 you've been pretty close to so yeah why don't you go ahead with that yep sure thing uh so on the hackfest front uh and hackathons uh a couple things uh first in uh shanghai march 11th and 12th there will be a hackathon uh i'll send everyone the link for that uh in the meeting minutes but this will be similar to the hackathon that we had uh with abn amro ibm netherlands and holand fintech in amsterdam back in october um so uh more details coming on that uh on the hackfest front like we just had in san francisco uh there was some talk around doing a hackfest in shanghai uh in tandem with the hackathon um want to hear from the folks on this call if that's something they would be able to attend or not um have heard some concerns just uh from the fabric side of things uh with everyone jamming on that front uh as well as the short runway to doing something in march um and wondering if it may make sense to push that a couple months later in the year in peg two a different event in china uh and in the meantime uh do something more likely in new york uh instead any any thoughts from the group uh is this something that folks would be able to attend if we went forward with it in shanghai or is it better to push that to a slightly later date so this is on speaking for myself obviously um i think i could attend in march uh i i acknowledge the fact that the fabric team is focusing on trying to get one zero out it's not clear at this point you know where we'll be then officially the goal is to try and be pretty much done but we know how that goes and so it might be wise indeed to push it forward a bit further down into the year the thing though is and i think civil of us have said that before is the sooner we set the date the better you know the more likely we'll be able to make it not knowing is the worst yep uh completely agree um noted on that we've been we've been trying to find space and struggling a bit there but yeah i i hear your point others from the tsc or just the broader technical community hi rich is here i probably won't be able to be shanghai in march so i hope it all right mic or heart um i probably won't um i can't speak her down though okay he might be able to send someone and heart are you uh similar to that or what what's your perspective i think i have to be uh in california on the 9th i'm not sure though okay it's still up in the air okay yeah we heard uh similar from chris ferris that it would be um quite a bit of a challenge as well um i my guess and and brian chime in as well is given with about uh four or five weeks to go and getting visas and whatnot it would be a bit of a challenge and also hearing a lot of hesitation from the people that have spoken um it may make sense to peg this to an an event uh a couple months later in the year yeah yeah so we have um yeah the hackathon planning went slower and we're hoping to piggyback this on that so that was a reason why for the uncertainty and um you know apologies for that should do with the idea of keeping this kind of every two months kind of uh pace so she then started planning now for an event elsewhere um uh you know keeping the pace would mean end of march beginning of april um and should that we should here i think should that be new york or should we aim for europe we were thinking of europe in may um anyways and and have some thoughts uh some some research coming on now about london and uh i think uh uh intellect to you one of our friends there i suggest uh spot and lispin uh but we we know we need to get planning on these further ahead than just you know the very next one um but uh but for at least now do people want to stay kind of much beginning um okay uh let me be able to have this conversation over email then all right sounds good um all right the next item uh rocket chat is now live for those of you that were at the hackfest last week uh you've likely logged in and poked around there um please do let me just drop the the link in there into the chat window uh head over there the ui looks very similar to slack which is great you can use your existing linux foundation id to log in um but we are are moving everything over there i believe rye has finished archiving everything from uh slack um so yeah any any questions on the rocket chat front or any feedback to this point from anyone that's used it so this is all again i mean i you know for those of us who've tried it we were quite amazed how similar it is to slack there are a few glitches here and there and some things don't you know are not exactly the same but it's extremely similar and quite frankly i'm pretty happy with the change so far great good to hear uh has anyone encountered any trouble or uh so far so good all right well hearing no complaints uh that's a good sign uh definitely let us know uh as you get moving in there um that's great that's one of the biggest issues with uh um you know for developer tools for the community was just the uh on archived ability of slack um so i'm really happy that we've moved over i'm really um happy that my was able to capture the art so can i ask clarification question on the archives when you say rye you were able to archive of slack is it everything that has always been posted since the beginning of time there rye are you on that i don't know if i know i don't know i don't think rye's on uh we'll connect with him and just get an answer to that one really okay i mean she's on the i mean he he's on the chat so i was expected him to be on he's on the go to uh meeting chat right right i did see him pop up so i but okay maybe the rain washed him away maybe indeed so um my understanding i'd have to go and look at the posted links to where he stored them upon github um was that by by basically shutting down um by shutting down uh slack we were able to get access to ironically enough accessed old messages um i i don't know though if that goes back be on the 10 000 and i will have to come back to you i think the intent was to go back and get the ones older than 10 000 messages ironically enough we can do that if we reduce the number of user accounts on slack to under some threshold amount that those that would become available again um i uh i think um i have to go back and check with him but but are people comfortable with the idea that the old messages come back and become searchable as archive yeah it's funny you say that because i thought about it i was like well if some people assume that was okay to say anything because it was going to disappear it may be surprised i'd like to introduce these people to the immutable blockchain um yeah but there's a