 all yours. All right, hello everyone and happy new year. So we are now resuming normal activities for the TSC. I hope you'll enjoy the break. To get started, we need to remind everybody of our anti-trust policy, the notice of which is currently displayed. This is to stay out of trouble. And then the code of conduct is also a key part of participating in these meetings, which are otherwise public and where we welcome anybody to join and contribute. We have a pretty full agenda today. Let's get going with that, any further review. We first have an announcement. Ryan, I believe you added this. Sure. It is what it says on the 10. We do have a weekly newsletter that goes out every Friday and we are always looking for content. It's kind of difficult for Jessica and Dave Hughesby and me to go looking for the cool important PRs or the cool changes in project state. So it would be really helpful if you want to publicize your projects to help us out. Comment on the Wiki page for the next week's newsletter and just help us help you. So that's it. Yeah, the newsletter for next Friday is already up. If you go on to Hyperledger on the Wiki, there is a shortcut to the Dev Weekly newsletter and then you drop down to 2021 and they're named by the date that they are planned to be published. So yeah, if you want anything in next Friday, just go to the 122 one and add comments as Rycen, please. Thank you. And I think there's a few more hours. I think there's a few hours to get there. Oh, sorry, we keep talking. Go ahead, Rycen. No, I was just going to say the editorial window for the one that goes out today closes in a few hours. So if you have something you want to get in there today for this week, it's still open. Anyway, Arno. Now, all I wanted to say is the kind of services we have at our disposal and that we have, you know, that we benefit from that are more than what you would get if you were just on a Gita, like one of the many projects there. And it's kind of a shame that we're not using those to their full extent and that the staff who is providing those services has to struggle getting the content they need. So we all have here, you know, some responsibilities in the different projects. It's part of a responsibility to pass that message and keep an eye for things that can be relevant and that we should bring up to this channel. All right, with that done, there are three quarterly reports that were posted. I didn't see any call for action or questions for the TSC elder than the usual, you know, from cactus. Specifically, I have in mind that, you know, they keep saying, hey, please, everybody come and help us. And for sure, you know, because they have this need to interact or to integrate with the different platforms. They're in the need to have the people involved in different platforms to keep an eye and help them figure out whether they are taking the right approach or not. I do want to highlight that we are missing what we've actually realized. I have to keep right credit for that. We realize we have not been having any reports back from the Aries project. And so this was an oversight. It will be fixed in the coming months. We'll get reports. It's interesting that nobody noticed till now. But in any case, it wasn't in the calendar. So that's why we didn't catch it. I also took the liberty of rescheduling a couple of the reports to be in the same week. So Indian Aries and Grid and Transact, since those seem pretty closely aligned. And our schedule is pretty full. And with holidays, it makes it very hard to work around. So I'm just trying to make this easier for the for the projects. If you have feedback, please let me know. So is there any questions that has not been asked on the wiki on any of these projects? Anything anybody wants to bring up now? Now is the time. Okay, if not, then I suggest we move with it wasting any time. So the main part of the agenda for today is a presentation from the cactus project. And we will then have a couple of discussion items that I hope we can cover. So let's try not to spend the whole rest of the hour on this. But the idea is, again, you know, we are gaining this series of presentations from working groups and projects and eventually six as well. And so it allows us to have a bit more insights, deeper insight into what's going on in the projects. So that being said, the floor is yours. I don't know who is going to talk specifically. Thank you for the interesting. My name is Shingo Fujimoto, so I will be brought here for the presentation for our project introduction today. So the other core contributors are also online. So I'd like to keep it short for my presentation in five minutes. And I'd like to encourage the given feedback and questions from the TSE members. Can I start the presentation now? Yes, please go ahead. Thank you. Thank you. So the thanks for giving us this precious opportunity. So as I mentioned, our project Hyperagic Cactus is the first half year was passed. So this is a good opportunity to report and share the current status with Hyperagic communities wide. And I'd like to ask for the further feedback and collaboration from the group, from the different projects. So that was our intentions. So as you may know, the cactus is located in one of the two projects, which helps to the use of the different platforms like a passive barrel and fabric in these erofile sources. And now the different the radio technologies even in the Hyperagic communities. So the unfortunate things in the blockchain market is we currently have some sort of the fragmentation among the industries. But as a nature of the industry, we better to inter-work with several different markets. And that might be how the good solution could be generated if we could remove to