 All right. Thank you. All right, welcome everybody to the first meeting of the TFC in January of 2023, the January 12th meeting. As you are probably all aware, the meetings that we have within the Hyperledger Foundation, almost divided by two things. The first is the antitrust policy notice that is currently displayed on the screen. So there are potential competitors in this meeting. Make sure that you're not doing anything that would impact the, your antitrust and competition sort of laws that exist. And the second thing that we must abide by is the code of conduct, which is linked in our agenda. Basically all are welcome here. Be respectful of the other people and their ideas and opinions and their thoughts, and we'll have some really good meetings this, this term. So with that, I think we have the agenda to announcements. The first announcement is a standard announcement that you will hear every week. That weekly developer newsletter goes out each Friday. If there is something that you would like to include in that newsletter, please leave a comment on the link there for the wiki page that is in the agenda, and it will go out on Friday. And then the second thing that I included as an announcement is just obviously this is the first meeting of our new TOC. And so I wanted to link in our TOC responsibilities so that everybody had a chance to review what our responsibilities are. In that document there is a list of obviously what's included in the charter and what it says that the TOC is responsible for. There are also some specific highlights for TOC members as far as specific things that you must do, including participating in these meetings and reviewing project updates and other sorts of things that might be helpful for you to review as you become a member. So I do want to take an opportunity here to welcome all of the new members to the TOC. I really appreciate the fact that you ran this year and that you are elected. So congratulations to everybody who was elected to the TOC. So any other announcements that anybody has or would like to make? So I don't see any hands coming up. That is probably something I should mention is just we do use the raise hand feature during these meetings to make sure that people have the opportunity to speak and be heard, and that there are no sort of people just jumping in. So please do use the raise hand feature as we continue through the meeting. And I think that we don't have any, well, I guess we do, Arun, see your hand coming up. I just wanted to tell all the new welcome to welcome new members and then I know we have certain rules on raising hands and then talking through but please don't be imposed by like what you know and what you don't know. Raise up your opinions and voices. We're happy to help you through the journey through the integration. All right, thanks Arun. Marcus. Yeah, hi everyone. This is Marcus speaking. I mean, I want to quickly say hello to all of you. I mean, I haven't had the chance yet to speak to all of us. So my proposal for this meeting would also be very brief round of introduction for everyone who's here on the TSE and new the board. Sure, we can do that. I had thought about doing that and didn't know if people wanted to take the time to do that but we can definitely do a round of introductions for for everybody on the call. So, I guess, let's, since whoever is showing scroll down to the list, let's do this in the order in which it's listed here. So Arno, you want to say hello and give a short introduction. Yes, hi everybody. Well, I'm one of the dinosaurs of hyperledger have been involved in this since the very beginning and still around. I'm part of the old technology group at IBM and I tried to help make this effort successful. So, Arno, Aru. Hey, morning. So, I'm excited to be again in the TSE. So, this has been quite a journey and I'm not sure I should. And first year of my TSE term and then under 3C. It's exciting to see the next one, especially with different engagements that we have been planning and different kinds of meetings that have been getting to involve in last couple of weeks at least looking forward to working with you. All right. Hi, everybody. I am glad to be back on the TSE. I come from the education side of things. So I am focused on onboarding people spreading great materials through the community so it's accessible to everybody and looking forward to another year of this great endeavor. Thanks. So, I guess I'm getting close to dinosaur status as well as Arno. I've been a long time maintainer of hyperledger fabric, and then after a couple years of that became kind of the release manager and point person for a lot of things on fabric. So, looking forward to another year here. Marcus. Yeah, so this is Marcus again. So I'm a research staff member at IBM Research in Zurich. In my day-to-day life, I'm contributing to a couple of labs and also in particular the fabric token SDK, the fabric smart client, but I'm also running the fabric project, which is part of fabric apparently. I'm super glad to help this year our community with all my expertise, which I have gathered in my time with hyperledger. I think that's in since 2018. And yeah, so I would really contribute back by helping you guys and the community in this committee. Thanks. Marcus. Hello, Steve Curran. I'm from the digital identity side of hyperledger. I started with ARI or joined ARIs or helped to initiate ARIs, I mean, and then a non-creds as well. So that's primarily focused, trying to help out a bit where I can in Ursa as well. And looking forward to learning about the other hyperledger projects, which I've not dabbled in too much. And so looking forward to that. And glad to be here. Hi, Timo. Definitely not a dinosaur. Quite new, but a few years within hyperledger and also mostly involved with the identity project. So hyperledger Indy, hyperledger ARIs and now recently also the new hyperledger AnuClatch project. I'm excited to also