 I started recording and for some reason it didn't give the recording announcement so the meeting has started. Yeah, I got the recording announcement so hopefully everybody else did as well as means being recorded. So, welcome to the November 4 TSC meeting. We have two pieces of information that you need to abide by as we start the meeting the first is the anti trust policy, which is displayed on the screen. And the second is our code of conduct as is linked in the agenda. Basically, don't be a jerk. Everyone is welcome to join and participate so welcome to the non TSC members who have joined us. We're looking forward to the conversation today so we have a couple of announcements. The first announcement is one that you will see on the agenda every week, because every week we have a weekly developer newsletter that goes out. And so the call here is that if you have any information that you would like to share with the wider hyperledger developer community, then please add your content here, and we'll make sure that it gets into the newsletter. The second announcement that we have is that immediately following this call there will be a maintainer orientation call. And in during that call we'll be talking about a couple of different things. The first one and how to create a hyperledger lab or an incubation project or graduated project so we'll be going through the kind of the project lifecycle. And then the second one is around the question of we'd like to host another hyperledger maintainer summit and we'd like to find out from the community what they might like to see in that summit as we cover that and how it might work. So looking forward to getting some input and feedback from the wider community. Are there other announcements that people have that are not on the list. I do. I have two other announcements one is that our marketing. DevRel call is next week. It's on the calendar. We're trying to figure out the future direction of that call. So please attend. And the second announcement is that you will soon see a cancellation for this meeting. And I will send out a new invite. So don't be surprised when you see this meeting canceled later today, because there will be a new invite coming out very shortly thereafter. So I got. Alright, anybody else have any announcements. Okay, let's then get into the agenda. So as always the first thing on the agenda are quarterly reports. They are all held over from previous meetings. I apologize to the Aries and Indy community for some reason last week that was a week off when I listed the upcoming reports so most likely that is my fault and not their fault for being late. But anyway, there are some existing reports that are out there. I sent through them this morning I think the two that had maybe some comments or questions that we could talk about in this meeting are the Avalon and the sawtooth report. So I think on the Avalon reports. There was a question around. What would it look like to split out the Intel SGX portions to move that to the confidential compute consortium and what kind of code would be left in the hyper ledger source repositories. Would it be the blockchain connectors and kind of what would that look like. Would it have anybody who is from the Avalon team that's on the call. I can talk to somebody I can tell and see if they will respond. Okay. I think the thing to do for me is probably calling to one of the meetings since that's encouraging TSC members to do. Sounds good dinner. Alright, so on the sawtooth one. The comment at the end was specifically around. Details about kind of who's using sawtooth and how do we get data and stories out there surrounding this. I'm bringing this up. Mostly to ensure that the staff has seen this question because, as Arun mentioned in his responses probably a question for the hyper ledger staff. And how do we get data specifically about our projects into the greater hyper ledger marketing and blogs and those sorts of things so I don't know if anybody on the staff would like to comment on best ways to get information about the different projects and what's happening in those projects. I'll take a stab at it. That basically comes by request. We reach out, we ask people to give us the information and write the case studies we work with them to write the case studies and the blog posts, etc. I don't have a question for David Boswell. I don't know if you are aware of any efforts in that area for sawtooth. I know I think you're, you're right I mean as far as tracking users go that's not something that would be an insights. I mean, I'm wrong but I mean yeah this is really reliant on people in the community who are doing things with a specific project letting us know right I mean unless somebody tells us it's hard for us to know. This is again maybe where the idea of a liaison could come in handy because it just I know because I have been to some of these special interest group calls sometimes things about sawtooth come up in there so for example in the media and entertainment there was a really interesting presentation earlier this year about an NFT marketplace it was built on sawtooth. Again that might not have gotten much exposure outside of that group so there are things that are happening I think again maybe the question is how do we service that more widely, you know, sometimes also there are meetups for example that feature a specific project that might not get seen beyond