difference when you expect it or not of course but so yeah i understand the what you described rye explained that to me as well i just didn't know if it had happened already or what and when you say it so is slack actually down now i do think so i i see i i see that these archives things i see that the icons next to you i'm looking at the slack app alleged project slack dot com window right now and all the groups except for general appear to um have rye posting archived and oh yes it'll be searchable in the archive so um and i and it looks like i can't actually add new messages uh but the general channel appears to be open and i don't know if that's not possible to close uh that's a little hello into this um so i i but the intent will be the closest down okay but i do see what you're describing now it's every the channel seems to be archived and so in a special mode and so that's good yeah you know it may be like github where we can't turn off you know the the issue trackers that people keep lodging issues over there um uh uh what we'll try to get this cleaned up and then but don't think about this question and for the others if we can get to their private messages and we want them to be sort of directable into a useful brand of history of the project to the degree that conversations about development happened or even bootstrapped questions that sort of thing um people shouldn't play into when their messages disappeared i don't know if people wanted that behavior or it's not like this is a snapchat but it is a different there's a reason why people will have this conversation i'm all for the archival i'm just so you know i think we suffer more from the lack of access to the archive than the other way around for sure so and this is not because i've been saying anything stupid before on the channels that i might regret i don't know but i'm willing to live with that understood um so moving into the work group charters uh i know we won't be able to take a vote today on the identity work group charter just in that we only have four of the 11 tsc members um quick update on the other two so fabric sdk part is going to be sending that uh soon in the coming days uh to the tsc list so we'll review that at the next meeting uh oh leg i'm not sure if you're on any update on requirements working group um all right we can we can connect with our leg offline uh vipin do you want to just do a quick update uh from discussions from the hack fest or over the last uh week and a half or so um and then we'll likely need to do a update to the tsc list uh in an email vote if people are ready at that point yeah sure um essentially um the changes that were proposed in the last meeting the tsc meeting which was before the hack fest have been put in place um primarily uh a directive to get an implementation uh pathway into the document uh which of course is this i have made this remark before we are the only one uh the working group to have well of course the working groups which are connected with uh specific uh uh things like uh explorer and all have uh implementations but we are the only ones who are sort of a generic uh identity or architecture you know requirements that sort of uh group to have this requirement and um i have already uh so i haven't made any changes to this document since the hack fest and i had already put it out that this charter was changed with all the suggestions made before since this is not going to go up for vote today i urge that people um either we set up an email vote or um we uh set up you know basically uh any kind of comments should be made to the document with enough time to um respond the other other point is we don't want this thing to drag on forever you know because uh that creates a certain uncertainty in the uh in the whole working group uh moving forward and i had also posted up uh sort of a minutes of what happened in the call yesterday so people should try to take a look at the uh primary document and make changes if they need to uh meaning the meeting notes and other things which have nothing to do with the charter so that that's all for now from me all right sounds good go ahead brian sorry i want to say i think i think it looks great i think this is the right degree um there's a lot of conversation after i've accessed about potentially uh a new project in this space um uh specifically focused on identity and i'd love to see people working through um be involved in helping make that a compelling uh proposal and a compelling project uh i think this is uh an important thing kind of you know our projects together so i kind of just want uh a silence equal consensus i think uh this is you can hear you brian now we can move forward okay i'm sorry what did i cut out again uh not cut out but uh maybe uh it's got really quiet yeah yeah yeah that's good i'm my apologies um just saying i think this looks great i think we i think uh we should move forward we can formally approve it but i don't think you should take uh lack of feedback as opposition to this because i think uh this is a vital thing and we had conversations about the uh that new project sovereign um which the proposal is being worked on on the wiki right now if anyone wants to uh start to take a look at it i don't think it's officially ready for submission yet but uh there um the folks from from sovereign are starting to work on it um but and i see the relationship between that project and this group is being very complimentary so uh yeah um thank you for doing this this is the right degree of granularity great all right um moving on from there uh the final two items are just quick heads up uh the global sync log uh that we've been talking about the last few weeks um i know that uh morali and i think parda and tamash and and a few others have connected up uh they are chatting on this right now and the intent is that uh tamash is going to uh give an update on that on the tsc call on february 23rd um and i think uh part of our morali will be sending some notes on that in advance as well and the final item is the internship program which we talked about at the hackfest um we are looking to get the potential mentors uh and project suggestions finalized by the end of next week february 17th so if you or your company is interested in mentoring a summer intern uh please fill out the the form asap let me just drop the link into the chat window and then from there uh we will open this up to interns to apply for the program any questions there are the interns situated like at a central place or are they at like at red hat in westford would would one be on