learn about other projects because, yeah, as well as Steven said, not too familiar with the other projects. Welcome, Timo. And Rama. Hi, I'm Rama, another one of the IBMers. I work for IBM Research India. I'm a senior researcher. I'm not a dinosaur either, but I have been around long enough to remember when hyperledger was called open blockchain. So I've been around. Recently, the past three or four years I've been interested in everything to the interoperability. I'm the lead maintainer of the Viva project, which has recently, as you all know, been rolled into the cacti project as a merger with cactus. So I am the goal of interoperability, though, the envisioned it as a connection between different distributed ledgers can also think about it as a way to create an integrated or more of an integration between the different hyperledger projects. So I've been looking at the different hyperledger projects and I think there's a lot of scope for us to get the different projects to be compatible with each other. And so that when somebody looks at the hyperledger project suite, they can, they can take whatever they want be it distributed ledger middleware tool and everything. It's a, it's a one place. It's a one shop shop for all for the entire blockchain solution. So that's something that really drives me and I hope to make some inroads into that this year. Alright, I'm trauma. And I guess I should do an introduction to myself as well. So I'm Tracy Kurt, I work for Accenture going on almost four years now at Accenture. And I got my start in the hyperledger space as well when hyperledger fabric was the open blockchain platform. So back in 2015, kind of timeframe is when I started my blockchain journey. I obviously spent a stint a whole number of you know as the hyperledger architect, at some point in my past and currently the hyperledger lab student, as well as the chair of the POC for hyperledger so welcome everybody who is new to the call. And I do notice that I think we have a few community members on the call today as well as staff members. So I didn't know if anybody else wanted to take an opportunity to introduce themselves while we're doing introductions. Feel free to do that now. Victor. So I'm Victor Griniewski. I'm helping mostly with Eroha too. I'm from Soromitsu. And generally I'm addressing documentation and technical support side but sometimes I'm digging in the code and actually quite a lot. So any questions regarding Eroha too are something that I can help with. And also, if you have questions regarding the author side, I will be attending our meetings and try to help as well. That's it. All right. Welcome, Victor. Anybody else like to take the opportunity to introduce themselves before we move on with the agenda. So if you are completely happy to lurk here, participate, feel free to at any point, jump in, raise your hand and add your thoughts and your opinions to the meeting. So we're completely open to anybody who wants to participate. So then I guess for quarterly reports, we do have the Ursa report that is still outstanding from December. I know that there's been some meetings that have attempted to be held in the Ursa community but it's maybe not a good time for the people who are participating there. So we do want to try and figure out how to get that group really kicked off here in the new year and see if we can get them to do some updates as far as what's happening there. Steve. I will type of address Ursa. I did a report late in 2022. Was that not the Q4 or was that the Q3. That was the Q3, Stephen. Yeah, it was it was interesting right because when you did that I think it was shortly before the Q4 one came up on the calendar. And so it was kind of like, do we ask for the Q4 one, do we not ask for the Q4 one. So I've left it on here, because we weren't quite sure what to do with that. But yeah, if you want to, if you and maybe Victor want to work on that together, that would be great. Alright, and then we do have two reports that are due today. I did see Dave, you had requested the link for reports to show up in the right spot. So hopefully we'll get the fabric and I guess I need to be better about changing that to cat die. That should say hopefully under cat die. Those reports are due today. So we'll hopefully see those and get those to be reviewed for next week. And then I'm sorry. The name hasn't changed yet. The name for cactus hasn't changed yet. We're still waiting on the code merge. Okay. Yeah, yeah, just wanted to echo that point so we have a, I guess we were the kind of the blockers there because we were waiting for some outstanding peers to be completed. So this is basically done. I'm going to message dry and get some time from him as soon as I can try to get this done. Sometimes middle of next week. So yeah, but yeah, you can from now on we can probably submit reports for cat die in fact the update that was we submitted earlier today or I think it was yesterday that contains updates on both cactus and we were so it was meant to be cacti updates. Okay, great. Thanks for that. All right, so the main, the main topic for today is really to discuss goals for our 2023 TSE term. So this is really an open discussion to try and figure out what people are interested in. So we have a set of both new members as well as returning members to the TOC and so like to spend some time just thinking about some of the things that we would like to work on. See if there's potentially any sort of task forces that we might want to kick off besides the continuing continuation of the security task force as it's ongoing. And those are I think really the sorts of conversations that I want to have and see what people are thinking. There's going to be the brave first person to raise their hand and talk about what it is they'd like to see the TSE accomplish this year. Yeah, Victor. So hopefully we can get also going ahead this year. And hopefully it's in more major state. I think