that. Right is right as far as like something that shows up on the hyperledger site for example I mean that's really on the onus of the people who built a tool with sawtooth in this case to agree to create a case study right so I think the answer is we're a big sprawling community and things happen like how do we pull that information together and make it more discoverable is maybe a wider issue beyond just what's going on with sawtooth but you know, again maybe that's a wider discussion but some things are happening with sawtooth if that's the question and how do we surface that. That's a good question for the marketing committee maybe. Okay. Sorry. Sorry, sorry. I just want to add that. Yeah, surfacing this information is the big part of it. I mean, just from the member case studies that we do we reach out to all our members. We did just publish one on sawtooth which is Bondi value and I know sextons in there as an official case study as well as. Yeah, I think it's service. I think if the, the question and maybe is Kamala Sean. Yeah, I'm here. Is, is, is that. Yeah, maybe we can talk offline but yeah I think David's point about surfacing where this information is easier for you and for others. So actually many for others because the last four to five years like I am in my company and we're using the hyper laser thing. And even I talked to the many community members whether they are using hyper laser non hyper laser project so for other people hyper laser means hyper laser fabric and other things could be maybe for the identity management people talk about the India is how many not even there is so but we have different DLT like you know how other other projects so if you have such data so community and the the blockchain architect and decide like which is the right product and you can write DLT for the particular use case, because currently the, the IC and I face with the different customers and clients, they only know about the hybrid fabric is a project. But if you have good stories and good deployment of the other projects and right fit for the particular use cases then it should be kind of communicated to the community the broader level so they can make a right choice. For selecting any, any DLT. David, did you come off me or did you want to. Yeah, I mean, I hear what you're saying and I think, yeah, maybe that's part of a, maybe a follow up to the greenhouse task force that one of the kind of open issues that came out of that that maybe we want to decide what to deal with but I, what I hear you saying is maybe how do we help people get started and find the right part of the hyperledger project for them and maybe for some people that's one project and for some people it's another one so to me that sounds like an onboarding question not specifically necessarily related to sawtooth where this question came from but how do we onboard people to any of the hyperledger projects or labs and I think we could certainly do a lot more around helping people get oriented and finding the right project or lab that's a fit for them. So I'd love to talk more about what to do with those open tasks that came out of those greenhouse task force. Sounds good. I think then we'll move on in the agenda. Before we move on though are there other questions that didn't get surfaced in the reports that people do have on any other reports. I will then move on to the white paper task force that was added to the decision log. The intent of this task force is to create a white paper around the role of blockchain in the elections process. I didn't see any comments or anything show up specifically on the issue itself. Are there is a discussion that people want to have on this particular decision item before we think about coming to a decision. Tracy sorry for me personally I'm completely lacking the background on this initiative. Was this a mandate from the TSC or from the foundation in general how did this come about. Yeah, so definitely not a mandate from the TSC. The folks in the community, Vikram specifically who's on the call I believe today, added this request as something that they are interested in pursuing. Hey, I guess my thought is this is a super good idea. And it's always good to have people exploring these applications. I guess the question is what or how is hyper ledger planning on endorsing this. Yeah, that was going to be my question. Would this be endorsed by hyper ledger in general or this is just something contributed by the community. I mean, because we're also writing, you know, there are also sort of groups of hyper ledger people writing academic papers. You know, do should we get those approved by hyper ledger is there a process I mean it might be good to advertise papers to right. Just curious about this or if anyone has any thoughts. Okay, what we've done before when a paper has come out of one of the official approved hyper ledger groups, we've put it on the website and have given it hyper ledger branding so for example the telecom specialist group has written two papers. So perhaps that was some of the motivation here by the people wanting this to be an official task force group so it could kind of receive the same sort of process. Yeah, and so I guess David won't be surprised by what I'm going to say here because that the point has been, you know, a point of contention for a while is the very use of the term white paper. I mean, for some of us with some research