 All right, welcome everybody to the May 26th hyperledger technical steering committee meeting. As you are all aware, two things to abide by the first is the anti trust policy notice that is currently displayed on the screen. And the second is our code of conduct which is linked in the agenda. What was it Daniel you said last week be excellent to each other or something like that. So with that, let's get to the announcements. So the first announcement is the one that we see every week that have weekly developer newsletter goes out each Friday if you'd like to have something included in that newsletter please consider leaving a comment on the wiki page that is linked in the agenda. And your message will get out to hundreds of hyperledger developers. So this announcement, David had let us know on the, I think the TSC chat that the architecture working group has been archived. There was an email that went out to the architecture working group mailing list, and the only responses that were received for a plus one to archive the architecture working group so that working group has been archived. So that everybody saw that as an announcement. And if there were any comments, we could discuss that here but I doubt there's probably any comments but if there are please raise your hand, and we can talk about that. And then my standard question here, any other announcements that anybody has to make a room. This is probably a request to all the labs towards so you may be receiving multiple requests from people who are participating in hyperledger challenge so I saw so far 11 teams have submitted their solutions. All of them could be raising a request to push them into hyperledger labs. All right, thanks for I've seen two lab requests come in this week. And then one was one this morning so I haven't had a chance to review that one yet but. And I think, just in general I think there's actually three open PRs right now, one that's waiting on our response back from the submitter, as far as licensing and DCO signoffs, the other one. There were some DCO signoffs just in the PR itself. And then, like I said the third one that came in this morning, at least my morning, I saw it here so I'll get to review that one today and make sure that the other lab stewards are taking a look at those as well. Any other announcements. So with no other announcements, we do have three project reports, the one that came in last week hyperledger bevel, and then the grid and transact reports that came in this week. When I looked at them this morning. About 15 minutes ago or so. I noticed that we are probably not even half of us have reviewed them yet. So if you haven't had a chance to review them please do so. And I didn't see anything that was outstanding with those. But if there's any questions on any of those. Now is the time to bring them up. So I don't have a question but I noticed the grid projects raised an issue for us. Which was that they felt like they agreed to their grid top level domain website is not easy to find. Oh no that was on their last month or last quarter as well. David I know you had reached out to the grid folks on that but obviously didn't see your response come back but I don't know if you had any offline conversations with them on making it easier to find the grid that hyperledger.org from the project page for hyperledger great. I shared that feedback with the designer who is working on the designs and I know that's on the agenda later so we can touch on that when we're looking at the designs but hopefully the new mock ups will make that somewhat easier, if not a lot more easier so but we can discuss that when we're looking at the mock ups is it is it easier in fact to find resources like that for projects but I did pass that feedback to the designer, and she incorporated that into her mock ups. I would use put that in a comment in a response to the report so that they know we have like knowledge there. You know that they raised this issue. Sure, if I remember correctly I may have referenced it on that but they are repeating the same as if nothing has been done so I just want to be responsive because we you know this is part of the process and one of the reasons we put these reports is that we need projects and opportunity to raise issues to the TSE, and that makes it the fact that they risk, you know, repeated the exact same statement makes it look like oh, they don't know we are actually, you know, heard them and then doing something so that's just what I'm trying to do. That's a good point and you're right they might not have been watching our discussions here about mock ups, I'll point to those mock ups in there. Thanks. And, and David I don't know. Is there something that we can do before those mock ups are are done to add that to the project page or is it that we want to wait till the mock ups, we agree on the mock ups to ensure that all changes to the website or made at once. Sorry, I've got some barking dog in the background. I think we'll do something sooner, but I think we're almost at the point where we can put the mock up in place. Let's discuss when we get to the mock ups about what do we need to do something shorter or move forward with what we've got in the designs. Okay, sounds good. And barking dogs I think it wouldn't be a TSE meeting. If we didn't have a barking dog somewhere in here so I think we're, we're good with that David. Any other comments on the quarterly reports at this point. And thank you, I know for reminding me of that comment. Okay, um, so for upcoming reports we have the cello report that's due next week. And then the quilt report is also due next week I did send an email out to David fueling about whether or not we wanted to maintain that in a dormant state or move it towards end of life. So we'll hopefully get a response back at some point