 Hey there. Hey there So I don't know if there was anything planned for this call because I just got my power back on this morning. Oh So I was gonna say I'm surprised you're on the call Yeah, well, I just I saw that Catherine couldn't make it and so I was Caroline couldn't make it. So I thought I should dial in just in case The Did you all have Texas? No Portland. I was based in Texas. My power would still not be back on Well, it depends some people were lucky like my boss is and Texas Austin and he he is one of the lucky ones that did have it But yeah crazy crazy what's going on the So, yeah um, so I haven't even looked at The agenda if any I just Posted the date and there wasn't anything in here. So I think I have only maybe something regarding the Framework next steps. So I'm just gonna add here, let's do it right um framework So I've been working on I don't know if it's the right word But I've been calling it the contributor growth framework kind of a high level framework of what to think of if you want to grow your contributor base be it code contributors or non-contributors and So I interviewed a few people Scott for Microsoft came on the call and he wanted to help so he um Interviewed someone as well and we're gonna actually meet right after this call. So I think this is ready to go on GitHub Yeah, and then Get feedback kind of stuff. So that's basically Where we are at And I can add Maybe I'll just add this So, you know if these are like the things to get approved by our this RTSC chair people like So like for the templates, I think Paris was going to our chair Or our TSE rep to like get the documents approved. Do we need to do? I thought you kind of submitted and then they go the approval goes through there But so they would approve the work doc Because I know that nothing goes through approval Not nothing is published, but I thought like you kind of submitted and then So what's the process because I I thought when we were talking with carolin It was like, okay, just get it on github. I was like Okay, no, it depends. There's an approval process for stuff to get on the contributor Contribute that cmcf.io website If it's not going onto the website Then there isn't an approval process. Yeah, well, I'm hoping at some point it goes there But it's not ready yet. Right like first We want to put it somewhere and so we can ask people for Feedback Yeah, you're gonna put it in the drafts folder then Yeah, so I think so. So I was like honestly I just learned how the basics of github last week I had no idea how to read So one of the reasons I had no idea when I joined this group because I did not know How to read that page and where to find what because it all has like the contribution is like, oh my god That's why I like that's why no one told me because the information is here. So I just had these aha moment right now And I was trying to find it and then I went I couldn't find it and then I went through your drafting So I think that's where it should live, right? So those are kind of the little questions that I have so I would just create a new file And that will create a folder, right? Because it like it's actually create a new file Right in the drafts folder Oh, okay, because I think right now, let me see You are the only one that's drafts. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You know, I see it. Okay This is experimentation for me learning while doing I know it's not difficult but It's the first time it's kind of different Yeah, so the process would be Added it in there Summitting it submitting the PR and then someone would review and see like if this is something shareable, I guess and then once it is Uh, or is the draft always a draft? Um, I think the plan was to put it in drafts So like for the rest of the people in this they can take a look at it. Um I think a lot of times people just do like they can sense this and say like hey, like, you know, like look at this by, you know the 25th and like there aren't any other Comments like I'm gonna move forward with it Um And then from there, I'm not sure I don't I think if at that point you feel like it's good to go And like get approval then we surface this to Paris. I believe Okay Well, I think like the first step is just to get it On here and then I think it's it's by then we're probably Well, I can ping People like or Paris ask her what like once it's there But I guess like it would be like let's wait until two weeks and then see what we do once it's in there and because I think like maybe I can um get some feedback from other people that we already know before Yeah, and then we discuss in our next meeting Yeah, because I like went through this and then Right like then like josh all like there are other things to add and so be kind of We're still working on ours and we haven't gone back to Paris to get it Yeah, so there may or may not be like more iterations to come but you want to start putting it Yeah, oh, yeah, I'm sure there will be iterations and I'm hoping there will be iterations because Yeah, yeah, we want this to be To have as much You know input from as many people and projects as possible. So I would be disappointed if there was no um, yeah, I would drop a note to the file like the github link in the Slash channel when you post it. Okay Okay, cool. So that was the only thing that I was kind of hoping to get out of this meeting to understand the next steps Um, so I took another look at the contributor ladder template and um I think the only thing that's kind of blaring for me right now is just the difference or like how we want to describe a reviewer versus approver right now um I added I mean, I just kind of put like a reviewer reviews puller class before they get merged by approvers I'm not totally well versed in