background, you know, white paper conveys a very tight specific type of document, which I don't know here if it's actually implied to be that kind of white paper or not. You're absolutely right and you're I didn't kind of go into those details for you right the telecom group called their papers solution briefs not wait papers just for clarity. Yeah. Yeah, I'd suggested to that to stay away from using the term white paper because it does tend to carry that quite a bit of meaning for some people at least. And so I guess that's my question to, you know, here, is that really intended to be a research type of paper. Which, you know, again comes with quite a bit of expectation. And I mean, I take it from hot reaction that he reads that as a he's a research guy and so he takes it as a kind of research type of paper. Yeah, it sounds to me what's missing at this point is for for this gentleman to find a to find an endorser it can be a TIG, SIG or one of the projects. So they can have in the end have a platform to publish this right. Yeah, thanks. I know to follow up on the comments. You know, yeah, when I see white paper I expect something like new to be constructed. And, you know, maybe this is like an SOK paper or a systemization of knowledge, which is also great. And I don't want to discourage this effort at all. I think it's fantastic that we have people around hyperledger getting together and do this. I just want to, you know, properly figure out what we want to call it and how we want to to handle it so we can have more of these in the future. And I think that that distinction of getting the research done and whether we endorse the research is important because a lot more of this kind of work would be really helpful. Even if a lot of us might consider this work dangerous or or difficult to do right. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying to figure it out and do better. And, you know, publishing things like healthcare records on blockchains and voting on blockchains are often considered very dangerous activities because of the track and trace ability that's involved in those use cases but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be, you know, putting our best thinking forward and in terms of what's possible what's not possible what's recommended what's not recommended and this is the kind of effort that will lead to that. If I could just jump in real quick sorry I didn't raise my hand. This is another example where maybe there are things happening in the community where, you know, if we had more cross connections we connect the dots just anecdotally I know that Jim Mason has organized a meetup tomorrow and somebody's talking about a different way of paper on voting using blockchain so a lot of this stuff is happening so maybe I would encourage the people who, you know, want to do this to go to that meet up I sent the link to a room. So they have it but just there are things happening in the community on this maybe we can connect some connect some dots and just flagging that. Yeah, I guess I'll just like to think about what the next step should be seems like we need to find existing expertise on the subject. You know from the, from the projects or from sg working groups. If we don't believe there are existing expertise that can do the paper justice for reviewing it, and we may need to form a new new task force or new sg. Okay. So, Vikram, I know you are on the call. As you submitted this, and I see that you just raised your hand so I'm going to give you an opportunity to talk. Hi, you know, this is Vikram. It's been good to be part of this meeting. So what I wanted to do is, you know, as part of this task force, you know, so, you know, we came up with this initiative at, you know, Hyperlegia India chapter. So as part of the chapter, we, you know, we folks, you know, looked into that, you know, the blockchain elections is kind of a hot topic. When it comes to, you know, for example, what is happening in India and abroad. So although in India, you know, we haven't tested this much, but you know, there are, you know, success stories and challenges that people have faced abroad as well, you know, this has happened. So we did a bit of, you know, we did, you know, look into a while before we submitted this. So the idea here is to, you know, one, you know, gather the information what has happened, make it part of this, you know, initiative. And, you know, from the learning. And as part of it, also look at that, you know, how this can be implemented and not just in one way, you know, come up with, you know, multiple ways of, you know, how this can be achieved and you know, what is it. Then that, you know, if someone is, you know, jumping into it or probably wants to do something about it, you know, for blockchain and elections, it could be, you know, their reference material to, you know, know from, you know, a crux that okay, who all have done it and you know, how it all happened. And again, you know, not particularly, you know, just, you know, I understand, you know, someone suggested that, you know, maybe even we should look at a product or something. So from that perspective, the idea is that, you know, we are not restricting it to a particular product. So that is not the idea. So the idea is to understand from that and, you know, suggest, you know, based on, you know, our expertise and obviously, you know, the people who will be reached