follow along and dive in whenever you have time Um, we're going to try and phase this out. You know, initial version should look like this The next version should look like this. So we're not going to like do anything just yet We're just going to decide the scope of it and you said 4 p.m PDT 8 a.m Pacific on monday Which is That's six I may be able to join But yeah, if you can can you put some stuff in the chat for where we can find the details Yeah, I think I posted it in the cloud events and serverless slack. You might just have to scroll up Yeah, there are a lot of messages in slack. Um, is that the only way we announce things like this through a slack message or It's tough. We've got a lot of places to look. Um in this effort. I also have a hard time following along Yeah, I completely missed this. Um, okay So I think I think an email might be the best way to reach everybody at this point Yeah Okay, go ahead Kathy. Yeah, I'm also interested in drawing. Sorry. I didn't pay attention to this poll. Um, so if I cannot draw our Dedicate someone To join this meeting, but you are going to bring back the um discussion, right? to this work group, right? The I stick it behind proposal that right Always and if we do it on monday, we should be able to be able to present What we discussed on the following thursday Let's go. Okay. Okay. Thank you Yeah, and just to be clear the the first meeting was only to discuss What is the scope of things that we could talk about and what do we think we should limit it to? And then after after we've figured that out we'll start doing work to Provide code or whatever else based based on that feedback So I don't think that people will be missing a whole lot on the first one. That's we just try to scope it So the any following meetings will be the same time or could could it be different time? Um, this is only going to be a one-off meeting right now We'll take our findings reported to the group on the thursday call and then figure out how to move forward from there Oh, I see. Okay Okay, thank you All right. Any other comments on this one? All right. Up next Kathy you had a doodle poll for the workflow call. Yeah Um, it's open or closed So this is in pacific daytime the time. So I just want to clarify Yeah, sorry, okay. Yeah, so this is in pacific daytime And okay. Yeah, I can show new york time. Um, so I see some Yeah, I saw the people there are two times loud very close One is, you know, eight people the other seven people Austin, I saw that, you know, you could not attend any Of the time slots Yeah, this time around those are those are hard times for me to do I really want to participate in this but I couldn't make those but I will follow closely and try and jump in the subsequent calls Oh, oh, okay. So this is just an example of the date. It's a bi-weekly meeting So Austin, I you said you cannot attend this time or you cannot attend like every Tuesday And once you cannot attend every any Tuesday or Wednesday. Oh, yeah, I didn't know that this was going to be ongoing Um, so since it is I'm gonna have to look at this again and I'll I'll chime in with uh, what works best for me Okay, good. Yeah, this is an ongoing. It's just you know, it's just an example of, you know, the time slot Yes, so what so we're gonna are we gonna pick Tuesday or did you want to wait on Tuesday at uh, 130 for eastern or did you want to Wait for Austin to vote or how do you want to Scottie? It's up to you I would like to wait for Austin to vote or any other um people who you know, who would like to vote Okay So what what's the what's the new deadline then for this vote because I do think we need to have a firm deadline so everybody knows when they need to get there How about um, how about end of tomorrow? Oops Pacific did have end of tomorrow Sounds good. Yeah And a day friday got it. Okay All right. Any questions come on to that? All right. Cool. Moving forward then at the face to face I can't remember who it was but someone brought up the fact that we forgot to actually do sort of a post mortem about the interop event so Added an agenda item for us to discuss that are there any Comments observations or anything along those lines that people want to bring up relative to the interop event Aside from Austin did an awesome job putting everything together Nothing This is rachel. I think it would have been uh, like I didn't think this at the time I didn't understand the importance of this but in retrospect. I think it would have been fun to have more Image providers like more sources emitting the events So maybe for the next demo that we do we could do that Okay, or maybe changing them together might be the thing to do just like show more of the um process I didn't understand what an interop event was but now I I think this was a demo from kubicon Yes Maybe we could talk about this in in planar language like the I don't know the kubicon Event gateway demo. So I I felt um, like we missed out on that Open Vaz community really would have liked to have been a part of it. Um Somehow we didn't get the message and we you know, we used to working very late notice With a few hours. We can turn things around. So for the next demo, it would be great if we could find a way of being inclusive with it Well, it's it has been Three weeks of work that we all did together and the door was open the whole time. So I don't know