the specifics of the different roles. So Josh, is that something you could look over? Yeah, oh you've added more stuff to it. Just a little I cleaned it up. Awesome But um, I don't know if we're missing anything else Yeah, the um Oh, I really need to give these titles hold on No, that's not the right one Do you want the link? No, I'm just having the usual. Oh wait, it's one of your hack mds. It's not one of mine, right? Yeah, got it. Okay, that's right Okay, so we've got contributor reviewer approver Organization member Subproject lead maintainer various kinds of maintainer roles and activity. Yeah, I mean we still need to bulk out some description Which one requirements info? for Oh like for reviewer for example the So saying how is this different from you know Clarifying with both review and approver how the two are different from each other Four organizations that are going to use both and also probably with a comment I'll add this with a comment saying a lot of organizations don't use both a lot of organizations just use approver or just use reviewer and and owner Subproject owner so the um So here's something that I didn't quite get So as an approver approves full request before they're merged by maintainers Which is not how approvers work in most projects that I know of and most projects that I know of Being an approver means when you approve something it gets merged by the ci system But you're saying sometimes an approver is just an approver and not necessarily a maintainer, but sometimes they are also a maintainer Yeah, well, I mean the real distinction between an approver and maintainer for projects that have both Yeah, would be the scope of their responsibility Oh, so like say say for example and say contributor strategy If I was an approver just in the governance folder, I could be an approver But if I wasn't an approver on the root level thing, then I'm not a maintainer if you follow me because I'm not responsible for the SIG overall Um our approvers often leads Um, you well leads are often approvers. Have you follow me? As in you can be an approver without being a lead um, but you can um You know the um But most leads are going to be approvers So the one a few cases where a lead is not an approver is when they are a lead in the sort of social sense Right when they're saying maintenance or contributor cultivation or something else That doesn't require them to have repo permissions Okay, so lead is or sorry an approver is more of like a it's not necessarily like Well, it is sometimes a role, but mostly not a role It's like a function, right? Okay Yeah, when I was thinking about a prover role as sort of narrowly scoped maintainer the Well, because I asked the question about the lead portion being um early because like you has a sub project lead section as well the um Well, some project leads So some project leads are for projects that are actually divided out into sub projects. Sure. Um, like for example with, um, I network tools um, or what is it called network network something Working group. I don't I remember anyway, they're they're a weird project where they have these individual tools and the individual tools each have their own maintainers So some project leads some project maintainer would also be a name that we could use Um, if we if that was clearer to people So so like for all these things for a prover Sub project maintainer maintainer It's all these are all ownership permissions. It just varies what the scope of their ownership permissions are And then also with anybody who's got the title maintainer. There's this expectation that they Have responsibilities to the project that go beyond just approving prs so so does it make sense to just talk those into um The other existing titles right now as opposed to having their own categories Yeah, well almost feel like we want to have A subtitle here where we say maintainer and hey, here's a list of different kinds of maintainers The different projects have and it really depends on how complex your project organization and code base is You know Because for a lot of projects i'm dealing with Approver and maintainer are the same thing. There are no sub projects. You know, there's only one sort of level, right? I mean those projects generally have they have A contributor, you know org member and they have you know approver slash maintainer and that's all they have That's going to be true for a lot of projects So, okay, so right now on that doc There's a maintainer section and within that there's a breakdown of like community manager project manager at least manager docs manager Yeah, you want to talk sub project lead under there Yeah, I mean I guess the difference is Um for those and actually this is just a matter of filling it out, right? Is that um Ideally we would have more example duties requirements, etc for all of these sub categories Because we have we have sort of sub project owner more filled out But that's just because we have it more filled out. It's not and actually no We don't have it more filled out because it's always a bunch of stuff in it that doesn't belong there so A lot of that stuff that's in it belongs under maintainer Okay, let me fix that right now Rather than then continually saying it The um What did you move? I moved all the handling cncf relations, etc because that all belongs to maintainer or whatever the senior most position is Got it. Okay The um and I'll need to block that out because in some projects where they have a steering committee All the cncf relationships go to the steering committee and Which has some substantial overlap with who the maintainers are but it's not the same body so um the um I knew it was going to be complicated to do this sort of generic grab beg of rolls. I'm almost thinking