out to obviously different product teams and gather their opinion. And, you know, combined opinion could form this as part of this white paper, where, you know, it could act as, you know, guidance for anyone who wants to do repeat the same thing or, you know, get into, you know, elections using blockchain. I'm not sure, you know, provided all the answers that you know, you're looking for. So please, please, please, please do ask. Alright, thanks Vikram Kamalash. Yeah, so, add-in to Vikram's point, so in India, there are different Indian state governments and election commission and other regulatory bodies, or maybe like research institute like Indian Institute technologies and this kind of things are already using the hyper laser technology and other blockchain and piloting the blockchain kind of solution for the election with the remote voting or any kind of election processes. So, so all this kind of research institute or maybe this election bodies try to do the research and kind of reinvent the things. But if this is a white paper can provide some kind of, some kind of details and materials, so then maybe this kind of white paper can be used by this kind of bodies to go through the research and take a right decision, which kind of blockchain and what kind of attributes like was like, with some zero knowledge for identity management is a really well ingredient for the any kind of election solution for the blockchain. So this kind of research people I think really helpful for the, because I think lots of initiative already going on, but everyone doing their individual basis. So this kind of material kind of white paper could be kind of a starting point or maybe enhancing their solution according to the need. Okay. Angela. Yeah, thanks Tracy. I must admit, I don't understand why this should happen under the hyper ledger umbrella. I see part of the complexity of the, this thing I see, I don't know crypto conferences or journal where this can be addressed more properly discussed at the theoretical first at the theoretical level. There is a way the blockchain so I don't, I see. So we need first a solution before then going to the, to the technology so I think there are other venues where this can be discussed better venues that already exists. I'm pretty sure also in universities that are already groups that are working on this, maybe hyper ledger can finance this group so can say oh we will have some will put some money on to help people develop protocols for elections for blockchain in the enterprise space. That would be more, more, more interesting, at least from my point of view seems more interesting than us having a work group on on this. I mean we need experts and experts in this case are people that have knowledge about crypto distributed systems, they know what what it means to perform elections in a digital world and so on and so forth. Okay. So just in the sake of time, because we do have a couple of items on the agenda. Basically what I'm hearing at this point is that the TSE is not ready to decide on this, they do think that a white paper is the wrong terminology for such a work product that would be developed. And they're also looking for specifically. I think really, to me it sounded like, you know, there was interest in it does this fall under a working group does this fall under our sake that sort of thing I think the answer to that was the hyper ledger India chapter is interested in doing such work. So, I don't think anybody is necessarily saying that we have people shouldn't do the work, but yet at the same time I do think that there is a concern about the language and the optics, if you will, of this being a white paper. So, I see three hands I think come less and Angelo you haven't lowered your hands. Last, last comment on this goes to heart, and then we're going to move on in the agenda. Tracy thanks a lot. I was wondering if there was a way that we could say, basically to these folks, like, yes, this is a good idea. So, we can give you like a meeting room or like a wiki page if you want to get started, but we're not ready to, you know, endorse something like this as an official hyper ledger paper, and certainly, you know, not a white paper. And if we could get back to them with something like that do you think that's a possibility. Sure. I think that's a really good idea heart. And given that Vick Roman a number of the people who are in the initial participants are actually on the call today I think that is been communicated hopefully during this call, but we can also then comment on the issue to that respect. All right. So, thank you for the conversation on this. I want to move us on to the blockchain automation framework project proposal. So we do have some guests on the call, who are here to represent the project proposal. So, so Nick, are you going to drive us through that. Yeah, well thank you. All right, so now you should be able to share yep, we can see it now. Okay. Hello everyone. So I'm Sean Accroy and product owner of blockchain automation framework. And I'll just give a brief so that all the this in the meeting. The link is there for the rendered version so I just opened it. And so the details are here but I'll just run through quickly. Next, not sure how many of you have heard about blockchain automation framework, but in summary it is it is an accelerator, which gives the developers and operators of DLT network platform so that