 Working group documentation subgroup meeting for May 17th of 2022 and let's jump right into the latest. Don't forget to put your name in the meeting notes. If you're here that way we know that you were here. Post a link to those notes. There we go to the hack MD. And we'll start up Brian updates to the technical documentation. Okay, so I've actually decided just push it live. So I've pushed it onto the actual site with a header saying. It's work in progress. So there's a little point in actually doing it. This is meant to be a community effort. Why not just do it on the actual site. So it is now you'll see we've now got a development section. On the site. I have moved things forward a little bit. But I can't get it to build up the six or seven Docker files in the project. I can't actually build the console so I'm currently working through trying to work out what's going on with that. But the good news is I actually have a cluster that when I do get it built, I cannot test against it. So I have rebuilt my home cluster. So yeah, it's it's there and I incorporated John's feedback. And the idea is we just want to build it out from here and just get people to do pull requests, add comments, raise issues and hopefully wouldn't build out that section. I'm quite keen on what the upcoming changes to the community participation is and how it's going to affect that section. I'm sure that when they're ready to tell us they'll tell us. So we have the general gist which is that it's basically they're going to be lining up incoming developers to to take it on as a, you know, a training ground basically some that's cool. But I think there's also, there's also, I was going to say there's also the ship to mainstream the prowl. Right. Yeah, it seems to be on its own. Yeah, because they were, it was a combination before of prowl and I can't think of the name cumulus. Cirrus Cirrus, that's it. Cirrus. Yeah. Okay, nothing new on the working group the separate repo for the working group. I did do a pull request which I noticed that it failed for modifying the working group menu. I'll have to take a look at that. It failed for is actually a one of the sites that linked from I think it's Vadim's guide. Oh, very slow to respond. And that's one of the challenges of having a link checker in that if any of the sites are down or not behaving when we do a push. It breaks our build. It's a question. And that was, it was trying to get to Minio, right? That's what it's saying here is that right. Now I'm going to run this and see maybe we'll get a better. I have rerun it twice and it's still playing up. Really. That's weird because it doesn't seem like min min.io takes long to load in my browser. I noticed that it rendered quickly, but it didn't finish downloading for a little while. And the other thing I've noticed and some sites have started putting robot blockers on, which I think break this as well so right. So the question comes is it more valuable to have the link checker on automated. So should we have it as a manual task that we occasionally run to verify broken links are horrible on a site, but this happens more often than not that our build breaks because as you see we have a couple of hundred links on our site. And the chances of them all being there and all responding in a timely manner. We're going to be hitting this more more frequently now so is it was just taking the link checker off. Is there a way for the link checker to just give warnings as opposed to fail the build. I will have a look. I'll have a look. That would be one thing. Yeah, let's add that to as it to do just because if it could give warnings instead of that that might be interesting. So let's see. That's sort of suggested someone's going to actually look at the logs. Okay. Yes, that pull request is created and then once we get around that that will redo the menus and the way that we talked about so. Okay working group and then subgroups menu. And about and. And the, the, the, the other sub menu. Right. Okay. Up it's, I've got to commit to make to the FAQ about the release differences. I'm still collecting some information about 410. Okay, these specific stuff because there's a few specific things in terms of. Stuff that's slightly different from OCP stuff testers and CRC. I haven't written anything up. No one's, I haven't seen anyone actually talking about. Seth, the past, Seth, the past couple past two weeks or CRC, the new focus seems to be bare metal. Everyone keeps asking questions about bare metal now. Did that kernel, did that fix. We're waiting on a kernel fix for stuff, aren't we. We talked about in the last, last meeting. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, Bruce, I think that the interest. I think the interest is still there. It's just that everybody's waiting. Right. And so there's not much point in flooding the channels. While we wait. And let's see if I can find the. I think as of last week at the main meeting, it was still something. Well, it might be a while before it hits the kernel. So. Well, wasn't it, it, it had to be fixed, which will be in Fedora 36 and then they have to request the back port to 35. Correct. Yeah. Yeah, last, last I looked at hadn't gotten out of the kernel. There was still a pull request. Outstanding. So that's the upstream Linux kernel. It hasn't even got to Fedora yet. Correct. So it's like a long process. And so probably I'm not going to wait. I'm going to bite the bullet and back up all my pvs and recreate them. So is this a problem for existing self users? Yes. It's a problem. It's a problem. It's a problem. Excuse me in updating to 4.10. Okay. 10. Then you lose stuff. And you can get it back, but you lose all of the stories that you've had. And