 Okay, we are live. Hello, I welcome to the Jenkins governance meeting to this much tense. And you will have a few topics in the agenda. So we'll start from recent news and announcements. And we will talk about the Jinx business operators project they discussed the upcoming contributor summit. And then we will talk about formal things like the confirming candidates for Jenkins governance board and other positions of the market checks and step down. We will do some main agenda items, and hopefully we will finish in time. Okay, I will start from the LCS release. So if it's officially out by now, Mark, would you like to summarize it? It is to 2.277.1 has released major changes as announced previously as planned for pull requests that were more than a year and in flight. Thanks very much to so many who contributed so much to this release. We'll do a webinar next week on it we already have 230 people registered to attend the webinar. Awesome. Yeah, so it's Jenkins online meetup I should use the correct terminology shouldn't I. Yeah, we'll put the links to the agenda. So yeah, speaking of that, we still have some known regressions and plugins. The discussion in the million years yesterday I'm trying to get. Okay. Do they use a VH. I have no idea but here there's the, there's the link to the I've pasted the link into the into the agenda. Okay, so for me, just doesn't work now. Yeah. It works. Okay. So everyone is welcome to join this webinar. And if someone wants to present them a demo features the agenda is flexible so please join and we will be able to talk about changes. Okay, another important changes about Jenkins trademark. So we almost ready to park this topic. So as discussed at the previous meeting. Mark is all by LF charities. So I have updated pull request to the Jenkins governance documentation. As far as I can tell there is no legal implications due to that. And one of other follow ups is likely you will remove sub license agreement entirely because there is no such entity for trade marks, the Linux Foundation holds except the Linux trademark itself. But yeah, since you have pre-approved trademarks. I think that we are totally fine. So I hope to mention this pull request today. You haven't seen it yet. It's approved. So why it's in use because it creates some change leads to some changes for downstream users, including vendors, adopters, because trademark attribution also needs to be eventually changed. So currently you have to write that the Jenkins is a registered trademark software in public interest. Now it has to be changed to LF charities. So there is a pull request, each of these guidelines and after that, there is no need to immediate change, but we expect Jenkins users who use trademark attributions to make this wish to be new one. Okay, then Jenkins contributor summit recap. Mark, would you like to summarize it? Yeah, so we had, we had a three day contributor summit. The three day contributor summit started with an opening two hour session concluded with a two hour closing and then had tracks in the middle across a period of about 48 hours. The initial opening session had 25 attendees closing session had 21 or 22. So that's, that's okay in the sense that it's as good or better than we did in Belgium a year ago and we were face to face, but it's certainly not as good as we could do with an online contributor summit. We were delighted to have people from all over the world participating in the tracks we had truly people from let's see Africa, India. Israel, the North America, Europe, all involved in the summit really positive. A number of points of feedback that were sent as an email summary to the dev list. That's feedback, but a feedback about the summit is positive. There was, there was suggestions about what we could improve mostly promoting to them and more. Yeah, I think this is something we could definitely do. I wish I planned ahead and went to more of this stuff. It was a little tight for me to schedule around things. Yeah, I think the two were great. Yeah, that's why we talked about the next summit now. Right. And there were complications hiding in that right because some of our attendees that could have attended from India just didn't because of the time that we put the starting the opening session it's, or our friends from China. You know we have lots of people all over the world who are interested in these. That's all that I had on it like. Okay. Okay, so the next item is the satisfaction survey. Yeah, to stay. We're running surveys throughout the community so our members ambassadors and contributors being being one key body so we're asking anyone who contributes to one of our projects or directly to our special interest groups to take this 510 minutes survey and to give us feedback on the perspective of your project or your interest area to know, like, how are we doing on communications, which services do you use, and what would you like to see more or less off. So, yeah, I think it's just for our planning, and also to know how well we're kind of meeting the requirements of the project communities. Any questions. So the survey takes something like five minutes. So you have some time that would be great. And I'll drop, I'll send an email as well to the deaf mailing list. Yeah, thanks. Thanks for surveying everybody Tracy much appreciated. And yeah, in general as well if this board has any feedback always feel free to reach out to me directly or to these meetings when I can come along. Are there any other news we're missing. So the one we will be discussing later that Mark Jackson has stepped down as a governance board member and James event officer. There's no reasons so you will be selected interim board members and event officer. It's