 in a sense of where people are so Morning all and thanks for joining Again, I think we're short because it's July and and then August will be even more more challenging Although I think a few of the names. I'm kind of surprised with me. Let's let's let's get going so Todd where are we with and actually I think that Brian and I think I like the Phrase it easy instead of hackathon call these things hack vests But because they're not really contests and I think hackathon is much more closely associated with the contest Where are we with The July August and September Yes, so things are looking good. We'll get that updated to hackfest for the San Francisco Hackfest, so it'll be July 26 and 27th 40 people have registered so far So really happy with the results there We suspect some more will be joining. So if you haven't had a chance to register, please take care of that at your earliest convenience The next thing we're gonna want to be thinking about as it's about two weeks out at this point is just some General agenda planning. I know we typically run these fairly in Unconference format, but if there are specific topics or things that people want to rally around Let's definitely get some structure in place Above and beyond Kind of a kickoff and wrap up and whatnot So I'll pause for a second now if there are topics people would like to see see get added or specific direction Yeah, so actually Brian and and I and Rai were on a Thread earlier this morning. I don't know if Brian's on or not, but you know, we are or we had been planning to Transition the fabric over to Garrett and Of course, we're a little bit challenged because two of the maintainers have been out on vacation the past couple of weeks But you know, maybe we could finish the planning for that and actually schedule the transition to happen Maybe you're like right before the Hackfest and then that way we could use that time to sort of iron out any You know any issues that we have and also help people with the transition, you know, maybe if Rai could come down and And visit Anyway, so that was that was one thought that I had and then the other That I was thinking about and and sort of I think you know sawtooth Lake I think had a really good idea of You know having people right I guess in their case it was you know adding to the arcade of transaction families and adding the Battleship game, but you know we could think about you know being it more focused on actually writing apps I think the fabric certainly from fabric perspective is in a really good Shape now to actually start thinking about writing apps and starting to get feedback on on that aspect of things and so maybe we could We could do some some of that I guess it really is going to depend on who's there and and what they'd like to do I don't know. Maybe I Don't know what others think, but you know, maybe we should have some sort of Discussion here about what people would like to have or would like to see happen at the next hack Don't all start at once. Oh, that's right. Thank you Thank you Hannah actually that was another thing and I meant to to bring it up On the on the agenda. Thank you for reminding me the marketing team is actually they want to do a Demo at Cybos and I I said well actually it would be at least two because we have the fabric and we have sawtooth but They would like to have somebody work with them From a technical perspective in helping to keep them grounded in reality about what that demo might demonstrate and what it might seek to do And they were actually looking for somebody to come and Help brainstorm with them next week but that we would then use some of the hackfest time with some subset of people to Start working on developing demos for sawtooth and for a fabric that would be official Hyperledger demos that could be used it not just Cybos, but going forward at other Other venues as well So I'm actually looking for two Technical people one from I don't know Dan if you've got somebody from your team and then one from From the fabric which I have to I should meant to circulate that internally, but do we have any volunteers for that particular piece of work? And again to be clear. This is really just a one-time thing. It just I need somebody with Enough technical depth on both sawtooth or on either sawtooth or the fabric that They could sit down with the marketing team in a one-hour brainstorm next week to sort of hammer out what What a demo might look like and then we could And use that as a foundation for actually starting the development Yeah, this is Dan you can throw me onto that and I'll either attend or I'll find somebody on my team to attend Okay, thanks, Dan Chris this is she and I can volunteer for the fabric, but I'll Circulate it among the team and see if anyone else is interested great. Thanks. Sheen. Okay All right, so I'll give Greg Wallace your your names. I'll send a note and And if you have subs then just let Greg know and I think he's gonna try and schedule a call Next week with the subset of the marketing team that's focusing on the cybos demo Okay, so we have the dates Todd do we need to I Think the August virtual one Do we have any kind of closure on the timing for that? Yeah, so Just tying up the July one really quick I'll kick off a Google doc into the minutes and dump these agenda topics into it And we can just firm that up next week as well For August it's looking like the vast majority of people It works for the week of August 22nd Which would put it on a good cadence with what we're looking at doing the next couple months So the one question is, you know for the virtual hackfest two days or three days So I think you know doing Tuesday through Thursday or Wednesday through Friday or maybe just truncating that to two Depending on what people want. Okay Okay There's any objections to doing too. Oh, all right So then maybe we look at doing Wednesday Thursday that way we can get it kicked off and then start day two with the TSC call when we know we know folks are around Any any objections to that? All right here. All right sounds good. And then lastly the European hackfest in Amsterdam a lot of people have filled out the doodle pull at this point. Thank you for that It's looking like most people are available the very first week in October The second would be at the end of the last week of September right after as Sybos is right wrapping up So we'll just circle back with ABN Amro who has graciously offered a host and just confirm their exact availability And we will get that Sent out to everyone before the TSC call next week. So so people can make travel plans there Okay That's good Awesome All right next up Is exit criteria or no, I think I saw you on Yes, I'm here Great. Hello So it's been a while But and so to be honest, there isn't like nothing drastic happened to the document But I think we should take some time to discuss where we are and what we want to do In particular so, you know overall on the document itself I want to thank those who made specific comments I incorporated the fixes from VP and others to just try to make the document cleaner I tried to incorporate some of the comments that we that were made Before but I think more importantly what really need to be discussed is I mean last time actually Brian I've been confused because the document is it contains several proposals or elements of proposals And so there's the first two pages that you know I still there that I actually author it based on the input from everybody and then Plus the second page and I put the blank page to make it clear that there is a there is a separation there we had a we had a proposal from Jeremy and Now we've received also a proposal from Bill and Bill, you know, I think you're right And I I know you tried to reach out to me and I apologize. I didn't get a chance to get back to you I was out of pocket for several days