the such barriers between the industries. So the main issue on the such interworking is when we think about the integrated multiple measures that we need to, we cannot avoid to the issue for the trust on the trade on the digital asset, which usually manage on the different radio technologies. So there's a beginning of the project that we clarified. We have started from the clarifying to the principles for the to remove to solve the problem on the interoperabilities. So we also figure out to the features really need to be provided as the two or the parts of the libraries. This is the kind of the big information for the today. At the beginning of the cactus, we have a very high level architecture was the proposed, but the other friend after the six months later that we are providing to the code and figured out to the fat is a minimum and fat is a common. And there's that kind of the discussion was internally made with not only the Fujitsu and Accenture. And the other as a result of the discussion, we device to the diagram of the architecture to fit to the multiple the needs from the market. So the mainly that we need to do thinking about is other racial plugins that is a mechanism to absorb to the difference of the other regions. So the other those racial plugin will be a access from the common common parts that is in scope of the the the cactus. So the the cactus application for the we call we name to the those are the business logic plugin will be provided from the each vendors or developers. And that can be access to the other all the different races in the that was implemented in differently, but that could be easier to be integrated. So the the at the end of the last year that we published to the interroom degrees, which the target name is a version 0.3 that is consistent with the racial plugins like a fabric version one that is kind of legacy and you know, but that is a practical to know the to control and the best to and go Israel and quorum is even those are same using to the same network, but the different implementations. So these that want to be the good exercise to figure out to the parties the common and parties could be differentiated. So then we also provided to the example application in two different use cases like your cart rate and supply chain management. And for example, the cart rate is kind of well the example to using to the existing solution how we can integrate to the existing solution can be the the the other integrated service. So the cut rate is actually the example application for the hyper asia fabric. And that is the transferring to the ownership of the curve from the one to the others. However, in this particular use cases, example application that we can upgrade to the setup example without the changing to the result calls. So that the cactus will be arming to the actually paying to the transferring to the such a money ownership between the users. And and also that we are the other short time goal that we are thinking about to the removing to the dependency on the other languages and the implementations. So the now that we are thinking about to the using to the different languages and different interface and the different solutions. Those are designed for the problem problem will designs. So the this diagram is showing to the others, the proposal at this moment, but the the we choose to the other types split as a primary languages, but for the leisure programming can be implemented in different languages. So this is also another in the example for the programming mechanism, which is not the main feature, but for the case of the we are thinking about to the some commonality, but that might be a different way to implementations. That case, we define to the interface and we are going to the different way to implement it to choose it. So the then there is we can be using to the those the programs through the other common interface without the wearing to the different implementation under provided. So there's the end of the presentation. The intention was we actually the provided to the the internal release for the operation, but we are still the have the lack of the other resource for the developing enough. So the for the case of the developing to the leisure programming, we we are planning, but still that is not the enabled for the fabric version to and the code. So those both are the very the community and the people really wanted it. And we also need to do some sort of the very complicated mechanism, like the hash the time rock mechanism mechanism, like the the because of the htlc is usually implemented to other the the single application. But I think to the we better to extend it to version of the cross-racer atomic swap could be possible in the other extension from the cactus. And I do I know that we are the core contributor hearing to the strong wish from the community to provide to the common high-level transaction protocol on the cactus. So we are still discussing to the how to manage it is that should be in scope of the cactus or not or other the the platform dependent, leave it as a platform dependent. So anyway, that we are providing to the those activity on the wiki page and asking to the other more people in come to and contribute it. So we also are provided to the white paper in the active state. So the other all the agreements and the current status and the apis are described in the white paper. So that's all for now. And I'd like to hear your comment question and comments. Thank you very much. All right, can I jump in before we get to the questions? I just also wanted to highlight again that slide with the language master plugin development. So that's something that I alluded to back the last year in my or our global forum presentation. And