it's in Iroha because the raw as far as I remember some security issues to fix and well maybe some quality stuff, because it kind of stuff at some point. Well, on several occasions. I guess that's it for me, but I feel like it's quite important. Yeah, so just following on what I said earlier. I, I do want to try and get like talk to the different different project maintainers to figure out how they can be compatible with each other that's that is, you know, different projects have their own niches now they can depend on a different project for to solve a particular example, Firefly as a middleware for multi blockchain application can depend on something like cacti for underlying interoperability protocols, we can have cacti depending on Ursa for all of its security mechanism needs and so on. So what I think I see and I don't know how closely the different project maintainers are working together, or even aware of what the other projects are doing but they may be a lot of reinventing of these going on across a different project so I want to make sure that we try to eliminate redundancy as much as possible and try to have particular projects be the repositories that other products can depend on like Ursa for as the canonical repository for security mechanism. So sort of, I have something good taught on this, hopefully I'll flesh these out as the year goes by. Thank you, Rama. Arno. Yes. So, I mean, to the risk of sounding like a broken raker to the to the past members of the TOC, I mean, but also in keeping with what Victor touched on, you know, and for those who don't know, you know, I spend most of my time now focusing on. Open SSF, which is a sister project to Hyperledger within the various foundation, and which, you know, focuses on securing the open source software supply chain. And so we started looking into this last year, we then really get to where it was hoping for, which is, and I hope we can do that this year is for the TOC to really shape the, you know, establishing policies with regard to how we deal with the security of open of the software we're developing in the Hyperledger across a different projects. I think we do need to improve a security posture as we call it now. And I'm very hoping that we can succeed in this this year. Yeah, thanks for that Arno I think that's a really important topic for us to talk through this year. I do know that in the governing board meeting that we had in December that was a topic that came up as well. I think that is making sure that we're putting together the best practices for security across our projects and so I think it's definitely going to be a topic of conversation that we need to continue and to really focus on that to really come out with what are these best practices and how can we consistently apply those practices across the different Hyperledger projects so thank you for bringing that one up as a topic because it is it's top of mind I think for a lot of people. Right. So one of the things that has top priority for me this year is in terms of in speeding up the adoption or improving the adoption. So especially some of the challenges that we have we have been facing is in terms of lack of doling support itself again when it comes to the speed of adoption. So when we talk about blockchain related or blockchain multiparty system applications. The value is understood. It's no more question of people asking please deserve value add for our use case or is this going to solve our business problem statements. The question rather now nowadays that we are facing is, okay, let's say we adopt this. So what's the benefit, like, we would be the only person adopting it. So the foster adoption would require us to develop additional doing around it so which means we need to foster projects that would bring in additional capability. For instance, it could be as it could vary right for instance it could be even a simple validation or verification frameworks the formal validation of smart contracts, there is no standard way of how do we do that. Or it could be in a way of having unified tools for deployment, or it could be in a way of having the interop support, which the captain is the captain team is putting into, and then having frameworks like Perun brought into mainstream my project. So my priorities for the year would follow this norm and see what we can do to the year from our side. Thank you. Yeah, I think I'm going to play off a little of what was said earlier. You referenced Ursa and things we found with Indy which is really trying to come up with a best practices and guidance and help whatever we can do for projects to be able to have automated pipelines that produce artifacts that that make it dead simple for somebody to make a contribution and actually have it come out the other end. Indy just went through a really long and painful exercise to update its pipeline so that when you make a co change it actually can be produced can produce an output. Ursa doesn't have that I asked that the other day or recently somebody put in just like a dependency update we need to update this dependency to this, and the act of actually producing an artifact from that is painful. And so it is a difficult thing but I'm hoping that across the projects we can come up with good practices and borrow learnings and so on to make it easier to have each project able to produce those in a, in a, in a fully automated way. It's a lot of work I know that. So it's not easy but but I certainly encourage it we're getting better at the various projects I'm involved with but it's hard. Yeah, so I wanted to add something to what I know suggested regarding the security back purchasing and collecting those in order also to share it with different communities on the Linux foundation. But I was also thinking that not only the security best purchasing but also our processes we have established within hyperlature and other vehicles like the concept of the labs. I believe