hopefully as near as I can tell, you'll still have the pvcs. So everything will request. Stories, but then when you get stuff up and running again. Which provisions the storage, then they'll all be blank and we'll have to. Reinstall. But he, but that's it. You can and you install or work today. It's purely an update. No, not the stuff. Okay. I think you, but I mean, if you were aware of all this, it wouldn't be a big deal. Because you could do your new install. And we don't have an operator. So you have to sort of install stuff by. Applying the crds. And then waiting for a while. It's actually not that big a deal. And then go in and make the fix. Before you actually start using it. What's the fix. The fix is basically changing the, I guess, changing the, the storage. YAML file. So that it doesn't use the default. Way of starting up, which they changed from synchronous to asynchronous. So you have to change it back to synchronous. Okay. And then it, and then it will work with the existing kernels and everything. Now, I haven't tried it. Because I've been chasing down the rabbit hole of the silly other thing that I uncovered. To see whether or not I get anybody to agree that there's actually some underlying bug. It's just life. Right. All right. But by the way, I noticed, did anybody else notice that all of a sudden. About 100 operators appeared. It looks like the on the red hat side, something happened. I did not notice that everyone's going to log in and take a look and be like, what? Everyone is now dusting to their M operators. Take a look here. You've got 152 community. Yeah. Wow. And my that sort of uncovers that one of the things that we're not very good at is. History. Yeah. Like when there's a change. The only record of the previous was in your memory. And like, I think we used to be at about 40 operators or so. Until I don't know when, sometimes the last week or so. Well, I mean, the challenges to they will work. Because even when we have 40, there was still some community operators where red hat had. Their version of an upstream, they changed the community operator to use the red act. Version, which means you needed a subscription to get to the registry, the red heart registry. If that makes sense. Yeah, right. So, okay, my first reaction to this is, let's actually write something about this and put it on. We don't have access to blog yet so we can't. Yeah, maybe put it on the, I really wish we had the Twitter thing worked out. Let's do it on the blog and just do a post like. I don't know. I feel like we should just do something like, okay, status of, of. Okay D or updates or changes or something something that we can, like update the blog post with latest news or something like that. Like maybe just the latest news blog post does that make sense. I guess it'd be nice. It'd be nice if, if we could find somebody that did something that caused this to put up an entry. And if we just say, oh well we discovered that we have these operators today. Yeah, that was my week. Yeah, yeah, we don't want to do that. My thought was that I'll reach out to Christian and see if he knows anything about it so what's, what's the current time in Spain. Quarter past seven. Yeah. So folks are probably all out drinking right now right because that's where you kind of you. So, I'll shoot a message to him and see if I can get some clarity on that. And then I'll let folks know because it seems to me like we should say something because it's like wow our operators just quadrupled. Right. So, if they work, if they were such a skeptic. Yeah, no, that's, that's fair. I started trying some of them on my test cloud and particular the certificate manager one. But unless you quit else is there while there's a whole pile of AWS ones, which aren't really noticed that. Yeah. And the ones that were most interested in, which would be like, you know, tecton and serverless. And maybe Istio or those things I don't think are there yet. The, although the ARCO CD. I'm open shift data foundation is there. I know that too. And that's a biggie if it works. Yeah. I pulled up a 411 buster. And I've read of open shift in there. They have 152 also in the community. Wow, steak or some kind. This is actually a huge update. Open ship pipelines is there. I've got some of the red hats. I think we may have some of the red hat operators now released as a community version. Wait, what version do you I've got? I'm on the wrong cluster. I'm on agnomi. I'm on the wrong cluster. Okay, I was going to say. That would be. I've got an OCP and an OKD and different tabs in the browser and I got the wrong one. Alright, so let's do a little bit of research. I'll find out what the scoop is. I'll reach out to Christian. And see how it is that these popped up and then we'll just we can determine from. From there. Just make sure they're not going to punish tomorrow. Right. Exactly. Okay. Oh yeah, go ahead. No, Bruce, did you have anything else? No, that's all. Okay. So CRC, we're waiting for Diane to get back to us about that external group. See if they want to do it. She said she reached out to them. We'll see. So the scoop on Twitter is that I still don't have access and Diane it's unclear if Diane has access to it as well because it's based on that employees email address. And I haven't got a response to Diane yet about if we could change MX records to point to our own mail servers. So I don't know anything yet on any of that stuff. This all hinges on. And I think this is going to affect us into the future is email addresses. How can we have email addresses for the organization. So nothing there. Okay. Folks haven't really said anything about it haven't really commented or updated anything to it. My sense is that