That we want to spin out a separate document. That's an example of the sort of simplest contributor ladder Okay, where where we have contributor slash org member as the same role Reviewer and then maintainer slash approver so basically three levels like a light as an example simplest one. Yeah the um because Because this is otherwise going to be a little bit terrifying the um Because even kubernetes doesn't use all of these levels well, okay Should I start doing that because I can probably start doing that, right? Yeah, and well, yeah And we just need to remember to sync it with the sort of main grab bags. So here hold on i'm gonna actually Can I or i'm worried there so i'm adding a header for maintainer rolls So that we can go into that Yeah, if we do that put that in there So i'm gonna actually add a roll here So make it really clear because the maintainer rolls particularly area is a grab bag Based on what your project looks like And i'm gonna add the approver maintainer roll You know and then make it clear that no one is going to adopt all of these rolls because some of them contradict each other um And then have in there the approver approver slash maintainer roll Which is the simplest one for projects that just have one top level and they don't have subdivisions and stuff. Yeah You know what actually make this so i can see doing this two ways to help me figure out Let's figure out which way is better, right? One way would be to have this one big file that has every roll we can think of or have seen in any project in As as a menu for people to pick from um The second one here is because the really complicated part appears to be the maintainer rolls You know approver on up That may be in the basic file. We just include approver maintainer You know the simplest consolidated roll and then we have a link to a second file um You know where we say look if your project needs sub project maintainers or maintainers with specifically scoped domains or you know a distinction between um You know directory owners and maintainers etc um See this other file for a set of rolls that you might want I'm kind of thinking that's going to be better than giving a super simple example And we might want to give a super simple example also But if you look at what's above that maintainer line It's not very complicated. What's above that maintainer line is not very complicated. It's one two three It's four rolls with some notes saying that you know, you might not have this roll if Yeah, I I wonder if We message it as like if your sandbox you use the light version of the template and then like as you start thinking and growing right then you like Reference the other one to kind of plan out what you're going to do I don't know about that because It doesn't correspond to what we have It is like the network working group is a sandbox project and they have sub project leads Sure, whereas xcd Um has is a graduated project and they have a two level contributor ladder Okay, right. You're a contributor or you're a maintainer and that's pretty much it okay so I mean, I think it's more dependent on on the sort of natural complexity of the project Yeah, I'm just wondering if we should make any statements in terms of helping people figure out which stuff they should use Yeah Well, and that's why I was thinking it might actually because if we take all of the sort of alternate, you know extra maintainer stuff out of this one like I said, we have In that case we would have five total levels of which Um community participant and reviewer often get dropped And why would we drop community participants just to make it shorter people people often don't recognize who their participants are They're good or bad though It's not necessarily a good thing um the um, but I mean You know the only thing you have to do to become a participant is to make a post on a mailing list You know or a slack form or whatever somewhere right the um, and so that's why people don't often think of those as a group It's helpful that people think of them right because people are saying how do we get contributors and you say okay Well, who do you have participating in your community forums? Yeah, right? That's that's your first pool to draw from um But people often do not call that out as a specific role in their contributor ladder I guess I so I feel slightly inclined to include it just because it's kind of Like this like the baseline I guess or like the starting point before You become a contributor aware of somewhere where to come upon a ladder, right? And they're like, oh, wait like hey a community participant That's me and then I guess I don't know You sure opinion here It's like I feel like if they like self identify with something then they can start Yeah um Yeah, as opposed to just seem like contributor and I don't know if that's intimidating to read. Um, yeah Yeah Yeah, the um Yeah, I mean it's good. It's good for projects. Yeah, I guess we are making a recommendation because what is good for projects? the um But the one sort of drop so I guess the one dropable one there in there is reviewers, right because A bunch of projects don't have a separate reviewer role Um They just go kind of straight to a prover. Yeah, if you're not a general contributor I'm if you're not an organ if you go above organization member Um, alternately some of them lump reviewer in with organization member That is organization members have reviewing rights so The um and And just make it clear that that's sort of in there. I mean in kubernetes We have those as separate levels Because of prow largely and projects that use prow tend to have those as separate levels Because it's built into how prow works Um But but most other projects don't So yeah, so then we would have five levels of