 prior you on I see that you're recording okay but I can't hear you so first we have the antitrust policy notice that hopefully the majority of y'all are already familiar with and then we have the inclusion about all our welcome into the hyperledger community so we don't have a huge amount to do for today so it's probably a good time for a dance like to be having to be rescheduled the main thing that I would like for y'all to go and look at in regards to the announcements is the link to the CICD homepage so we've created a section and we've made most of it public there's a couple things that the committee members don't want to be made public which is basically how much everybody's CICD costs etc so if you'd like to join that committee to see those numbers please contact Dave Hughes v so that you can see that but you can still see a lot of the process that's been made I'd also like to point out the fact that there's a new supply chain SIG that's getting started right now they do have a space up on the wiki and the other portion set up I haven't they haven't gotten back yet with the date and time for when they're meeting but that's also up and we're also looking for volunteers to participate in a new fabric developer certification workshop that's happening in July here at the LF so if you'd like to participate also let me know so that I can get you to send you the link to the forum for signing up are there any questions okay the next one is for discussions one of the things that we've been talking about on the community architects team is opening up a lot of the different work that we do so that everyone can kind of get a little bit more information about it so we're doing something that we're calling task forces I just call them specials to make everybody feel better and so for that we've got like the CICD I'm also going to be getting together another task force to talk about the contributor's summit location and maybe having more than one before that we're talking about doing a special task force so that we can help raise sponsorship monies do some different things in regards to that figuring all those different pieces out and then rye is also doing a bunch of work on the DCO portions so we're going to be creating that also as a special task force so if there's any of these different things or functions that you're interested in helping us out with please let me know I'll be putting up a special section in the wiki so that everyone can see what we're working on and how all that's progressing for each of the individual task force so are there any questions about that it's a little different than a work group because it is a lot of the work that my team ends up having to have deadlines on and other different things that have to be finalized but it is a way for us to open things up more so that everybody can see what we're doing I feel like a lot of times we've been kind of operating in a little bit of a vacuum and this will make it easier for us to have some public meetings that people can join the documentation that'll be up on the wiki so people can have some input things of that nature this looks like a really nice idea how do people join these I think what I'm gonna do with these heart is I'm going to be putting up a special section in the wiki and I'm going to have them all outlined out with all of our notes and things and then basically anybody can join it's just making sure that I don't want to take up a bunch of so we only have so many zoom channels and such and so I do want to make them public but I don't want to take up a lot of different space for them so basically if you tell me I'll just add you to the list and then you'll get the notifications and all that kind of stuff but it just seems like it might be too much noise to put it up everywhere else so we're trying to keep the bureaucratic overhead to a minimum where like you know like with the work groups we have charters we elect chairs we do all this other stuff and this is like quick things that my team has to own for the basic working of Hyperledger so I wanted to take a little bit less of the bureaucracy but still make it open because none of these things have really been open in the past it's like I feel like I throw announcements at the TSC but it's not really as transparent as I would like for it to be so basically contacting us and I'll just have a listening of the different ones that people would like to participate on and I'll keep announcing them at the TSC as well what do you think that sounds good thanks I know a lot of people have been you know a lot of the like the contributor summit for instance a lot of you know the locations to many of us just seem to sort of drop out of the sky yeah and a lot of that's us trying to work with events too but this and that's one reason why I was like it would be great to have this as something like a task force because it doesn't work is for me it didn't feel like it worked as well doing the whole Japan thing because our events team couldn't find anything and so then we were like depending upon the members and and people were being very kind and generous with their time but it was just not easy to sync up on it and this way I feel like I can put in some more deadlines I can talk about where we're looking at have that conversation be public so that everybody can't go and look and sit there and see and also to be quite honest the doers you know get what they want so if you do go and find me a free location find all these other you know find our team all these different things then we can't actually move forward on it and move forward on it faster than I feel like we were doing previously yeah it makes a lot of sense to me thank you okay do we have anybody here from hyperledger grid to give the report Andre I see that