But I didn't mean to ignore you And so I you know in general I I'll be honest with you guys both of those proposals I find are very interesting very interesting aspects, but I you know Anyway, I'm impressed by the amount of work you put into this and the you know The precision of some of the elements that you guys put in there but at the same time I don't know how to incorporate this with what I started and And I wonder if it's not you know going too far and trying to be Smart about this and you know offered engineering it and I don't mean that you know in a negative way I'm just I just don't know how we use it in a way that still gives us enough flexibility that we don't you know corner Ourself basically so I I think we should try and take some time if it's possible here To to discuss a little bit what what you guys are trying to do and how is possible we could leverage this Into what we started with This is Jeremy severed. I thought from the discussion three weeks ago that we were going to get rid of I'm okay with getting rid of the whole table with the since the I believe what we had Talked about was Migrating some of that into the spec world So I'm I'm happy to go and whack the table Would you like me to do that or Well, no, if it's okay with you I can do the editing I just I just don't you know when you when you editor of a document like that So it's a challenge, right? You don't want to look like you're just being impolite and just go absolutely And so I'm trying to be you know cautious here. I appreciate that Not a problem All right, and and and if there are specific elements in there that you think we could on the other end Incorporate in the text of both, please, you know Feel free to make specific suggestions or even add the text I you know, I would very well very much welcome this kind of input and Bill are you on can you tell us more about what you sent in email because I know you sent it in an email And I didn't see any follow-up. So it didn't you know, we haven't had any chance to discuss it I saw Bill on the list. I don't hear you Are you on mute it look like bill was on mute I've just Unclicked the mute button next to him bill if you want to try again I'm gonna go ahead and unmute everyone for a moment. Hi. Can you hear me? Yeah, okay, sorry about that little audio issue there Um, I think I think the idea behind it was and I don't have the document in front of me right now So I'm speaking from memory, but I think the idea behind it was to have some sort of a simplified Matrix if you will for People to consider when they introduce a project and then What and their minds it would take because I know that Christopher Ferris had indicated that, you know, maybe the maintainers should be the ones that decide when it's mature and whatnot And not the the TSC. I don't necessarily disagree with that. It's not my position to do so, but that being said I think there's some There's some You know applications that may be submitted that are just not going to be as sophisticated and not intended to be as others so the matrix would be a way of you know differentiating those so that You know, we know what needs, you know a closer look when the time comes to to call this thing, you know ready And my question for that is is We've only really discussed the graduation from incubation to mature and Does the graduation from mature to deprecated is that just something that's transparent to everyone? It just takes place automatically or is that another? Increment that that that the maintainers have to deem. Hey, this is deprecated at this point Well, my my thinking on the deprecation part would be that the project maintainers would Recommend that a project be deprecated and it would go through a period of Dormancy but while it is still being sort of actively Supported there would be no new feature developments and so forth, but certainly, you know And maybe we would need to think about, you know, do we only address, you know critical vulnerabilities, or are we also addressing, you know You know merging of bug fixes and so forth, but no new features and then after some period and again I think we have to figure out what that period was six months a year or whatever The the project could be put in the attic or You know completely archived Where again, I think it's that's really you know deprecation is really a statement of we're not really Intending to have this thing go forward. We'd like you to work on adopting some new thing or whatever right and So my thinking was that that was really You know just like when is it ripe for a release that that's really a function of the maintainers Putting that out. I think probably the TSC should get involved in the actual In the process just from an awareness and and you know, so if a team comes along and says we'd like to deprecate Others you think it's soon or whatever Or have some ideas about that then they can Partly is really going to be a function of Feeling that they have the support of a community to keep something going forward. There's a Static in the line or that just me If you're Calling in from the phone if you wouldn't mind just going on mute Well, let me let me just say real quick I found a couple of mistakes in the document. I think I submitted to the mailing list Jeremy has an updated Version and I guess with our note and anyone else that if you would like me to kind of do some more work and fill that out Because there's a few TBD things in the matrix. I'd be happy to do that work. I just wanted to get an initial Response from people whether it was Emma off base here or this is something that we could use Or is it not that's that's kind of what I was going for So I would apologize as with our no, I was on vacation selling my house The week that you submitted this and it completely escaped my Memory that I needed to go back and and revisit it. So I I need to spend some quality time with your note bill and Generally with this this whole thread Bill this is Jeremy server, and I took a quick look at it. I I think it might be a little complex and I'd want to Talk through with you maybe offline a little more because I had some I found a couple of examples that we might be able to use of something for example that IBM had on bluemix as well as of a US federal government FIPS standard That might provide some examples because There's so you have a lot of sophistication in there But it It looked a little daunting That for that sort of first pass Yeah, I understand completely Yeah, I can pass you my contact information over slack and then we can we can talk whenever you want to but yeah I mean that's good feedback. That's what I was looking for I'm just trying to pitch in and if you feel like what we have already is good enough and that's good as well But yeah, if you I mean I'm completely open But I do think that some way of people that don't really You know not everybody is going to be read on to every working group And so it should be an easy way to look at it and say oh, I see where that one is I see what they're doing I see what they're doing. Anyway, that's that's what I was going for. Yeah, so I think I don't think there We have anything like that yet that I'm aware of So I I think it's I think it's still a gap So I don't I don't think it's It's already taken care of I think there's a there's a particular risk with all of this That because some of the the the financial side is complex and the crypto is complex That this isn't just a dev ops kind of thing Or a you know standard real distributed reliability kind of thing but involves some functional expectations of the system so I think It's a really important piece. I mean, I think at some point we have to get folks, you know If this goes far enough, we have to get folks like NIST involved So I think there's there's and legal folks involved So I think there's a there is potential