Well, we have people we have people in the course as well But um one comment was that it was only decided that the last minute or With a few days, I did I did three weeks of work on it And all in public with public repose Maybe the takeaway is to message it to people that might not know about it next time Well, we can't do more than just have it on the call every week and say, hey, we're doing this work and come And I mean, there were a ton of people joining. It was all happening on the on the slack So it's hard to see how much more we can do there, right? Okay, it's not a criticism to you clements. It's just uh, it's just something that we noticed Just like the um the call For um designing the stk like that was on a slack message. So it's just um What if we just try to make sure that going forward Uh announcements about meetings or anything, you know, I think big like this is put out on the mailing list I know some people like slack, but I feel like not everybody's actually watches slack very closely But mailing lists should show up in everybody's inbox. What if we just assume that's the preferred mechanism for getting The notice out about something. Is that okay with people? Yeah, that sounds good. Yeah, I like that because I don't have the gigabytes on my machine to run slack Different I also added that we found out twitter wasn't the the best Presentation vehicle given that they we've worked locked out Yeah, we we've had that with the color eyes for a number of times I don't like you automating it Yeah, okay anything else I think it might be worthwhile actually Developing a similar demo, uh running rss or something like that as an alternative So we can actually validate it well beforehand Who is that speaking This is louis. I was proposing that we uh evaluate rss as a way of demonstrating the uh showing the demo Uh and try it out well beforehand Yeah, that's something that we actually brought up during the uh face-to-face and I like the idea of of using of an rss feed for this Yeah I think we discussed it's the wrong uh, you know with the images. It will probably be problematic with rss So if we can we talked about maybe doing a single page thing that reads from a q or something But um, it supports embeddings and so that works with rss But is is it visible or you get sort of a link and someone needs to open and download and Well, you can't embed them what we didn't embed them in twitter either So you basically put an html there with a with an image tag and it will show in every rss educator Oh, okay Yeah, I'm trying to find the intern who might have some free time to put together basically a A facebook. I'm sorry not facebook a twitter light kind of thing basically to To visualize the stream at some point so that we don't have to rely on twitter But gives the same sort of net effect, but we'll see how that goes just so you guys know So two two changes that I had to do for dispatch one was Uh ensuring that we could set up a let's encrypt In order to have real certificates um And then the other was the application cloud events plus json change What was the first one again mark? I'm sorry oh, but I needed to to have a real certificate not a self-signed certificate. Yeah I'm not saying that that's a problem per se, but it was it was things that Had to scramble to to get in place. Yeah. Yeah. I definitely had to to learn how to use Let's encrypt for kubernetes Yeah, it's not it's not easy is it with cert manager. Um, it's easy when you know how So that I think that just speaks to like the preparation for the next for the next one Um, we're talking about rss which sounds um, you know, I remember that back in the day as well What about something like our our group slack? Um, if we guess get a token from the administrator, we could use that and we're all on there The nice thing about rss is that you can everybody can go and publish to a feed that they have and then you can go and pull it All together in an aggregator, which means you can really make it make it distribute it And then you have an aggregator which basis shows it all in one place Like you go read it If that would still exist But there's there are still plenty of those rss readers around you can use in a reader or any of those things rss didn't die with google reader So I feel like some of this discussion is kind of bearing into what we want to do for the next interrupt demo And let's try to focus just on sort of feedback on the on the previous one if you can um, one of the things that I would have really appreciated is like a clear deadline on uh being an event source um I would have rearranged my work So that I could actually be included in the demo That'd be good too. Yep. Good point Anything else Yeah, I've got some some Some feedback and I'm sorry for the background noise. I've got uh some presentations coming up which I'm at a coffee shop um You know, I think I think the goals That some of us had in mind and I especially had in mind for this one was Want to get some visibility for this effort want to do something that really turns heads I want to do something that demonstrates possibility um, and I think that this demo in particular really accomplished that And you know, the the room was super full. I think the view count on the video is actually one of the highest from cube con overall um, I regularly get regularly get a lot of comments and