that there are other concepts that exist for many other open source communities. This is something really valuable, I believe was developed here, or maybe not even develop but definitely we have that here in place and could be could be shared with other people. On the other hand, I also believe that there are other concepts used in different projects, which we should maybe also try to adopt. And I think, I mean, I believe the role of the GC is here then I mean to basically see what are the needs and understand what are the needs of our community. And what are maybe what processes are maybe broken what what do what does not work so well for us. Are there any other concepts, which we can basically borrow from. And that's what I wanted to add to Arnold's suggestion. And so what I also believe should be a goal of the to see this year is to, I mean, try to help the community to streamline the ease of use of our different projects. And because I'm saying that, because I remember from the last time that global forum, many people were, I mean, users of our projects were saying, Oh, there are so difficult to use. I mean, then they explained how difficult it is to set up a test network for hyperlateral fabric, for instance, right. There are some talks and they said, well, I mean, it's so easy to set it up just just do this and this and this and then you're done. But if you look more closely then maybe you notice that sometimes it works so nicely and easy because they're sacrificing security to some extent. And I think there that you see should should try to I mean to help me in that we are we are not losing the nice security benefits we get through distributed ledger technologies. I'm by just I'm making it easier to use. I guess I mean, it must be not so easy to set up a distributed system right. That's I wanted to bring you on the table. Thank you, Marcus. Promo. Thanks, I just want to ask a question, have passed the TLCs or TLCs considered providing some kind of permanent test for people to spin up different networks and apply different tools like drawn from the hyperlateral projects. Like, this relates to what I think Marcus was saying is people find it hard to set up the networks sometimes. Yeah, I think there has been discussions of test beds and test infrastructure, I think it boils down to cost and how do we cover those costs. That's what it really comes down to. So, I think that's been the biggest challenge on anybody who has knowledge otherwise or knowledge specifically, you know, who'd like to add to that please see. Sure. That's something that we've talked about basically since day zero, setting up test nets, and it does come down to cost. One of the expectations of support. One of the big things that we ran into. Following the workshop that we did last year was there was a test network that was set up for the workshop, and we continued to get questions about where the stuff that I did during the workshop go. And we, you know, the, the people who ran that test net only ran it for like three days. And there's some expectation setting that would need to happen with the community about the test net is a test net and it will go away. So it's a little more complex than just spend some stuff up and let people test. Yep. Yeah, I actually had a small comment about like Stevens thing on like pipelines and making sure we have releaseable artifacts is that, like, for example, for the Ursa library. It's by coincidence that a colleague of mine made a pull request for that a few months ago. But it hasn't been looked at much and I think that's maybe also a problem. I think especially and for example with Ursa project that isn't very actively maintained is that there's maybe not always ownership then over who. Yeah, reviews those pull requests. And it kind of follows on some of the other ones around good practices we heard about like security of best practices and CI pipeline, good practices, but I think it would be nice to pull that together into an overall project good practices or best practices. We have like the checklist that we did last year which is I think a good start but I think we can go further than that and say, these are the different things you need to think about for a project. And maybe they link to a deep dive like a deep link to a deep dive on security good practices and CI good practices. But overall I think there's a lot of considerations for managing a project that people need to consider and if you're bringing a new project in your or you're a new maintainer. You probably don't know a lot about a lot of those things so you know even like there's a lot of GitHub settings. It's hard to know which ones are recommended. We've had conversation in the past week about Zen Hub versus GitHub projects for managing backlogs of issues and things like that so there's just a whole host of things I think it'd be good to have a one stop shop kind of umbrella location that we can then link off to for these different aspects. So I'm not seeing any hands at the moment so I'm just going to kind of go through the list that I've heard so far to see if it sparks any other ideas. Really, I think project health came up a couple of times related to Ursa and how do we improve the project health, the compatibility across projects and eliminating redundancy is another item security came up multiple times. Increasing adoption, tooling and validation best practices came up in different contexts we just heard from Dave about, you know, maybe it's project best practices that include best practices for security for automated pipelines for project management for how we configure GitHub. That sort of thing. I heard that there's some processes that we might want to either bring to other communities or bring other communities processes into Hyperledger really understanding what other projects do and what we might want to adopt from there. There is the streamlining the ease of use, right. So, I think that goes