to that email. So we know what, what the status there is of quilt. All right, and then the discussion item that I have for this week is last week after I listened to the recording for the TSE meeting and took a look at the security. I think that Arun had put together, I suggested that Arun put together a PR to propose some of those security related mandates for graduation to our life cycle. And he did so. And so I wanted to see if we could just discuss these changes, see what we think of them. So there should be a security section that was added here. That didn't exist before as a requirement to exit incubation. So, with that I think I'll just see if there's any discussion that anybody has related to this. Any objections to what you're reading. As I give you a chance to read. Go ahead, Jim, I see it came off to you. Yeah, I was just about to raise my hand. Would it be clear what the foundation wise security discussions where those will be happening. Or is that not decided yet. Hey, yeah, thanks Jim that's a great question. We haven't, I guess, formally flesh that out yet. The big thing with this is that, you know, we do have a security list to address points. Right, when sort of security issues come in through our disclosure processes. And right now, we don't have all of our projects with people on these lists. So it's hard to get people to respond and deal with these security issues which could be urgent. We also have a lot of people like most projects may have one person that are on the list. So if that person is on vacation or something which has happened before then it also doesn't get addressed quickly. But, you know, if you have feedback on how this could be efficiently done. We'd love to hear. Gotcha. I guess, since this announced. This is sort of the top line description of the possibilities, maybe just add a little details on this bullet and that should be fine then include some verbiage about the security list. I'll try to come up with some wording and assume this is in the in the PR. Yeah, definitely. If you want to comment on the PR with some suggested wording or changes that'd be great. Yeah, we'll do with the background hard just provide I should be able to add something. Any other thoughts or comments on just adding the security section here. So a little the the second point address depend about in it. Probably don't tie it to depend about because I would say address automatic alerts or something of that nature. Because depend about is only one of the tools that that do this. I'll try to come up with a better wording or wording that I think is good. Furthermore, we have to change that. It's no longer the CI and Arno has feelings about that probably. So I'm done. Okay, well that is not part of this PR, but we can definitely create another PR for whatever the correct verbage is for now the CI I badge that might exist or not exist part. I'll just say yeah thank you right the intention was never to make that strictly depend about. So we should change that to automatic. I think you could still put something like such as from depend about to make it enough, you know, get more specific and still keep it more open as right suggest which I think is a good thing. We've seen in other cases like, you know, chat systems and whatnot. It's prudent not to be too tied to a single solution, because they tend to change over time. I completely support the rise motion, but I think we could still name dependent but as one of the things that you know as an example of the things that we're talking about. So it kind of, you know, makes it very clear for people look kind of things we're talking about. And otherwise on the CI badge indeed CI has been renamed now it's part of open SSF the open SSF batch. All right. So, I know, will you open a separate PR to address the CI badge thing or I'm not good to do that. Sure. Okay. Thank you. Any other comments on the security section. All right, so I didn't hear any objections. I think the security section being added to the information exit criteria is generally supported by the TSE. And Jim, right, you'll make a few suggested modifications to the PR. Hopefully we can get everybody to then review that those changes on GitHub and provide any additional sort of comments or feedback that you have the link there is in the agenda. I will also put that in the TSE chat if I didn't already. So the next thing then is the project families website revamp. We've got the straw man proposal so David has provided us with a few mock ups, different proposals for the proposed project page, as well as a proposal for project specific pages. So, David, I don't know if you want to drive us through these two different proposals and, you know, get us to discuss. Yeah, I'm happy to do that. I'm not sharing my screen. So whoever is doesn't mind pulling up the first mock up. Do you want to share your screen. No, I'd rather I'm on my phone. I'm probably not in a great position. So is this proposal one. Yeah, just the first mock up on the page. Yep. So for some background we've shared these before and so this incorporates feedback we've had from discussions here as well as this discussions that we've had internally LF recently had an all hands that we got together staff and kind of reviewed these as well so this reflects updates to the mock ups. Again, based from feedback from the TSE discussions the task force discussions and then the staff discussions. I like that it's a little bit bigger. Yeah, the big change. So the big change on this one this is the main projects page. Again, I think we've seen this before so I won't necessarily go through everything that's different from the current projects page on the website but I will flag which changed in this mock up from the earlier mock ups. The main feedback on this one that we got from the marketing lead, the