uh, you know favorable feedback on just the presentation And I think it it has people talking about it when I have like private conversations with people You know end users and just people in this space like they're I hear that they know about this so the awareness is there which is good And they're talking about it in a way that it seems like they're trying to factor cloud events Into their future plan projects and a lot of these people aren't surfaced in this group right now There's only you know, select people who participate in this in the actual working group here Um, but I hear this out out in the ecosystem now and that's and that's super exciting And then the other criteria kind of for this demo was like, how do we come up with something? That's inclusive of all the vendors in the group and that's a really really hard thing To try and rig up something like that and we actually I think we nailed it Um, so that was that was pretty neat Overall, I think you know for a first demo for just coming out of the gate wanting to get that visibility wanting to demonstrate What's possible being inclusive of everybody that's involved As long as you know, they got the memo then You know, we I think we nailed that you know up up next we got to make it real for people We got to get closer to those real world use cases We've got to get the tools the other pieces that you know are just kind of stable table stakes for using this stuff more easily like the sdk's um integrations into you know all Pieces of important popular pieces of infrastructure in the ecosystem Um, so we got to get more real now and what we do next. So that's my I think that's my biggest feedback And um, overall, I'd say, you know, given those criteria, which are hard It's really hard to get visibility get people excited be inclusive of all types of vendors I think we we knocked it out of the park there I would agree Yeah, based on what I can see effectively from my vantage point then looking out into our customer ecosystem Um, it really put cloud events on the map like people were surprised that there were so many vendors involved and Were also surprised that all of a sudden, you know out of nothing So many vendors come together and show something that interrupts and that was something that certainly customers that I've seen react either directly or via social media were Very excited by Yes, I've I've heard the same thing. Um, that's one thing to put out this Put out a standard It's another thing to do it with all of the industry influencers coming together And at the end of the day, that's probably going to be the thing that makes the most difference And we we've done such a great job with that so far. So Exciting stuff. Yep All right, any other feedback from the event The reason that we're doing this feedback is that it's Uh, actually on the roadmap for zero dot two so you can now cross that off. Ah, good point. Okay Okay, cool All right, moving forward then issue maintenance But I'm trying to do going forward is as new issues are opened up When appropriate, I'm going to try to see if we can find an owner for them Just so we have someone who can sort of shepherd it through the process I think we have actually had more than one open, but I think only one of them Actually makes sense to have an owner at this particular time So Thomas, since you opened up this one about needing do we really need both binary and structured encoding? We do want to take the ownership of that one Uh, as long as I understand like what the What the procedure is for the owner like do I just tag in people who I don't care about it? Do I just make sure I respond to comments in timely manner? It's it's more just to help make sure that something happens with the issue It gets resolved in some fashion So whether that's I mean that doesn't mean you yourself have to write the pr But as you said get the right people involved who want to have the discussion around it and see if you can come up with Some kind of pr for it if you want sure. Yeah I mean, I think it's a bit ambiguous for discussion prs or discussion issues, but I can take honor Okay, appreciate that. Thank you All right now I believe during the face-to-face meeting we briefly talked about these two issues and we agreed that We could probably close them, but we wanted to give people time to look it over So I did put a note in each issue saying if you care about this one and want to champion it Please speak up. Um, and that's they People that we were probably going to end up closing the issue fairly soon if no one speaks up So this is my way of saying If no one speaks up by next week, I'd like to close these two issues If everybody's okay with that So this is just a heads up for people. Is there any concern with Giving one more week and then closing these two if there's no comments or somebody willing does to a champion it All right, cool. Thank you guys Next um, this is just for me Jason like I think last thing is roper. I believe I see in australia. So he probably isn't on the call but he opened up I can remember if it's an issuer pr. Let me say it's a pull request for to add an event key field to the spec Now during the face-to-face we briefly talked about this and the notes Have an ai for comments myself to add this non goal of defining transport I have no idea what that means. Oh wait, um Who wrote this right here? Is