that's okay because we can wait until coupon to, you know, wait until next week or the week after to send this out to folks. I think the last two weeks have been we had red hat summits and now we've got. Qcon, which is, it's the open. It's the okay the session tomorrow isn't it. Yeah, the open Commons yet. Yeah. I'm guessing people are preoccupied. Yeah, so but I do want to keep this on our palate because I think that doing this would be fantastic. So the deadline. Well, don't we say say we're going to publish it. Next, it's the 17th. Yeah. So next, next documentation meeting will finalize it and publish it. So any comments by two weeks today. And then then we'll publish it. So that would basically be the 31st. So we'll send it out on the first. We'll finalize it on the 31st send it out. Fantastic. Bare metal request for testers bare metal. We don't have Twitter to be able to request. So I don't know if we want to do something other than Twitter and maybe just send something through the working group email. I was going to do that but. I actually, again, I actually think we need to to be clear about what we're asking for. Right. Yeah, I think you're right. You're right. Um, because just saying a bare metal tester. Is it an IPI? Is it a UPI? Is it anything specific about it with storage or. Did we create a discussion item? Did we create a discussion item to basically say. This is what we want to ask for. I don't think we did that. Yeah, I'll do one right now. So where's the request come? Where has this request come from? Is it based on people's. Yeah, we're just getting a lot of bare metal stuff that like no one knows how to answer because I don't have bare metal. A lot of other folks and the red hat folks don't have a lot of bare metal experience. And so the idea is that we at least firm up. We get some testing. So that we have some data about how bare metal is working. Because there is now the assisted installer. Like running it locally, right? And then the other aspect is, is we want to shore up some. We want to get some people involved in the working group. Continuously who are bare metal folks because it's a, it's an area that within the working group, we just don't have it covered. Everyone is is cloud is either AWS or these here basically. And I'm guessing the question is, if you set up half it isn't the ends in vSphere. Would they classes bare metal. Could you actually do bare metal on. Yeah, yeah, and I think that that's that actually comes up a lot is do you consider that I feel like we should because that's. Well, I mean, so I mean, this is generally question in terms of, would that satisfy. I'm able to answer the bare metal folks, or are they little things like how do I get a serial console or things that are very, very bare metal specific in terms of, or a particular fiber driver for a bit of hardware or a bit of. Are they predominantly bare metal specific stuff ie the virtual machine gets rid of all that complexity in terms of device drivers and things like that, or are they generic bare metal stuff where a VM would actually work. Do you know what I'm saying. Yeah. Because you can do bare metal on the ends, but will they solve. Do we even have a definition like it sounds like that's, that's the issue is that we don't really know what their metal means. Like, whenever I look at it, it seems that like to me bare metal is like a raw piece of hardware with nothing on it. But whenever I look at a bare metal documentation, it seems like they're all assuming that they have Linux on it. Which to me is not bare metal. I mean, that's like a liver or something like that, which is sort of a different branch. But somehow those are conflated in my mind. So I don't know that it could be maybe it's just me. But do we know what exactly people mean when they say bare metal. And I think that that's so if I look at the documentation, which, you know, you know, Michael, you can speak to this probably better than any of us is it's bare metal is just one of the install options in the documentation. And it doesn't actually show like, oh, Michael dropped, it doesn't actually show any type of explanation of what they mean by bare metal. It just says you can install OKD on bare metal. Doesn't it actually stop doesn't start with an ISO that you download and boot this. It does. Yeah, so. I think it does use live verts. It does builds the builds the containerization on top of that. Yeah. So, I guess, maybe that should be one of our tasks is to actually define what we mean by that. This to the larger group to actually like flesh this out. I mean, I'm guessing a lot of people would have access to say a virtual machine that can set up a virtual machine and do an SNO install on a virtual machine. If that would classes bare metal testing, then we probably have a bigger audience that can do that. Right. Then if we actually say you need a dedicated bit of hardware with this many know this much memory and this many CPU calls. That's probably a bigger ask. So what should so should we bring this to the larger group discussion? Yeah, I mean, I actually mean. Yeah, I mean. And what's different. Like as Brian was saying, you know, if it's. You know, when you're saying bare metal, what specific things are you worried about. Right. All right, let's put that as a question to the larger group. I'll put it. In the to do. But it sounds like a documentation. Issue that in the bare metal install section. It should maybe talk more about exactly what bare metal means. Because like in the VMware section, which I'm more familiar with, it does go into. In fairly great detail. Yeah. Right. Style updates, I think that's all done. So we can pull. Yeah, I think we need to ask. Diane, if it runs available