hand in hand with some of the adoption piece but really streamlining it and making sure that it's easy to start up maybe a different blockchain network and still ensure that we're taking into account things like security and how would we run this in a healthy way. So I think those are the topics that I've captured. I think there's another one which a lot of the returning TOC members are going to hate me for bringing up but it is something that the governing board had a discussion about, which is really related to the status or the health of projects and how do we ensure that projects are remaining healthy either through some sort of badging process or through some sort of listing of what it requires for projects that have graduated. Right now our project life cycle is a Ford only life cycle and there's been discussions about whether that life cycle process needs to change or needs to be enhanced in any way shape or form. I think we've had this discussion at least once for the past three years, if not longer, but I do think it is something that we do need to see if we can come to some sort of resolution about how do we go about handling that. So that's what I've captured so far. There are a few TOC members that we haven't heard from yet. I would love to hear from those TOC members who haven't had a chance to speak yet. And anybody else who that list kind of jogs some other things in their mind about what it is that they'd like to see us accomplish in 2023. Jim. Yeah, thanks Tracy. Sorry for being late. I guess just a general thought around enabling the high pleasure based project on public chains. I guess, depending on the specific project some are naturally have a need to support that versus others, especially the DLT projects that you don't necessarily have that goal, but a lot of projects are by design like blockchain, cactus, bevel, far fly. I just feel like also Aries, or the other endocrides, the other DID related projects. So many of our customers are looking at stacks that enable them to do solutions within a permission setting in consortiums, but they also want to enable and engage a wider set of participants and public chains become a natural place to do that. And there's more than one occasion where the high pleasure stack would have been the perfect choice, except for that you can't use it on public chains. And they would have to go with a lesser less mature stack as a result. And so I don't know what what are the specific concrete things we could do to encourage that but I would say, you know, from our messaging from marketing backgrounds, we can, we can, we can do more to encourage this. Thanks, Jim. Bobby. Hi, yeah, I was in a meeting with the learning materials working group which now has new leadership with David Boswell, and we were discussing how the new reorganization of that will help the community. I think the things we were discussing is kind of the documentation standards and the standards for people coming into the community, how do they find the resources. So that's something that definitely I'll be working with the learning materials working group moving forward with David to try to figure out how to support the community. Once they get into the community, the resources with the resources we have available. Thanks, Bobby. Any other thoughts that people have specific goals that they have for the 2023 TSE term? Victor? Yes, I'd like to know if the time was slightly shifted because I was surprised. I haven't seen previous meetings for a couple times and was it shifted for an hour after or something like that. And is the time and calendar will, is the right time currently? Yeah, Victor, so we haven't met for probably three, maybe potentially four weeks. Okay. The holidays, the holiday schedules for most people were a little, I think shifted some took earlier holidays, some took later holidays. And so we wanted to make sure that we didn't mess with anybody's time off and make sure that there wasn't any sort of issues there. And I think we actually canceled the one right before the holidays as well because we didn't have any specific topics to discuss during that one. So yeah, it has probably been a month since the TOC has met and so no time changes just related to the holidays. Okay, so thank you very much. Yep. All right. Other other thoughts on goals for the 2023 term? I think we have a really good list. I do think that there is the potential to kick off some task forces from this list. So what my plan is is to basically take the chicken scratch they had here and put them into the agenda, the meeting notes so that everybody can see kind of what they are. And maybe think about, you know, some potential task forces that we could kick off for the 2023 term that we can make sure that we're continuing to have discussions. It really sounds like there's some, some things around different sorts of best practices that we might want to put together task forces around, you know, maybe some thoughts around the different sort of ways in which we might ease the adoption of the different projects that we have. There could be something around that. But yeah, happy to have any other thoughts that people might have to include in that list. I think we did have everybody from the TOC who had an opportunity to speak. So that's really good. Thank you for the participation now. Okay, so I think with that, just I want to cover what else is left on this page just so we can have a make sure that everybody is aware of what's happening here. So the HLF operator project proposal has come in. There has been some discussions that have been ongoing with the Bevel community about potentially bringing the HLF operator into Bevel as a fabric operator. Those conversations are continuing so we're leaving the project proposal open until there's been some sort of formal resolution on that. But that's the expectation at this point is that that project is going to, or that proposal is really going