that I did it? You get it. Okay, cool. So you know what it was Okay, never mind then So you know what we need to do there? Yeah, it's uh, that effectively the the transport binding itself needs to go and figure out how to go and create these These elements from what metadata it's because it's really a concern of kafka for how to go into the the partition key And we have the same scenario We have a scenario that actually layers on an existing spec where we have a now named kp binding and We need partition keys for Um event helps Or you know at least as an option to do that for event helps which uses a nkp and I would have to go on we would have to go and define Effectively a constraint over the nkp spec that says well, here's how you generate your partition key Got it. Okay. Cool. Thank you for the clarification. I appreciate it So it seems like every time someone new comes in Everyone assumes well, of course this is since this goes over a message queue It must be you know, it must include your topic. It must include your shard key whatever I wonder if there's a good place to put in like Our spec what non goals are like things that we have learned should not be here Yes, and I think the doc wanted to write this primer Intro and I think that should also have these these, you know Things we have this considered and have said we shouldn't be doing them kind of principles Yep In fact that I already opened up the pr for that and I think that it would be a great place to put this type of information because it's not necessarily normative text, but it is sort of Background history guidance. What do you want to call it? And that's usually what a primer is for So yeah, bye briefly Thomas All right Moving forward actually, uh, right relative to what you just said there Thomas. Um I don't want to lose track of your suggestion though. We do want to open up an issue just so we don't lose track of that Sure. Okay. Cool. Thank you very much All right, um Let the next one CJ I think you run the call you have very pronounced your name, right? I thought I saw CJ hold on So on this one, I have a principle court on this one. I have a principle question. Well, hold on Clemens. I see j you there Let me get it. Uh, what's mean? Yeah. Yeah, would you like to just quickly just introduce this pr and then clemens You can go ahead and make your comment So, uh, this be like that. He tried, uh, to introduce, uh, apache closer as a transport bounding for the crowd event Uh, basically, uh, we are trying to playing uh around with the crowd event Back and uh, that's why We want to see how, uh, apache closer can, uh, uh, integrate with uh, how can That be uh, one of the transport bounding for crowd events and how we can map the Uh, possible masters between, uh, the crowd events back in that way, uh, the crowd events can be used up from, uh, events, uh presentation for the Postal functions to process the, uh, uh events in the stream All right, that is the the purpose of the PR Okay. Thank you very much and clemens you want to make a comment? Yeah, so my my there's a principle question here and that is So first of all, I looked at I just looked at the binary, um transport stack of pulsar Which is effectively a four by framing preamble for a protobuf frames So i'm wondering whether there is even a pulsar protocol And and one is not like the others in that we have So far mostly all mapped to actual standards so kind of building a layer on top of things that are In standard consortiums and arguably what the pulsar team here does is effectively creating a preparatory protocol just for that project And I feel It's it rubs me kind of a bit in the wrong way to bless preparatory Um protocols of single projects with official bindings of a standards effort That is an excellent point. I didn't realize this was a preparatory binding Yeah, so so when you when you look at the binary when you look at the binary protocol, it's it's a it's a preamble framing um That basically just says here comes a protobuf message and then the the protocol basically just puts protobuf on on the wire So it's it's effectively tcp preamble protobuf And that doesn't meet the bar for me for something that is um A protocol in a bigger sense frankly. Um, and so I I find it And it will probably probably evolve and need work. Um, and it's an incubation project in the Apache in the Apache foundation and that doesn't um I feel I feel it's wrong to go and elevate um Singular efforts So blessing from standards or so clements. I want to make sure I understand Is this proprietary in the sense that it's not been through a standards body or it's proprietary that it's only by one company Yeah, no, it's I think it's one if it's one project. So I can I could go So if we I could go and make us make a project In the Apache foundation or in linux foundation somewhere else Um, just by their rules make up any proprietary protocol that I want um, and then come to cloud events and propose a binding which is then kind of A standards body as we're operating and then kind of gets blessed by that as You know the official thing kind of by by indirectly by us by us giving it official blessing I think it's perfectly good for that project to have a cloud events binding It's just strange to me that um, it if we would make that binding uh, uh, canonical I wonder if we can do this, um We're going to compromise