now we made it reality. So I really wanted to make sure that I underlined that now we have the ability to talk to you any other plugins written in any other language. And we believe this is a big step towards unlocking a lot more people from being able to come and contribute. And that's why I also wanted to make this pitch, which is my second thing I wanted to underline. Let's get there faster together, meaning if anybody would like to come and join us, help with the specific topics as well as others, then please feel free to talk to me. You're especially interested in, like the slide said it, fabric and corner connector contributions, also feedbacks from the other or about the other connectors. And, and yeah, the other big slaps that we don't have anything on it yet, but we would obviously have to. And I feel like this is the right time to make a stronger push for asking people to take a look again, because now we have an actual working example of it, end to end tests passing in the CI where there's a plugin written in Rust, which is just a language I pick randomly. And it actually is able to use the same existing API definitions on the Node.js to communicate with the Rust code. And it all just works. So that's, that's my pitch at the end, just an extension to underline everything that Shingo said. Thank you. Thank you, Peter. All right. Thank you guys. So is there any questions for Shingo and Peter? Otherwise, I have one to get started. I mean, you know, in the first place, you say, okay, one of the goals is not to have a middle main that you need to trust. And then you showed us this slide where exactly that one where, oh, come back. It was the one that I was looking for or thinking about. Yes, this one. And there you show us characters as if this is exactly the middle man. So can you explain a little bit what's behind this box? Because I'd actually know that it's not quite the middle man. And so I think it'd be interesting to highlight why it is not so. Yeah, I think that because of the we are focused on the providing to the multiple region programs in very first stage, but we also provided two examples now. So that was named to the cart rate and supply chain management. And that is kind of the, at this moment, that is kind of very the skeleton, the application which execute to the the transaction line by line with conditions. So the for the case of the cart rate, the we are stepping to the to the application had the ability to get into the event from the region province. That is targeted to the region is the fabric network. And also does that had the that application also using to the cactus ability to making the inquiry about to the the balance of the account on the Ethereum networks. And that is determined to the cart rate. It could be possible with the current balance. And then the that application also execute to the the transferring to the money as a escrow services. And the friend the transferring to the such the token transfer. Then the cactus also execute to the another transaction on the high fabric measures to transfer the ownership, the one to the others. So the that was the kind of step of the the examples, the supply chain management is a similar study. The if you are interested in the such a projects that we already have the example application on the GitHub so the you can be see the fact that we are doing in the such such a black box. Is that answering your question? All right. Yes. Thank you. That helps clarify that anybody else? I know this is this is Angelo. And so the thanks for the presentation. And but I have to admit that I I still I cannot really wrap my mind around that it's my limit around this this project, because during the presentation, you talk a lot about engineering aspect. But I must admit, if I have if if I want to use tomorrow cactus, or let's suppose when it becomes even more stable, I don't really understand which are the guarantees of this architecture. What happens if there is a fault in one of the networks? How do you build trust among different, among different networks? Which are the even the semantics that this plug in which the contracts that these plugins as to satisfy in order, for example, to get an atomic swap or an atomic transaction that spans multiple multiple network. So maybe this this theory is there and I'm missing it. And if it's if it's there, please send me the links. I would be really cool. Or if you have papers published a conference, I will be very, very interested in reading that because I the problem is very hard. I don't understand how if you manage to solve it so easily, I would say this is astonishing that I think that the world that is a very good point for the how we can solve such a very complicated problem. So the as a beginning of the our discussion with the undergraduate student as a volunteer that we are starting to the writing to the academic paper for this one. And there are very brief the clarification. We also provided to the typical use cases like the such an atomic swap like the trading. However, at this moment, we providing to the solution for the two obstruction on the this level, like the how we can absorb to the difference on the the different the different type of the format and the steps. For example, it's only required to the single transaction. However, the fabric cases, we need to do the two phase the commit like the operation is needed. So there's such a difference with beer. The actually need to be interact or realized by the business logic. However, the because of the the the cactus mechanism of providing to the some sort of the common functionality to absorb to the such a difference in the certain level. The the because of the order blockchain has a very similar mechanism like the