hyperledger marketing lead is that people don't spend a lot of time on the pages on the website you know they mostly scan through things so he said if you can make it as tight as possible what you want to feature on this page that would be better so if you remember the earlier version of this mock up we had divided things into the life cycle buckets that we had six graduated top projects up top that had more of a, you know, primary display on the page and then further down below on the page we had the incubating projects that had, you know, a smaller secondary display. But again based on his feedback we tried out in this mock up not going with the six graduated projects but trying what we're now calling featured projects and the details again this is just a mock up the content is all placeholder but the idea was, we could select perhaps four projects instead of six and really feature those and that could, you know, that could evolve and change over time you know that this would be more of a marketing criteria versus more of a life cycle criteria but you know what are the, what are the projects we want to feature all projects would still be on the page but some would be in this featured section and then the rest would be at the bottom so if you scroll down. You can see what the kind of the secondary display would be and so the all the projects are on the page all the projects have an opportunity to put the description so everybody can read through. I think, again, this is a huge benefit over the current landscape where you don't actually even see the descriptions on the projects you just see the icon you have to click in individually to get all the descriptions. So, that's the big change on this one. Again, it's still the same format about having a primary section and a secondary section it's just what the mock up has changed in terms of what we've put in that featured primary section. David, I think the other change looks like that you made based on the last time we looked at this is before you just had the icons and you didn't have the names for the project. And then, and then secondly I don't think you have the descriptions down below I think Jim had asked for both of those and so it looks like those have been incorporated since the last time we looked at this flagging that yeah this has gone through a number of iterations I can't remember the last but you're right there wasn't earlier one where just the logos, which was not I don't think enough. So you're right so every project has a description now, and this goes back to the grid feedback right if you don't mind scrolling back up. You can see on each of these descriptions there's a learn more that would go to the projects page but then there's also this resources link or drop down where if you click on that you can click directly into a set of resources that the mock up doesn't show it but you can imagine if I clicked on resources it maybe would point to the repo point to the docs you could point to, you know whatever you think would be relevant for the project you know tutorials. So hopefully I could address grids some of grids feedback about it's you know those sorts of resource links are not prominent on the website. And David, when when you click on that is it. Is it a separate page or just a drop down with like a list of just a drop down. Okay. And that could be a next step we could ask the designer to start coding these on a section on the site where they're not public yet but we could all kind of interact with it and see how that dynamic would work. Any comments questions on the page again I think maybe the big thing to flag is the you know, having the primary section be featured based on what the marketing, you know lead suggests we focus on versus having to be some sort of life cycle bucket. Yeah, I think that's the question that I have David, just to make sure that we're clear you're not asking the TSC to provide the items that are the featured. You're suggesting that somebody in hyperledger foundation staff would be developing that is that correct. Well we can set up a process where the marketing lead comes to the TSC maybe on some sort of basis and talks about we have a discussion about that I'm not saying the TSC couldn't have input but the, the feedback from the marketing lead was just how do we narrow that down and so that implies, you know, having some sort of selection process. Peter. I like it. I think it would be great if it puts in place the sooner and better. That's it. Alright, thanks Peter. I'll just emphasize David's point that this is inherently a marketing thing. And now that we have, you know, Ben on who's a professional marketer he has emphasized that we have made some decisions from a technical perspective and not a marketing perspective about marketing that we're suboptimal. And we're really great to have him point those out because it seems like he's doing a really good job of improving our marketing. But to reiterate both your point Tracy and David's point this, you know, this really isn't a TSC matter. And that being said if you want to get involved there are appropriate avenues with marketing. So. Yeah, thanks for I think that's what I wanted to try and drive to right is. I know in your write up that you had done originally around this kind of topic. You suggested that it probably wasn't the TSC spot to come up with this list of things that would be featured or whatever we want to call it. And so I wanted to just verify that that I was hearing correctly that it was truly marketing and it wasn't going to be something that the TSC had to do. Say like, here's your floor. We just randomly picked them out of 12 or whatever right. So I'm really glad to hear that part. Yeah, and I will just say like they have the numbers they have the analytics. They know what's going to get us the most