for more to do there So so Jeremy I definitely agree with that. I think that as a function of the software that we release being suitable for use in context a b c or d That and again, I think you know depending on the domain for instance healthcare We have certain criteria that need to be satisfied and ass may have other potentially overlapping criteria that need to be satisfied and Internet of things and you know on and on on supply chain so forth that That it's likely that really what we're talking about is Have we you know has the hyper ledger project? You know maybe in conjunction with the likes of NIST or You know Have we gone through and done the due diligence to be able to sort of assert that the software is suitable for Things you know kind of like going and getting tips 140 for a crypto Implementation for instance, right? That you know we actually various levels of certification that can then be sort of used and In an informed way by consumers or by vendors that are looking to incorporate the technology Into an offering as to whether or not that's a suitable match and so forth I definitely agree that when we're talking about Those aspects of the software that we release that that that those things pertain to the software itself and the Again, I think that the function of the incubation exit criteria was much more about As I think I've said in the past much more about the maturity of the team that's producing it, right? In other words, do we have a diverse community of engineers, you know representing multiple stakeholders so that the project is going to have some chance of sustaining itself beyond somebody sort of walking away from it, right? You know does the project team have a Release process or are they following a release process that we've established? No, are they using the right, you know nomenclature? Are they using the right tools? You know for tracking defects and responding to Those things that are really necessary just for a functioning open source project team if you will and And and not so much a function of is the software the right, you know, is it right yet, right? For various use cases, I think again that the project team should be the ones that Decide and potentially as you've noted in conjunction with various certification bodies and or various other Works that we can do to try and and instill some sort of confidence in the in the quality of the software that a particular release Is suitable for a particular set of use cases? I think that those two things need to be separate and so I think you know The work that you that you and bill have done I think is very helpful in the the second part of that conversation about the the the maturity of the software and and so maybe to to try and and Help to Reduce the amount of confusion that we have I think it's potentially the term mature is the thing that everybody's getting hung up on And we're talking about the maturity of a project team and maybe it's just a matter of your in incubation until you are I don't know We I think we just need to maybe think of another term that we would use for a project that is not an incubation Not and not archived Or not in deprecation. So I'm glad to bring you that up I don't know if Brian is on the call But so that's the other part that we are that is kind of left open is last time Brian said that he pointed out that he didn't like the term mature for him There was some kind of negative connotation as well Maybe like, you know, it's not innovating anymore which doesn't seem to to match what we want to convey and I mean the app that she saw transportation simply uses the term top-level projects And so I don't know that we want to use that term per se, but maybe something more along those lines you know, there is We could use and so I I'll Put the finger on Brian. He said he would he would kick off a discussion on the naming But I didn't see that happen. I'll blame him for that I don't know if you all can hear me. Yes Okay, great. I think either top-level or active or stable would be the three that seem to make sense to us Or it would make sense to work easier and I would say stable is great Active just behind a top level is a little bit digital from Apache Meaning known in that community, but perhaps not more widely. So I think I'd be a different Marbles behind stable. What do people think of that? I kind of like active, but I could live with either one of those two So I might My first impression on stable stable what sounds like stabilized as in no further development. So it may create It may be the wrong connotation of some people's minds Unless that's what we want another suggestion if only to reject it is The thing that strikes me about all these projects is this is a new frontier with Consensus critical code, which in some cases will be used for fiduciary purposes It will I think this is one Chris is making Even code that we would guard as good enough for some production use cases Still won't be acceptable for other production level use cases until it's matured further and people have gained more confidence I suggest there's only in case you want to reject it You know Google with Gmail and some of their other apps were quite they're quite quite overt about this They had they they they said you just using the term beta once it was ready for people to use But with no warranties and with an expectation. There's more maturity to come Petual beta or beta for five years has worked pretty well for them and it gives the right signal So just another suggestion, but again Much as is the project out of incubation and Again, you know the criteria that we're looking at and if you look at the the write-up that everybody's collaborated on here it's primarily around The process of producing the software less so on the software itself Right. Okay. So you have that point So so I think you know and no, but I I appreciate the thought because I think That when we get to the to the nomenclature of releases that your point is Maybe quite relevant and that maybe we do have a really long beta period until Somebody comes along and certifies it for a particular use case in which case we might call it GA for something, but We might just call it Production or something But what do people think about I mean so Richard what what are your thoughts on on using the term either stable or active? for the project Yeah, I'm stable There's no further development, I guess which is maybe unfortunate Of the two are prefer active, you know, because I've active okay as well as beings of it It's a positive and optimistic term. It also it signals things like if things are happening, so therefore there must be a community There must be some process, you know, it's It's not sitting there dormant and therefore there must be some maturity of the community and Given the confusion I had until you reiterated it between the status of the of the process versus the status of code Yeah, other people won't get that subtlety, so it has to So I think the risk is stabilized and we'll just people just believe it means dog other thoughts Dan Yeah, I agree with Richard on that I think stable is likely to be confused with stable versus develop and branches and things like that or as active has that nice Active connotation to it. Even if it's maybe subtly different than thank you beta It's probably projects the right thing heart I'm just going down the list here Yeah, sure Active is good. That's a good point about stable that people might think that new features and whatever aren't being added I'm completely fine with active if we want to go that way Satoshi Nakamoto Who else we have here Stan. I actually agree with Richard's points that I was initially Leaning towards table, but the active makes a lot more sense in terms of kind of Indicating that it's an active community versus just Dormant well stable working, but it's