rather governance things who doesn't immediately in your own projects. Okay, so let's go back to the agenda. We have a proposal about making jinx been separated sub project within the Jenkins organization. So what it means, currently on the website you have a number of projects listed here. And this is a bit dated, because we had the next night into actually archive evergreen project because it's no longer active. And for the rest of the ideas about merging sub projects, special interest, maybe working groups or teams, because it's hard to distinguish sub project and seek at the moment. And since there is a lot, for example, for Google somewhere. So, and the proposal is to it. Jinx Kubernetes operators to this list. So basically, just highlight that this part of the Jenkins project has independent governance to some extent independent roadmap. And also, it allows with more promoted using various channels. So Jenkins X was a jinx sub project. Just one question. Oh, like just on the details. I know they have seen the special interest groups outlined process is there a reference document for sub projects and kind of how that's managed. No sub projects are quite informal. They were created before we had the Jenkins enhancement proposal. Basically, all these items have been created on a more random basis. So when the project needs, we're interested in the registry and it is a sub project. Yeah, that's the only criteria. And formally approval from the jinx governance meeting is enough to edit to the list. Okay. It's good to understand. Basically, we should have some formalities around that. But I think that do we need to sub project at all or whether it's fine to just have a working group. So it's something we can figure out later. Yeah, I can see this kind of distinct uses for for each thing but appreciate it's not probably not high priority to formalize at this stage. Okay, and I guess, yeah, Agenda is such a vote and to agree on this topic. I'm just checking up the vote is the synchronous there. What would you like to add additional details. Yeah, of course. So so first of all, thank you for adding this part of agenda today. And as mentioned, would be great to be aligned with overall Jenkins roadmap in terms of community support and long term we also would like to make this project more open for the wider community, especially we plan to join CD foundation as well. And we would love to make this project also part of CD foundation project portfolio. And this is kind of, like, think which makes everything more easier and convenient for us to make this part of CD, CD foundation, otherwise, as a virtus lab we would have to establish kind of separate unit involved legal department. A lot of unnecessary work involved, I believe, hopefully Tracy can elaborate more on that because we were already discussing this part, I believe. But at the end of the day, we would like to be aligned with the community would like to be part of it, especially now, we finally have dedicated team appear to slap working exclusively on Jack this operator. So it would be great to, you know, have more engineering effort, establish governance, governance model contribution model and inherit a little bit from like CD foundation ways of working and be part of this group. So I'm also happy to answer any questions about the project itself about like any concerns you have. I think that that makes sense. I think if the, we can have Jenkins operator officially recognizes the sub project and the Jenkins. That means we will kind of treat it to some extent as part of Jenkins, certainly for, you know, any activities we do with the project so whether it's surveys or featuring in the newsletter or reaching out to you for being part of CD con or running buffs and things like that. I think it's a it's a good path to help kind of talk about it through through our specific channels. So is the plan to make it a sub project or Jenkins now and then later be a full CDF project later. I think there's a path for that similar to to Jenkins X. But yeah, I would say we should cross that bridge when it comes to it. So if we're building up contributors and we want to kind of get more into the cloud nature space potentially we could because it doesn't make much sense to be both a subject object and CDF time. Okay, so long term it would be one or the other it will never be both. Yeah. Also it's worth mentioning that it's been a while since the project was like it's still hosted under Jenkins CI GitHub organization for almost like more than two years I believe. So it's kind of, you know, informal thing to make this this work basically. And certainly from my perspective are seeing a lot of interest in the whole operators space and certainly with Jenkins operator CDF are planning to do many more activities with the CNC F. So I think, like via the operator that's one way we can try to also encourage folks to discover it through through their channels. And I don't know is that Jenkins operator have its own kind of yet bit on the road map. I think it'd be nice for it to. It has one data tent. So basically the job, which was created two years ago when the project was hosted. And after that, there was some discussions about getting this road map reflected. But the data hasn't happened due to discussions about how to address different road maps because we have British law, we have red heart, which currently develops its own thing is greater. So no good and later the discussions how the most central but you know they're basically to separate projects. From the governing board side is there like I could see how it would be so much stronger for Jenkins to focus on one operator and encourage all parties to work together towards