 All right, sandbox review is on. We are now recording. Go ahead. But I have got a drop, but I can reply to others in Slack if you need me to, if that helps. I believe you've already put in your plus ones for, if I'm correct in here, it's Crestless, Crater, and Oraz. Yes? And Walsham Cloud. Yeah, Walsham Cloud. Thank you. That's what I was missing. Should we do those, you know, while we're still thinking of those. So any other thoughts about Crustlet and Crator seems like they're worth discussing together? Plus one on both. I mean, you can get it going. Good. Shall we do votes for Crustlet? Are we missing somebody? I have seven, so I'm not sure who I'm missing. Shane, there we go. There we go. Great. Pessus, thank you. Cool. And that's for Crator, missing one. Is this an IBM project? I can see some contributors from Microsoft. And the person who submitted the project is also Microsoft. Actually, it might be useful information to add to the list of questions to ask, because I always try to decipher it either from email address or GitHub org. Maybe we can make it more explicit going forward. Alina, Tyson-Lori seems to be in IBM. OK. Maybe it's again. It's the Beamerang one. I think we're talking about Crator at the moment. Yes, it's one row below Taylor Thomas. OK. Great. And I think we will only have Quorum for the ones that Justin has voted on, because that takes us to eight. So let's cover those. And then we can we can always talk about the other ones and do a vote in a polling slack or something. So should we talk about Aura's next is line six, I think. Chris, do you know anything about the sort of OCI background here that seems like there might be some? I don't know. Is there any no, it's like I think a typical, you know, standards body versus open source projects. The OCI folks are just very resistant to major changes, at least the core maintainers. So making anything big, you know, they tend to avoid. Generally, they don't want things like reference. Implementations outside of RunC itself living there. So Ores is basically an implementation of some of the ideas in the distribution spec and artifacts work, you know, essentially. So it's a way of basically formal way of hosting artifacts in a registry. I think Ores actually uses Docker distribution, I think, under the hood, I recall. And I see the why you want to contribute the project being for evidence reasons. Yeah, the fact that it is is currently existing under open containers. Is there any? I don't know, legal. And if you know, or anything, no, it would be like container D implements, you know, OCI specs, right? There's no issue. So they would move that artifacts directly. No, potentially, they'd have a discussion but or as itself, it's got its own project. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, OK. They have its own GitHub repo and so on. So they have a CLI, they have a go library and a spec. And the spec is currently under OCI, is it? Yeah, I think it's OCI artifacts and distribution spec. I think those will remain in OCI. But that's OK. I mean, it's clearly cloud native, you know, area. Yep. People want to stuff other things in container registries is the end of the story here. And this is one implementation. Yeah, plus one. All right. So let's do those for OS. Apologies for my messed up capitalization there. I think that's everyone. And should we skip ahead to wasn't cloud? It's quite a good statement here that as a technology, wasn't cloud is compatible with and enhances the lives of the cloud native developers. It's very ambitious. Any comments, any? Ricardo saying they're going to present the tag runtime. Any concerns about this one? Anyone wants to air? I guess one question I have is are they talking about the whole? Wasn't cloud organization, which has a bunch of different. Sub projects. Yeah, I assume so. A lot of it looks like utilities. Examples, some CLI, Wasm Cloud Shell. We could ask, but I'm assuming it's it's everything. So Wasm Cloud is the name of the company. Looks like it's some kind of LLC. They're going to don't need this whole organization to see us here. Yeah, I mean, they're going to have to either donate the mark or choose a new name. So subject to. So I'll put some of that subject to. Name naming. I'll go I'll go shoot them a note. That's interesting. They want to start looking at the incubation process right after. I mean, it seems aggressive. Yeah, I think they're probably going to be a little bit early for incubation straight away, just from. You know, what I'm seeing here. Agreed, it's nice to have ambition, I guess. Can can we check how much how many people contribute to this? Or like who? It looks like Capital One and a company called Cosmonic, which I think is a spin out from Capital One. But yeah, I think it's a lot of code that came out of Capital One with wazzy and all their kind of wasm experimentation. And then folks left and spun out a company. And this Liam Randall seems to be like. The serial entrepreneur. Yeah, I think