developing in the growing My vote is an active Okay, I'm also leaning versus Both our case stable and active would be the best for me So stable in the sense of I can use it as a consumer and active people are still working on it. So I'm fine with it The moss like this move I missed here Todd who am I missing? From what I've heard It sounds like Active and and Brian I think you're you're okay with that. Yep. That's good Okay I know why don't we go through and why don't we do two things here? Why don't we? Can we take the the The table that Jeremy had started and the The proposal from Bill and consolidate that into another document that we can talk about maturity and And so forth of the software itself and and and I don't know One of you two might be interested in sort of, you know, leading that effort of pulling some of that That you two we're going to sort of get together off the line And and I think that that would be a valuable conversation to start and then and then Arno, can you sort of Take the poem and you know adjust according to you know using the term active and We'll bring that forward next week Yeah, and I will also if now we have an agreement is officially adopted that will update the project life cycle documents so that I change the matter Stage and call it active in that document as well because we have several references in different documents So I can kind of look around and update all the references to use the term active Awesome. Thanks. Okay Um Where's my screen Sometimes I don't like and again, I mean I I saw several people, you know added the various pieces And I know Brian added some reference to the numbering of the releases and you know Consistent release numbering is important. And if there are other things like this or even grammatical, you know Improvement, please feel free to make suggestions. I very much welcome that Yeah, I think it's really close on on I think Consolidating some of the other proposals after the first few pages into the into those first two pages would be would be ideal But I think I think it's really shaping up to be good To be a And I think we could probably converge on something for approval of next week's native So we're just chatting in the chat and I wonder and since you're going to go in there and do a little bit of Lifecycle I wonder if we just just finished this last thought here Stan brought up the term dormant. I think you know, we had gone from active to deprecated and I wonder if We need a dormant stage in there where something is You know, I mean basically it's it's done. I Don't know if any open source is ever done, but sometimes they are And and maybe we want to have a phase where something is done and it's perfectly fine and and people are fixing it But we're not, you know, we're not actively developing it, right? Well the obvious name that would be inactive, but I don't know Yeah, and maybe we have to think about that one visit. Yeah, actually dormant and inactive and And you want to somehow or others, you know, say that it's being sustained but not Developed I Think there's a difference anyway. We should maybe think about that but let's you know Let's move forward with what we just decided and we'll take that up later And then Todd I think you had put together a draft of a timeline for the TSC elections. Thank you very much Yep, and then we can skip back right after that to the taxonomy discussion. If that makes sense So let me just drop the link into the window Do you want to knock this out quickly or move back to the Yeah, actually This is Brian. I can make that a real quick thing. I had somehow missed the semantic versioning specification out there. I Rather like that. I think I Was trying to reimplement it poorly so Why don't we take another week? Everyone could take a look at stem there dot org and maybe We talk about the next meeting adopting that For hyper larger projects I work for me, Brian Okay, okay great one one left talking approach to me So so Todd the the TSC yep So that's in the chat window now we just pulled together a quick overview So the initial startup period for six months for the TSC it's comprised of the premier members after that point It moves so that the TSC voting members will consist of 11 elected contributors or maintainers That get chosen by the active contributors So I just put verbiage from the charter at the top of this just as reference point And how the charter defines contributors and maintainers from there We put together a time line to get this taken care of during the August time frame so the first phase of that would be we will send out an email to all of the the contributors and maintainers at this point to call for nominations during a one week period at which point it would go into voting In which the active contributors would all vote and rank their nomination rank their choices And then from that We will announce the 11 new TSC members from there We would kick off a second election much like we did at the beginning of this TSC In which we'll elect a chair from that new group of of 11 TSC members And then all of that will conclude on September 8th any feedback on the Process itself thing that's missing here is the criteria and I think maybe just a little bit of clarification on What the sort of the premise we were going on in terms of contributors And basically that would be anybody that's contributed To the technical aspect of the various projects And so that would be code so we have you know We can obviously pull the list of people that have sent in a commit documentation So there's been some work on things like You know the requirements working group and the white paper working group. I think that would be considered documentation So people that have contributed towards that I would actually count, you know the contributions to Some of the discussions we've been having here for instance on the exit criteria and and so forth I think we have a little bit more work to do to figure out who contributed to those And then I was actually going to extend it to the people that are actually actively and meaningfully contributing and participating in some of the work groups although I know we haven't yet produced anything I think It's probably worthwhile to recognize that contribution And so so that was the thinking that I was going on. I just want to make sure that people are Comfortable with that going forward At least for this time around. I think you know as we go forward we can maybe It'll become a lot clearer because we have a lot more people in the community But that that was what I was going to go on and again, I don't get to choose I mean, I think we have to collectively choose what the process is for ourselves This is Brian. I'm very supportive of taking a very broad view of who will contributors I think it's anybody who's made you know a an actual Offered anything of intellectual value to the project since its inception I think we have plenty of room over time to tighten that up if we need but right now We're still in a community building phase and I'd love to see this be a big tent So if what can we get a Todd can you just do a poll of the group to get everybody to sort of agree to that General characterization that I just made and In that way we have that up Yep, no problems. They're just taking a quick vote in terms of the the definitions as Chris describes them a little more broadly If you're in support, just let me know stand from CME group That's Tamash Yes, Stefan Stefan are you there you might be on mute Stefan. It's a pipe in the chat, too Yeah, heart, you know, that sounds good. All right. Oh she my son. Is that a yes? All right. Thank you, Chris Yes, Richard Yes, all right. All right, Ajit All right, I see in the chat window. Yes So I think that was just Stefan if you can either check type in the chat window or Or respond Hey on the membership a