which one is optional For a sort of basic file and then we have a big thing saying hey If your project is more complex because you have a large Code base or you have sub projects or you have you know permissions on specific modules Maintainer permissions on specific modules see this other file that covers some of the kinds of maintainer roles that people have as types of maintainers And I think that'll make looking at the basic file less complicated for people. Does that make sense? Yeah, I think so um Okay, let's try to understand the like order in which to want to read the section under the maintainer roles So right now it says approver dash maintainer and then you go into We'll explain like right so So for simple projects Right. I'm gonna fill out a set of requirements under approver maintainer And for simple projects, that's the only kind of maintainer or approver they have Right the minute that you get Cited on that owner put into an owner's file as an owner somewhere um You are now a maintainer Of the project in general, right? That's the one level they have Right, and we put a big note there saying hey This is how a lot of simple projects Simple in terms of code base projects do it If your project is structurally more complicated than this um Please see this other file um called contributor ladder dash maintainer pipes something like that Okay, and you stand so we're gonna have Are we having two files one of which is like the light version and then the other one that is more complicated Are we having Yeah, either two files or we have a walled off section at the bottom of this file um I kind of feel like having two files is a bit more readable just because Among other things the second file is a little bit different Because with the maintainer types we're saying hey, here's like eight different maintainer types Yeah, and not only are you not going to use all of them You in fact can't use all of them because some of them contradict each other. Yeah, okay um Yeah, I think they should just have two as opposed to having one with like offshoots like multiple You know and then we'll also put the other things in the community manager project manager Release manager which are also other ways to divide things up. Yeah, um the um, so The um And that also gives us the ability if we put it in a second file, here's the advantage putting a second file We might not do that second file immediately Because it's a lot of extra stuff to write And maybe we merged the first file And get that published and continue working on the second file so it doesn't hold this up. Yeah, just so you have something out there Yeah, okay um the um I will know You hack md for the light version And I'll share that with you Yeah, okay Wait, I thought this was the light version where you're going to move the approver stuff the all the crazy maintainer stuff To a new file Okay, so it's okay. Yeah, that's fancy. We can do that. Um, because we have we have a whole lot of essential stuff in this version like bouncing people for an activity and you know the um Okay, so then should should we keep the subsection that are currently under maintainer like me manager project manager release manager adopts Uh Yeah, no, I think we'd move that to the new file. Okay, so I will create a new file Yeah, yeah Yep, okay. Okay, and I'll add a big note about you know The maintainer roll grab bag and and why your why your project might need what's in the second file. Yeah, okay Anything else? Most of what we've got with the prover is Okay, sorry. I'm messing with it I'll take my hands off it I really like the idea of breaking it up by the way because I think it it gets overwhelming especially for Small projects if they in probably most people using this they're small and then they will grow And it will be like very something like making it really kind of the bear But like this is like the simple version and then hey, you're more advanced. I think that's a really good move Um, or here or more, you know, like more for more mature projects or bigger projects or whatever I think that's a really Because there was a little bit by fear first. It's like when you see it. It's like, oh, wow. Do I need all these roles? so Really good point Yep Yeah, and and most people don't you know I mean, I would say we would even skip the extra roles entirely except that because of the projects we've dealt with We know what some of these extra roles would look like and you know, it's still useful to give projects templates for things because otherwise, they tend to Tempt to write these from scratch And find out that it's really difficult No, I do think you need like I think it It makes sense to have them all. Yeah, also for smaller projects to to understand like all these are the role and it makes sense to understand how bigger projects work or Even if they don't need it yet because that's maybe where they get at some point or So I think it does make sense to have a complete Um ladder for sure Yeah, I'll go ahead and clean this up and I'll send this ever hopefully this afternoon I have a quick question. So I've been uh slacking Charles a little bit because I was like looking at starting to add like the first thing into Get up and because it's so long I wanted to have like the introduction and then like the different sections with a little summary And then linking to a different page because it's just too long, you know, and you may be interested Again, it's overwhelming, right? So you may just read the section that you're interested in um So what is the best thing because like, um, Charles was saying there is no way of doing subpages So should I create a folder in the in the draft folder? So I think you can do what I had done on mine where I made this like kind of like