Jason based data formats. And we also need to do some sort of the trust point. The for among among the the participating the network. So the for example, Israel has a the group who agree on the the security of the digital asset token like mechanism. And on the other hand, for the our cases, the cartridge make in the razor had a different mechanism or the water and also the policy to manage that's at razors. So there's also razor, the difference will be realized by the body did the other the point of the trust. And that the signature on the sorry, the signature on the each transactions. So the that signature will be evaluated by the verify using to the common mechanism. And the as a result, application can handle the event without the scene to the actual the implementation of the block chains that can be react on the such an event given from the underlining the network, like Israel, the fabric and so on. So the other I hope that is that is the help to the answering the your questions. I guess I guess if I can say maybe a recommendation, I would I would really recommend you to accelerate as much as possible on on the paper, because this will give also more confidence in this in this project in this in such a such complex endeavor. So I'm really, I found I found the goal very, very important, very important these things on putting a unit or adding a common ground among all these different systems. But because the task is so difficult, in order to make to attract people to say oh, if tomorrow Fujitsu wants to use cactus, we will use it really, really build trust really, really, really say oh yeah, cactus really works. We these achieves what we what we want. It gives the security guarantees, the completeness guarantees and all these guarantees that we need for our system. So I really encourage you to go to a community to a conference as soon as possible, because then you have peer reviews, and you can be more confident on what you are doing. Yeah, we are already started to the activities, thanks for the such advice. So the I think that is the kind of parallel work with the with collaboration with the outside of the high pressure. However, this is an open community so the we are solving such a program the as soon as possible. So, Angelo, I want to add that this is ongoing. You know, as I said in chat, we're working on a full academic paper with the UC inspired security model. We'd be more than happy to send you the paper once it's in a readable state. And we'd actually, you know, love for any kind of, you know, love your comments if you're interested. With pleasure, with pleasure. Yeah, absolutely. And if you're if you're really interested, we frequently talk about the paper in the cactus western hemisphere meetings, which are usually every Thursday, every other Thursday, right after the TSE meeting. So not this Thursday, but next Thursday. We frequently talk about the cactus paper and what we want to do and things like security models. So you are anyone else who's welcome to join, you know, everyone's welcome to join. Yeah, basically, the basically, the Japan has difficulty on the participation, but that we are exchanging to the communication on the main basis sometimes. So the and if I can be at something like the contributors meeting also having this touch of the such critical issues sometimes in the topic. Yeah, but you're exactly right. There's a lot of stuff to do. Even once we get done with the basic model, it becomes a question of how do we handle sort of privacy preserving mechanisms, or integration between privacy preserving blockchains and that gets very, very complicated in a hurry. So yeah, I hope that answered your questions. And we will definitely send you the paper once it's in a draft state that's good enough to read. Sure. Thanks so much and keep going. All right. Thank you. I mean, I think this is the kind of discussions we want to enable with those presentations. And, you know, that's great. Arun as a question. Yes. So I was asking for questions and times hard for answering those questions on the chat. So that makes me, I mean, your last answer makes me more curious to understand how is the trust anchored from these individual siloed blockchain networks through to the integration layer? What I mean by that is, is there any implementation expected or any changes expected from the underlying blockchain networks? And where does it lie? Is it at the poor protocol layer or is it at the application layer? So yeah, I believe to the your question is regarding to the consortium management mechanism here. We had a choice of how we can manage to the set of the region can be trusted. So we provided to the very simple minimum version of the consortium management mechanism, like the simply the single manager adding and the exposed to the those the ratio can be trustworthy. And as a case is, it might be the this mechanism also asking to the end those to the the which the the DLT technology, sorry, the blockchain network can be trust as a part of the cactus applications. So because of those application will be the spread out to the internet as the integrated services. So the each service may choose to the different policy of the management of the consortium. So the I think I hope that that is answering your questions. Well, at least I hope this is a good start of an answer. I mean, obviously, we can't hope to answer every single question in depth on this call. That's not really the point but hopefully it has given people a bit more insight as to what's going on where the project is heading to and then give an appetite to maybe find out more, which can be done offline through many different channels, including getting involved in the project itself. So unless anybody has a burning