to do any more work. It's just, I mean, just thinking about what was spoken today is having an area on the homepage for latest news where you can put something on. It'll be there for two weeks and then automatically go away so we don't have to worry about having latest news. And it's certainly nine months old. So a feature like that added onto the home page, I think would be useful. So do we have Brandon for additional tasks or has his funding with Red Hat expired or anything like that? Right, that'd be a good thing. But as far as I'm aware, the styling update is finished. He's delivered it. It's live. And that piece is done, but I think there are updates. And when I'm talking about updates, I will just. Last weekend, I did update all the tooling in the automation. So I went through and made sure that we had the latest versions of MK docs of material and toolings. We were still using an old. Sentos image to actually base the build on. So I'll put that to Fedora 35 now as our base container to actually run the MK doc build within. Yeah. By the way, that task didn't succeed this time when I ran it. Oh, great. Yeah, so I'm going to merge it right now. You could actually merge it before. Yeah, but I do like to. I don't like circumventing tests because the whole point of a test is to tell you something. I know. There's been a couple of times. Well, because I mean, what it's going to do is now going to rerun exactly the same script to actually publish it. Right. Yeah. Oh, okay. So now we're up to new business. I'll just pause publishing updates or style update. Anything new about the publishing? I think. Are we agreeing then that we should disable at least temporarily until you find out if those can be warnings instead of errors? Can we just disable it for now? Or do you work the other way? I mean, I get notifications so whenever anything fails, I go, I go poke it and product and. Okay. And if it is blocked, I bypass it. All right. I'll leave that to you then. If merge, if the test fails, let's leave it to Brian to make the decision on that. Yeah, I do go review the files and check it's okay. And look at what the failure was. And making sure that it's not the change of introducing the breaking feature. It's something old. And then I get it working, but. I'll probably do that this evening or within by the weekend. I'll have that by the sort of. Excellent. Okay. Next up is. Okay, so this came up before. Currently, we're using blue jeans. It doesn't have as much adoption. I don't have direct access to the recordings because this is actually. Diane's account. And so we're behind again. Because I have to reach out to Diane. Diane has to make time in her busy schedule to grab the recordings and share them out with me, et cetera, et cetera. And also zoom has is more feature rich out the gate. It's, it seems I could be wrong. That seems to be the case and folks are nodding. So that seems to be general consensus. How do folks feel about switching to zoom? Do we have an account we can use or would we get kicked out after? Well, so here's, here's the thing. It would have to be community. Funded, meaning one of us would find more than happy to contribute. But we would want an email address that multiple of us have access to. Right. And, you know, one way or another, we need to find, find a resolution to the email thing. We need a dedicated email for all of these accounts that we want to set up, you know, in different services and stuff like that. So assuming we figure out the email thing, what do folks think about moving to zoom? You know, I use zoom for just about everything else. But we have an institutional zoom account. So that gives you a little bit more security. If you care about that sort of thing. But I mean, once you get it going, it's not that big a deal either way. Right. Yeah, I was going to say, because I think with zoom on the free level, you do have a number of participant limit and a time limits. You can come straight back in, but we don't really want to be kicking everyone out. But I think it's like less than an hour, isn't it? It's 40 minutes. I'd be willing to contribute towards the, I think the least expensive one is like 60 a year or something like that. I don't know. Let's take a look. Plans and pricing. Oh, I guess it's a little bit more. It's like 158 year for the pro. And it's up to 100 participants, large meetings, one gigabyte of recording. Whiteboard. I don't know. So that would be. We'd have to maybe put out our hats to the community and ask folks to chip in or. Ask some organization to sponsor us. I was just going to say, I mean, is. I mean, is red hat open to sponsoring. Okay, there is a community or. That's a good question. It's a really good question with, would they be willing to. To do that. I don't know. I don't know. And with this new model. That might complicate things if it is in fact going to be a stepping stone for their new employees. Because to me that it's like, okay, well, what then what is what is the control that's going to be. Excuse me on this. I actually think that that is part of the problem is that we're not truly an open source community. Because at the minute, everything is built around the red hat product to build the process. And yes, we can do things in a community way, but we can't really decide the direction of okay D. That's that's a red hat product managers and activity. So, getting an external company to support I think is going to be a little bit more challenging maybe. Because at the end of the day, it's a red hat commercial product that's driving the direction. Not a community. There's no community governance. So I think we should certainly start the conversation with Diane. Yeah. Right, I think that's