table of contents thing at the top And I just linked to those headers further down But that work functionally for you It would I just feel sometimes if it's so long and it's ever ending Never ending scrolling that's So I really like the page because like the ladder is a lot shorter, right? Like you I mean, it's I think it's 12 pages right now the framework and it's like but not everyone will read Everything at the same time. So I think if it's chunks, it's a lot more user friendly I yeah, I mean if this is going to go on the contribute website eventually um, I think it would be better to actually have sort of chapter pages If you follow me Is to divide this up into sections and have each section be a separate Page linked page. Yeah It makes it easier for people to digest And it's a really a lot better if people are going to refer to it Right if somebody's going to say um Oh, hey the contributor framework had something about this. Here's the link to the pr workflow portion Yeah, and and well you can do that based on header tags It's more trouble for people to find the header tags. Yeah So that's what I was trying to do, but I don't know how to do it in Github because Charles was saying you cannot create sub pages because like You have like the main overview, right? And then you have the difference. So it's like On on a website. It would be the link and then yeah one page. How does just Github um What what are we using for hold on are we using doxy? Are we using something else? That's a very good question. I don't know what that is Uh web framework for documentation I don't I don't know what we're doing using carolin's not here. Um, let me hold on. Let me take a look at it Because it depends on what we're using um But but it's also going to live on github, right? Yeah So I mean like for a lot of things You know, what you just do is you just create a document with links to the other documents You're not you're not doing this as a directory structure necessarily Okay, so that's what I was Yeah, sorry go ahead. That was just what I was saying about github doesn't really have the concept of because I know you and I use notion a lot And I think that that's maybe where you're you're trying what you're comparing it to is creating a sub page there and so I'm thinking of a regular website too, right? Um, which is but um So basically it would be what uh, Charles was suggesting I create a Folder in the draft folder and then create separate files And then link to those pages in the so one is the main one and then the other ones you can link from it Okay That's the closest you'll get in github to to that kind of structure. Well except we are Um We're using doxy Okay, and doxy actually does have a way to make Um, directory structure reflect and insert a document structure. Okay, um the um Um, so that's an option if it's going to be easier for you Is it doc sy? I've never used it Yep, okay. Oh wow somebody apparently Did an overhaul to the old contribute site Ages ago that was never made live Okay, we're gonna have to wait for carolin on that Do you want to because I'm not yeah, I'm not sure how she's pulling stuff So I don't know if if any of that's going to work Um But in the meantime I can use those Yeah, full idea, right? Yeah. Yeah the um Yes, there's a question of whether you have to manually link to the stuff in the folders or whether it automatically displays the table contents Because the nice thing is with a regular doxy repo Is that I can actually do that where I can just put a toc tag And it'll pick up all of the documents in that particular folder and automatically create a table contents for them Yeah, the um, it's just that we're using this thing where it draws from our the sig contributor strategy repository um Into doxy and I don't really know how that works Um, because carolin built it And it's not done yet. So Or can just ping her on slack too and ask so I don't have to wait until Yeah, yeah, oh, you don't have to wait for a new meeting. No, you have to wait for her to be You have to you have to wait for her to be done repairing a roof is what I'm talking about waiting for Oh, oh, I saw something. I didn't I didn't So she had like yeah Yeah, yeah, that's what she's not here Oh Okay, good at least I know Home to ask and what to do. Yeah what I needed from this meeting. That's good. Thanks. Yeah Yeah, to be good. I mean that's looking really good. I just put a couple of comments in there About potentially moving some stuff around Okay, great the um, I mean one of those that I think I'm gonna have to tackle is it to do is really looking at the whole um more seriously at the whole Devising metrics to figure out how you're doing in contributor growth Is that in dev stats? Except that we don't have a good mapping of here's things you can look at in dev stats I see. Um, and there's a lot of reasons why we don't have a good map Which has more to do with a hey, we're really having trouble defining exactly what it is we want to know Okay So there's an awful lot of stuff speaking of somebody who wrote a bunch of those reports and devs apps There's an awful lot of stuff in dev stats that was there because it was easy to report on Rather than because anyone wanted it And and a lot of the data there And a lot of other stuff that's kind of a first a first stab at something Like, you know trying to determine workload by label No, and I devised that because of some issues we had in kubernetes and said, okay This is my first stab at this Somebody give me some feedback on one that it's working for you silence So Um, just probably a no except that we talked about taking it away and then somebody's like no, I'm using that so Seems to be the only way to find out if anybody's using metrics as you just continue them