that. So kind of the overall future so I don't have any discussions. There were discussions. Unfortunately, we were not successful at that point. Maybe we will try being later. But anyway, it's not a blocker for this particular project. Yeah, since we have road map here, of course, putting coming in 19th and the main thing is road map as well as promoting it through Jenkins social media events essentially everything is totally valid and let's do that. So, from the side of the government's board six, etc. we can support that and provide some resources from the administration standpoint. I personally don't see any workers which would prevent us from posting it as a sub project. Because again, it's just the de facto acknowledges the current state. Yeah, and in addition to that I think there's also the trademark thing needed to resolve because as the project itself is part of Jenkins CI organization. We have like, we made this informal assumption about using Jenkins operator project name, right, and as the Jenkins trademark will be transferred under Linux foundation, it makes it easier and we can reuse the same trademark as part of CD con, sorry CD foundation project portfolio will have the same trademark. So we are happy also to transfer this. And yeah just one thing to mention that similar to how Kubernetes has set up a compliance program to allow folks to use like Google Kubernetes engine or produce a compliant one if if there's something that's of interest to you to say okay we'd like to have a similar style compliance program so people can, you know, produce branded versions of whatever Jenkins or Jenkins operator. Then that's something I can coordinate with the the LF legal folks and the community. I think we can definitely do that. There is likely to be some demand. Because you have a historical product names. The new trademark name policy. To some extent. Perfect. I think there's it's fairly straightforward from our side the side that is complicated is just agreeing with the community what the technical specification is to say something is compliant. So we want to be in a position that people trust the brand and know that it means something specific. So coming up with whatever tests or measures that that that's kind of the challenging part that I'd look to the board here to work with to help figure that out. I think Kubernetes makes it even easier because the API standard is quite, you know, it's a clarity so we can rely on manifest schema as a compliance policy and it shouldn't be that hard the end of the day. I don't think much of the same for Jenkins needed. And because, yeah, they were multiple experiments and prototypes, which we were actually converting Jenkins to a set of services and producing features like high availability multi-tenancy while retaining the rest APIs and other user management. So we can just do something along these lines. I suggest we just set up a sake that would be in charge of managing that and go from there. Maybe. Yeah, so the main question is whether there is a demand to do that, because if there is a demand, we can do that. Probably it's too early. But yeah, I think we should formally vote. Because, yeah, no feedback. Use anyone against or does anyone have any concerns about having it as a subject. Good. That's one. Yeah. Yeah, that's the easy part. They will send it to the website. So like I just saw the saw the Google the Kubernetes Jenkins on Kubernetes documentation as a sub project there I think it's safe to remove that now. So I'm going to be doing that anyway you want me to touch this or would you prefer that this come from Bartek or someone else. So that that menu there. It's not a menu it's also a page he says summary here. My recommendation would be. Got it. Okay. It's not a big deal. Is it just a project overview or is it complete documentation. I mean technical documentation needs to be hosted under this website. No, it doesn't have so basically we have summary page with pointers items and that's it. And also community contacts, but it's just meta data. I don't mind adding in you to request. It's just a skidoc page with some meta data. If you could to do that. Effectively. And yes, and for the Jenkins road map, if you have some major items. It would be great if you could submit it there so we can represent it. Yes, we'll do that. Congratulations. I was going to say now that it's an official part of Jenkins if there's a like a 1.0 release keep us posted and like CD foundation helps with press releases and something like that. I think would be of interest to to the community so worth making an announcement around. Yeah, we can have an answer that becomes an official sub project. It's a blog post. Why not. Yeah. So, if someone wants to do that. It's not like we post or many blog posts these days. Wait, wait for GSOC. Wait for this. Currently we have a trend today. Okay, we submitted 17 GSOC posts. She was good. So anything else regarding this topic. Okay. And next item probably quick one next contributor summit. So my suggestion is to actually start planning one because this one was our first experiment is remote contributor summit. We've done a lot from that and also we still have a lot of opportunities to engage with the community because we didn't cover all the topics. There are also some key discussions which could happen, for example, releasing Jenkins three things like that. And if it is dedicated contributor summit, it would be nice. If we do in the gym timeframe, we will have plenty of time to prepare and have everything in place. So that's why I'm thinking that having it around. Yeah, I had a quick chat with the list. Sorry, I do have to drop off, but just very quickly. I think I'd send one proposal where