you're on and Sean's on okay there we go thanks Sean certainly answer questions about it I think everyone's pretty much gone and looked at it now has everybody checked their names off of the schedule that looks like most people have except for Mark and Baha are there any questions in regards to the grid report for Sean is Chris not on because I know he posted several questions that doesn't appear that he is Chris said he wasn't be able to make it you know I don't think we have a clear separation between and solutions and and templates and such I mean at least a clear commonly a preferential kind of understanding of the difference so I think it's just a message to the good community to kind of just watch for where the things that we're building that are very blockchain specific where the things that end up being a lot about an end user solution and just try to steer more towards the former than the latter but I don't know that there's anything actionable out of that question I'd have to understand what Chris is seeing that led to his comment without him here to represent it we can only guess I think our focus is certainly on things that are reusable yeah and I think that's at least one kind of thing that we can use to guide kind of one side of the fence that's on because things that aren't reusable would definitely be more kind of application focused I mean reusable in the sense of building different applications so for example we have the product capability in there because all the applications that we see being built on top of grid kind of need that that basic capability as an example and say a bit about what what it means to the track and trace demo to be fully integrated like what was it before and what is it now yeah so we took the sawtooth supply chain application out of well out of sawtooth we forked that code base and kind of split it in half and the application parts we put in the contrib repo for grid so that's kind of un-maintained that part of the platform code so that that serves as an example of how to use grid essentially and then we took some of the the core track and trace ideas that are reusable and integrated that into the platform like the smart contract for storing the data for example okay yeah so that's in the contracts there yeah so I didn't see the contrary before yeah and then like the fully integrated piece primarily means like integrating with pike which is the current identity capability within grid and there's a schema support that is kind of inspired from the track in the previous sawtooth supply chain work but made as a separate component it's more contract within grid so it's reusable between not just a track and trace capability but also product and other things and so there's there's a lot of work in kind of integrating these pieces together to form kind of that that initial kind of grid capability now those contracts gonna run on they're running currently on saber are they and these how is that where is this gonna land with respect to transact saiba and everything yeah so today we're using sawtooth and deploying them in saiba so grid requires a sawtooth network as a result so transact will support the saiba transaction processor and eventually sawtooth will use transact so then the current kind of architecture like where we're using sawtooth as a BFT distributed database like that'll kind of be the same we do plan to try to make sawtooth more consumable into grid in certain ways and then for other patterns that might not be BFT distributed database models will plan to use saiba by using transact directly so do you ultimately see the sort of composability the interoperability with grid as being either through transact or free sawtooth well free sawtooth transact and primarily because we're focused on using saiba for the smart contracts things that can use saiba so so for example if we're using like Byzantine both tolerant like like shared database as like one of the things architecturally within the solution like as long as that component can run saber we should be able to have the flexibility to explore things that are not not sawtooth as well but also like I think we're interested in other patterns that like where we stick to using saiba so we can write the contracts the same way but but but use them in ways that are not necessarily identical to how sawtooth works any other questions for Sean just one other comment that at least an earlier version of this I said that there were as what there was lots of activity on the mailing list but there hasn't seemed to have been I mean there are a few messages each month and I know there's a rocket chat channel I can't say that I followed the rocket chat channel closely so there might be conversations there and on the calls but you know the the mailing list feels I don't know maybe this is natural at this point in time for the project and Devs had just chosen to to focus on the chat channel but I just want to make sure people feel like you know that they know how they can get plugged in to getting started with grid and and climbing that curve to becoming a user and a contributor and and maybe even maintainer it just it felt like the claim was hey the mailing list is great but there's like three messages there it was it actually not three it was some of it some other single digit number for April I just wanted to highlight that that seemed like it was certainly the mailing list isn't the primary method of communication for the team it's it's rocket chat in terms of like attracting new contributors and maintainers that is very much on all of our minds and I think the contributor meeting and just continuing to kind of strengthen our documentation in that area and making it clear where people can contribute and like when they come to the project like you