 And welcome to the, okay, the working group docs subgroup meeting for the 19th of October. And I just put the meeting notes in the chat for folks that don't have it. And anything you want to change on the agenda, don't forget to put your name in the attendance. Michael and Bruce, that way folks know that you are here. Anything we need to add or change in terms of the agenda? Okay, then let's jump into it. No update on the charter yet. I was working on the video stuff, so I haven't taken a look at the charter stuff yet. Betasite and Brian. Unfortunately, no real progress. I was hoping Diane was going to be here to see if she could prod. We're just waiting for the DNS entry. Everything else has been done. It's all been migrated, tidied up all the branches, switched all of the automation onto the main branch, renamed the master domain. So everything's done. We're just waiting for the switchover of DNS. A couple of other things that have happened, though, since last call. We've integrated the virtualization voting group. Sandra decided to remove the media sort of ticker. They still have the links there, but I didn't see that was a reason not to integrate. So that's now been integrated. Sandra also helped upgrade the automation, so it now does a build. So if you've got a spell check or a link error, you get notified immediately that you create the pull request rather than when you actually do the pull, when you actually do the merge, which obviously is a help. So that's really it. Okay. And being here, moving on, we'll be reworking the install and the read me after the data site goes prod. Inclusive language update that'll be addressed when data site goes prod. Unhold until the data site goes prod is creating a build doc outline for the dean. Is basically that'll be sorting through several documents all at once. Upgrade path notifications. There's still item mostly. Yeah, I think it is. Most of those things in there are. Very old and we talked about them. Yeah, that's what we're going to. Did anyone have a chance to look at the code of conduct yet? I had a read through of it. I guess my idea is that it's reasonable if the people that are implementing it are reasonable. Right. You know, as with many of those things. Some of the terms can be problematic when interpreted by problematic people. But accurate. Yeah, but. So then the question is, do we, do we need to, I mean, I'm happy to go with it the way it is. It's better than than many. That I've seen. So, I will let others decide whether or not we need to words method or if we can just go with it. Yeah, do is it ethical to just do that straight lift and shift like that. I go in and they've done it before that way actually on a couple other types of things. So like the. The charter is actually sort of a lift and shift with a few modifications from I think CNCF stuff. And so this, yeah, I mean, she she was under the impression that it would be fine and she knows that the answer will folks ran this through a lawyer. Even if it even if it weren't and we had to do lots of word smithing or a copy and paste. Do people generally think it's. I mean, we can bring this to the larger group, but is there anything that you would strike out and this folks should feel open in this conversation. Right. Yeah, I guess I guess my only concern is really under the anti harassment. Policy where it talks about offensive comments. There is very little these days that anybody can say that somebody won't take as offensive. So, especially if it's offensive. From the standpoint of the offended and intent is irrelevant. Yeah, I will be honest that I've actually been. Concerned about the trend towards intent not mattering. I mean the one comment I would say about that that age it says offensive comments related to gender, but then goes and lists things such as age and physical appearance which I'm not, I don't really associate with gender. I mean, if I'm being agist, it's not related to a gender. It's great. There's a common other there's a comma there, right. Okay, sorry. Yeah. Yeah, I just sort of the way I read that it was sort of like. Right. I think it covers us. I think we can, if somebody is being particularly troublesome. We can use it to resolve it. And we can point people at it that even if they're not, as I said, I think this is also a cultural thing as you travel around the world. What one culture may find offensive another one may not. If someone comes say to Jamie and said look, I don't feel comfortable attending these meetings anymore because I'm feeling that I'm being bullied or whatever. Then this gives Jamie something to sort of point out and say to whoever was being not not knowingly being sort of bullying just sort of calm it down. Just think of other people's cultures. So, as, as with all these things, I think it does have to be handled with common sense. I'll be happy to type this as is. Would folks