clicks in the most eyeballs and that's what they're running with any other comments in this particular proposal. But I know David has a second one that has also been suggested so we need to review that one as well. But if there's any other comments in this, that was your time. Yeah, there's three mockups that we can review that project page that was the only version of that project page but there were two versions of what we're seeing on the screen now. So something that's new on the site and it was referenced on that page before that we saw. There's some texts that says something to the fact of, Oh, are you not sure which project is right for you check out our getting started guide so it is trying to just give people a little bit more support with trying to understand you know we're presenting a lot of information to people you know you know here's 14 projects and one of these may be right for you but go figure it out yourself right. I think that's kind of our current approach like click into all these things there's a bunch of links that you can digest and after you've gone through a bunch of these links then you'll know what's right for you. I think that's probably not the necessarily the best approach like how do we perhaps package up some of that information in one place so people don't have to click into the wiki click into the repo click into this click into that and kind of pull all that stuff together so this is a proposal for a new page on the site. The entire page was a update to an existing page this mock up would be for a new page. Again, where we collect some of this information that's already out in the community but it's pulled together and packaged in a way where it's easy for people to digest so this would be the getting started guide. The proposal is to have a series of different factors that were letting people evaluate by and this mock up only really shows one of them but you can see at the top there's a set of tabs so they're this page would include a series of different things. Again we can only see one this is where maybe if we start coding it. That would be a good next step like code it on a place on the website where we can interact with it so we can see get a better sense of what this page would look like but. Again, the idea is a series of tabs you can click into each one of them in in that tab you would then be able to get. You know a comparison of how different factors you know apply across the different projects. And again with the goal of pulling information that is that in the community but it's probably spread across half a dozen different websites that would require somebody a significant amount of time to pull together themselves. Why don't we pull it together and then provide it in a way where we can allow people to digest it. I had shared an earlier version this mock up on the call I didn't think the format and the design was necessarily the best way to allow people to scan it so I asked the designer to create a second one, kind of a second option. I think, based on discussion at all hands we all felt this design was stronger so we just for I, I, unless there's you know, feedback from people saying this design doesn't seem to really work. You know this would be my recommendation let's code this and let's see what it looks like in action, but this would be again a new page that we're calling, we could change what we're calling it but currently thinking of calling it like the getting started that. David the, the, the, I am not able to the buttons at the side get started analytics. What do they do. What are they intended to represent. So you're talking about the different. It's like underneath hyperledger basic where it says get started and then analytics. What are those things to do. The project page for that specific projects. If that's not clear I guess we could change the label on the button and then the analytics would could go into the LFX to allow people to, you know, look at some statistics, you know relevant statistics for that project. What do you think the audience for this sort of page is. Well this goes into the persona where for the website so I mean I think you could arguably talk about how I think a developer could come in here and get a different set of information than for perhaps like a business analyst, you know, for example, I think that's where the tab content up top comes there's some content up there that might be is more relevant for that technical developer audience like what language is for example or what consensus mechanism. I think there could be some other stuff that's more relevant for a different persona, you know, like if we have some content on here about you know where what are the different industries for example or use cases where these, you know different projects are being used. So, in theory, I see different personas would come to this page and get different content out of it. Yeah, I think that's where I'm driving towards this. I think maybe analytics might be interesting for developers but I don't think analytics would be interesting for somebody who's looking for industry use cases right I think some of the use case, sort of write ups that have been done would be more useful sort of link, if you will and so I wanted to see do we think this is specific to this page right need to get started in analytics or or to the I'm sorry to this tab on this page and different tabs would have different buttons there or. Okay, yeah, so maybe we yeah that's a good idea hadn't thought about that so a tab, we could put the personas at a tab level this is a developer tab so that's surface more technical stuff this is a analyst tab. Yes, sir. And this is again where maybe having a coded so we can click into each tab would be helpful because then we can say this tab maybe should have this link. Yeah, so I