site here if we were eligible to get an intern or would they go like are they remote and we're managing them remotely most likely remote uh that said if it worked out and there were local interns and um that made sense that's certainly an option um but i think we want to cast the net pretty wide and um um yeah allow for that so so either way really okay just curious any other questions all right um relatively short agenda for today um we're happy to give everyone a half an hour back but certainly if there's other topics um please chime in now sorry no i had a quick clarification question of the identity working group charters status then do we try to follow up in email to get it formally approved or what would we postpone that to next week what's the plan i didn't get the we can kick off an email vote today uh it didn't sound like there were any any objections from those on the call uh and a few people chimed in in the chat window saying it looks good uh as well as brian said so if there's no objections from those on this call we can kick off an email vote today uh to close on that sounds good to me thanks um i'd like to throw this out as a question because it came up during yesterday's call whether interoperability of all sorts would be a stated requirement of the identity working group or not so i know that there is no quorum today but this is a just basic question that needs to be answered before we go um uh playing dragons all over the place we don't we don't want to get into any uh uh sort of blind uh you know alley with no egress basically we want to we want to create a pathway towards implementation something concrete which is which is the real aim of uh you know this whole exercise because i think uh identity being a foundational concept is a very uh crucial thing to solve i've gotten something from bin about the layout of the interface and other things so i would like to ask the others like iroha and stl and possibly the cord up people to send me any thoughts they may have on identity uh also da h so there are two things here one is you know this whole question of whether interoperability is a requirement second is a call to all the uh all the projects currently under hibernation under uh under incubation and potentially going to be under incubation to send some material about uh an identity interface it doesn't matter whether it's a document or a or a code we'll try to tease out something from that so that that's it from me within uh ram here so uh you know from the architecture work group perspective we have assumed that interoperability will be a requirement and in fact i think it made it into our charter document as one of the things that we are going to be addressing uh so i would uh so you know if the oral architecture kind of assumes that we would have to tackle interoperability i think my uh input was that you know that should be a requirement for the identity pieces as well hi vip in this is richard here speaking from a quarter perspective so yeah i think this is important two comments one our our technical white paper outlines how we're viewing identity in the core platform um and it's not that we did we did look at um the membership services car but it wasn't quite what we needed but it is quite similar in some ways so the the the pkix pkix approach we're taking in the core platform is in the tech white paper so that could be a useful input document for the work um there's also some work we're doing um in our working groups um inside our three but not not not fully advanced yet on um on i guess identity higher of the stack so not not not just mapping you know names to ip addresses and keys but the whole the whole um self sovereign stuff and you know attestations and so forth um which we probably need to find a way to to fit into that discussion as well so maybe maybe stop that offline but they're the two main things that are relevant to corder i guess thanks richard anyone else want to chime in on this or um i'm here um so um i guess i was talking to muted for a little earlier uh uh from the architect we heard you i don't know whether you i heard you that's all i got any other comments or questions on vipins topic or any other topics in general to cover uh so you have one other kind of comment i think uh i saw something from the early draft from the market marketing uh workgroup and it mentioned mutability so i was wondering whether uh that came up in any other discussions uh because at least in the discussions i've been part of uh we kind of assumed that uh it will be part of the uh that you know immutability is an essential uh you know uh characteristic of the distributed ledger that we are developing here in hyper ledger in hyper ledger so i just wanted to get uh folks's folks input on that and i would propose let's apply it here i would propose if um identities going to become a project so we can have we can develop something for implementation then the charter and its scope be uh solidified to include at least some of the high-level requirements we know already will be included like uh the operability one interoperability one and any others at a very high level we know uh key for a working solution so because now it becomes a project so this is more of a project charter for identity going forward so i do not want to reopen the charter discussion at this point unless you want to make changes in the charter that satisfies these conditions because i don't think we should put in anything about the requirements it already just says two things we are going to develop a document that details the interfaces which will include uh uh something about interoperability and the other thing it's all very generic it says there will be an implementation so there's no there's no requirements in there and um i personally do not agree that we should have that requirements in the charter because right now you're reopening the charter discussion right i mean i probably agreed already to get it put to a email vote if you want to reopen that charter discussion i i agreed to pin i certainly agree from what you just said we agree we put us to a vote however the document you mentioned which is going to be um an artifact related to this charter will it be a specification document for that implementation of identity because that's where we'll need to capture all of these uh details it needs to be somewhere in one document okay i'm i'm happy with that uh any other topics hearing none i think uh we'll give everyone a half an hour back today uh and enjoy thursday thank you uh thank you all thank you everyone cheers bye