questions, I suggest we leave it at this so we can move on and address the other items we have in the agenda. Yeah, some for the give us the opportunity. And as you know, this is a very early stage of the project. So we hope to deliver the first release as a whole solution as soon as possible. But we also want to encourage all the people to come to us and give us a feedback. That is our hope. Thank you very much. Well, thank you to you for sticking with us and giving that presentation answering questions. Thank you. So with that done, I would like us to move with the agenda. We have two discussion items on the agenda. Let's start with the first one. This is a follow up to Tracy's post on the mailing list. She had the first meeting with the senior people and, you know, she sent a quite an extensive reporting email that I thought it would be a good idea to spend a bit of time today to hear from her for those who may have not seen their email. And maybe start discussing what we can do because I think what that's really interesting that there's all clearly some items we should take on and discuss so that, you know, we can improve the situation. So Tracy, floor is yours. Thanks so much. So yeah, I'm just I've brought up on the show screen the actual email that I sent out had a really good discussion with a number of the sick chairs this past, I think it was this past Monday or maybe it was the Monday before. And these were the notes that we kind of took, David, and I kind of took out of the meeting that we had. So there were a number of items that were brought up, ranging a wide range of different topics. Some of these topics I think we have talked about before. Some of them are new topics for us to think about. And, you know, I think we can take each one of these and really kind of dig into them. Some of them are obviously a lot easier to address than others. Some of them, you know, are probably as simple as trying to set up some sort of schedule whereby we want to do presentations from projects or working groups or six, similar to the one that we had today from Cactus and the one that we had previously from Bobby, whereby we can have people sign up, you know, if we want to do this once a month in one of our meetings or whatever that cadence looks like. And I think that's just a decision that we have to make as a TSE as far as, you know, what it looks like. And then there's some other ones that I think have been hounding us for quite sometimes like item number two, right? And really the understanding of how hyperledger projects work and kind of the different these cases that might apply, the sorts of things that could come out of, you know, maybe some best practices that people have had. I know that came up a lot in the member summit this past year and I think has come up in the member summit pretty much every year that I've attended the member summit. So again, has been an item out there, I think, that we've yet to address in a way that seems to satisfy all. And so, you know, basically the, I don't think we can accomplish this necessarily on a call, right? I think this is going to have to take some maybe some task forces to go out and actually do some work. But these are the six different items that came out of that call. All right. Thank you, Tracy. I agree with you that, I mean, clearly some items seem easier to, you know, address than others. But and I saw Arun already responded to your email and also, you know, made some proposal. So is there any reactions? Yeah, thank you. Any comments from anyone? You can use the raise your hand feature to get on the queue if there is any queue. If nobody is talking, obviously you can just speak, but Yeah, so since I'm sure I can't see if anybody's raising their hand, but maybe I'll just pile on to what I've already said, because I think there's a couple of these that are probably really good pieces for people in the TSC themselves to get involved in. One is kind of mentorship. You know, we've talked about mentorship in many different ways and forms, but I do think that the six could use somebody who is potentially a member of the TSC to at least be some sort of official mentor, right? Somebody who would be there to answer questions, maybe help direct them as far as how they get involved in the technical community and asking for help. You know, sometimes, unfortunately, from what I've discovered in this conversation, it takes a recognized voice for people to get responses back, which is an unfortunate sort of situation, but I do think that we are obviously all TSC members recognize voices in the community that could potentially help. You know, I think that, you know, the other piece that is an interesting one is rolling up different sorts of contribution opportunities across the six, but I think then we could also extend that to, for example, the three contribution opportunities that we're just suggested by Cactus, right, and how do we roll up all of those contribution opportunities so that people can, you know, go to one place and look and see what might be of interest for them to focus on and work on and then also, you know, kind of an entry point into who should they go talk to right now, maybe an initial contact person who would help them with that initial contribution, which again lends itself to the commensuring, right, when I first started with Hyperledger, Nick Gasky helped me through the process of working through a PR and bringing that into Garrett, which I've never used before. And if it wasn't for Nick, right, I'm not sure that I would have made it through that process successfully. So I think, you know, these are the sorts of things that I think about, right, as far as my journey in the Hyperledger community and the sorts of people who