if we had wanted to have it in like the CD con platform and do it as a full day zero event. It would be a costly event because we do like using hop in and having like LF events team would insist on kind of, you know, supervising it. And we do marketing and things like that. A lighter kind of suggestion would be that if you had one on the Friday after CD con, and that's something we put on the schedule and let people know but then the Jenkins community just runs it and you run it in your own platform. And you do it in zoom and I think that that would kind of work out better. Just as a kind of lighter, keep it managed by Jenkins community. Is the cost for doing it on on CD, the CD con platform that would cost about is it still 20 K. More than that. Yeah. Okay. Is the cost mostly like a time thing for moderators and stuff or is it actually like platform costs. A bit in platform costs, gotta say the virtual event platforms are not cheap, but it's also like for every room we'd have it's, we'd have a full staff member plus someone on hand for speaker support, plus before, before the event kind of managing So it mostly does end up being people costs. But there's no, like for all the Linux foundation events they are fully moderated so there's no option to kind of delegate that to the community as such. Yeah. Yeah, so we discuss, most likely we should do the second option or find a sponsor for the first or find a sponsor. Or a couple of sponsors. We are doing like before the main city con the day zero event which is the Tuesday we are now likely to be doing a spinnaker contributor days or workshops and six and a get ups day. Probably on organizational effort, we're probably maxed out in terms of being able to take on another day zero event just because CDF is a small team. But again, if there's something Jenkins wants to do that doesn't conflict or we can like have everyone come to CD con, call them into the boss and tell them hey come join us at this contributor summit. I think that could work well and even if it's not that week, it could be the following week but we, you could advertise it heavily and kind of spin off it. So I'm going to drop off but I think Jackie is going to come along to the advocacy meeting tomorrow so if you decide anything, you can start having the conversation with her. Yep. So let's talk more about this topic. Thanks. Thanks. Sorry, I can't stay for everything. This is super interesting, but yeah, good job. Bye. Okay, and actually we have two topics left. Are there any other comments questions about the summit. Maybe related topic about having user advisory board. I still need to formulate how it would happen but I think that we should run one. But here we can discuss how, when, etc. Once we have event of certain governance about my way in place because they will be involved. So what does the user advisory board or thing mean to reaching out to a number of users, most of the big users and user companies, getting them invited to a special event where basically they have some slot to share the experience. So would you say this is a position or would it be a separate board. I think so it won't be an entity in the organization. Well, we, some projects that create the user advisory boards as formal entities. Yeah, but yeah, currently I'm thinking about event. Okay. Yeah, I haven't learned the will require multiple formal things. Like, how do we select to let representatives there. How we ensure that basically other peer other users are represented. Yeah, just haven't thought as an open event. I think it would be a good starting point. Sounds good. I just didn't know it's just recorded. I figure it's good time to ask. That's right. Okay. So let's go for the governance and officers. Mark steps down basically effective starting from the last week. And what it means that we have two elected positions which are currently empty. And we have an interim procedure defined in our government documentation. This procedure basically states that the both an appoint an interim board member, and then appropriate the regular governance meeting. So what the governance board decided that basically we need a really not to become a board member. Why, because it really not. But the most of the votes in 2020 elections right behind. Absolutely right behind. And so, yeah, I think it would be fair to just respect these voting results. And hence the request for confirmation. I have already come to that she would be willing to take this role. I actually was interested in representing the users on the board. So, yeah, that's why I was referring to that in the user advisory. No objections. Okay. Questions questions. That's one. That's one for us one. That's one of the key. Thank you. So, I think then it's confirmed. One question is what would be the term. Because when we were working. The election process. We actually didn't touch the interim process. I mean, the state, the work is exactly like it was before to fulfill the role until they remain used. The remainder of the term. So for example, in the case of current replacement, it would be one year and nine months. So basically almost at the full term. So we find that we want to revisit it and basically target the next elections. I like fulfill the remainder of the term. Yeah, I see no reason to deviate from what we were in. And she had, she had agreed to it as part of the, the earlier election process. So I think it's very reasonable so long as Evelina doesn't have strong objections. I agree. It will be until 723. That's so far in the future that we flying cars and everything. Every year, I hear 20 something it feels like it's going to be like back to the future future, you know. Well, ten fires. So, let's see. Anyway, thanks