to become part of Bevel. So we'll continue to keep an eye on that and see how those conversations progress to make sure that we don't have to do anything specific there. Yeah, just a quick comment on this. Yeah, definitely Bevel. But I thought there's also another labs contributed by IBM on the same, basically the same functionality, right, a operator for fabric. You mean the fabric smart plan? Yeah, I assume that that team is also involved in the discussions. And Jim is right, there's also a fabric dash operator lab that's out there. So those that and the HLF operator are kind of meeting similar objectives. Yeah, I think, I think that there's potentially even third or fourth sort of operator out there related to fabric that I think it would be really good to have these communities come together under a single group, right, to really make sure that the operator is going to meet whatever the needs are for the different uses of the operator. And I would really like to see those conversations happen within the Bevel community and making sure that the right things are done moving forward. So that's, I think, you know, definitely a known sort of space that there's a lot of interest in, right, is really deploying fabric is big. And I think there's a lot of different ways in which people have a process and so I do think Bevel is the right community to make that happen and to make sure that all the voices are heard. So, would definitely encourage anybody who either is on this call or knows the right people to get involved in those conversations instead to reach out to the Bevel community to make sure that those, those conversations are, are had. Right. Tracy, would you expect Bevel to do some kind of assessment across these various operators and choosing which ones to more closely partner with. Yeah, there has definitely been a conversation about that, Dave, about making sure that there's, you know, understanding of what's out there and really looking at the space as a whole. So, I, you know, would definitely encourage, right, Dave, if you're the right person or you know the right people to maybe have a conversation with the Bevel maintainers to make sure that, you know, the needs and desires of that fabric operator lab and anybody else who has an operator that they think is, you know, the right one to bring into this, to have those conversations and make sure that, you know, all of the different, I think requirements right on that by whatever it is that the Bevel operators bring in because the other piece of this right is that with Bevel, I think the idea is that as you are probably all the way right it deploys multiple blockchain frameworks and so one to make sure that as we think about operators we're thinking about them. One for the individual blockchain platformers but also across the board what should an operator look like for the different sorts of blockchain framework so you know, that's, I do, you know, I had a conversation this morning with Sonak who's one of the Bevel maintainers and he did talk about right like what is the right thing for us to be doing and how do we lay out kind of the design pattern that these operators are so yeah definitely that's the right space I think to be having the conversations and Dave please if you are that person let's get you connected with Sonak if there's somebody else we should connect he's related to the fabric operator let us know and we can make sure that those conversations are being had. Okay, thanks. And I know when you had your hand up you're definitely been involved in those conversations as well so. Yeah I wanted to just, you covered all the points that I wanted to say, yeah Bevel as such, as you know has been looking into the next phase of the release like now that it is mature. I mean, I think Sonak would be better person but I'll try to summarize I think, as Tracy said, the future version of Bevel. We are planning to have flexibility in how people choose to deploy some of these components so there's right now, there is support for help operator. In the future there's going to be project specific operators such as fabric operator or the HLF operator if we can unify that and then consider one of those operators as the project specific operator, it would also be placed alongside. The choice of deployment tool from the user perspective they would be able to choose either they need this project operator or they want to go with and help operator concept itself. So that is definitely a good place to be in. I still feel like there is possibility for us to collaborate across considering maintainers from shallow fabric operator and HLF operator and then bringing them along with Bevel project maintainers on all on one call and discussing it further. So then the other items that we have our backlog items. So these come directly from our github issues tracking. We have the update the security process we did take off the security task force for that. So we're continuing to leave this open until the security task force comes back with you know the best practices that we need to make sure that we're consistently implementing across the different hyperledger project. So that is an ongoing item. This other one that's on here, which is just been open today to go by right to request to move project report to github. There's some discussion that's been happening on the issue itself but I think that is definitely a topic that we should discuss as the TOC. So right I don't know if you want to give like an overview of what you're thinking here, and then let people comment on the issue. Throughout the week and then we can talk about this further maybe next week. Sure, what I would like to do. If you can open that. So what I would like to do is currently the quarterly reports are in the wiki. And there are some good things and there are some downsides with that. The reason that I would like to do that is if you scroll down a little bit is it's much