be comfortable if we added a sentence that said something about mediation, as opposed to just like, I know that complicates it. I'd be happy with the what used to be called the reasonable man standard. I guess we could call it reasonable person standard. I don't have a problem with that. But in other words, what is offensive is what would be offensive to a reasonable person. My definition of which I guess is I'm happy to go with the English common law. And that one. So I guess my concern is that if someone says something. That's offensive to someone. And maybe they slip up and do it again. This basically says you have the right to to kick them out or whatever. But it, there's nothing here that says basic that lays the groundwork for a mediation between two people who are having conflict. That's, that's the only concern that I have is that it's basically like you're in or you're out. And maybe that's fine for people. But I've, I've been on a lot of different boards and committees and stuff like that. And sometimes conflict is a little bit more. But it's not as black and white as someone said something that everyone agrees is offensive and. And, you know, I mean, like there's often when it happens, there's it's a little more nuanced, but you know, I got that. Yeah. Again, reading this, I would say, if a participant engages in harassing behavior, the meeting organizers may take any action they demon appropriate. So I think we do have a general get out clause that if you think that somebody wasn't intentionally being offensive, it may just be their general language. They may think is okay, but someone else may not think okay. It allows you to maybe open a chat message and say that may not have been the best choice of words or something and you can resolve it like that. But maybe that you think, well, they are being deliberately provocative and being deliberately offensive. And then you may want to give them an official warning. Stop and disease. Otherwise, you'll be ejected. So I think it gives it gives us the ability to apply common sense. It's not saying it's an automatic. You're out. It's saying that we can take the action we deem appropriate, which I think is where your, your mediation or the common sense approach comes in where a quiet word at the side is, I mean, I think the challenges that we're all online. A lot of this seems to be written as if you're attending an event. I think online can be a little bit more and you're not seeing people, you're not seeing body language and things can be taken a little bit more out of context because there is less context to actually understand how the person's reacting towards you. Michael, what do you think? Yeah, I was a little confused. So it's quite the right, but a little confused by the, the term events. Myself, in terms of is this an event? It is. I mean, so we're, I at least my interpretation and when Diane and I talked about this and when we've talked about this at other meetings. Like, for example, the CNCF, they actually have mentioned their code of conduct at the bidding of every streaming TV show that they do. And they say that this is considered this streaming TV show is considered an event of the CNCF. So I think it's sort of that. So I just noticed at the bottom that actually this, even though it was apparently run through a lawyer, it's creative commons attribution and was pulled from the codes of conduct of open stack puppet labs, a boon to door project elastic, etc. So it looks like this was even pilfered from other people. Right. So, yeah, so it's creative comments so we can we can use it modify as long as we give proper notice. Do we define what an event is? We don't. And maybe that would be a helpful modification. Yeah. Event. I have some, they lifted up there somewhere. Mailing this code and documentation contributions, public IRC channels, private correspondents and public meetings. There we go. Yeah, for the conduct covers. Yeah. Yeah, okay. We can click that. Okay. So, what do folks think? Is this a straw poll vote of everyone saying yes here? Is that the gist? I'd like to. It redundant in places, but it's probably better be redundant than not enough. Bruce. Well, I'll go along with it. I'm sort of a, even though I'm sitting in Canada, I am a strict 1st amendment. The speaker. So, no, are you, are you a native canuck a standing or are you, you know, I'm an imported 1. Oh, okay. I see. And I don't didn't mean to offend anyone by saying canuck a standing. Yeah, and actually people are like, I've been to courses on microaggressions, which is sort of a related work topic. And asking somebody about the origins is a typical microaggression. Well, I don't mean to. So, I could be offended by that if I were so inclined. There we go. Well, it matters. Or if I were gaming the system of taking offensive everything. So, yeah, I mean, the. It's hard to get into most of those things