quick question Chris. This is Morali from DDCC Is there a or part is there a limitation on how many TSE members from a particular organization or There's no limitation from a organization perspective. That's a good question. I don't think Yeah, this is Brian. I you know, I don't know of a comparable rule in other open-source communities That would limit it. I also feel like we I'd love to see the project move to a role we're recognizing Participants as individuals rather than who they work for and I think during this bootstrapping phase We do to the degree that we want to guarantee diversity, but over time, you know I think a duocracy or a meritocracy should really carry the day and so I I would hesitate to implement a rule that's prevented more than one person from a company From participating I would leave it up to the contributors to make a fair assessment of You know who they feel it's not really a competition over who has contributed the most. I think it's it's It should be a vote that reflects You know people's opinion on who would make a good member of the TSE and that might be somebody who doesn't contribute as much as You know 20 other people do but that simply helps represent diversity So I think with that I'm comfortable with the idea that we wouldn't have On number of number of TSE members per company Okay, I think we have I mean unless Stefan comes in I think we're I think we're we're that that we're agreed on that that that Classification that I described And now I'm looking for my here it is So now we actually have a proposal to review. Let's see what time we are at here still have plenty of time good We have the W3C workshop update. Oh, yes, right. We have two things So we have a proposal and we have the W3C workshop skipping over them And I don't know if Chris Allen is on I didn't hear him I But I know maybe you could give us a brief recap of the W3C workshop and if anybody else was in attendance they want to share their perspective that would be most welcome Yeah, I'll be happy to give a debriefing type of report And I will put in the chat room a link to the report It's not the final yet It's the first draft that the W3C has made available and they're trying to it always takes them weeks to get those reports together and In this case, they're trying to leverage the community to get everybody to chip in on developing the report I'm not sure it's working for now They haven't got any contribution, but hopefully it will work But in any case just be where it's not final But I'm happy to share it with you because if you look through it You'll see that it already it already provides quite a bit of content, which I think is useful to get an idea of What happened? And so, you know in summary, I would say that the The workshop was very well attended they were like a hundred people as a big room with plenty of people and so it was a great opportunity to Bit of networking going on and talk about, you know, what the W3C might be able to do in that space The the workshop with organized with several sessions focusing on different topics There was a first section of the agenda that was focusing on identity with several presentations There is a fairly short presentation, but it helped identify areas of you know problem areas that could be of interest There was a session on provenance, and there was a much more broader Kind of open session and I use that one to put my hat in the ring as representative of the project here to talk present briefly what this project is about and the position that was put together on You know generally speaking very shortly is the idea that you know It might be too soon to stop standardizing anything in this space But if the dirty sea or anybody were to develop standards It should be done in a very modular approach where standards that developed in very focus And so that we could remain, you know, we could we could keep that capability of adding a very modular architecture that and and we wouldn't be shackled by any standards that would be prematurely developed and So I you know I can say I'm happy to say that it was great opportunity to expose the Present on the project and give it a bit more exposure. I did get quite a bit of Follow-ups with people coming to me and asking me more about the project and you know of the top of my head I have several people come and it's hard to remember who they were exactly now But I remember for it for instance there was gentlemen from Huawei was very interested and asked me You know their people was just like can you tell me more that the project was just a bit confused and some people, you know The at the hot time and I should say the audience was very diverse, right? There are people, you know from vendors like technology people and they're also people from Legal trying to figure out. So what does it mean from a legal point of view? What's the liability issue related to blockchain for instance? And so you have consumer type of people and you have people from finance, of course But you know and a bunch of consultant trying to figure out what's going on They want to not miss the boat obviously and so It's kind of a very rich audience and I can say I have a lot of experience with the RTC workshop from that point of View it was much more diverse I would say that what we typically see where the problem is much more technical in nature and you know You kind of see the same people that you used to see all the time And so that was kind of interesting from that point of view but so yeah, and and so what I was saying is you know, there are people just trying to figure out what blockchain is about and what the hyperledger project is trying to do and and Then there are people just like, you know, so the person from Huawei for instance who came to me He was asking very specific questions of how to become a contributor He really wants to join and stop, you know running code and he actually already started looking from one night You know from one day to the other He was asking me more questions the next day and stuff like that So I think it was a great opportunity for us to expose the project and give it a little bit more You know presence out there Otherwise so at the end of the workshop in typical workshop type of You know way There was kind of a free fall. They were different tables put together to try and Build a huge list of all the different possible activities that RTC could take on and then you know Everything was put on a big whiteboard and then people had like speakers to go vote and You know to express whether support for a specific activity interest You know if they were committed to participate and maybe lead the activity or if they thought this was a danger area And they should stay away from it And so there was kind of a bit of distilling exercise going on and in the end They came up with the least of things that seemed reasonable it's in my opinion a very very long list still and so if you actually look at the draft report there was this person was quite amazing skills that you know Graphically trying to capture what is going on during the meeting and You'll see that there is a there is actually one on What the director see might be able to do It's the last one called commitments And it's labeled under the RTC community and their three standards That's kind of a misnomer what we're trying to and I pointed that out and was acknowledged by the dirty stuff What this is really about is they were trying to differentiate between you know activities that are more in the stage where people need to talk and Activities where they think they could actually stop working on the specification whether that happens in a formal Working group or within less formal Call a group of groups called the deputy committee groups that are open to everyone that don't have to follow the legacy process strictly that's kind of irrelevant