 light agenda for today. I've got some announcements that I will defer to Salona and then we've got an Ursa update and I think that's about it. So I don't want to fill time that we don't need to fill. So if we're done in the first 30 minutes that will be good for everyone. If you want, I did the fabric update. I could give that. Sure. If we've got time, we could knock that out and that would get us ahead of things. Right. So just one other quick reminder. We do keep a chat stream going on the TSC channel on chat.hyperledger.org and that's preferable to the the chat facility that's in this Zoom context. And then with the quarterly project reports, general expectation is that the TSC members have read them before the meeting and that we are not reading those reports out during the meeting but we're just responding to things that we're either not covered in the report or need additional inspection. So with that, if you want to take us through the announcements, Salona? Sure. I'm back in San Francisco so my allergies are horrible so I apologize in advance for sneezing and snorting all over the place. So we mainly only have two big things. One is we've got Bobby. I see that she's on and she sent out a survey for voting on the chair and she can give us the results on that. But the three main things she's going to cover is with Bobby taking it over, we've kind of done a little bit of a reboot with it. And so we're kind of looking at documentation best practices. So one of the big asks she's going to have is to getting the other teams, all the other projects to start participating in this work group and think about having a delegate join so that we can go over those best practices and survey how they're doing and do all of that. I don't know if any of y'all got to go look at the survey and vote that she put over here or the wiki content that she's put in previously but she's done a really good job. So Bobby, did you want to take it away? Sure, no problem. Thank you very much, Salona. That was a very nice introduction. Again, I am working with the people in the learning materials working group and we're trying to get momentum going to have like a resource library or a spot for people to be able to put their information and basically find all the vetted documentation that they can use and grab and share to train and just spread the word about what's going on. So let me just try to share my screen for a moment. Okay, that's not really working. Hold on just a minute. Oh, somebody else is still sharing the screen so I can't take over. Rye, can you let Bobby share? I'm not sure if that's going to end the meeting but I'll do it. Oh, there isn't a way to so I think you should be able to take over it now Bobby. Okay, let me just work on that for a second. There we go. Okay, you should now be seeing the learning materials developing working group homepage. Is everybody seeing it? Yep. Good. Great, excellent. So basically what we're trying to do with the learning materials working group is we're trying to make it really easy to onboard, grab a project and get some work done because that's a lot of like the shortfalls is people like we're working on stuff and not really sure where it was going to wind up. So we want to be able to house stuff so that people can find it. So we're working on our new members page. We want people to be able to go there and pick up information on how to either update edX or be able to review some github work or we need people again like Solona had said to be a part of the other working groups and special interest groups to find out what their learning material needs are and you know when they're developing materials to be able to grab them for other people to use in other working groups so that they can be able to find them and there's just different in the resource library we're going to have a framework library and tools library where you can get information on those frameworks and tools and we want it to be up to date so it's not old information so we need people to maintain those so basically onboarding that's how we're working on getting that initiative going and again we really want the universities involved so we frequently ask questions and we're going to be you know building that section out so that people can jump on really quick. Another thing that we're working on is the resource page and again that's going to be the information that has earned the best practice approval which we're going to go over in a second and it will have each framework will have each framework will have a section it will have the links to all of the work that's been done by the other fabric people we're not trying to again reinvent the wheel we're just trying to house it and make sure that it is through the standards that Hyperledger wants or you know just is protocol same thing for the tools we're going to build out the tools page so that each one of those again has links to the current information and then the only other thing really with the resource page is that best practices and see that is so we're working on the best practice resource checklist we have some information for best practices for courseware we're going to work on best practices for presentation white papers and webinar and again all the the documentation that people created somebody should you know just have eyes on to see that it follows these best practices which have yet to obviously are in development the next section again is the edX updates which I'm not sure if Salona and I are still working on figuring out how that's going to flow through so how in the working group we're going to get project requests and how they're going to you know work on them and get them back out to the people who need to update the github and edX courses so Bobby that's about the JIRA integration that's going to come in later and so it's going to happen is the certification crew is going to start putting in things through JIRA and it's going to integrate them with that page okay great that would be wonderful and again we're just the survey was just a brief survey to touch base with who is actually still in the group or who is on the calls or receiving the emails we did not get a huge response we only got 10 responses and most of the people were the people who are the same five that come on the calls most people are interested in developing those best practices and working with that you know the github flow to help that out again it's just our job now to figure out how to make a system that people can actually do that with most people are technical writers they just want to help with developing the documentation you know the vote people you know right now like the leadership but again in the next survey we're going to build out we're going to ask for more volunteers and vice chairs that basically was the survey and then I guess that's about it for us we just again need new members so you know all our meetings are recorded and their the agendas and the recordings are