everyone. So I'll take an action item to actually announce this change. And it will be a blog post to be published this week. So we have a topic basically about doing this events officer. So for events of sir, we contacted members of our books and outreach seek and contributors who are nominated for this role in 2020. And basically we ended up is on the one person statement out of this role, it's me. So, yeah, but in my case, I don't really consider myself as committed to take this role entirely until the end of the term, but rather to be an interim officer and actually look for contributors who would be interested to take this role and work on onboarding and mentorship so that they can take this role. It's an ideal scenario. Yeah, my only concerns is that you do too much. So, not that I would say you shouldn't take this role but I'm very concerned that it'll be overwhelming. I would just do nothing. I was doing a lot of events things in the previous years. And even if I take this role, it doesn't change the current arrangement when advocacy now to see basically does that. Yes, like I said, I'm not actually concerned with you taking it I'm just worried about all like passing out in a dish so we're being too busy or forgetting to eat or doesn't see his kid ever. I don't know what is, I learned my lessons about being current loaded. Yes, this particular role now it's positive for me. So no objections so. Yeah, plus one for me. I like that. But given that the events officer is elected annually you're all your vision is that you'll already recruit someone over the next relatively few months and begin having them act as a shadow or as preparation is that is that right. Yeah, that's the current plan. All right. I love that I think that's brilliant. Can you link to the responsibilities in this doc. Yeah, we have the responsibilities here. It's still a team leaders here. So, yeah, but yeah, we refactored the role of the commission again before 2020 elections. It's the point of contract for one split and I'm not saying the three is that we need additional and etc. Yeah, conferences. It's a little late to the street fall and since we have advocacy and outreach secret I think that we can load balance it easily. I'll try to reach out to some people I know that might be interested as well. It would be great. So, if we can get more people from inside or from outside the community for everyone. Yes, it's not about submitting more code. We really need to work on outreach so that we can work more contributors. I feel like it's a weird conflict of interest but I think reaching as seeing if anyone have bevy especially a CDF is using bevy for all their events might be interested in getting involved. So, I'm not against the conflict of interest as long as it helps get things done. Yeah, let's see. Okay, so any objections. That's one. I just said I'm here to help you Oleg and future events officer. What's one for me as well. So hopefully we'll have friends about that. And yeah, I guess that's it about Jenkins, what an officer updates. Yeah, my understanding that we will also need to work on plugin maintenance because Mark was a maintainer for several important plugins, including for example, commit to us plug in the club plugins. For example, forget lab now we have a table students regression. And hopefully, we'll be able to use it today because it's time to park it. No, there is another contribution. I'm not sure what's the current state because there is no release permission. I'm not sure from where they must permission came. I will trace it down and then. Yeah, if somebody is interested in parameters, it's a great opportunity. Didn't wasn't the get lab a plug in a summer code product as well at some point. There was a club branch source plugin. Okay. So, the club branch source. Yeah, it's somewhat active. So, yeah, I just thought it would be another source of trying to find a maintainer, but I go pick the wrong one. So, so we get lab range source was originally mentored by multiple people. So, yeah, we had some children there. But still, this plugin is active. Any other comments. And yeah, last topic, which we had is about using GitHub Jenkins account. So just quick history dive, there is an individual user account. This account is no longer active. There was some activity in very beginning several years ago I all of the made an attempt to reach out to the contributor using the data. To ask about transferring account. I got no response. And why I'm going up this topic is because you're one of contributors created an issue, basically suggesting to move this account, and why did this contribute to join the call. Didn't happen, but at least we can have a quick discussion to all the people that we want to understand that. Yeah, when we released Jenkins to zero, we agreed that we don't want Jenkins to be Jenkins CI. Because Jenkins is generic to mesh server, but our Twitter handle and our behalf is Jenkins CI. So, I think we should try to claim it if we can, but I'm not sure about renaming. I'm looking certain about how much things will break free rename things. Yeah, that's a good question. So in theory, it's redirects. But in practice, there might be still breakages in there. We like we have all the plugin documentation that will read through it with API calls that may not handle redirect since they're fixable. I just don't know if it's worth the effort. Yeah, we also have a lot of tools in there. I'm really looking forward to the renaming, especially since the only way to claim this account is to bring up trademark infringement concern to give up support. And then it has obvious complications. So firstly, Jenkins is a common surname. For example, and yeah, even if Jenkins is a