 Hello, everyone. All right, so let's get started here today. There's not a lot on the agenda. But I start off with the items, the updates from the working groups. Ryan, would you like to start about Ergapt? Sure. So things have been going really well for the Ergapt working group. We've reported about four meetings in now. We have demos lined up for the next two meetings. So if anyone's interested in joining, we have somebody from Microsoft giving a technical deep dive of CNAB and Microsoft's Porter to go on with that. And that will be a week from this Friday. And then our following meeting, so I guess three weeks, we will have a demo slash discussion from IBM, so I had about some of the bootstrapping and container signing tools that they've used for OpenShift in Ergapt environments. Other than that, things are going well. We have a charter finalized and yeah. And we are working on our user stories for how companies and teams are deploying Kubernetes and other CNCF projects in the Ergapt environment. And all that is linked in our landing page in the app delivery GitHub. So you can take a look there. Yeah, I put the link into the agenda. So what we did for the working groups that they have a sub directory in our GitHub repo, Ergapt already has submitted it and the operator working group will do the same pretty soon that they should have it here. I think we have nobody from Ergapt here today. From what I talked with them, they're currently working on finalizing the document on the definition of operators and talking to them. They want to have a first version by next week that is then available for reviews. It's mostly about cleaning up that document right now. So we don't have a lot more topic on the agenda for today on project reviews. I think we are progressing nicely. There's still two going on. Serverless working group, serverless workflows is still ongoing on our side. Same, obviously for artifact hub, the others so far are with the TUC. Right now, especially for sandbox projects, if you haven't followed the TUC call this week, there's quite a discussion on how sandbox projects are handled now going forward due to some changes that I can put in the link to the updated document. The fact on current submissions is not yet fully defined whether they will push the current one through or they will follow the new approach. I'll just put in a link into the agenda for those who are interested, especially those in the current submission process. I think there's not anything else on the agenda unless somebody has anything. I think it's not the logo when we have Amy here, but beyond that. Logo bits, let me go back and check on that issue here. So because I don't think that critical mass yet. Maybe we can talk about what ongoing work items we've got as a group that could use help. We've got some people, it looks like they wanna participate, give a hand. What current work items could use people's help? Anything? I think on the main work group items, there's one thing we haven't really been investing a lot of time into, which was the landscape that we initially wanted to work on. It's like having a landscape on app delivery. This was always like going back and forth, but nobody really took the lead or the effort to really move this forward. Really, honestly, I also never really took the time to really discuss what the landscape is going to look like. I think there's not a lot of landscapes around, but the idea was to reuse the model that Harry initially worked on like these app deliver and layers and try to assign the current CNCF project into those layers. So this is definitely, and so a very good point. This is something that we should be investing some more time into the Lightning Current CNCF projects into a kind of landscape following that model. So let me ask you a question. If we're gonna, do we have a picture of those layers? Because one of the really powerful things about the landscape is that somebody can show up as an end user who's just a consumer. Because like 99% of people who are involved in CNCF projects don't contribute a lick of nothing. They consume it and they're happy consumers and they're trying to find the stuff. And so the experience of discovering things should be what does somebody who has to deal with app delivery, building and operating applications, what are they gonna be searching and using for in that taxonomy? And so I'm curious what we've got and how it maps to the kinds of things that they do and they need. Especially since so many of us here are builders of things and not necessarily in that same mindset of just a consumer. I know I'm totally not in that just a consumer space. And so I'm curious how that mapping works. Let me just bring up, I'll post a link here in a second, but that's a good point. Okay, let's give him a minute here. The nice thing about Chrome is that you can have so many windows. So I posted the link in the general, that means there's a pretty share here. This was also something that we haven't fully worked on a lot recently, just share here. Okay, there are some comments in there that people have previously done. So this was the latest picture that we've done. That was also the one that was presented at KubeCon where we basically put in like, we initially called them layers and then refrain from calling them layers because people weren't really happy with the terms. But what we broke it down is smallest application definition to how do you define your application that was one of the key areas, how in communities to actually define what my application is. And what's the descriptor or what can I use? Then obviously the packaging, which especially with AirGap becomes even more interesting, like how can I put like this whole thing together and install it somewhere? So then we'll be moving also to installing the entire applications. And this is also something I think people are wondering, so how can I ship it? And I have felt like really this application, like how can I ship the whole thing? And the discussion about the whole