he's at some cloud. He's at cloud custodian or whatever stack that. Now I think. Yeah, I think he was involved with cloud custodian when it came out of the capital. Yeah, and before he was at some Kubernetes, I think startup that he sold to Capital One. So he's been around for a while. OK, last one from me subject to me. So I think now that we've been through Justin's votes, we can't actually vote. On others, but we could still discuss. Any concerns that people have, and then maybe we can hold a vote somehow through Slack separately. I feel like we all have to use the same voting mechanism. Does that. Does anybody think I'm crazy to think that we only have seven minutes left? Yeah, I wonder if it's better to have separate meeting. I'm going to say there's this one that struck out to me is or stuck out to me is. Being a strange example of a project. And that was Pogtato head, which I think is lovely. I think it's a really cool thing. But I mean, it's never going to be like product. It's a test. Yeah. Then I don't see how it can ever. Get to incubation or graduation. It's in the sea and see if you don't work. Yeah, it's it was basically part of was it app delivery? I think the tag put together an example application showing different. CNCF projects showing how app delivery would work in a modern thing. So the question is like, you know, they've kind of been playing with this, you know, and I think they want to spin it as an official sandbox thing versus kind of it floating on its own. I mean, we allow, you know, working groups and tags to do like white papers and kind of example projects, right? So it's kind of one of these artifacts that they completely think it's a great thing that exists and see how it's going to get through the Yeah, you know, if we put it in sandbox, where is it going to go? It can't. Yeah, I mean, criteria. So I mean, we can just say we leave it in the CNCF organ street as an example work, you know, example project from. The app delivery group and that's that's fine. Chris, but then, you know, we have cuban into six, like so can we have something like CNCF tag and then move it there? We could. We could. I'd be open to that exploration. There's not many projects that would fall under that particular. Right. But then if you get a bar, other people will get ideas and say, OK, can we implement their request on our request there? It is actually interesting. Should we have kind of guidelines on how, like if you go to this repo, I mean, it's very clear that it's a demo project, you know, that it's it's pretty cool, really. But like who owns it? I don't know. There's. So in the cuban, the thing we end up saying, OK, this repo is owned by the CIG. So in this case, it will be the tag and then the members of the tag would get added as, you know, maintenance there. Yeah, actually, it does say in the about thing it says, since you have that delivery seek demo. Yeah. So. Yeah, I think maybe we should encourage some kind of way of. People understand when they come up across a project where it came came from like who. Who sort of owns it? But yeah, any of the other projects that people want to talk about or highlight any concerns about? I'm excited about a metal LB looks cool. Thank you. In fact, I think didn't we last time get as far as another load balancing project that we didn't get as far as metal LB? Border LB, right? They have the rename. Oh, yeah, reapplied with the new name. Look at line number 20. It looks like we need another decision. Maybe we have two minutes left. So we will definitely be like there will be a backlog that moves towards our next meeting. And as I get things together, I will announce when the next project meeting is we can probably do one the end of August. But I'm a little concerned about like a bunch of people on vacation in August. Yeah, this twenty two on the that we need to talk about. Twenty two on the sheet that we haven't already. Yeah. Well, we've got rid of got rid of. We just voted on about four of them. And maybe maybe I think unless anyone particularly feels strongly that we should hold a vote on Pogtato head, I think maybe we should tell that one. They don't feel. Yeah, maybe maybe we'll chat about like what solution we've come up with for these example projects, because I mean, for the white, you know, for the paper is that people are producing, it just goes into the actual tag repo. So it's very clear who is the owner. But for the code projects, obviously they're not living. You know, in those repos in particular. I mean, that could be the solution, but that kind of sucks from a maintainer perspective, if they have to maintain this. I like being able to have like them specifically noted as you are part of like the tag, you are like a demo project there, but you don't have to be in the repo directly. Yeah. So that that is a thing that we can take under advisement. Yeah. Yeah, I think we're up to time. We got through quite a lot today. So awesome. Well done, folks. Take care. Take care.