reasonable. Because I mean like it's like remember okay D doesn't stand for anything. Right. That's right. It doesn't stand for anything. So we're not open shift, which is the red hat proprietary. So I think we're sort of in that gray zone. But if no one has had success building it from source yet. And multiple people have tried then we're not really even a community distribution. Right. Well, I mean, when, when Christian is talking about prow, he's talking about the red hat internal. Right. I mean, you can like I haven't tried it yet, but you can run prow on Kubernetes presumably okay D. So the question would I guess the next logical step once they've got everything on their internal prow. There's whether or not you could externalize that to a prow running on okay D. I mean, and the problem is that their turn their public prow, which is some of the problems I'm having punched to that private registry. Right. Yeah. Yeah. So I'm seeing in the build files. There's points to registries to images that I don't have access to. Brian, did you catch that conversation between john and Christian. Where Christian said, Oh, there's, there's parallel for all of these is is there and I asked the question, like, is it every single one at that particular registry. We'll get a response. I don't know. And this is it. How do you know because I don't see where they're actually stored and it's not like it's it wasn't on key.io it was a public space within their registry but you can't get like a directory of those images available. Right. All those you should be able to rebuild, right. I mean, like if it's open source everything that's on their internal registry they've built. You should be able to wear the source from a doctor file or whatever. Who knows. This is it. Where's the source of that. How do we actually go find out. Right. You would have to go through that entire list of images all 60 or whatever it is in that list every time there's a release and find the respective source repo and build, which would be a lot. What's interesting is like, you know, you can you can build kubernetes script from source. Yes. But that that is all in the public domain. There's no commercial product around it. And it may be that everything here is an open is an open source it's it may or somewhere be in that in the several hundred repos it's in the open source GitHub, but the challenge is, do you have time to actually go and put all the pieces together. Right. Well, it's slightly worse than that, because even if you have time, you have no way of validating that there weren't some internal tweaks. Exactly. Exactly. Exactly. So, and this is what I'm going through with the console project at the minute it's just like out of the box. I did a podman build failed I did a docker build, just in case failed. And now I'm, well, why did it fail, you know, I'm now going down the rabbit hole of let's try and figure this out. As I say, there's a docker file product, which suggests it's the product build rather than the dev build. And that then uses these internal images, which I don't have access to so. Yeah, I think this is. Now that we start to this technical track these are the sort of things and we want to start when we actually figure out what the problem is we want to start raising issues and make sure that every project. In the release info, where we put the URL, every project there is buildable from the read me file within the project. There's no ambiguity, there's no guessing. So I think that's what we want to get to. And I think might make the comment that within prow, they don't actually take note of what's here because they have a global replace where they'll actually look at the thing, and proud will actually replace the base image with the current one. So proud doesn't actually use that from image as stated. So that should always be the public one, the okay D one by default. And if every project did that, then I think we'll be in a much better position so again it's just little, little baby steps to actually try to improve this step by step. Yeah. All right well that's that's a lot for us to digest but we'll approach Diane and we'll find out this just sprang from the discussion of the zoom but it's a reoccurring topic. Like, yeah, what what actually and if we had something definitive from red hat. I would feel better if it was actually like, even if they're saying we're going to continue to control this at X level. And just to hear them say that or write it down somewhere so that we know so that we're not always. Where do we stand how much effort we put into this should we be doing separate resources and what you know. Yeah, all right, well we have our to do is ahead of us and the to do is our check on link checking give to give warnings instead of errors that's for you Brian. Let's see what else. Announcement on operator change I'll check with Christian first bring bare metal discussion to the greater group. And Brian get the status of Brandon for more style work find out I don't know if maybe you can reach out directly to him. Yeah, I've got his. I've got him on slack. One other thing is, I know that we've got a discussion group around it but we're not very good at actually contributing to discussion groups. What do we want because I think we should actually set a timetable for the move to then you get all. I was going to, I could have chimed in but I always feel like I feel like the three of us do a lot of the talking. And I feel like we need to put some effort into getting other folks chiming in but let's yeah let's set a set a timeline on that. Yeah, that works for me. I just think we need to actually set a timeline on and then we can work on a migration plan. And because