thing was, obviously not just my YAML files or my home charts, but also the containers, all the security bits and pieces that I need and everything that I wanted to appear. And then it moves into a more operational lab, like how do we really support application that deployment and rollout from like life-cycling management. This is where operators would fall in as an example. But also how do we support like strategies and then it goes into the automation today. Yeah, because in each side of this, you're gonna have consumers and producers and the consumers will significantly outweigh the consumers. And so, or the consumers will significantly outweigh the producers in terms of things. So, okay. So if I'm a consumer coming in, what am I gonna be looking for when I want to discover something? Like what kind of categories would a consumer come at this stuff first and say, I need to consume stuff. How am I gonna discover it? Like what are the different things they'll wanna to select in their landscape that says, hey, this is how I'm filtering on. And I'm not sure that something like application, deployment, rollout is something that's gonna click with them. Yeah, Matt, I was under the understanding that the consumers here for the output from SIG app delivery would potentially be people who maybe developers but maybe somebody's produced a package or maybe a product owner or product manager says, hey, I want my package to, I wanna deploy my package to my customers on Kubernetes. What am I gonna need for that? I kind of viewed that that might be a consumer of the output from this group. Well, if we're doing a landscape around app stuff, we're gonna get lots of people who just say, I need to install my thing. So how do I find the things that will help me here? What kind of database should I use? And so they're gonna approach it from that consumer perspective. Yeah, but isn't that outside the scope of SIG app delivery though? So if we're doing a landscape for this that's meant for people to just roll up, I would expect people far outside of SIG app delivery to do it because it's people who are saying, hey, they're doing this. So if we have to do it, then we really probably need to note on there that the scope is that this is people who are producing things for other people to consume because right now, tons of people come to this landscape that's on the screen and say, hey, I'm trying to figure out what stuff is cloud ready from who, what can I start using? So they might say, hey, what are the service proxies that I can consume? I'm not developing service proxies. I need to use this in my stuff. Who's out there so I can start poking at them, right? And it's totally a consumer of the technologies, not somebody who's developing something necessarily. And I expect a ton of those people in the app space to come along to a landscape that app delivery puts out unless it explicitly says, this is for people who are building tools, not for consumers. Unless that's like a tagline at the top, that's big and bold, people are gonna start poking around saying, I'm looking for technologies I can use and install and I'm not a developer of. I got you Matt, but some of these categories, like you got remote procedure call category and API gateway and the container runtime. I mean, a general person that I would construe is to be a consumer isn't gonna be looking for a good RPC solution or what API gateway they wanna use, right? They're just looking for the, give me the apps, give me the end user apps, right? But the landscape contains a lot more than just the end user apps. It contains the apps that people will be using to deliver the apps, right? So there's kind of layers of consumers. There's the middleware producers, there's the infrastructure producers that goes up and down the stack. And my view and it might be the wrong view, but my view is the application delivery group would help people who wanna put their apps up in a cloud-native and Kubernetes environment, right? So it would be more leaning towards the developer. I agree with you. I don't think we should just assume everybody benefiting from that delivery is gonna be a developer, but there could be layers to that, right? So can I, I wanna chime in. The landscape for me, so I fall into this category of, I'm both a consumer and a producer. So I'm a vendor and so I sometimes come to the cloud-native landscape with that hat on and sometimes I come to it with the hat on and I'm trying to deploy an application or whatever I'm trying to understand Kubernetes. So I'm not sure that a landscape should be targeted at one persona or the other, the producer or the consumer. I'm relatively new to this group so I wasn't around the last time we talked about having a landscape for app delivery. I love the cloud-native landscape from the CNCF but it's pretty broad in scope. And so what I think you're talking about here is saying let's create a landscape that helps people unpack. First of all, the categories that you were showing just a moment ago, the different layers or we're not calling them layers, the different categories, those are prospective categories for then bucketing things into those categories. Various components that components or standards or best practices that address that category. So address the category of bundling, address the category of packaging, address the category of deployment, address the category of observability maybe. I don't know. And so that was my understanding here. So I'm not sure, I'm not getting as wrapped around the axle as you are Matt on whether it's consumer or producer. I think the only thing that I was noticing is the producer was the part that's talked about and the consumer element was missing. I tend to agree to you, I'd like to have both but the documentation we have is very producer oriented and I think it lacks that consumer element. And I show up as a consumer all the time looking at these things. Oh yeah, yeah, that's probably true. Maybe that document is, but I think that as we build a landscape, fair