they can consistent to deploy their own ready, auto blockchain system of distributed systems on on different cloud providers I mean we base it on Kubernetes. So it deploys it on Kubernetes, so full continuous and as it as and hence, it can be also deployed across different public cloud or even private cloud environments. So anyways, we did start the project in 2019 from Accenture, and then it was open source under hyper ledger labs in October 2019. And some principles that we followed our design for security modular design. We do confirm to the DLT reference architecture which was open source by Accenture. And we always use all of the open, open source components and it is also a project 2.0 licensed. It is infrastructure independent. We try to not use any cloud native cloud provider services, just basic, you know, VM and compute or networking in most of the pieces. Dependent wise, project wise, as you can see we use Ansible, which is the main automation provider that is provided, but in general we use Ansible more as a as a templating tool, because the actual automation of the deployment is provided by the cloud platforms. Kubernetes is the content, the platform on which the deployment will happen. We use him as the, the, the Kubernetes package manager, and Hashikov vault, we are using for the as a secret manager and key manager, because we are why we are using Hashikov vault, because it we don't again kind of similar to be cloud platform independent. We are using as you are not using any cloud key management service. And the projects wise from the DLT platform wise BAF currently supports these hyper ledger fabric base to Indy, then we also support go quorum and Corda open source and Corda enterprise. And activation wise, I'm not going to read the whole thing but but in general, it was more about, because we have so many different blockchain platforms and they each have them have their own way of deployment way, their own way of key generation key storage and deployment and their own way of different other associated services for example like quorum and base who has a private transaction manager. These would make the whole actual deployment quite complex, especially if you're trying to do it for a for a you'll see you're a more production environment not just a development environment which you can, you know, most of these providers daily platforms has there some form of Docker compose file which you can run it locally but we are more aiming towards when aiming towards the production already or worthy network, it will be, it will be much more complex so we try to kind of make that cross that bridge basically. And the main objective as well is is to provide the developers also a, you know, an architecture of how a blockchain network or in case of production how you can take care of the security key generation store key storage and management, as well as as the main operations like addition of a new node, or a deployment of, we also provide like have a sample application so in case someone wants to know how a sample application and a blockchain or a distributed application would look like. So that's that's the summary and this again it's a very long description but the solution in general is we do have a set of configuration file or one configuration file if you're only deploying a single network. And then BAF reads it and then translates it into kubernetes sorry helm value files which are used by flux operator to automate the deployment of the choice of platform that was selected. In general, I can deal with I can describe this the architecture or the whole process basically. So we do have everything is containerized so we use the images the fab in this example the fabric images, and then we have written our Ansible code, which does all these activities like certificate creation CA deployment joining a channel order server services nodes and all that, and then an operator or developer will provide the input which is the, which is the configuration file which we generally call network YAML and Ansible automation will use the helm chart and create those packages for so that it gets deployed on properties. These format is used for all, all the platforms, like basu in the quorum for the enterprise as well as corda open source. And from resource wise yeah so until now from this document we have 41 total contributors. And it has been overpassed to you know that since 2019 we have actively participated in the community we have we all our meetings and the planning happened on on on open snow open community on zoom. And then we have all. We have like at least for past 14 months, sorry for 14 countries in the past six months, and we have now got some sponsors for at least three other different companies and one independent contributor as a sponsor. We have all the deployment died and the operations guide detailed we have very quite thorough read the docs documentation. And as I said, we also have the sample supply chain and sample indy which is the areas example application deployable via a bath so that you can anyone can prove the working of the deploy of the DLT network. You fake FAQs are here. Just can conforming on on just again I will not run through all the thing. So difference between blockchain automation framework and blockchain as a service. At the same point there being blockchain automation framework, the scripts are not tied to a specific cloud provider, and