where we have like almost a second class listing of you know proprietary technologies and how they're used Because I think a lot of like there are proprietary platforms and as a platform vendor It makes sense if you want to encourage interoperability So like for example, I'm I'm sure I will come back someday and say google cloud pub sub uses this mapping Yes But I totally understand that it may not Be at least one click away from speck.md. Maybe it's two clicks away Yeah, and I agree. So Having this having this having a catalog of and here are event here implementations for particular products um that are using cloud event and here's how you map those and and pointer to Their project documentation. I think that's that's great But just having that as you know having these sorts of specs sitting side by side with mappings for um ratified standards like htp and nqp and nqp which are you know foundations for broader product categories That just doesn't seem right to me So let me make sure I think that's around the same page though because I'm not 100% sure you are I think you're on the same page and that there's a second tier of Protocol mappings, but do those second tier documents sit within our repository? Or do they sit in the other person's repository with just a pointers from ours? What's the suggestion there? Yeah, my suggestion is that we point to them. So we make a catalog But we don't embed them in our repository. Is that consistent with your saying thomas? Uh, it was not my original intention. I'd have to think about whether I'm for against that I was thinking that we would just have it in um Like a secondary folder in our repository Right, that's what I thought you meant to that's why I thought there was a difference there, you know So is there anybody else in the car has an opinion on this? Just to clarify on the second tier second level thing. I mean Kafka would be in the same boat that way Yeah, I think so because it's a it's a it's a proprietary protocol just of the Kafka project That's perfect I think that helps And that's streaming standard of this that has a spec and um mgt2 I guess mgt2 has a consortium behind it. Well, mgt2 is noise standard And that's actually it's actually ISO standard. Um, I don't know where we're we're nats It's uh relative to that if that's if there's just that one implementation that would also be in that So we already have a nats, um What are we calling these not specs bindings and it's I think it's being merged. I believe so, yes I've Nats has a fully specced out. Um, I don't I don't I have maybe I have not understood the relationship between that's the protocol which I read as a You know universally implementable protocol And if there's only one implementation of the nats protocol, then it would then it would certainly go and and read that second tier definition And I'm I'm making this a point because I'm all for promoting broad interoperability and broad interoperability Does not mean that you when you start a project you just start making your own protocols So what if we did this, um, what if we do this in two step process first? People review the current pr to see if the text of the protocol definition here sounds good as a first draft Um, and then two maybe clements. Maybe you could write up a pr with how to structure this second tier type of System that we're going to set up. Mm-hmm And then we could see um if you will like that second tier system or not And and we'll hold off actually accepting this pr until we decide whether we want a second tier and we'd like your proposal Okay, okay. Yep. Uh, I would suggest that we have a standard for what is a standard I agree. Yes, and I think that's uh, um There there needs to be there needs to be a principle obviously that guides that And since I brought up that point, I own Probably articulating that principle. Yes Like I would not bring I would not bring a msnq binding um To this group, um, even though I would know how to how to do it on msnq because msnq is a proprietary protocol And so I wouldn't just not do that So kafka seems like something that our end users are very likely to want to use especially in bigger business And are we saying that we just don't want to support them in this effort? Or that they everyone should implement their own kafka binding So we have a in the kafka case. There is um, I would say An out that is relatively new because there is now a second clean kafka protocol implementation that we built Um, and that kind of makes it a de facto multi-party standard And we're going to engage in the kafka community specifically on the protocol pieces Yeah, but I'm trying to understand why are we trying to be so strict, you know You go to spark a bunch of plugins for any database in the world Why should we make it so complicated? You know, we should have a repo for everyone that feels like You know, there is a standards and specifications, but the implementations should we should open to that I'm I'm since we're defining effectively a standard here um, I'm just trying to be In that standard the goal of that standard is to promote interoperability It seems odd to me that we would Be happy for proliferation of project preparatory protocol at the bottom And then simply go and layer stuff on top of at the bottom of it. I think All right, but you know, but when you have cni driver or csi driver also part