enough, let's make sure that we build the landscape not just for ourselves, but for the, like you say, far larger numbers of consumers that aren't gonna have as much of the, inside baseball context that we do. Yeah, maybe to share some, we had this initial discussion, like a very long time back it, one of the main drivers for this was you come to the cloud native community, obviously you have your company discuss the running and then you're starting to build enterprise-grade applications. And you start to have like all this enterprise-grade app delivery problems where some of them we started to address like this air gap going, are you specific? But just a very simple question. Obviously I'm not just running one micro-series, I'm running 25. And they have a relationship. Where do I put this? They might have an order of housing should get started up. Where, where do I put this? Or have to have an order of upgrading and I say, okay, it's great that I have this thing, but should there even be, how do I like package this up that great gods gets to air get? But also what I see at least a lot with the people who I work with and say, well pointing to an image on Docker Hub is not how you ship applications. So nobody's downloading an image from Docker Hub in an enterprise setting without properly scanning and taking care of those images. They might do it for like a proof of concept, but I very rarely see people just taking images that are on the public internet and installing them into production clusters. But then you realize, okay, this kind of gets now complicated. So first I want to like define all these dependencies and it's not just obviously the services and security credentials and how do they probably get attached to my application at the certain stage and I want to move those other things along there. And then the question was, I assume we have like this definition as you may have these components there which tools more or less can take these artifacts that we have produced and move them along these deployment mechanisms that the way we want them to be there. And that's a good point. I think that's a direct consumer use case, I believe, because when we work with customers and they start relying on more than one application which is really quick, right? Now they're juggling a number of different applications they're downloading from a number of different sources and they're saying, well, what are my options here to manage this process, right? And this could be a tool to show them, hey, these are the options that you have to deliver, deploy to package to manage some of these items. So of course, I guess since I'm working with a lot of software vendors my point of view is a little different but we're trying to help them use best practices and find best practices for packaging and managing their applications so that when our solutions team wants to integrate their software with one of our solutions we can do that in an already known reliable way and giving them a place to start. Like it really answers what I'd like to see is our ability to quickly answer the question like what options are out there and where do I, where can I get started? Like and those two of the questions that I hear the most from granted from developers and people representing software products but also in the use case that you put out there certainly once customers start relying upon these applications and have several of them in a production environment that they need to manage a life cycle for they need to understand how that life cycle works and we could help them with that too. So I kind of noticed two things in here though. One is the kind of thing that you're gonna get in the landscape which is basically just a dashboard of different projects you can filter by category and that's actually not gonna tell you here are good practices and they're gonna be people who disagree on what the good practices are and why and how you tie things together and then they're actually gonna be what are practices and how do you take holistic things into account? Security was brought up here but quite frankly, most of the stuff that I read about these processes gets you into the getting started and the pretty easy stuff but then they never dig into does this system even deal with security and if so, how do I tie it into my processes? We're not gonna fit something like that into a landscape and so we'd need something else in order to walk through those and probably multiple different situations. And so I kind of see two things being brought up here that have different contexts which I think are both useful. I agree Matt, I agree with that comment and yeah, it's not gonna be the end answer and it's however we lay it out it's gonna miss something it's gonna, we can't cover all the perspectives. I agree there. Yeah, and I don't see the goal of the landscape to be the be all end all of what this group produces. I think it's just one thing. Yeah, it was this initial idea so just how it got started this was what we started to look into and we didn't invest that much time into the smaller bits and pieces, which is fine. If you could answer what is app delivery? I get that a lot. What is app delivery? That's a question I get a lot from the technical folks here at Lenovo talking to us about app delivery. What do you include in that? Ooh, ooh, ooh. I have an idea on this because I've been around since the beginning when app delivery was just an idea because they said, hey, SIG apps we need to talk about apps. Oh, there's Kubernetes SIG apps and we don't want the name to be confusing even though they have very similar scopes and ideas. So we need a different name. So we're gonna call it Kubernetes SIG app delivery. And in talking to some of the TOC members they have talked about everything fitting in here from like tools that plug into visual studio code and help you do development all the way through things like obviously HOME which are package managers and stuff like that. And so that whole wide area was the original scope of