easier to get a history of the voting and the comments in a, you know, recorded form. You know currently in the wiki, it's, it's in the wiki, but it's a little bit difficult to get to to find out who did what and who said what. My idea here is that the, the, the votes, I'm sorry, not the votes as people read it as to see members read it. They would market as approved. And then once there's some number of people who have approved that it would be it would be merged and the conversation would be captured and the get history over here. And part of this is my, there, I don't know when there's going to be a change to how Confluence, there is a change that how Confluence is licensed period at last year has changed that. I don't know what the Linux Foundation plan is around that, how we're going to handle that turbulence coming in the future. And I don't want to deal with it again. It's really kind of terrible how the GitHub macros work in Confluence, and every once in a while it breaks and then I have to go on a journey of discovery to find out what exactly broke. So my assumption is that GitHub macros and the like that are on a GitHub project would have less chance of breaking, and I would like to remove that journey of discovery from myself. And then we would end up as a rune point out if you can click on the link for the governance rendered site. The, we would end up over here with a tab that would have the, like the non creds technical charter. We would end up with a tab under there that would have the project reports going back in history. So look, if you switch over to the TOC, if you go to like to see that hyper ledger.org. So if you go to, you know, any any of these, like the members, the TOC members. This is a page that shows, you know, the history, we would have something like this that would have like here the, you know q 123 reports or whatever. It would show the history of what they are and it would be easier to find I believe it would have higher Google rank. I see Stephen has his hand up. Yeah, one thing, sort of independent of what your proposal is but but along the same veins of things we could as a as a TOC sort of have a goal of is generated generated sites off of Markdown. And the benefit of what you're proposing is this becomes an actual website, as opposed to part of confluence and and so give us the ability to present the data in better ways. So I'm going to spin off of this this particular use case to encourage the, the TOC to figure out how we can help projects move past readme.md files that are sitting in a GitHub repo versus a generated static website or static generated that is a much friendlier, more welcoming and easier to understand version of the same information so I think this is a general, a general issue which is how do we take the information and make it more accessible to, you know, new people to contributors to maintainers to the particular audience for the particular thing you're talking about. So, in what Rai is talking about, you can find a way to find all of the projects and drill down to find the quarterly reports or you could take an individual project. For example, you can take the TOC view which is I want to see all the quarterly reports for all the projects and present a view that way but also present a view that is, here's the, you know, hyperledger Aries project and here's the history of the of the reports so let's go over the whole over how the information gets displayed. I think it's a good practice in general, but it's hard to do, or at least it's not easy to do and, and I think all the teams are going through figuring out how to do it and what's the best practices and so on so I think the TOC could help there. Agreed. We have a markdown material docs that we pay for that's excellent that I would like to get more projects using. I would also like to get all the projects off of read the docs and start using GitHub pages to publish their documentation and much like this TOC hyperledger.org. You know that's that's a GitHub page. I would like to get, you know, everybody off of these bespoke platforms into one place. And that one place is GitHub right now. So that's a longer term goal but I'm glad that you brought it up because it would be much easier. If everybody was on GitHub. Stephen. Yeah, so example of that just so you know is, we just went through a assessment of should we use make docs material or should we use docusaurus which one. You know, and, and it would be really nice not to have every project have to evaluate that figure out how to do it figure out how it applies to them, but actually have a way to, to just say oh, you do this this and this and now you have generated docs and now it's much more about the content and less about how you present it. Agreed. Yeah, and just maybe. Sorry, Tracy for a moment. That's okay. Coming on there for a moment, I do know that some of the work that Bobby and the documentation task force was doing last year related to some of this. But I would. It sounds like maybe there's some consideration of that happening this year. But I don't know, I think you're going to have the last word. Yeah, I'll be quick. I just wanted to follow up because as people may see on the screen I had actually asked right to explain a little bit more, give a bit more background. I think this discussion highlights the fact that I think, you know, the proposal. And as I said in my camera, I'm not against it. I think it lacked a little bit of, you know, details as to what it would actually mean what how we would use this. So, you know, I think this needs to be laid out properly so that we can have a formal proposal put before the talk. All right. Thanks. So yeah, let's, let's continue the conversation on that GitHub issue. And we will bring it up again next week. If we have something that's more formal that we can propose to vote on. But yeah, thanks everybody for your contributions today and and we will talk again next week.