know some of our current thinking is you know making it really clear what tasks and stuff they could pick up if someone's coming to the project and saying hey I want to contribute but I don't know what to do that we have an answer for that and so that's that's one of the things that we're thinking about in the next couple weeks like how to how to do that whether it's JIRA or JIRA combined with with other things or or whatever it is but like making that like very accessible one of the things that I did just get is I think I finally found a contractor for doing the JIRA confidence integration Sean so it sounds like when we start and we're going to be eating our own dog food on that where the contractor is actually going to be tracking everything in JIRA she's going to be posting all the code in github and doing a very clear defined example from github to JIRA to confidence for everybody to be able to work off of because I can't afford to have her took for every single project but that might be something that would be helpful for y'all is to sit there and see how some of those integrations can work so that it can our current sticking point is to figure out how to manage our our teams from a practical way while moving to JIRA or another like very public bug tracking system because the team does you know is involved in or parts of the team are involved in in like grid and sawtooth and transact and other things I'm trying to like we need some way to get kind of a unified view for like subsets of the teams so that they can view kind of all the work that they're they're doing so I think we have a request in two community architects right now to experiment and try to figure that out with JIRA we were looking at some other tools as well maybe help us with that but I think that the current feeling now is if we can do it with JIRA that that would probably be best yeah I was a little confused by your request it sounded like you wanted to merge two JIRAs together or you wanted one JIRA to contain them all or that part was a little confusing and we can take that offline but one of the things that I am looking at for that the reason for doing the JIRA to the Confluence integration is because it makes it easy to have a unified view on one page where you can actually have things like shortened road maps for different JIRA projects all in the same Confluence page so it makes it easier for people to go and look at but if we are but if it's a little bit harder if we have these different JIRAs and you know I create a unique Confluence space for each project so you know grid has its own space transact will have its own space sawtooth has its own space and unifying those across things will be a little bit awkward but that might lead back into this project sub-project questions that we we have on things in regards to how that might be easier to to do that yeah yeah I don't think it's like I'm not concerned at all about the wiki I don't think it's interesting from from from this perspective but because what we're what we're trying to do basically is and say like if we have all the tasks in JIRA and we do like a sprint planning session how do we aggregate as much as we can across JIRA so that we can show it on the single board that's all we want to do so we don't really want to merge the projects at all we just want to basically say you know for for the for for the teams that are like involved in multiple projects can we aggregate them so that when we do planning we don't have five boards that we're dealing with and that obviously is very sensitive to like the teams but if we can get that capability then I think we can do a lot within within JIRA like another alternative would be to use github issues and like use one of that the apps that sits on top of github and aggregates issues across rebugs so that was the other thing we're looking at so one follow-up sorry I didn't want to cut across that conversation that not finished and yeah a follow-up question on the line around kind of integration with say grid if I wanted to use grid components down the line I mean I understand it's still kind of being spun out at the moment but I want to use them in a different wasm engine how much of Sabre would I have to integrate looking at the dock for Sabre it seems like you've got some fairly generic proto buff to find kind of inputs and stuff around the transaction processor would it be I mean I'm just wondering how how because the idea with grid was that we'd have modular reusable components it was a bit vague the notion of how we would do that but something to do with wasm so I'm just wondering if you know if how viable would it be to run this run grid components within something that wasn't Sabre would it be so much work you basically have to rebuild all of Sabre would rebuilding all of Sabre be that much work if I did it in a wise mention say in borough well I think like the reusability would come from the the API around the smart contracts right so the API you know Sabre intentionally kind of followed the API for transaction processors as an upgrade to get to migrate from subject transaction processors into Sabre and so there's are there's already precedent for being able to compile Sabre contracts to a different target because all of the Sabre contracts currently you can compile to such a transaction processors as well and that's achieved by config setting in the cargo.com file when they're when they're compiled right that changes the inputs from the Sabre SDK to the Saatchi SDK if you specify the the feature so so I think it's more about that API and how the underlying underlying bits because the underlying bits can be kind of radically not radically different because it semantically they have to work the same but like from a implementation perspective clearly