where they were thinking but they didn't want the name to be confusing with the existing Kubernetes SIG apps. Well, when we worked on the charter I think the way I would phrase it is to talk about app delivery as pretty much everything from artifact availability to artifact retirement in production. I think when we had a lot of discussions do we want to get put in like how do we structure an application from what it is right now to calculate if that happens? Well, it's a nice idea but it's also a bit vague and very wide. And pretty much everything that I needed from okay I have now this artifact which in most cases obviously is a container to the point where I push it through my already deployed I run it and manage it and I eventually get rid of it and replace it by a new version. That would be my definition from what we did back then is what we talk about delivery. I think my definition goes a bit wider to the retirement piece because a lot of people think okay now we have shipped it. Yeah, but you have to update it you have to retire it eventually and get it out of production. It's also part like updating an application. It's also done otherwise we have exactly this like DevOps world where we have it okay we have shipped it, it's great. But now it should be everything running so I want to have all like the observability artifacts there as well that I need from like monitoring configuration and so far. But I think to move this forward I think there's still a number of questions that we can agree on and where I guess you mentioned like working with customers questions that they have which also initially started this conversation we can start by answering those questions and a landscape might fall out and white paper might fall out but I think it's an important question like how do I package my application? So can I first ask that if we've got some of these questions would people who've collected some of those questions be willing to write them down so the rest of us can read them and process them as a first step? You know I don't wanna jump to trying to answer them with our own styles I actually wanna sit back and look at them and ponder them from the different methodologies we have so they can be answered in the different ways but I think actually reading them and getting them from end users and people with questions is a fantastic first step to help us. Yeah that was my proposal to actually put them into a dark and then discuss those questions. Does it make sense for our people too? Like that's put okay like the key questions that people have and I think this is these are all the things you have to think of when you put your first application into production like delivering to all of those stages and also to your point chat this is what people usually ask me like it must be simple things like where do I put a database string? Where do I put a database string for a production database? Yeah I'm happy to gather some of that here and contribute that. I, what's the best way for me to be able to do that? So what I will do, I will as usually like create a small Docker which just go through and just put the questions in there and I'll try to help organize them and I will share them on the mailing list and obviously also in the agenda documents I'll do both. So I'll do this right off the bat here and we just get started. I will just throw in some example questions so that people just get started and for the next meeting we can then go through those and then decide on next steps and which one we want to tackle and how we want to move there. But just for the time being for all of them in there I just want you to try to structure them and what I fit is like equal structure so we can have a structure discussion obviously if it is agree on a structuring just let me know when we can discuss. So I'll create it. Let's throw things in there. Maybe it was the question. Ideally just don't put the question there. It would also be interesting how you usually answer it because the question might be some type of- Who it's coming from, right? The perspective of who it's coming from. Yeah, context would really help. Yeah. Yeah, let's start off with like the semi-structured approach and I'll put this into a format that's then easier to adjust but just feel free to throw in things that usually come up that you usually deal with and let's sort of do this and I'll actually take care of this today. So I'll just create the doc and put it in here for collecting questions and we'll also share it via the mailing list right after this. Fear for everyone to get this as a start. Just like to have them all in a doc rather than tearing it on the mailing list we did in the past and usually these mailing list discussions tend to get rather complex. I think the first form of collaboration is usually a Google Doc. It's usually because people can comment on what others mean by this and share it. Well guys, I got a job for another call but I will look for that in the mailing list and I'll certainly respond and give you some context and questions that we see that might be helpful for us. Okay, that was good. So I'll say it first. Thanks. Okay, so let's get started on this one. Amy, you said we don't have critical mass yet for our logo. You don't, you got like maybe like three people weighing in on here. Possibly four and that's not nearly enough to be able to say like, hey, nice things. Yes, go ahead. Can we drop in a link here? So some of us can do this while we're sort of paying attention to the meeting right now. Yeah, yeah, here you go. Like there's a lot of like the, hey, I really like things and like some things I like and there's not like the, there really isn't critical mass in here. So what are we thinking around logos? Cause this one's been open a little bit. Thank you. Maybe I think for a lot of people it's okay. It's just fine what it is. I know that there is some people who have a very strong opinion about this one. Exactly. And that's why I wanted to be able to make sure that people that had strong