posted on the on the wiki page so you know any input any way to get new members we're open for all suggestions and please join our calls on every other Monday that's about it for me thank you all right thanks for volunteering bonding thanks for the update what you say about volunteers is pretty much what what we see across the working groups you're going to end up with sort of a power law of active involved participants and then less involved participants for the sort of the remainder of that group so one of the things that we were talking about from this day on is asking that most of the teams whoever is doing their documentation joining that group this group so that we can talk about best practices across the projects and create some better guidelines for other projects and to help each other on it and so that's kind of the recruitment that we're looking for from the TSC okay yeah and I think a way to be effective with that is to communicate then to those people what you know what the impact of that time is everybody is you trying to get the most out of their time so what is showing up to a meeting to talk about the work going to do for for each of the projects I think the hard part is knowing who even to contact at all those projects because we don't really have that always clearly documented out and so we basically have to blast the entire list to find that out a little detective work that that you might be able to do is look for the commits in GitHub on the documents and then you can kind of see who's actively involved in that document creation for each of those projects will do for the ones that have the docs you can just hit up the project leads to right say hey yeah yeah well that's who should be doing documentation on your project right and that's one reason why I really wanted to bring it up here at the TSC because it's my easiest way to like get everyone all at once right okay well thanks again let's go ahead and keep moving on in our agenda so the next one is Dave's on the line to talk about the CICD committee good morning everybody I'll keep this brief in light of our CICD discussion last TSC call the community architects team got together we decided that spinning up a committee to handle the CICD recommendation was probably the logical next step now I'm calling this a committee because a couple things are different from the other groups that we put together here the goal is to have a deadline of like early to mid-June and to produce a report slash recommendation to the TSC about our recommendation or sorry our requirements and what are the possibilities for addressing the CICD set up here for hyperledger I've already put it on the calendar starting tomorrow morning at 9 a.m. Pacific and it's going to meet weekly for 30 minutes and I'm trying to keep the scope narrow enough that we can make quick progress and meet our goal and I guess the this announcement here is just a call for volunteers I send an email to the TSC mailing list a couple days ago and I'm looking for people who are very interested in this they want to participate go ahead and email me and I'll looking forward to get going okay thanks Dave clearly an important set of requirements will come out of that so I hope there's good engagement from each of the projects all right I know that not everybody had had a chance to review the Ursa report before the meeting it looked like about half of us had had gone through it Ursa is still pretty young so there's not I guess I should say there's still a lot of informational stuff going on there does anybody have additional topics that they want to dig into I had a question I was just actually searching through some of the main if maybe it's answered so apologies if I'm about a date but I remember from the definition stages of the Ursa project there was this idea that we'd have cleared levels of how much we trust the library we're calling out to and there might be some experimental stuff written in pure rust but most of the things would be calling out to the better established C libraries in the specific case of I see this ED25519 and the SACP 256k1 implementations in there now which so the SACP is to be written straight up in in rust and the other one depends on Atari Labs implementation it's kind of nice I think to see if pure rust implementations but I'm just wondering what what what level of trust based on the maturity or use in the wild can we associate with those two signature algorithms in particular so hey Silas so I guess I'll take that question so in the cryptographic communities a whole we're seeing more and more interest in just people building secure rust implementations so the prospect of building something mostly in rust is it is becoming more likely and more possible particularly for a lot of the a lot of the newer and more exciting stuff so like the most trusted bulletproofs library that I know of for example is coded in rust yeah this is Dan so maybe if I understood your question a little bit differently Silas the the libraries that it's hooked up to were meant to be the most robust ones that we knew of which were not necessarily the pure rust implementations but the pure rust implementations for those two were meant to provide a different build option for if you wanted to go and then to support things in the browser and things like that but for the secp library for example that that should be linking directly to the Bitcoin library which is the most robust that we're aware of and the Edwards curve I think should be coming from Libsodium if I remember right okay so those options are still in there yeah I mean the tenor of that question was really I think I remember asking more or hearing about it at the time about the choice there and I mean I was I was actually keen to see some pure rust stuff done so that's nice on the one hand I also remember being previously kind of reasonably convinced by the argument oh well yeah we'll use the different PTC libraries say sorry are you saying that the both are actually available yeah so the idea is we're we're working we actually have RFCs for these right now but the idea is we're going to you're going to be able to use whatever you want and you're just going to be able to change your implementation with the simple essentially configure parameter configuration change so it'll be like you know one line somewhere that you can just change your setup and switch between implementations so the idea the goal is that you can use whatever you want pretty much interchangeably okay cool any other questions for the ursa update I was just curious Dave had sent out mail yesterday about Ross not being as safe as people think and I haven't really digested it at all but I didn't know how that impacts any of our projects and since we were just talking about rust for ursa I don't know if people have had a chance to look at that is I guess it's more a sense fault sense of security maybe so I haven't read the particular article you were talking about I'd be very