guess first of all, I assume this is going to be in addition to the top level page for a sort of next level drill down. Absolutely. I guess, I'm kind of struggling with this because if I'm a developer and and this the intent of this page is sort of present a decision tree for me to pick which the LTI should adopt. And I don't think that's that's practical because there are so many, there are so many dimensions that leads to, should I use besuo fabric or your Roja. It just doesn't work this way. I'm going to decide which one I should use and also, I think people who who landed on this page, usually already have some idea. Right. I'm going to be using basu or I'm going to be using fabric. If that was the intention and if it's intended to be a decision tree I just don't know if that's that's that's warranted. We really want to help people sort of compare the differences between them. I think we need something much more elaborate, you know, some sort of blog or a deeper level comparison among them. You know, what's, what's the differences. For example, just just randomly a Roja right they, they, they, they spend a lot of time on the client side making sure, you know, the, the, the mobile applications can be easily involved using their SDKs. That's what they spend a lot of time on. It's just not very easy to present in the in the tabular way. I hear what you're saying and that goes to maybe where different tabs have a different sort of in for, you know, interface maybe this more table based lab does make sense for some things but I hear you maybe there's a different tab where that's not the interface and again maybe that's something they can get explored can get explored if we can put this on the website so we can interact with it but I hear you but yes to step back a little bit. That's the goal. I mean we consistently hear from people. We show them the landscape. You know they're like okay I see there's a lot going on here but like what what should I do next right and I feel like right now at least on the website. The burden is entirely placed on that person to click into every single one explore all this information kind of collate it. Pull it all together themselves and that would involve like I've counted I mean it would be dozens and dozens of links for somebody to absorb that crosses literally four or five or six different, you know, web properties there's the website there's GitHub repos there's read the docs pages like it's and we hear from people that it's just overwhelming so the the high level goal is how do we pull information. It's already in the community into one place and when somebody comes to us and says I see you have a lot of stuff here. I think this is something we want to explore but like, how do we evaluate it like we have a place to point them instead of right now, again. I don't know if this has been your experience with the landscape but the landscape just forces you to pull it all together yourself by clicking into 2030 40 more links which is just too much. So first I had a question I mean this is just a mock up there's no such thing running somewhere I can play with right, you cannot click on this tab like language is the thing which is what I've been wanting to do. Not yet but that was what I was hoping to get to from this conversation are we comfortable. And so I actually think, you know, this is very interesting piece of information. I think to address Jim's comment which I understand that I would agree with him that, you know, choosing the, you know, a specific platform probably goes beyond what can be conveyed in that in that kind of documentation. I think this needs to be presented as documenting, you know, a set of, you know, a whole set of characteristics, and maybe we can have a disclaimer at the top saying, you know, you're in this to, you know, to, to make a I mean this can only go so far and only addresses a few dimensions, and actually choosing the proper platform for your solution, or for you for your use case rather, you know, may is beyond what we can possibly do with this kind of like adding some disclaimer that would address some of Jim's concern that people might be misled to believe all this is all I need. Otherwise, I wanted to also say it's a lower level kind of kind of but I wonder, I mean the language base. To me, that's the actual language it's implemented in. I, maybe we need a better word than base. And I think most people I'm not sure they care so much about this the most important is, you know, what languages are supported for the smart contracts and for the SDKs that people are going to actually implement against because you know, and contributors will care about the language, the language people will care when they are contributing to to the platform but that's actually a small number of people right for the most part there are people who want to use it as an application developer. That's the important aspect. And I know that you know a lot of those platforms support different languages that's what we need to expose first. I want to hear you and you're right I mean maybe some of the things that are just, you know, stubbed out in the mock up won't end up being what we display because that's not really the right content and this is where, you know, the details of what should be in here, you know, we do really want your input and feedback. So if I like it otherwise, I think this is a good thing to. I was just going to summarize it sounds like at least for this page everything I've heard so far says we kind of need to see this in action before we can have a better opinion about about it. That's not quite what I meant. I mean, I personally I think I think this is valuable and I would encourage sending the resources to develop it further. I think we may have to discuss some of the details, and we may need some kind of