have helped me to be part of this community. All right, thanks again, Tracy. You know, on the mentorship, I'm worried that if we have just somebody, it seems to me that the seek should have a mechanism to ask for specific expertise, and we should be able to, you know, figure out who might, you know, might be the relevant person, or at least the kind of person, because, you know, like the example you have is on how to create a wallet in areas, I would think, you know, not everybody is going to be able to answer those questions. So what I'm trying to get to is I think maybe we need some mechanism for them to be able to get the expertise they need, which is a bit different from having some kind of general mentor who could just be there, but may not be able to answer the questions anyway. All right, this is David. I can just add to what Tracy had said. I think in many cases a mentor doesn't necessarily have to have the technical knowledge. It's more just being an entry point into the community, as Tracy kind of referred to. I've seen examples of members from SIGS ask questions in chat on the list, reaching out to some maintainers and just not hearing back, just because they're not a name that's been recognized, right? And so I think maybe a mentor in this case would just be more of an entry point into maybe some different conversations in other places and just maybe facilitating introductions would be more valuable in that case than having this specific technical answer to a technical question. And then to add to what Tracy said, I also was really, really interested in the idea that came from this discussion that Tracy was having with the SIG chairs about rolling up all the different contribution opportunities. I think we do have situations where different projects are making information about contribution opportunities available, but if you add up all the projects, all the labs, all the SIGS, all the working groups, I mean, that could be 40, 50 different places where somebody would need to go to get a sense of all the different opportunities. I personally would be really, really interested in having some sort of a task force that looked at how do we roll all those up? So we can have one page on the website, one page or on the wiki where you can go and kind of get that holistic view. That seems very valuable. All right. I would think maybe also we should offer this to the SIGS to, you know, reach out to the TSE when they are in search of any kind of expertise. And the TSE in general may be a vehicle to find the right experts so that they would be able to engage. At least that seems like it's the low hanging fruit that we should be able to enable. On the lab process, I have to say I'm a bit interested. I'm a lab steward. I've been involved in the lab from the beginning and I saw Arun suggested maybe Deepin could join us one day and tell us more about this. I am truly puzzled by this whole thing about the labs being kind of disconnected and the process being difficult. And of course I am biased here because I have a lot of knowledge about how labs are functioning. And it seems easy to me and I'm interested to hear what the challenges are. So I just put it that way. Yeah. So Arno, I've had some follow-up. David has connected me with one of the folks who had some challenges and, you know, we've talked about a few things and I'm happy to, you know, forward that email to the lab stewards because I think there was some good suggestions that came out of just minor things that we could do to make things easier. Putting things in different places so that it's more visible and people know kind of what they're getting into when they're signing up for a lab. So I agreed, right? I was with you. We're like, what's happening here? But there are some really good suggestions. So I'll make sure to include the lab stewards on that. All right. Sounds good. Thank you. Any other questions? Otherwise, I suggest we move on. You know, I think we should follow up on those items individually on the mailing list and then we can take them up back on, you know, separately on these calls to see, you know, practically speaking what resolutions we can make and to make progress. Arno, would it help to start a separate email chain on each of these six items? And then we can, you know, comment specifically on those. That's probably a good idea because I think otherwise it's going to be intertwined different answers to different items. Okay. Thank you for following up and executing on your action. Not that I'm surprised, but. All right. We have one more agenda item. Who is going to talk to this? Brian? Daniela? Sorry about the maintainer summit. The maintainer summit. Yep. Okay. Great. So we thought it's past time and well-due for us to try to do a virtual version of a maintainer summit that we lasted successfully, I believe it was 2019. I forget which month it was there. And for the focus to be, you know, kind of a smaller gathering of the technical teams on each of the software projects at Hyperledger and really focusing on, you know, not just, you know, regular presentations of here's what Cactus does, that sort of thing, but really the opportunities for projects to work more closely together as well as trying to understand, you know, just what does it mean to be a maintainer at Hyperledger? How might we drive more convergence around things like the directory hierarchy structure that we agreed to last year and some other kind of, you know, CICD, other types of cross project. Think of it as standards, if you will, for how the projects are run. But also to do some social kind of building as well. You know, the last maintainer summit was, I wasn't there, but I heard it was a really good opportunity for people to kind of