it is also has support and we support multiple different versions and I mean it is again first of all it is open source so anyone can take it deployed there with with some changes deployed in a newer version or an older version of of a specific DLT platform if they choose to support heterogeneous deployments across multi cloud. And it is bring your own infrastructure. So the only thing that we ask is is it's a Kubernetes and vault one vault. And that's that's the minimum, but but that's anyone can bring their own infrastructure. The organization and all everything can be managed by a single network YAML file which, which is basically an operator YAML file. And then we as we will have a sample supply chain application. So the platforms that we are supporting and from comparison wise with other labs. We did discuss working with cello we did have in participating meetings, but then as I know cello for only supports fabric right now. And we did not get a lot of, you know, feedback from then about the collaboration. The other highlight that I'd like to mention is that fabric operations console is now fully integrated with BAF, basically that we have we have created a Helm chart so that we can deploy fabric operations console on or using BAF. And, and then that basically means all the upper fabric operations that you can is available available through fabric operations console can be now done on on a BAF network. Okay, we have maintainers, we have multiple companies represented in the maintainers and for projects use usage, I mean at least for within Accenture we know that we have participated in at least seven projects where BAF has been used both for production and and as well as POC projects. That's pretty much don't think I mean we can answer any questions, but on on the. Yeah, I think that's that's all otherwise the legal part from the naming and all that kind of things we don't have a choice of name. And we'd like a hyper ledger committee to choose a name for for us and from licensing it is apathy to license. Alright, thanks so much for going through that. So at this point, open for discussion, comments, questions, anything that people have related to this particular project proposal. Beautiful. This is what I want to see. I'm looking forward this to become a hyper ledger project, really, really nice. All right, thanks, Angela. Any other comments or questions. Jim. Yeah, I also think this is a very good step forward. My main concern is regarding how to position this with cell, both being top level projects seems like both are trying to solve this the same problem but seems like BAF is further along, even though it came about later. Well, that's my impression. Maybe this is not accurate. Are we going to retire one and then replace it with with BAF or what's what's this feel like it's it's a, it's a duplicate between two. Yeah, so I mean I'm happy to comment on that provide my thoughts but I would love to hear other people's thoughts on that as well. My expectation is that there would be no change to cello as it stands today. If I might. I'm cursed without a raise my hand button. I would say that this is a topic that has been on the TSC backlog for a while, which is how do we. The project is not doing what it set out to do. Does it become what we do with it. Does cello become fabric cello to the explorer become fabric explorer. That's those are questions I think for the future. And I would agree with Tracy's assessment that immediately. Nothing would change if if BAF was approved we would have BAF and cello and that would be it. Yeah, so a couple of things. So first, you know, from just, I mean, the proposal on it by itself, I think it is definitely worthwhile. And, you know, we always tend to favor that lab of project starts as labs even though it's not mandatory step. I mean clearly, you know, here we have the case of a team that has been working for quite a while in the lab. We can say that they've been pushy. They took their time. They have set themselves up as a within the hyperledger and an organization and they live by the organization's rules. And, you know, I say that because I'm a lab student and I saw it coming and I've kind of looked at it a few times. And for me it has given all the good signs. And so just from that point of view, I think it makes sense. Now, the question is pertinent with regard to cello. And I wanted you if you could expand on the answer but it sounds like, you know, the way I read the text that's right there. So the result of our initial discussion is that BAF can be another community-oriented agent within cello is unfortunately what, you know, we, it's a polite way to say, yeah, whatever. You guys can just be, you know, a feed to a project. That is a bit hand-wavy, in my opinion. But, you know, marginally speaking, so I'm interested to know a little bit more behind this. But basically, this is saying the cello team doesn't want to, you know, embark in some kind of convergence. And so we have lots of precedents of competing projects. And so, you know, I'm sympathetic to what Jim says that maybe we shouldn't have that. But that's the way it is. And I don't see that this is a ground for us to say no, they can't have it. But it does raise again the question that I touched on last week. It was like, you know, when and how do we prune the garden? But, you know, it's kind of a separate question, in my opinion. And Arno, I will say