trademark, I'm not sure that we have enough justification to go and to purchasing an account which has Jenkins there. The account is dead. I mean, there's no activity for like for four years. I don't think there's any, any benefit to putting the effort in unless there's unless there's concerns about us not enforcing a trademark. I don't think there's any point in pushing this week. It's Jenkins CI is is like documented everywhere as the repo to go to. So, yeah. You much need to talk on that. We could put in the request to Jenkins support said and ask if they would be willing to do a redirect from Jenkins to Jenkins CI. But I don't think that's worth it honestly. I agree by Gavin suggestion of redirecting from Jenkins to Jenkins CI that that wouldn't fundamentally resolve the question from the Jira ticket from the issue, but it does remove one more point of confusion. If you go to if you were to go to Jenkins in that case you would be directed to the correct get have or to stop redirect we just need to take it over. Right, correct. Does anyone feel strongly about doing that that we should do that. No, I do not think it's worth our time. And if I remember correctly, just changing the, the branch hierarchy is quite difficult in GitHub. So you need to make several emails to support and, and this is like a bigger thing. So I don't think it's really worth. Well, very delicious. So, for example, if you go to Jenkins CI, you can see that a featured project doesn't include Jenkins at the moment, because at some point it was included then something happened. You cannot really pin this repository anymore due to unknown reasons so I submitted two tickets support. No Jenkins here. Yeah, I'm just thinking about even like the rename renaming CI to Jenkins is just like all the info, info pipelines are going to break. Probably most of the tooling it's so and I don't think it's worth going to trademark dispute just to get a redirect for something that doesn't affect anyone right now or doesn't affect very many. Now Twitter on their hand, I can see that going fighting that one that wouldn't I would be much more like if we wanted to try to claim Jenkins by itself on Twitter, I would see that much more worth our time. Because that's marketing that's, you know, user facing. I wouldn't want to fight this guy for it that's fine but I'm just saying that that to me has a lot more use of our time than to get up. Maybe. Oh, I'm not sure whether the context that might be for. I didn't maybe tell you today. I'm not sure that taking over Twitter handle is easy. No, but you know, people are more likely to go type in Twitter comm slash Jenkins or Jenkins rather than go to GitHub. You know, and even if they do go to GitHub they will be able to go to the right URL they won't type it up by hand, you know, post somewhere link to the wrong post like it just seems like the split of effort there you know. I agree. So, for now, just keep it as is then. Yeah. We can decide it to the new events operator for a member that's there that will be their first first job right. Not you the new new one. Twitter handle. Either one. Yeah, I think that yes, definitely something to be dedicated to advocacy and efficiency. Yeah, I say, I say, but punt it wait till we need it. Unless someone really wants to do it, then we can support them. Yeah, there are so many things we can do that make a real difference. So, piping blog posts actually from working again on reports because our current Twitter LinkedIn activities below what we had last year. Yeah, I guess it doesn't really help you. And in Chrome and fire, you can hit the delete key. It goes away. It's gone. Yeah, we'll do that later. But yeah, we need to work a bit on promoting stuff, because there is still a lot of posts happening around jinkies again with different hashtags with different mentions but things are still there. Best plugins to use in 2021. The best ones. You know that. I'm going to say get in warnings and G mostly because I've seen the search results on the. Oh, interesting. That would have not been my list of plugins best plugins. The best list is opinion and because it's environment specific. Lotion or maybe an integration plugin, zero plugin in backup. Okay. Yeah, anyways, I think we can call the meeting now. Yep. Okay, so I think about your list about the recommended plugins. You can do that. Each board members should make a blog post that says their recommendation recommended list of plugins. Okay. Let's see. So, thanks everyone. Next meeting, I guess, as usual, 24th of March, right. The way about time zone changes, our meeting is in DTC, I believe. So that will be. Yes, our meetings is UTC our time is defined UTC. One hour later. I don't know it depends on which part of the world you're in and whether or not they met with clocks. I know but let's say the time zone changes I think it goes further away from UTC. Yeah, I'll figure it out. Yeah. So, we assume that the meeting in UTC and they will fix it. Correct. It was, I intended to put it in UTC. If I was editing it and we've regularly talked about it as UTC so that we don't have to meddle with clocks. Yeah, it's okay. It's one 1pm for me for the next one. So it's definitely UTC. Yeah, it will be a bit late for Europe. Let's see, maybe we could adjust. I'd be happy if I stayed at the same time, but I'm good either way. What's your preference. I think it's for me it's still okay because I'm working in the night when my children are sleeping. Let's leave it the way it is as standing. And then, and I'm going to pronounce your name wrong, but when Alina joins us next time, then we can have a discussion. Yep, I agree. Okay, then. Thanks everyone. Yeah, we'll post the recording. Thank you. Bye bye.