disclaimer that you know addresses James concern, but otherwise more for it. I think it's it should be presented as something that's documenting facts different characteristics. And again with the disclaimer saying this cannot possibly be fully comprehensive but what people need to take into account when it comes to choosing the platform for their use case. All right, thanks. I just had language basis contributor language and language SDK is application developer language right heart. Thanks. Yeah, and Jim to address your point, like I don't think we really wanted this to be a full like getting started guide you know obviously if you're going to pick a system to use. You're going to want to look, you know, at more than a table you're probably going to want to try out the systems and everything. We sort of thought this was a getting started to getting started. For lack of a better term, and we really just wanted to help people find information about projects. So one of the unfortunate things is that all of the projects store and put their sort of core information and a little bit different places. So if you are trying to look for you know all of this stuff. It can be a little bit tricky because there's not like you know a standardized place for every project, where you can necessarily find all of this. So one of the big utilities is just finding the basic information. And we think that, you know, this is very useful for that problem. Yeah, thanks for a room. Hey, thanks, Tracy. So couple of I have a couple of comments. The first one is on creating multiple tabs. I think having too many tabs or options would kill the purpose to make it simple. Then idea should be to provide all the information whatever is necessary for somebody who's coming in in more simpler form than to create multiple options for them to iterate through. If the decision tree that they need to make to reach where they have to reach is longer. I think that will not be pleasant experience for somebody who is new. So if we are considering for instance the language and the supported SDKs they could probably part be part of another subsection when they are interested in a specific project, but at a higher level. If they are coming in probably this kind of information should not be there. So instead of creating hierarchy at the top level it should go inside each project that here is more information about this project since you are interested in it. And the other reason or the second comment associated with that was. I thought that now I'm a ledger avoided comparing two projects or comparing any project within our pleasure. The goal was always to provide the fact for about each project to the user and let them compare on different marriage different basis points right now. Some of this could be fact sheet for instance, languages is probably a fact sheet. But if we go deeper into feature said then it may become a comparison across projects. That's all from my side, thank you. Thank you, Bobby. I want to jump on what Arun said from the newcomer's perspective this is invaluable like I intend to put this right on the homepage of the learning materials working group because when you get a lot of kids from college coming in looking to get involved. They have one thing in their pocket and that's a language and if they can connect it to a blockchain. I think that's fabulous so thank you for doing this. Thanks, Bobby. Any other comments on this or David, anything else you'd like to Thanks for the feedback and I hear Arun I mean the goal is to make this less overwhelming for people so if the page itself is overwhelming that's not solving the problem so yeah we still need to keep it simple so if the tabbed interface or if there are too many tabs that is good feedback. And I hear you about the comparisons I mean again I feel like this is just collating and packaging factual information that's already out there and not you know adding any additional you know subjective information that would be a comparison so but good feedback. And we do have one other mock up if we want to spend just a couple I don't know Tracy if there's other stuff you need to get to on the agenda but there was one other one more. Yeah just before we jump to that last one. Yeah, just wanted to clarify. I'm all for trying this this this format, as long as it's not meant to be a decision tree so I'd be more than happy to help out with the categories and the contents. That's great thanks. Let's move on to the last page that you've got for the project specific page. So this would be, as you say the mock up for the project, a given project specific page this is the mock ups looking specifically fabric but this would apply to you know every page, or excuse me every project on the website has a page dedicated to it. So again, unlike the getting started page which would be a page. This would be redesigning existing page. And so there's two things on here again we've reviewed this before. I'll just go through it quickly but the two things on here that are different from the current project pages are kind of a persona based approach to bucketing some of the links so you can see that that black horizontal bar right now has developers users business analysts throwing a bunch of links of people and letting them figure out which one may be relevant for them to help, you know direct people and putting these in these different categories which the current project pages don't do it just here's here's a set of links and you can kind of pick which one. And then on the right you can see there's a sidebar we did have a discussion in the past about what would go in the sidebar but the idea being that many of our projects linked to each other but you don't get a sense from that right now. On the website if you were in the fabric page or any of the pages really you wouldn't