of uh, you know cncf standardization efforts you have cni drivers for You know cisco and VMware and you know open v-switch and whatever And we're not so restrictive as what we're trying to do you Yeah, but you know, these are new if there's a new effort and the new effort it starts to um Uh to send messages across the wire. Why are they not picking in PTT? Because then they could actually go and leverage the binding that we already have Because someone has his own Implementation which is uh faster or whatever, you know, or is New features and that's the thing right like you look at you look at four standards that exist Instead of picking one of the four Because it doesn't quite exactly know what you do you create a fifth and that's how you get 20 and 25 And that's how we destroy interoperability And I think if we're if we're here to go and promote interoperability We should also do our our part in in stopping proliferation of preparatory protocols and not not try to sanction Right, but you may have open source projects which become sort of de facto standards, you know not itf or i-triple or whatever And now we're going to block them from being able to participate or we're making it much more complicated for users to use those things Yeah, see Kafka it's something that is established is a top tier project and I think that sits in a completely different category Then an incubator project which is for which is new Right, but who are you to decide which one, you know, maybe tomorrow there'll be another project which is in its inception It's still not widely adopted, but people want to use it. So You know, if you're making an exception for a kafka Which is not an itf or i-triple or whatever standard Then I think we should open up for uh, we want we shouldn't be so strict So clemens, is it true that I think in your mind you actually have a distinction between um a protocol binding for A completely new type of binding Versus a protocol binding for something Like say htp, right if someone was to come along with a brand new htp binding That it's just different than when we have I think you're really concerned about a proliferation of htp bindings Right, you want only one htp binding, right? No, that's that's not that's not even the point um My point is I don't I I don't want to sanction people making endless numbers of new protocols where There is a selection of existing interoperable protocols for their For their for that purpose And then us happily accepting the fact that everybody's making their own protocol And then kind of go and just provide bindings for all those protocols because that doesn't help with interoperability That's a part of the that doesn't align with the With the goals that that we that I have in in making making sure that we have more interoperable interoperability Because actually it leads less interoperability Where everybody can now put go and put the same payload On a less interoperable ecosystem and that doesn't make sense to me So so instead of doing that I would go and say if there is and I think the base principle is if you have a Protocol that protocol must be implemented in At least two projects needs to have a proper protocol spec and it needs to be implemented in at least two Um projects independent of vendors. So that's similar to the rules that you're familiar with in oasis even though they say three and And basically promote interoperability and not for every project to just come along make their own thing and then make cloud events Binding and then declare that as In claim can be able to claim that that's a standard thing because it's not Right. So let's do this because I don't want to take up the rest of time with this because I think this is a little bit contentious So clements you took the ai to write up a pr to describe The process we're going to use to decide One whether we want to have a second tier tier set of specs or not and how we're going to decide what falls into that category Whether it's two implications or whatever you want to call it So and now we'll once you once you have the pr people can review that look at it comment and go back and forth Within the pr itself to see how people feel and they'll give people some time to think about a little more rather than on the spot right now Yep Okay, and we'll obviously we'll come back and revisit that but In the meantime, I would like people to go and look at this particular pr To see if they're okay with the actual text in there as a starting point for a draft and then we can just figure out Based on clements pr whether we're going to accept it and how we're going to accept it That sounds fair And we won't we won't vote on that today obviously a way for clements pr to get results I'm also a piece of warning. I'm on vacation next week All right, but I'm gonna I'm gonna I'm gonna try to get that text in Okay, appreciate that Okay, any other questions comments on that topic All right, so at the face-to-face we talked about Removing the extensions attribute itself And let me show the text based upon what we agreed to So basically what we agreed at the face-to-face was to have basically this type of paragraph here, which basically says Producers can include additional attributes That's about it. Now. I did add another tech plan of texting that says New extensions It should be when you're inviting your extension you should