you find out who's who yells at you I've heard of that happening before actually. Yeah, it's really funny But it would be good for us to kind of hash out and talk about hey, you know If we assume all the cncf people have access to dev stats We have some ability to modify dev stats. Can we come up with a short list don already took a stab at a short list? um in one of the other documents of of sort of things to see how your community is doing um But you know, she was doing it based on hey, here's kind of what we have already Not a hey, here's what we would like to have because we we have the ability to change what's there Um, you know based on what it is we think projects need okay Because I was looking there in chaos and I realized you were just referring to the chaos stuff for community for building a community rather than the chaos stuff for their monitoring Yeah, yeah, that's I I kind of gave up playing with the chaos stuff. It was I it's a it's unwieldy. I was on the committee and I dropped out because I was looking for like I'm saying, okay. Well, I've already worked on dev stats. I've already worked on grimoire Right. I know all the stuff I can pull What I want is the what should I pull? That's what I'm interested in right show me the fewest number of metrics I can get in order to get an accurate picture of what's going on um and Wasn't the direction they were headed so um the um and um You know because things like And I felt we got a few of those one of the ones I'm more proud of in dev stats that I feel is underutilized is the um first time in an occasional contributors chart Because I feel like you know as a sort of end-to-end test that Tells you a lot about how easy it is to contribute to your project Yeah, yeah, that's I just had a hard time setting it up, but it was uh Wait, so wait, you were setting it up as opposed to having the lucas and stuff set it up for you Yeah Okay, yeah, it's just right. Yeah, sorry. I wouldn't have recommended that. I would have said follow Lucas. I'll just set up an instance We have a whole sprawling more acid bash scripts Um and go binaries On one of the cncf servers that deploys this It's not portable code, which is why we have not open source to need that stuff Because it's it's horribly full of all kinds of things like um Well api keys and stuff along the cncf So got it Um Next time. Yeah next next project Um The um also the cncf pays for a bunch of really high octane arm servers to run all the devs that stuff We did is our experiment and running kubernetes and other things on arm Um, which worked really surprisingly well So i'm not familiar with any of those tools that you uh mentioned. So I guess we should add Yeah here. So um, Charles, can you then help? Um, yeah, so we need let me add Let me add a yeah and also let me let's see. Do we have a natural place? Well, I was just suggesting by the way because you have this thing about, um Which we'll call it about um Community crms and I feel like That would work better as a subsection around software for community growth and then we could put metrics in there Um as well as the crms um The um and so then let me put that down right below that section um Because it's weird because right now you have the crms And then you suddenly jump back to a non-software issue Which is contributor recruitment tactics so Yeah, that was I wanted to have like a link to parishes Yeah Since this is kind of like really high or a really high overview thing. Um, I wanted to kind of link to the different Other resources that we have So it's also linked to the Heading level heading three there we go Why am I not? Oh, right because this is pulling from a red hat account Okay, Charles you'll have to tag yourself on that because I'm getting red hat LDAP for all the names Okay The um But also the the other reason to divide it up into files for separate chapters Um, like we were saying with the contributor ladder is this means that you could actually start Publishing the chapters that are done sooner Yeah, yeah, and I feel like the ladder Chapters are because it was based on interviews and it was like people were like very giving a lot of information at the beginning And at the end of the interview was like, okay, people are getting tired It was like oh should I should have like flipped it around for some and just start with the last question so, um Yeah They probably need a little bit more work as it goes gets to the end Yep Cool Okay, and this looks really nice. I had not looked at it since you started it honestly and there is um a ton of stuff And now I'm really curious. Do you have so speaking for Continuing tracks to like future meetings and stuff Do you have anybody that you talk to with this crm usage thing? that would be willing to like do something at um I contributor strategy meeting or maintainer circle or something Because I have not actually used crms ever for contributor management. And now I'm really curious is to see how people do that There are two. Yeah, sorry. Go ahead There are two that we're using or evaluating One is called orbit and the other is called savannah yeah and I I like both of them for different reasons I mean, I'm sure that I mean you want to have a contributor um talking about it right because I think they're relatively new and one of the things that I did is like I actually um Contacted the I don't know founders whatever and was like, hey, we're writing this stuff. Um Can you just walk me through it? Like how did you Picture it like what how how do you how do you want us to use this right like and then and um They could do that like a little I don't know if that it's it's a vendor, of course showing it But if you have like maybe two two Competitors who get like because it's it's actually really