while staying on topic. With it with our subject matter, fortunately. And so my, my feeling is it's not harmful. And, you know, that's sort of also my feeling on the inclusive language. You know, if it doesn't hurt us, why not. You know, change. Whatever is the name that we can't say anymore of the brand of the main branch domain. Etc. Although I've noticed that like the wild flag people, which is another red hat project. Don't seem to be doing that at all. They're looking at their get repositories. So it's a little bit inconsistent. But, you know, why not. I don't have a problem with that. So I guess I'm similarly with this one. It probably is not going to hurt us. So I'm happy to go along with it. I don't necessarily want to encourage it. So, you know, hand halfway up. I'm not going to avoid against it. Let's see. Okay. Well, I'll tell you what, we'll bring this to the main group at the next meeting. And I guess what we'll do is. Michael, do you have a second between now and next week where you could. Lift this and change the references from Ansible to. Okay D and any other. On text changes. Yeah, you need an email that works as well. That's related to us. Yeah, we need. Yeah. Report was conducted. I am. Yeah, actually, we don't really have a. Like, well, I guess the, well, no, you wouldn't want it on the general working group email because then that goes to everybody. It would have to be something like chairs. Yeah. All right. Should we create an email address them? That's the chairs. It is to say. If, well, I, you know, I. My sense is that stuff like this wouldn't be used a lot, but we probably should have a private email address than which people. Yeah, we should. Yeah, in all seriousness. Yeah, it's a good idea. Yeah. And the chairs. Definitely one person. Yeah, yeah, it's myself, Diane and. But Dean actually Christian is no longer a co chair. He's just a. You know, participating member. Okay, well, I will find out if we. Have resources to do that within red hats. Or actually, we can ask Diane. To find out, because I was just going to say Dean, but was Diane because she has all the communications things. So I'll take that as a task to ask Diane. To ask around to see if red hat can provide an email address. It might be that we. Michael, did you have some. I was just wondering if we had a mechanism outside of red hat. That would just from a liability perspective. Sure, that would be good. I don't know. I mean, we could set up a Google email. Yeah. I mean, we've got the Google group. You've got the email list so. I'm guessing the other thing we could do is if we're going to set up an organization for gigs. That might be an opportunity to create a. A similar linked. Email. I wonder how, yeah. But we couldn't do the dope. We couldn't enter the, the domain of okd.io. It would have to be something else. Right. Unless we could convince the powers that be to route to it. The MX records to a different mail server than red hats. So it would have to be a completely different domain. Right. Unless we use the get email. Addresses that you can generate. I don't know. Let's wait for Diane to chime in on this because there's a bunch of legal stuff that's wrapped up in this that I don't. Completely understand because on the one hand it's it's. An open source project, but a lot of stuff is pulling us in a separate direction. Away from the sponsor, which is red hat and I don't know how much the sponsor of this project. Like wants to keep their hands in it. Internal external resources. Because she was going to find out about even being able to do a separate repository and I haven't heard back on that yet. Let's shelve that until we know better. Well, I would say Michael, go ahead and start working on it if you can. And just chip away at it as time permits and then we'll come up with an email solution. Sounds good. Private 1230. Yeah, half an hour before next meeting I'll probably do it. I understand, you know, and if you can't, that's fine. This is. An ongoing thing. But of conduct. We did that. Logo for slides. I got that. Let's see here. And you saw the video actually it's it's a new business session. I'll talk about that. Michael, did you take care of all of the 4.9 references? Yes, it should be. Okay, so that should be good. Okay, it's all version now. Okay. Yeah. And Michael, I just, I'm probably going to raise an issue on it tonight, but I just noticed that between 4748 and 49 the overt section in 47 is called our hv so red hat virtualization. It's been totally removed from 48. And it's called over to 49. Oh, so I'll probably I'll put a, I'll put an issue in on that. Oh yeah, that'd be great. Thank you. 49 stuff in, in Maine, which would be latest. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I was going to say, when you go to the documentation, it just say latest. So at the minute for for us that should be for rates. Yeah, our latest should be for rates because we haven't released for nine yet. The Michael, is it possible to pull latest out of the pull down? Oh, yeah. Okay. Yeah. Let's do that then and just stop at 48. Okay. Done. We'll. We're going to have to wait for Twitter and Facebook for next steps because Diane was the one. And new business, the video intro. Are folks happy with this. Diane isn't here to sign off on the whole font issue, but. Are folks happy with the intro video enough to. Where as long as there's no font issues, we can move forward with sticking at the beginning of the videos. And the link is broken. Oh, oh, whoops. There's some extra characters here. Hold on one sec. Okay, try now. And that looks good. And much to be able to read the letters. What do you think Brian. Yeah, that looks. Should the okay DB bigger. And maybe bowl to bigger than working group. Yeah, actually, I can, I can do that to make it. It does. It does seem a little sort of backwards. So. Yes, I can, I can do that. That's an easy thing. All right. Well, I don't think the main group will care. So I'll just make that fix and run it by Diane. I've held off on putting videos in the past few weeks because I didn't want to put any more up with that. Ray. Old slide. Long time ago. All right. So, ask list. Let's see. We can actually change this task list. Done code of conduct review is done. Oh, put of conduct edits. And it's Brian, what about right up on the site automation is that. It's partially done and I'll leave it on there. Yeah, it should be done by next time, but I'm hope I've been sort of holding off doing too much in cases and the issues with the. We, when it goes live, so I didn't want to actually do too much change meant too many changes to it. So. But of conduct edits right up guide on site automation. Maybe later me and then. From Diane. We need. We have legal inputs. External repo and social media. Is there anything else in the task list that we need to add? Or is that everything we've covered in the meeting? Okay, well, we had an item last, I guess, 2 weeks ago on task boards. And I was having a look at that and. Because I use get lab for my students. You know, the, I was happy when very quickly up popped get lab references. And I was somewhat stunned. At the level of happiness around get lab that came in the last week's meeting. Because I thought that everybody was totally on board with GitHub. And all of our stuff is on GitHub. So the. I guess from my personal standpoint, if there's a good solution on get lab, I'm happy with that. Now, for us. The. You know, I can continue on with with general search, but, but I guess. It would be considering. Moving to get lab. I think. I think the general consensus is that we can. Diane was going to do 1 last check to see if it's okay for us to. To move the community stuff to an external repo. But my thought was the general consensus was that people are on board with get lab, Michael, Brian, does that seem. Like your interpretation of the facts. I think the only thing that. Someone raised, I can't remember who was was if there's any points of integration needed. Right, then because all of the rest of the build system is on GitHub. Would that cause us an issue down the line. I think some we did talk about that product that I don't know whether it will be an issue whether we will ever have linkages but. Probably. Yeah, that was the only thing that I, I took as a negative from that whole discussion in the main group. Yeah. Yeah, good. I was just going to say from a personal thing, and if we're going to move the OCD side and I've never used get lab so just as long as the automation is similar. So we can do the GitHub pages equivalent and the automations there to build it. It'd be good if we just check that. Bruce, if you're familiar with that, if you can just confirm that those similar features, they may not be the same, but there's, you can do the same thing basically that I can see no issue. Right. No, I think I think that's an even more important point than the task board type thing. Yeah, why don't you. I'm in the middle of midterms this week so it's it's a bit busy but why don't you give me a task to see if I can get the, the beta site running on get lab. Okay. And then, and then it's, and then it's the bit that's yet to happen with GitHub but GitHub supports is can Red Huts DNS do a redirect and as a C name that will respond to you. Right, that shouldn't that shouldn't be a problem I wouldn't think but the whether or not the automation would work is, I guess, significant issue. I wouldn't want to express an opinion without trying it. Sure. I think that's a good idea. Alright, anything else. The productive meeting quick and productive. Alright, well, I will hit stop then on this and. We will do our various tasks and meet back here in 2 weeks and of course, the regular meeting is. Next week. So with that, we'll end the meeting.