take care to make sure you pick a name That's descriptive enough so that you can try to avoid conflicts with other extensions or future things We're going to define That's probably the best we could do because obviously we can't absolutely guarantee that Going forward, but this is the gist of what I think we agreed to at the face-to-face Are there any questions or comments on that? Do people need more time to think about this before we even think about voting? How do you guys feel? It's just consistent what people think we agree to at the face-to-face I think Thomas you you you're okay with that with some minor nets, but I think I just Yeah, yeah, um, given that the things that I was asking for are going to be something Clement takes on. I'm fine Yes, yes, and may I ask for those So so dog does this mean we're going to remove the extension Attribute from the spec, right? Correct. Yes. Yes so in the future if If a new attribute need to be added it just add it as a top-level attribute It depends on what you're talking about if you're talking about a new attribute from the spec perspective It's going to be just like all the others if you're talking about an extension attributes That's going to be done or that's going to be handled at the transport spec level and clements has appeared as an ai To modify all of our transport specs to say how extensions will appear in each of those transports So does it mean that uh any new field um related to the event Will be put as a top-level actually similar to this event type, but any new um attributes associated with transport Will be put into the first No So the the what we agreed to is that we don't we're not going to make we're not going to make in um a distinction here for In the main spec for extensions We're basically just allowing that extensions can go and extend the the attributes that's inside of the cloud events envelope And then it's really up to the extension spec per se To define how that project how its attributes project into the respective transport So the the extensions become a layer on top of the existing specification set And and then and then there will be a generic so so in each transport spec Will have a generic way to um to map extensions if the extension itself doesn't have an opinion so if the extension itself says The attribute x must be mapped to a particular HTTP header because like in in the case of I think open tracing it was There is a set of very specific HTTP headers that are that must be used Then the extension spec is effectively overriding anything else and says if you have this if you have to find this this attribute Then that's that must produce the following HTTP headers in uh in the HTTP mapping And then there was going to for all other cases where the extension is not specific about this There's going to be a default mapping that the um that the transport specs Does that answer your question Kathy? uh, okay, so so, um, sorry because I missed that I missed that discussion in the face to face So in there were so there is an extension on spec separate extension spec Yes, so so think of think of there being a catalog of extensions so there will be an an open events Uh, what's that open tracing spec? That is an extension spec that extension spec will define An additional or two or three additional attributes. I think thomas brought those Uh, I think there were three um three additional attributes that can be included in the cloud event spec and then it will also define How for specifically for htp because there are specific rules for for open for open tracing for htp How that actually works in htp and if you want to use the same metadata and have that flow in mqp and an mqtt Um, but you're not specific about near extension spec Then there's going to be a default way of how those fields are going to be mapped and still transported Okay, so those fields will be defined per Per transport per extension per extension So you write a spec in the extension and the extension defines what the fields are and then also defines special handling for special transports So it's all self-contained in the extension and you're saying it sends some spec needs to as you write a new one Needs to take care that you don't have clashes with The base specification Or and then also avoid clashes with other extensions And that's mostly about convention and with that we actually avoid having you know prefixes or anything that's special So if you're writing something that's for open tracing you would probably go To be safe to go and name your attributes Open tracing something so that um, you avoid clashes, but I don't think we need to have hard and fast rules here To go and do prefixes for everything that are kind of weird But we just make it in an organic fashion and just put it on the put the responsibility on the extension spec owner to go And do the right thing But but just to be clear the extension the extension spec owner only needs to write those special rules for how it gets serialized on the wire If it doesn't want if they don't want to follow the Generic pattern that we're going to put into each transport spec. That is correct. Right Okay, so Those extensions are just specifically to that transport over the while No, they're not you write an extension and the extension is to the cloud events envelope And then you And which effectively adds to the abstract