otherwise, it's never going to happen. We've had the repo now for what two months. Yeah, six weeks. You know, and to be fair, some of it is also my hesitancy because of not knowing what this changes and what it's going to mean. Yeah, I was going to say because I mean, in reality, we're really talking about the open shift and the OKD.io repose. They're the only two that we really control. Everything else is going to have to stay. What happens with the operators where the community operators end up living? If they're being maintained and managed and built by Proud, they're probably going to be in the open shift of. Yeah, and I don't know. Well, I mean, they could now let's from a technical perspective. They could pull in from an external repo and use it in their internal prow. So that that would be possible, but they would have to set that up to happen. Well, it's, you know, to mean like allow us to submit code and then have it pulled in. But majority of the operators are going to come from open shift source. So it's effectively just a build config in Proud that is going to build the operator catalog. So there's possibly nothing to go in a repo in our org. Yeah. Other than a proud project, which. But yeah, we're speculating. I'm speculating. Yeah, for sure. All right. Last thing is going to say I'm not about next week. So I'm not going to make the main meeting next week. Okay. I will be there at the main meeting I. My sense is that the discussion will probably be about a lot of this stuff because if we can get Christian there. And or Vadim, I think we need to sort of hammer away at this like, okay, what can we really do? What's going to get impacted by this change that's happening on the red hat side and how much effort should we be putting into this? You know, at the last main meeting Christian said, yeah, I think you should continue working doing external builds and and what not an external testing. But then how does that work if red hat is going to be. It still controls the sources and whatnot like. I mean, I think if the open to us doing pull request against the sources. Right. But for me that that means that I have to be confident that my build and my local build and test isn't going to fall down on the first hurdle when it gets to the red hat system. So for me to feel confident about doing a pull request. I have to feel confident that I can do a build. If I can't replicate what's there now, then I can't really make a change to it and feel it's a valid change. Now, but that's the same in the same vein as what I was saying a few minutes ago, they could create a page that gets generated with results from full request that isn't directly within. Like they could mirror some of the results from prow out to the outside world to let people know the success. You know, of their tests and stuff like that and details and whatnot. But I think, I think just from a confidence point of view, if you if you if you contribute into an open source project, you don't want to look stupid. You want to get some validation. Your change. Yeah, basically, there should be something that you can fork. And, you know, that's a reliable copy. Yeah. And you build your, you know, change against your fork. And, you know, before you do your pull request, you, you update the fork to make sure it's current and then you try it again and then you put it in. The way it is. That's not possible. Yeah. I mean, like, you know, you can fork tiny bits and pieces of things, but you're still missing some critical parts that you can't build. And it doesn't make. Well, I guess they like the okay, the part is they've removed the brand the red hat branding. Right. I mean, that's part of their the changes. And, you know, somehow there's these, but, you know, like a lot of a lot of the OCP stuff is presumably open source. But somehow there's these little stickers that I don't know if it's so much. Well, red hat philosophy is just that everybody's busy and they don't have time to think about it. I would hope that it's the they don't have time to worry about it. Because if that's the case, then you have some chance of fixing it. But I mean, certainly with Diane if she wants to bring in the outside community, then it has to be possible for them to do the normal things. And I think Mike made a very interesting comment a few weeks ago is that there are some internal red hot engineers that aren't really that aware of okay D. So they, the way that they work in the projects, they're not deliberately trying to stop us doing things, but they're really doing it for the proud bill so they know what pro needs and what the internal systems need. And that's where the ref it is going. They're not really considering a community having to sort this stuff out that doesn't have access to internal red hat systems. And I think that's part of the challenges that that you're then trying to pick up that content from outside in, and it, you don't always have a great time. I managed to reach Christian. He doesn't have any idea about the operator situation. Okay. Good times. This is a great discussion. A lot of great ideas. Yeah, but by the way, on the self side. It looks like the patch is made into the testing branch. Okay. That's a small bit of progress. Yeah. Sorry, that's a testing branch of the upstream of the colonel. Right. Not the fedora. Yeah. Right. So we'll go into colonel. Once it goes through testing, then into 36. Into door. We have to request a backport to 35. Yeah. Although by that point, we may be on 36. That's a good point. Yeah. I'm okay. They for 11. All right. Well, let's go ahead and end for today. Brian, I will see you in two weeks. Bruce, I'll probably see you next week. Put this meeting to a close. Stop recording.