that when the team originally started working in labs, part of what we went through was a process of seeing what exists in the community today. How can we have conversations with the different projects as well as labs to find out how we might work together more closely, right? So we did attend multiple cello calls before we finally actually made it to have a conversation with them. I got part of that call so I can't give you specific details. The quote that you see here in the FAQ is what I got back as the answer from the conversations that did occur. So yes, I would probably read that as well as, okay, that's nice. But at this point, there wasn't interest, right? Now, it has been a while, I will say. I think since that conversation happened. So, you know, I don't know where we would go from here at this point, but just to elaborate kind of on that particular comment that you had Arno. So you had your hand up next before we get to Sonar? Yeah, just to say that personally, I don't find the problem having projects that are more or less solving the same problem. Actually, we have multiple blockchain systems. So they are actually trying to solve the same problem. So I don't see, actually, I see this positively as competition and then we will see what will happen. But I agree with Arno indeed, and you Tracy, all the others are the same that pruning is probably the most important thing, but not the competition. Not the competition. Actually, we should foster the competition. Thank you. Thanks, Angelo. And I think obviously not necessarily part of this particular conversation right around blockchain automation framework, but a conversation that we should have in a future meeting regarding the pruning. Sonak, I think you were next. Yeah, yeah, so I was going just to add on that. Yeah, we did try to not try we reached out to Cello team and attended their conversations and all and even tried to contribute as well. But yeah, it was, I would say that it was not met with a similar, you know, of taking forward from the Cello side. And from the current seat, I always see what is happening in Cello as well. I can see that they are they're still having it's only one fabric, and even I think it's only 1.4 only not even two. And, and it is more revolving around the, you know, the Docker, and it has become more about the front end operational console now that I believe, whereas the bath is is more on the on the deployment of the network. As I said we have now can now incorporated with fabric operations console and we don't intend to become a front end. Sonak, Jim. Yeah. So this is by no means criticism to either teams. I think I definitely see the difference between the two, both in terms of one being more of a management console, the other is underlying provisioning, but also the approach. One is template based more decorative the others complete completely code and scripting. I guess we just need to be careful with setting up the precedents where when the team wants to solve a problem that a existing project is already supposed to be solving. One of the things that makes them want to start something new rather than contributing to an existing project, because if everybody is, if people are not able to work with existing teams to contribute to contribute and make it better, and they ended up having to create something completely different than I think the end result is sure we have competing projects and it's good to have competition but maybe we would have had something better if if all the teams work together. I just don't know what are the things we can do to encourage more collaboration rather than starting something from scratch. Maybe there's something that both teams can share to see what could have happened to have allowed the teams to work together and sort of, you know, create something new. Yeah, I think these were points that came up last week right when we were talking about the objectives. Jim, did you raise your hand again or did you attend. Okay. All right, so not hearing anything negative or there any sort of concerns that people have other than the overlap potential with cello. All right, are we are we ready to move forward with this or are we wanting more time to take to consider this proposal. I'm happy for us to vote on it and improve it. All right, so that sounds like a proposal. Yeah, I'll. I'll move. All right, anyone want a second. Okay, and then I saw you had your hand up did you want to comment or wondering if the name needs to be done before after the vote if what the precedent on that is. So I think, yeah, heart, go ahead. It can be done after we did cactus well after the vote. Okay. As long as there's precedent and no issue. All right, so I think we're ready to vote. Shall we do a roll call vote right. Sure, and I will do it completely. I'll do it from the bottom up. No matter before the technical steering committee Troy, how do you vote. Yes, Tracy. Yes, Peter. Yes, Nathan. Yes, Kamlesh. Yes, Jim. Yes, heart. Yes, grace. Yes, David. Yes, Dan. Yes, Bobby. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And the measure passes. So congratulations to the BAF team. The soon to no longer be the BAF team. And let's let's let's move on. That's great. All right. Great. So yeah, it's congratulations. And I think we do have one last item on our agenda. And I think I'm going to hand that off to grace to talk about the chat system and the concerns. That exists with having both matrix and rocket chat. That was a agenda this week. Yes. I think that was the last one. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Right. Brian, feel free to chime in. I'll just give the. High level overview, but obviously you're very, very close to this. So we. On the base who team. Or I guess everyone's probably noticed that we've been running. And have been planning on moving to the matrix. And we've been working on the, we've been working on the, we've been working on the chat channel system for hyper ledger. As of a few months ago, and a few channels have moved over such as the TSC one. Within basu or basu contributors one has. But there's been a slight delay in the, or I guess a months long delay in the moving over because of the development work for matrix. And it not being able to scale correctly for the entire community is on pause up until I think you two of next year. So it's my question for the group where I want to kind of talk to the group about, you know, should we one pause the matrix move and maybe move everyone back to rocket chat until we have a clear timeline or clear, you know, until matrix is officially ready for everyone to move over. Or two, should we continue as is and kind of split while we're like split, I guess, as is until it's ready, or should we, you know, consider other chat channel options and think about that as well. I don't know. Like this has been a basu challenge because half of our, our maintainers are operating on matrix right now, but our new users are asking questions in rocket chat. And I believe the documentation currently, you know, in the hyperledger sites all directs to rocket chat right now. So we're kind of just splitting communities in our chat channel. So I wanted to raise one, how are other communities addressing this to, you know, if it's, you know, maybe getting kind of agreement from the TSC on how we should move forward or, you know, if there are best practices on any of your all's experience. I see lots of raise hands. Hart, I think you were first. But I guess actually let me pause for one second. Right. Did I capture everything correctly? I just want to make sure I got that right. You got it. The development resource that was working on the, on the move is working full time on another project. And so you're correct. And part. Awesome. Thanks Grace for bringing this up. I think ideally, and I think Grace hinted at this like a split is a really bad thing, right? We're already encumbered with, you know, I think in all of our work lives, more communication channels than we can possibly deal with. So sort of the fewer extra communication channels we add in the fewer we have in total, I think is a very good thing. So, so I think we should probably try to avoid a split if possible. I've noticed the same split problem with the areas and Indie communities and had some trouble with the mobile client for the new matrix work. And it's the kind of stuff that we'll get worked out over time. And I think it's, it'd be a good thing for us to keep everybody together on a platform until we feel like we're actually ready for a full cut over, because the, we've seen the same thing where the new users are showing up on rocket chat and having the maintainers already on the new platform makes it hard to keep track of what's going on. Okay. Anyone else? Sounds like it's a common problem that exists across multiple projects, right? Yeah, so one thing that came out of the member summit last week was there are a lot of communities, particularly in APAC that are using other chat platforms. They're not using either of these options. They're using WeChat or they're using WhatsApp and Telegram and Signal. So we should, you know, acknowledge that it isn't just rocket chat or matrix. You know, the current situation is rocket chat, matrix, WeChat, Signal, Telegram. So it's worse even than it appears. Okay. So I think this is something that we should continue the conversation on, but it sounds like the desire from, at least the people on the call here is to move back towards rocket chat and away from matrix until we're ready to make a full blown transition of all of the pieces, including kind of updates to the websites and documentation and that sort of thing. Just the last thing to mention there is there are competing communities that have easier accessibility on their chat. For example, for the areas in the indie projects, a lot of the conversations are being pushed over towards the decentralized identity foundation, which has different membership requirements. And so, you know, making sure this works smoothly as quickly as we can does help us to gather the community and rally people behind our co-projects. Based on some feedback from the community last week, I did set up a discord server because that seems to be fairly popular. And I'm just trying it out. So if anyone, I will post the invite link. If anyone wants to try discord and anyone has any strong feelings about it, I would love to hear it. All right. So we are at the end of our time here. I don't know that we actually came to a decision slash conclusion on this other than I think right, people would like to move the TSE chat maybe back to rocket chat until we're ready to make the transition completely. We'll do. I'll unarchive the channel. Okay. All right. Thanks everybody for joining. Thanks for the conversation. And we will see you again next week.