the Sabre implementation is quite a bit different than the the raw transaction processor implementation. Okay so so that would be actually my integration would probably live in Rust LAN so I compile from the from the Rust contracts but I compile against the awazen slash borough target or whatever. Yeah so for for the smart contracts that's true for for some of the other components in grid that that applications can decide to use or not like product for example you know there's other components like smart contracts only one of the components right there's also a Rust API built into the grid Damon there's SDK code for dealing with you know kind of writing code against what will be the product stuff but for example the pike stuff has which is the identity concepts that are currently there there's SDK code so that smart contracts can use that component and kind of integrate with with pike and like use it and the same thing is true of schema where there's there's a Rust API there's a CLI component for it and they're all optional but there's there's like a lot of like a component kind of has a lot of pieces that all kind of work together if that makes sense. Yeah thanks that time if I just. Okay any other questions? Did we want to do the borough update because I just saw that it got posted early this morning and I'm not sure how many people have actually read it at this point so did we want to do that check in with not having some I well we'll go ahead and post on that just to like have this be an earlier place to get out. I would encourage everybody to please look at the backlog and see some of those different pieces especially since a lot of these will probably anything that's been assigned to my team will probably have task force in fact Rai's been doing a lot with the community health committee working on diversity and inclusion portions and so he'll later have a report out for that but there are already Rai how many people would you say are on that committee itself? From the hypervisor side I'd say there's about half a dozen to ten that regularly attend we've been talking about merging that effort with the with the chaos D&I group so that's kind of the direction we're going right now. Cool so if y'all want to join in that and help with the report out that Rai is going to do with that please contact Rai and of course Dave with the CI CD report getting ready for June but please go ahead and look at the documentation that we've already made public and anything else that you'd like a little bit more transparency on please just ping me on chat. The one other thing I was going to heart put together a really nice message for the sub-projects and end-of-life stuff we need to queue up that discussion at some point recently soon and I don't know heart if you want to take ownership of leading that discussion. I was actually hoping for some more comments and email yeah from particularly longtime open source veterans as is kind of a sanity check on that but yes if we want to have that discussion at some point you know sure I'd be happy to to help steer that but again I would like some help from people that have that have been in the open source area a lot longer than I have. We're also getting a lot of feedback from marketing about this too and so that's why I was sitting there thinking that a task force would be useful where we can get together the people who are interested on the concept of sub-projects and also the EOL for the projects with the marketing team so that we can talk through it with them because they're also having some problems with vocabulary where projects and sub-projects don't mean anything and so they were looking for some better labeling such as platforms frameworks libraries etc and so I was hoping that maybe we could jumping off of hearts document and then going a little bit deeper with some of those to try to create a basic framework that we can then bring back to the group to help lead maybe a more focused discussion with an agenda yeah that's probably a good idea. I think it's probably good to maybe focus first on the problems trying to be solved because it's not clear at least to me what sub-projects would actually solve or what problems exactly it would address. I want to be careful to not try to solve this problem or start the discussion right now I think queuing up what the agenda would be for that working group is the business of that little working group so Sean it would be great to have your opinion in there and Hart I'm not sure I can contribute much based on past experience but I'm happy to help out if you take the lead I will certainly help as much as I can right but I guess my point is if the working groups like formed to with the intent that sub-projects are the right solutions that seems like the wrong focus. I don't think that was the focus of Hart's email I think the focus was to throw out some ideas and start and provoke some discussion. Yeah I don't expect a final solution to necessarily be what I proposed but we do have an issue with marketing and with sort of clarity around structure and you know I also want to let people you know contribute code when they want and do coding efforts and I don't want to sit here and discuss in TSC meetings you know whether something should go in repo A or repo B for an hour yeah so I'm on board with participating in that. Awesome thanks. All right drop me a line in either chat or email so that I can make sure that everyone who wants to participate gets on the lists so that they get the notifications but like I said we will be setting up sections in the wiki too so that everybody can read off of that and we'll be announcing that in the TSC meetings as well. Anything else? Alrighty I think that's a wrap then and everybody gets out early. Yay thank you. Thanks a lot.