and also gone on but You know you can look at the least that's on that chart I expect the the report to be updated later on with a more precise description of all these different projects I actually had a chat with Jeff Jaffe who is the CEO of the RTC who came to me and say so what do you think and I'm like well It's a bit overwhelming isn't it and he's like yeah, I agree with you and I said I think this is you know in my opinion This is a sign of lack of maturity actually Because there is so much and it's very hard to get one topic where it really can focus on right But you know I think there was definitely interest for sure and in areas that I would say you know lots of interest in interconnecting different Different blockchain networks as you will so whether that's to do with the format of the chain or whether to do with the protocol But people recognize that eventually we're going to have these different frameworks out there and Networks build on different framework and sooner or later we're going to have to interact with those different Networks and so they're going to be a need there to have some standards the way of connecting those different networks and so What's expected now is that RTC is going to mow over this right and they are going to try it We've come up with concrete proposals when it's just committee groups It's kind of a no-brainer for the RTC because it doesn't require the Self to put resources to it anybody can go create a community group So I suspect a lot of these will end up with just like hey if people are interested Please go ahead and you know go create a community group and they'll advertise this But they won't do much more than that You know the cases I suspect they will try to charter working groups to develop If not standards yet, I would expect they will develop I mean they will put together what's called interest groups that are more like discussion forums that are usually a first stepping stone Towards creating a working group. They often are used to gather requirements and use cases and then Develop a charter for a working group, which is then in charge of developing a standard So that's my summary. I think it was a great event overall and They do a pretty good job of attracting people for sure That was epic. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks, Arnaud Any anyone else that was in attendance that wants to share anything? Okay, let's Let's move on then so the next topic is a proposal from Conrad from DTCC on a A blockchain explorer so Conrad Hey everyone so Yeah, I'm actually a internet DTCC and I've been working on this for the past I guess month or so and I can actually give I have a demo prepared for you guys so Barney is on the line Barney is on the line and I've hooked up with team viewer because I'm developing this on Linux So I'll go to meeting doesn't work If you could do screen sharing with you guys and then we could have a live feed and I could give you guys a demo the Explorer But pretty much What this the purpose of this Explorer is? Like pretty much every Bitcoin Explorer like has one like any cryptocurrency explore a blockchain has one and You can pretty much see the recent blocks. You could see the current state of the blockchain Currently if you want to see all that information, you have to either dump the entire database. You have to query each Each search individually or you have to like run individual command line argument. So this is I can see it. Yeah, okay. Yeah, so pretty much this is a web application Written in AngularJS. I used a little bit of jQuery and some vanilla JavaScript HTML 5 and CSS and Pretty much what it allows you to do is it takes the the 10 most recent blocks in the on the blockchain and it queries all the information so we're able to see information such as It's like the the date like when it was exactly added you could see all the hash information You could see all the transaction information and if you wanted to do this in the past You'd pretty much have to run the command line arguments But this pretty much puts everything in a in a web application that anyone can run. So this is not only good for the development community But this is also to be used for like demonstration potential Individuals in the future who'd want to use this and we could actually show them working code like yeah This is this the current state of the blockchain. This is the information that's on it Like the basic search functionality you could either search by block number or you could search by you ID to get the specific transaction number and I Tested the compatibility on it works on Firefox. It works on Chrome I tested it out and Internet Explorer 11. It works all versions of Microsoft Edge. It works I Tested out on Internet Explorer 8 and it doesn't work, but pretty much all of the browsers Everything seems to be running fine I Have a few graphs that are written in v3.js, but so far they're kind of just templates They don't really represent anything. I kind of Cheers like a like a concept image. That's from a few months back. I kind of Based my Explorer off of this like I kind of use the same color theme and I tried to Pretty much set up the graph so that in the future like once there's more API is available Then we could just hook up the data into the graphs and you could have information stuff like that At the bottom here, I also have the latest transactions. So at the top It shows you the 10 most recent blocks added to the the blockchain about the bottom It shows you all the all the recent transactions So like and I had and the 10 most recent blocks I had 16 transactions. You can see There's also you could expand it and see all the details So It presents it in a really nice user interface and on top of that I Developed so it's mobile friendly. So if you wanted to use this on a phone you could you could even try doing so So right now if I if I really zoom in Everything scales like really nicely if they could use this on a tablet. I'm gonna have to go really slowly showing everything here and There definitely is a lot of room for expansion like if you look at like Bitcoin explorers like there's a lot of really good ones then There's this potential to keep adding more information more graphs Especially like right now the network API is a really limited so you can only see like the amount of peers connected to the network and You can't see like the amount of like Transactions that an individual has that appear as validated and stuff like that Here I'm gonna here I'm gonna zoom in a little bit more. So here goes in the completely mobile view and these are just jump sections so you could jump to the current area and The tables transform dynamically. So it's really nice and you could see all the the hash information transaction information Pretty much payload all the information is there This utilizes the existing gRPC APIs so Pretty much you need an HTTP server up and running need one validating peer at least running and then pretty much everything else Everything else seems to work off of that So long-term support Tomorrow at DPC is actually DTCC is actually my last day. So long-term support We have individuals here satish. He's gonna take over this and I'm gonna make sure that like he knows exactly how all the code works And long-term like he's gonna put at more and more features to the Explorer And this is something that definitely the community and anyone can add new features to this. So I guess any feedback on this or Or like what do you guys think of this? So kind of add this is Chris. I think it's a really great start You know, I think it would be good. I think Brian actually guess it on the mailing list You hear me there's some static line, I think If you're a phone caller if you wouldn't mind just going on mute so I don't need to mute all the lines I think this is a good start I think, you know, the one to burn I have is is going forward. I'd like others Collaborate and contribute on this So maybe Brian's idea is a good one. The challenge that we have There is that I think that Watching thing And I don't know that we still have that I'm breaking up kind of hard to hear. Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and mute everyone and then I'll take you off mute one sec All right, there you go So as I was saying, I think the challenge that we have Subvrying it suggested why don't we merge or you know, sort of from a project perspective merge it with IBM's contribution and We haven't actually contributed I've been pushing digga that done the challenge of course is getting somebody to To work on it and support it The the version of an explorer that IBM had written I think was also written by an intern and I don't know that that individual is still With IBM but the one that IBM is looking to contribute is actually written by the Bluemix team and that's still Under active develop develop. Oh, is it okay? Yes, it's a pretty full-fledged I would say that one's almost more than an explorer because it has some functions such as being able to for example submit a chain code So I almost wonder if these are two separate projects like This one from Conrad it is a bit like of a light explorer, you know Something you can use to view what's going on on the blockchain and use it on your phone and tablet Which I think is very useful and then the the one that IBM is looking to donate Maybe, you know a bit of a kind of heavier You know almost turning it into like a web SDK or something And I don't think the the IBM Bluemix it isn't open source as a moment And I don't think it will be open source I don't know who has that information but I think you scared them into open sourcing Well nevertheless an explorer is definitely needed for for a project like this. Yeah, this is very cool So I'm actually like My last days tomorrow, so I'm pretty much ready to push the code Like today or tomorrow, and I was just wondering like I Mean if everyone's okay with me pushing the code to the master repository like I could There are some like right now. I have it pretty much. It's in the Fabric peer directory, so it's kind of just Randomly in a directory I was wondering like if there's any like specific area where I should put this code or should I create a new New like section or like what do you guys think? You just mentioned that this is your last day. How do you which technology is it written and how do you propose to work on continuing on that? Like I said, this is developed using AngularJS Little bit of jQuery javascript html and css and pretty much to connect to the To the blockchain it uses the existing gRPC APIs So you just need a validating peer running one htp server handle the request and Pretty much you open this file in a browser and you're good to go So that's that's how it works. Um later on like more advanced. You just can be developed to like Like right now. There's a there's a rest endpoint setting. That's just in the script file So if you want to redirect the rest endpoint to some other htp server You have to like go and manually change that later on there could be like configuration files and you could have like there's more advanced features that could definitely be added to this For the moment being like I think it's a really good start And and I believe you said someone Do you plan contributing to it? After you pushed Can you say that again Do you do you plan contributing to the project after you pushed it? Um at DTCC there's going to be individuals who work here full time that will be taking over this I'm already like teaching them Exactly going through the code making sure that they know like how it all works. Um, so There's satish. Uh, he's not on the call right now, but he's going to be taking over uh Long time long term support of this and he's going to be adding new features in the future You know, I'm I'm going back to the college in in about a month Uh, so I want to be kind of busy, but who knows if I have time I might Contribute some stuff, but uh at DTCC there will be full-time employees that will take over this and they'll be contributing code long term So that's not a worry So this is blind. I think um when we when we take a new project in we're partly evaluating What that project does but we're also partly evaluating The team of people who will be coming around it and continuing to work right to the very least support What's been built could hopefully evolve it further and with with this news that IBM may open source and contribute there They're a explorer as well and we may have a have two of them and maybe we merge them Maybe they are they remain separate. There's a great opportunity here. I think to create a Project that kind of sits logically separate from fabric It talks the fabric, but maybe it also talks to sautees like or to other Other chains in the future But I think what's important in a proposal like this is to reflect who those contributors are going forward and Make sure that they are committed to building a project the hyper ledger way And I think we can You know get started on this. I'm excited about it, but I'd love to see Kind of the people at DTCC who'll be taking this on after you And the the people at IBM who know That could they as well kind of get together and maybe think about a joint proposal Putting collectively their names on it and talking about, you know, if it makes sense to work together how they might work together and that sort of thing What do other people think? Yeah, but so I would add a comment. This is Morali from DTCC So so we are we are committed to this right so we have also We've also taken up the Java chain code And you know if everybody is in agreement on the hyper ledger explorer We can work closely with IBM and and But in general DTCC If you get the approval, you know, we are committed to the hyper ledger explorer Just to add to that, this is Morali from DTCC You know, we are already working closely with IBM on the Java chain code the individual that were mentioned Convite has been working with you on this and so is Satish On the Java chain code aspect So yeah, we definitely can continue the collaboration and You know see where where it goes from here Whether it makes this test to support projects of this much better in future So I I think You know, I think from certainly from an IBM perspective I think we've been more than happy to figure out how we collaborate around You know the concept of an explorer I have to do a little digging because again, this is sort of You know as Sheehan noted this is actually something that's been developed by the blue mix team not the IBM Blockchain team. There's IBM is a big place And and so I'd have to figure out You know who that group is and And you know how interested they are in open sourcing it and so forth There's an awful lot of sort of blue mix specific stuff that we'd have to tease out and so forth And then of course that means you have to be able to sort of you know get a team Open to the idea of working out in open source I'm I'm happy to help to help drive that and and I'd be More than happy to help You know collaborate on with DTC and anyone else who's interested in thinking about starting a you know sort of explore project where we could You know where we could take in You know various pieces of work and eventually come out with something that we can all leverage that Potentially even you know has has been suggested in the slack of Having the ability to talk to either sawtooth or fabric or whatever I think would be awesome So I think okay, I think your idea is is spot on Then uh, um, let's not uh wait on uh, what sounds like it's a might be a process that IBM is figuring out how How does it forward with the blue mix code? It sounds like the intent is