The abstract model the abstract data model that we have And then as you serialize that As you serialize and map that cloud events documents Down to the transport then you also apply rules. So the way how I think about this in software Is that you effectively are You have two pieces. You have the cloud events document. Let's say that's a an object graph That object graph the the spec tells you hey, you can add the following three properties into that object graph Then you run that through a pipeline and the pipeline There's a pipeline stage here in the hdp transport that says, oh, I know those three things And it will then go in the hdp pipeline and then take these three properties and map them appropriately to hdp So think of it really as a plugin model and the extensive spec is defining how you ought to write your plugin Does that help kathy? Yeah, it helps. I think probably I still need some time to read through this extension spec and how all this definition in the restriction the The I'll write I'll write this I summarize this for docs documents Um, and then also make the additions and I'm going to and I'm going to make that That's the the one work item. I'm going to go into along with the the principles for protocols Next week and then have that in time for The Tuesday deadline, right? Okay I'd say so given kathy's questions on this let's let's hold off on voting on this one Give people another week or so just to look or look it over as well as See how it relates to the ai's that clements has is that okay? with everybody Okay, we only have four minutes left um So there's one thing I wanted to bring up before we do We circle back around things. Uh, where is it? So I did as I mentioned I opened up a pr for the first pass at a primer. It is By no means a complete primer. It's just sort of a A reorganization of existing documentation that we have just pulling it all together into a single document And I did add a at least I think at least one placeholder for additional text to come later This is just the first draft of the document Just to get something out there so people can start issuing other prs to it Not going to ask for a vote right now obviously, but please just take a look at it I'd like to see if we can get uh comments on that and potentially address the comments before Next week's call so maybe we can get that document or that pr merged. So please just take a look when you get a chance um And before we go back and double check on roll call Uh per alex's suggestion Let's circle back to community time Is there anybody on the call from the community who has a topic they would like to bring up for discussion? going once Okay, not hearing any um, I pretty sure Yep, sure. Um I'm pretty sure I did send a note, but I'll double check to make sure I send a note out on the my list about this And let me just circle back around now for the attendees Anthony skipper are you online? I am you are I'm here and what company are you at? Is this your first time? Uh galactic fog. No, we're here fairly regularly. We uh, we uh, what do you call it? We're just in the background Okay, I've been sure if you were here or not. Okay, uh matt. Are you there? I'm here dad. Excellent clements. I got you Lulie I heard Kathy I heard Is there anybody who is not on the agenda or a list of attendees with a star? I think that might have everybody All right in that case we have a whole two minutes Is there any other topics people like to bring up that we can quickly hash through in two minutes? I just wanted to ask one question about cloud events So are the cloud events something that we're expecting cloud providers like aws and azure to Support or is it something where we kind of take events from the cloud providers and then convert it into a more standard format Just to help me understand how this is going to be working in practice So clements you want to answer for microsoft's and you guys actually yes, and you can say about that Absolutely mic if you read the documentation of azure event grid, which is the platform capability limits events from the cloud platform You will find that we natively support cloud events 0.1 today And we will support all further iterations in productions And when cloud events goes 1.0 and an appropriate standard then I foresee that we will switch to that format as the primary I think the way I'd answer it is yes that cloud providers can Switch over to using cloud events as a native format and also there will be Connections from legacy event sources into cloud events that will be occurring Things like dispatch or the serverless event gateway do those types of translations Are we seeing anything in the industry other than from azure? I um someone from azure I met at docker con told me that the previous spec for event grids was very similar To the spec for cloud events Being a json body with some of the same elements What about where we have a much more varied spec like the aws? Spec for events are we seeing any any interest there? I think kindre is going to join us from aws and we'll then eventually be able to talk about that. Yeah. Yep And unfortunately with that, I think we're going to call it time. I did notice one person on the call ying. Are you on the call? ying Okay, I think with that we're going to have to call it time Thank you guys very much. We'll talk to you again next week Thank you. Bye