keen to read it but I think that it's natural for people to make those claims because there's a lot of hype around rust security and I'm guessing and I'm actually I'm willing to bet that they're gonna highlight a couple of like if you combine a couple small corner cases that are built into rust you can do some untasting but in general the compiler is I still have I guess what I'm getting is I still have all the worlds of confidence in rust and its ability to check things it like all tools right you can miss you I guess yeah I was gonna say I want to read this article and if we're really curious I can read through it and address it on the TSE mailing list I thought he said you sent it out Dave I sent it out but I didn't send anything out okay with rust it's common well it's coming a lot of things to go through a foreign function interface and and you can break things and that the language is trying to give you easy oh so I think I did send stuff out I did send stuff out about foreign function interfaces those are really hard to get right mostly because you're exposing rust to the bad features of other languages right yeah we've been grappling with that with the Ursa library and the problem is is that rust guarantees only go out to that rust boundary where the rust code stops and there's some strategies that are coming out of like Mozilla security on how to deal with that and that's there to go I set out so I'm still super excited about using rust though okay thank you well I'll just put in a plug then that one of the things that that will help Ursa as we're starting to take the shape with some of these RFCs and design decisions is having well-informed requirements not you know sort of vague things like we would like private transactions but more concrete things like we've got a use case for a certain kind of anonymous credential or something like that and that can help us make sure that those APIs that we're developing will work well with those use cases so Chris mentioned at the head of the call here that he's already written up the the fabric update so I have not taken a look at that post yet and I'm not sure if others have but I'm well I'm open to using some of our time here and we can get ahead on on next week's agenda I think we need to be careful with that because I know some people were waiting for that update and didn't get on this call because it was on the agenda yet okay so yeah I just thought we could expedite talk about it twice Chris I mean you know there's not a there's not a lot to talk about really I mean we had we did publish our release candidate for 141 and we expect next week to actually push it out although I suspect that that will happen probably after the TSC call you know towards the end of the day we actually have I guess increased the diversity of the maintainers because we retired a couple and one of the IBM maintainers left IBM and so the ratio is has gone up in favor of non IPMers let's see anything else you know think things are going smoothly right we actually do have some healthy and substantive contribution ideas coming in from others in the community there's a CLI proposal there's a refactoring of the validation pipeline proposal to incorporate new forms of validation and there's some performance improvement epics I should say stories that are tied to an epic on performance and you know keep chugging along so to speak we do expect to have an alpha of the 2.0 also published next week and that'll include the the new refactor of chain code life cycle which is the major reason why we're calling it a 2.0 because the API's are changing and you know we welcome people to kick the tires on on that and of course the 141 I should have mentioned that actually includes the raft consensus and actually there's a nice performance boost because we can keep latency much lower with raft than we did with Kafka that's about it okay great so as Salona pointed out we'll probably still keep yeah that's fine this on the agenda for next time we're not going to really go through the report details but it'll give people an opportunity to ask questions after they've reviewed the report great so I'm not going to keep people on the phone any longer but I will ask that you take a look at the backlog items that we've got there including the project readiness for 1.0 that Huseby is working on and make sure that you've got thoughts and input together on what we define around 1.0 and then Mark what is the gist of the overall engagement in projects topic there that has to do with you know a bunch of projects and working groups have had declining attendance and so it's just you know in particular it started as PSWG but I think I've seen it across some other projects too so it's sort of a community health as well I think overall some of the numbers are down and it's not not a diversity thing per se I mean that's part of it but in general just you know are there things we can be doing to improve participation which I think we've already sort of indirectly mentioned a couple times on this call right okay great I'd also like people I'd also like to remind people that we can also add other topics of discussion to the backlog as well so if there is another topic just like Mark is bringing up the fact that he sees the problem and we would like to see about how to fix it that's the kind of input that I would that I greatly value so if y'all have some stuff please let me know especially for my team all right well with that I think we can wind up today's call and give everybody a half hour back and again please use that half hour if possible for some of those topics in the backlog oh I just I was trying to unmute myself and stumbling there was a proposal sent to the TSC I think last night for adopting a translation translation proposal yeah it's similar to what other projects have used in the past like OpenStack and so forth I appreciate if people could give it a look we've we did review it in the fabric maintainers call yesterday and it seems pretty reasonable the nice thing would be if we could you know make a deal with the company that has the tool because that I think they do have a policy of giving it gratis to people that are working in an open-source project so I don't know Solana if we can reach out to trans effects to see about licensing but if we can do that then it might be nice if we can get agreement across the document landscape most of the projects that are using Sphinx would would sort of fit right into this proposal so so when I looked they didn't have anything on their website about doing that like actually written out no about giving it to about donating to open source um yeah I think you just need to contact them it says that they offer license to open source projects didn't say you know like what the criteria was or anything okay so we can we can add that proposal to the backlog and give people a chance to research yeah yep all right so thanks again everybody for your time all right thank you thanks dad