there. It's just great But why don't we launch a hypo ledger explorer project? I set up a mailing look for it set up a repository for it And get the the DTCC developers set up with commit privileges see if there's anyone else who Expresses a strong interest in being a part of the project and Get get going on this and IBM can then Bring their code to this project or propose a separate project if they feel it should be different, but Um One project can have two different arms to it like like this But let's not hold up the conrods great code and and this project Because I think this is a valuable way to uh get even more developers involved with uh with fabric and let's not too fight Yeah, I agree Yeah, um, this could pretty much it's already ready to go. Um with Working with the blue mix team would probably take some time before Getting our the hypo ledger infrastructure like hooked up and everything but pretty much. Um, this is this code is good to go and People can start using it. I guess tomorrow for just like demo purposes and and and like exploring the blockchain and stuff like that so So I I think I think brian, I think I like your idea. Um Uh, I think and it was suggested in the chat and I you know dan, and I don't know um What others think about this but um I wonder if we Start a sort of explorer project and then have the first repository be fabric explorer And if you know if if that can consolidate down into Being more generally about you know, just like we did with the chain tool that can become more generally useful We can think about renaming it if we have to but Why don't we just started why don't we just started a hypo ledger dash explorer? And uh, you know started with the uh, the premise that the team is free to explore Connecting to southeast ways and other blockchain tech. Um, they don't have to but uh, um, you know, I don't think we have to Be you know a fairly binding on this so that we can be late binding And and it's really simple. It's the it's the hypo ledger explorer I'm I'm good with that. I just I was trying to be sensitive to um Okay, I didn't mean to see Malia. I'm sorry You know, I anybody disagree Well, I I think uh As long as it is only connectable with the fabric it would be more appropriate to be keep it down Yeah, it's pretty much completely separate from the fabric. Um, like I said, the only it interacts with the existing Code through just like one HTTP server. So this could completely be stripped out and be in its own, uh, directory Well with connectable. I meant it is using really the concepts of fabric, right? So it's using using the concepts of chain code it's uh, it is Using the uuid if I just look at the picture everything that I see is very fabric specific Yeah, um, so either we either we really really start thinking about making it more generic Or I think it would be more appropriate to keep it with fabric So so dan, let me ask you would would you think intel would be willing to sort of help sawtooth lake if I this Yeah, that's that's something we could think about. I just put the uh, the web api Uh for sawtooth into the into the chat So there's there's endpoints. There's rest endpoints that I think that a front end like this should probably be able to consume Um without too much trouble. I just don't know without looking at the the project Uh, how tightly it is to how tightly bounded it is to assumptions about the the uri's Um, I think that those those assumptions could be addressed and you know, there could be a little bootstrap thing that's figured out Oh, I'm talking to sawtooth lake and therefore I use these Um, you know these tiles versus You know if I'm talking to fabric I use it Slightly different sort of tiles, but some of the stuff is basically the same Yeah, it's certainly possible. It's hard to say without looking at it in more detail. We also have an explorer that's um Uh that we're anticipating having an in a state that can be released within the next couple of weeks here too so that might fold into the The mix but I'm not quite sure how because you know, we're gonna have probably it sounds like three or four different explorers projects They could all be mixed or Evolved separately Okay, I didn't want to yeah, I didn't realize you guys had one in them in the works as well Well, this is good because it teaches them all out. Um I I guess I didn't get we're sort of running up against the the clock here. Um and Maybe the thing to do is take a step back Uh, let's not make a decision just yet. Although I I'd be happy to accept this project Uh, you know given the DTCC is willing to take it forward. I think the naming is is the The real challenge and I I think we need to Collectively and being a brian to your point on on another thread about you know, how do we get these projects going forward? I do think we probably need to have A little bit of thought given and maybe we can do that next week on how do we how do we How do we handle when we have multiples of the same thing and What's what's our criteria for accepting them so forth? I think Um, maybe we need to do a little bit of thinking but you know Conrad I think this is in currently in your own personal repository um If I mean I I mean one thing we could we of course we can always fork it but Um, you know if and since your your last day is tomorrow. I just don't want to Put us in a situation where we can't reach you need to Um, it's going to Um, it's I'm going to be pushing the code to uh satish He's he's full time at DTCC and then uh from that repository like I'm going to push it to the master on Piper ledger so that um, he's going to be able to manage all the existing code in the future So he's going to have full control over it Okay And I was going to say as long as uh, you know, some of the author States that is uh, or the IP owner states that it's under Apache 2.0. We can accept it later Even after the operation is on But either way it sounds like we're going to get it in at some point before That's great Well, Kamri, I do I do want to like this a great piece of work and And it's certainly getting the sort of I love the collaborative thinking that's going in and out So that's that's that's really good. Um, but I think you have to sort of move on I think what I'd like to do is I'd like to ask ask the work need since we are out of time basically to send your um status to the long list so that we all get a sense of We're we're a thing to stand although I know it's been a slow couple of weeks. Um, but we haven't Uh, we haven't met for for a few weeks. And so um, it'd be great to get an email update from each of the the work group leads I'll I'll send a note to that effect as well just here are much That he's on Is there any other Any other business for today? Um, just a quick question. Uh, so when I press the code should I just should I keep it in fabric or should I just create a separate one? um So I think that uh, ultimately what we'll probably want to do is work with um I'm sorry. I can't remember the name. It was a satish. You said it was taking over Yeah, um, I think we'll we'll work with satish on actually getting it Merged in I mean we could I guess we could merge it into the fabric, but Um, I think that that creates a different set of problems. Um, I think I think it would be best if You pushed it to satish We make sure that all the licensing and stuff from dtcc is is covered Appropriately and then we can um We can bring it in and I I think that the direction we seem to be heading in was to create a separate repository for this to to evolve Okay, but I think we'll have satish handle that end of it Okay, sounds good any other, um any other business If not, I think I'd like to thank everybody and um Great call and we'll talk to you all next week and thanks again to dan and she in for helping out with The the cybos demo brainstorming Thanks everyone Thanks chris