know that you know other projects were linked to it so what we wanted to do. And this mock up was have the ability to cross connections. Again, and we've, you know, I think we've talked about this in the past, but the main thing that we've done in the design based on feedback from the TSE is removed. The idea of linking to labs in the sidebar before that section had said related project and labs. Now that mock up just as related projects. So, if I remember the conversation correctly we had had the discussion about what we linked to labs or not we decided not to so I had that removed from the mock up and I think the feedback would be then if we have a lab that is worth linking to because you know, something that we want to promote from the marketing standpoint and maybe we need to be encouraging that lab to think about becoming a project so then we could then link to it from that way. So, there isn't much changed on this one but I just wanted to move the loop and let people know that we asked the designer to kind of make that one change. All right, thanks David. Any comments on this page. I personally like it. I think it by separating in the personas I think that helps a lot. I don't know where we're supposed to go. Or no. I'm sorry what you're off me. Sorry, I apologize. I'm messing up. Just wanted to know if you had any comments there. No, no, no, no, just forgot to and it sounds like nobody has any comments on this one David I think people are waiting for it to be done. I actually had one which is unfortunately explorers out of the picture but I think we can ignore this for the sake of the exercise at that. Yeah, that was just placeholder content. Yeah, I understand. That's why I'm teasing you with it but it's kind of abusing in some way. It does bring up a good point though we have to decide what projects actually do get featured on the sidebar of which other project pages so that is something that you know the TSC. When we start building it is out on the website, the TSC can look through and say hey, you know, this project should probably be linked to versus that project so that I mean we will need to sort that out. So David I know we already have written that down it probably needs to be updated to reflect projects that we may have recently end of life. So, I'll make sure that that gets updated. It's it's also under this task force that we've written stuff down so heart. So David I'm going to push back against that a little bit and suggest that marketing should possibly have the most impact. Obviously we don't want them to make technically incorrect links, but we may want them to actually pick the projects to go on the sidebar. I think that's a good point but yeah I think you're right absolutely you know I wouldn't want to put the burden entirely on marketing because they wouldn't even necessarily know what their options were right I mean. Yeah I don't think Ben necessarily knows that X project X is related to project Y right. I think Ben knows more than you're giving him credit for. But yeah, we can we will obviously you know the technical community can obviously provide input. Yeah, yeah I think yeah exactly input is a good way to have a discussion about what that's where. Okay, any other comments on this person. Alrighty. So it looks like no. We just to kind of summarize on where we're at with the project families website revamp. We did have a conversation on Tuesday, a few of us were able to get together and have a conversation. We, maybe can I share my screen here quickly right. I'm going to make it easier to share free. And this is the one. All right so hopefully you can see a wiki page that says has to be completed. Great to assume that's yes. Yes. Thank you. I can't see anything anymore zoom has taken over my whole life. So the task to be completed, determine how we will group projects on the hyper leverage your website. We do have kind of this functional grouping proposal that we put together. We in the meeting on Tuesday discussed this criteria for projects to meet and obtain priority for hyper ledger foundation marketing. As you heard today in the discussion, we are going to leave that to marketing so this task is kind of not a task for us anymore. So I think we're fairly close to being finished with this task force based on the discussion that we had today. We've got website project pages related to the project sections. The website mean groupings and then this criteria thing, like I said, is something that we just discussed and decided that it's not really in the purview of this task force but it's in the purview of marketing folks. So I think I just wanted to kind of wrap up on where we're at specifically with this task force comments or questions on that. Okay. Any other business that we should cover before we close the meeting today. I'll just say thanks again for all the feedback over this conversation and previous conversations that's been an iteration so thank you for kind of working through it. And taking a look at it a few different times but I'll get my next step will be to get these with the designer onto the website and some sort of a draft forms everybody can play with it so when those are ready look for some links. And we'll have another round of discussions before anything goes live. That's great. Thank you, David. We will look forward to seeing something we can actually click on and play with and provide additional feedback and thoughts on anything else. Anybody would like to cover before we close. Okay. Well, thank you all for attending today and we will be meeting again next week. Jim, I think you are up for a task force discussion for project health. Next week is the task force that's next on the agenda. Yep, sounds good. Have a great week and for those of you in the US have a great long weekend and we will see you next week.