opinions were able to put them in. Yeah, my only strong opinion was a slightly negative one. I said, I don't want to see actual containers and ships. That was my only requirement that I had. I can't see containers and ships anymore for care native perfectly. Yeah, sure. I'll put it in for comments and I'll nag people on the mailing list. And that would be lovely. And everywhere, until they just comment so that I stop nagging them. I think this is close to the code of contact of harassing people to comment on something, but I'll try to... It's a directed focus here. I think being able to have people weigh in on this could be appropriate. So when I click on the link, Amy, that you have in here. Oh, I only see one embedded. It's the... Round two of designs is what I want people to focus on. It's the embedded piece in here. So the one that I'm looking for directly is go ahead and pop this one up. Round two of designs, is it that PDF? So you have to deliver it to me? Yes. Okay. Well, I appreciate your comments. There are more things to be able to be directed at. Say, also, the... Oh, you get a legit comment from me. I know. I know. All is good. By the way, in the meantime, I put the doc in there just letting everybody... In case it can't access it for the app-deliver-related questions. I'll also share it on the beginning of this one here. Okay, so then let's people comment. Anything else people want to bring up today? On the logos, I noticed that many of the logos are these. Is there some significance to that other than they're cool? So... But to me, you're the Amy. Just to anybody. Just because, like I said, I noticed a lot of them had bees. And I wondered whether there was some conversation where bees means something special to some folks around app delivery. But since nobody's speaking up. No, actually, I think it was more about like the, hey, like ant hives or bees. Bees are looking at large nests. This came from a comment on December 5th. Further up in the thread. Yeah, I think we had some very strong bee supporters in the past. Yeah. That was the only reason why. There's also like the kangaroos in there. Yep, there's a couple of kangaroos. Couple kangaroos, couple of ants. So the idea was, I think other six are using animals as well. That's why we came up with animals, I think in the first place. That's why we've ended up with like, kind of like the vague animals. Yeah, I think that's how we got to, and at some point some people just like bees because they're already burrowing stuff. That's also why we have doves in there who ship stuff. So I think overall we are flexible. The only real veto that you will get from me is no containers, no ships. The rest I can actually deal with perfectly. These are the only two, nothing, but just sticking to like, it's a common scheme across six makes sense. And I think it's right now mostly animals, right? Yeah, you would know, yeah. Yeah, by and large it's mostly animals. So again, getting more feedback here would be super. We can do a proper vote on these. I just want to be able to get a sense of like which ones people are looking at because voting on like all of these millions is going to be a little rough. Get one or two votes on each and that doesn't seem to be a darn thing. Exactly. Yeah, okay, we'll back people at the time. Is there a repository somewhere that shows all the logos of the other states or do we have to jump here and there to see them all? You know, I think those are over in the artwork repo. Let me check. Yeah, I'm just dropping into here and to see instead of art repo because I know that we've uploaded things. Yep, those are over in other and we've got both sick security and sick storage. So. Okay, here's a tip for you. Don't choose the white one. You won't see anything. So yeah, security I have open here, that's the box. Yep. That's this one here and storage. I can color in G. That's a plan. It's a Klam, I think, yeah. The NCF logo behind it. I think you also want to keep mostly the same style I assume that we already have. Yeah, it would be nice for them to all propose something on top of the NCF logo if we had consistency with that element. Okay. Yeah, let's share it again on the mailing list maybe with those that have linked to the existing examples what's already out there. I'll compile it for people. Again, I might be the easiest one to handle here. No ships, no containers, totally happy. So you have stain on your vote except for negative votes. No, I don't know what I'm going to like but these are just the two that I really can't see any more like than they were people talking about. Okay, it's a container, it's a ship. So yeah, we've been there, we've done that. And we most likely don't want to take it well because these kids get us into copyright issues. Okay, good. So then for the next meeting, I'll put over the link to that question in the doc. I'll send it out to the mailing list right after this one let's collect the questions and the next time we really have something to discuss and just maybe one more thing. If you have a question and you're using a certain tool we might also have it just listed in there. So that might make sense. So it'll make like a template of what a question could look like and like what your answer looks like and which tool you're using, which tool you think that it fulfills the CNCF fulfills these requirements. I wouldn't necessarily link it to CNCF projects where I find quite interesting yesterday in the TUC meeting. I think it was sick runtime but was also reaching out to other projects that are doing interesting things in their space. So maybe also with this exercise we find out that we want to engage with some other projects along this effort as well which doesn't mean obviously that we want them necessarily to become CNCF projects or force them to do so which we can't anyways but also might provide some interesting insights of projects and tools that people have worked with. All right. I think then we are done for today. Good. Bye everyone. Thank you everyone. Bye.