get past a bit of the tribalism we have sometimes and get to know each other. That's obviously harder to do in a virtual setting, but we feel like there's still some things that are possible to do in that front to help us get to know each other as individuals. It's smaller. It was, last time it was capacity limited only because, you know, we didn't have a large space and people traveling physically means you have certain infrastructure requirements. We don't have that this time, but we'd like to make it still feel like a must attend kind of thing and a high quality experience for folks. So thinking about just predominantly making sure that maintainers on the projects know that this is an important thing for them to attend, but it's still being open to anyone else from the TSC who doesn't happen to be a maintainer or others who show up on calls like this or otherwise kind of prohibited. But trying to just really focus it on the meat of how we develop software here. So we're currently thinking that March would be a good time for that, wedging it in between other things, giving people time to be able to put on their calendars. Thinking that, you know, it would be predominantly a virtual event, you know, hosted over something like Zoom, maybe a couple of different tracks or breakouts, but trying to keep things focused and tight. And in terms of timing being something on the order of three or four hours a day for two or three days. Again, it's hard to find a time that works for everybody globally, but probably something, you know, like around this time, you know, early Pacific, late in the evenings, Asia time, and otherwise pretty accessible for others. So wanted to put it on the table. If you have ideas on this, please get in touch with us, either direct email to me or Rai or David Boswell, who are just on the staff side going to try to organize the putting together of this. And we'll try to put this in any email to the TSC as well. But yeah, with that, I don't know if there's anything else, David or Rai or Arno, you think is worth adding? Oh, I think that's good. Thank you. I mean, obviously the fact that it's virtual is never going to be as good as having a face-to-face meeting and, you know, we'll sure don't have a beard together at the end of the day. But I think I agree that, you know, it would be good to get the community together. And hopefully this is better than nothing and can help, you know, get everybody on the same page. Last time the community got together, the social event was an axe throwing kind of evening. I guess Bureau was involved there too. Seems like a bad combination. Everyone survived, as I understand it. If there's a virtual something like that we can do to blow off some steam. Certainly worth considering. It was truly excellent, Brian. The beer and axes was awesome. So is there any reactions, comments? I mean, do people think this would be useful? You know, is that a waste of your time? Because, you know, we don't want to waste anybody's time, including the staff in preparing this, getting it all set up. If we don't have a fairly large number of maintainers committed to participating. And, you know, also related to that is, you know, what are the kind of topics that you guys think would be useful and would be appealing to people, you know, make them want to participate, not just because they were told so, but because they feel like there is something, you know, they will gain from this. So I have to say the, you know, the, when we had the last maintainers summit, which we had after a long break as well, by the way, we had a mix of meetings that were like general, everybody in the same room talking about general topics. We talked about some issues that were related to, you know, how the different projects operate are organized, things like, you know, the common repository structures were discussed, things that are pertaining to all the projects. And I suspect we could have these kind of discussions for sure. Then we had also breakout sessions, which was easy because we had a pretty large facility that allowed for different breakouts. That's much harder to enable in a virtual setup. And with very, you know, short, I mean, time constraints are such that it's harder to do this. And so I don't know if that's possible, but it allowed both some people to catch up on what was going on in the projects, as well as some coordination between different projects. And even among certain projects, they were, you know, taking advantage of being together at the same time. That probably is not as needed because typically all projects have their own kind of ways of meeting on a regular basis and communicating with one another. So if it were face to face, it'd be different here because it's online. It doesn't have the same appeal or, you know, it doesn't add much to what's going on on a regular basis. But at the same time, you know, we'd like to hear from everyone and what would be useful. So okay, I don't see any reactions. Well, you can kind of think about this. I will add one more thing on the timing. We thought March might be a good, you know, time because it's not too early. So we have time to prepare. And then later on, there will be the global forum. And we want to have a bit of time between. So we don't want to push it too far down because otherwise it gets closer to the forum. That's it for me. Anything else? Not for me. I think that's a good idea. You guys are not very talkative today. All right. Well, we'll leave it at that for now. I guess we have time to spare, but that's great. I'm going to close the call on this, let it sink in. And please do let us know what you think. Feel free to post the mailing list. That's what it's for. Otherwise, we'll talk again next week.