useful And they have a lot of really cool things and I think a lot of people don't know it just because it is relatively new You have lots of sira, uh, sira no Your rms now But like for traditional, you know, like sale cycle and stuff and they have a lot of kind of like the community Metrics in there, which are kind of nice um The um Yeah, because well because I also want to really get an idea like somebody who's actually using it on a real project I mean, we're using it and one of okay. Well, that'll be fun But we're not using it efficiently and so one of the things that by uh I was doing the framework and so we really want to kind of improve the efficiencies and we have a lot of tools And we wanted to make a decision and kind of we have also a new team member who was going to be looking more at the community stuff And so at some point we will know more. Um, I think we've been using it a little bit here and there but not like Really, you know, we didn't since we didn't commit We're using several things at the same time and I think we're not getting the best out of it So we may be able to talk to one of them Maybe in two months or so Right. I mean, do you feel right Charles? Because I don't feel like we really know All the in and in and out yet because we haven't been using it We asked what I would see is you could actually kind of do it back to back Right, the vendor could present the thing and then if you could talk about how you were using some pieces of it Yeah Well, it's just because How vendors think that we will use things and and speaking for a vendor How vendors think that people will use things and how people actually use them are often quite different Yeah Well, yeah, I I wanted to know is like what was his vision and why did they create things because Because there were a lot of things we weren't using probably so I wanted to get those nuggets and then like if it's useful And if we're going it's a different thing, but yeah, that was kind of the idea behind Yeah, I'm just curious because it was not right because You know, I'm more familiar with your standard sales crm. Yeah, and like I wouldn't I would never use sales force to manage a community I know people have tried And they install 800 different sales force extensions In order to try to make it work And they still end up doing a lot of stuff outside the system So, you know If if there's stuff that works a lot better for that then I would love to know about it Um, and I think I'm I would end up not being the only one. Yeah, I think I think they do Um, but if you want, um, I you know like in two months or so when we kind of Have learned and we can do the vendor and use it like right now I'm not sure we're ready for that But I do and that's why I wanted to have it here because I I mentioned it And carlissia was like what there are crms for community. So it was like, okay a lot of people Probably don't know about it. So I mean like you don't have to you know, adopt it But at least know it and evaluate it to see if it if it will work for you It's so which projects you're trying these right now I don't know. Do you know I know there are several They have several projects But I I'm not sure which ones are okay because I well Chrome crashed on me a while ago and I lost my savannah tab They couldn't remember the name but now that you brought it up I remember the name So it's going to look into that and then I was also looking into orbit. Um, and Um, I don't know like the the founder reached out to me probably because they already get microsoft and like Wanted to like see how I was going to use it. So I don't know if you've already talked to him Um, but I'm happy to yeah, like I'm happy to take some time and explore these tutorials because I was going to do that already Yeah, I mean like if you want to if you think there's More to add as well like and one of the things that we want to just kind of create here is let a little bit best practices what how to use CRMs in Open source community kind of a setting um And I think that's kind of important because right now I think like there are a lot of things you remember or there's not a lot of process right and that's kind of where you lose a lot of you know track of things or Yeah, so I think like basically what the sales people are doing really well Some of that can actually be translated into because they've been doing it forever, you know very strategically and they have a very Strong incentive right which is the sales and the commission. So they're they've really mastered A lot of these things, but I think a lot of the things that I've mastered we could actually use to better manage our communities I think um I wonder if this is something that like cncf would help cover for cncf projects and how that would look like as well If these things have you know substantial costs I think right now Yeah, there's they're still trying to figure out what the costs are but it's I think it would be great if the cncf helped One or both of these projects get off the ground. I know that savannah was started as a personal project orbit I've been chatting with them since like 2019 and I was just listening to a podcast today. They're getting a lot of traction. So I could see them very Very quickly taking off for sure But yeah, the cncf is in a position to Facilitate that I think not only would it help that them, but it would help the projects that Get value from their the product from orbit Yeah, okay cool. So I think I know what to do Thanks for your feedback everyone and if you have more questions, let me know I can help Thank you. This this was very productive for a meeting that started out with no agenda. Yeah Sometimes, you know, the spontaneous ones are the best Awesome. Thanks everyone. Yeah. Bye. Yeah