BRIDGE: https://zoom.us/j/661303200?pwd=TFdRd0c2MTJUem8xa252UGJHTE1Mdz09

Passcode: 209247

We will start our meetings by mentioning the project's Antitrust Policy, which you can find linked from the LF and project websites. The policy is important where multiple companies, including potential industry competitors, are participating in meetings. Please review and if you have any questions, please contact your company legal counsel. Members of the LF may contact Andrew Updegrove at the firm Gesmer Updegrove LLP, which provides legal counsel to the LF.

...

...

Action Items

Zoom Chat Log Zoom auto-transcript service - These are often translated incorrectly and can be misleading. They are NOT Authoritative!   Information as to why .
They are included here as a time stamp cross-reference for the recording only!  The notes above this line and the actual recordings are authoritative.

05:58:36 From Alla Goldner : #info Alla Goldner, Amdocs
06:00:01 From Catherine Lefevre : #info, Catherine Lefevre, AT&T
06:00:08 From Dong Wang (China Telecom) : #info Dong Wang, China Telecom
06:00:16 From Srini Addepalli (Intel) : #info Srini Addepalli, Intel
06:00:46 From Andreas GEISSLER (DT) : #info Andreas Geissler, DT
06:01:30 From ONAP Meeting 7 : #info Bin Yang, Wind River
06:01:45 From Sylvain Desbureaux (Orange) : #info Sylvain Desbureaux proxy Eric Debeau, Orange
06:01:49 From Jason Hunt : #info Jason Hunt, IBM
06:01:53 From Ranny HAIBY (Samsung) : #info Ranny Haiby, Samsung
06:02:11 From Damian Nowak : #info Damian Nowak proxy Timo Perala, Nokia
06:02:37 From Ciaran Johnston (Ericsson) : #info Ciaran Johnston, Ericsson
06:02:56 From Fernando (Fred) Oliveira : #info Fred Oliveira, Verizon
06:05:50 From Catherine Lefevre : Bin is our ONAP 7 ;-)
06:08:18 From Jason Hunt : happy Birthday!
06:10:25 From SaiSeshu MUDIGANTI (Huawei) : #info Seshu huawei
06:11:58 From SaiSeshu MUDIGANTI (Huawei) to Kenny PAUL (LFN)(Privately) : Sorry was late :)
06:12:33 From Kenny PAUL (LFN) to SaiSeshu MUDIGANTI (Huawei)(Privately) : np :-)
06:58:45 From Sylvain Desbureaux (Orange) : https://github.com/onap/logging-analytics/commits/master/pylog/onaplogging
07:03:11 From Ciaran Johnston (Ericsson) : Well done Chaker and everyone!
07:10:20 From Catherine Lefevre : Great Job !
07:11:19 From Catherine Lefevre : and keep going !
07:35:57 From Sylvain Desbureaux (Orange) : Just proxy today but +1 to Catherine
07:43:39 From David McBride : Need to drop

...

Zoom auto-transcript service - These are often translated incorrectly and can be misleading. They are NOT Authoritative!   Information as to why .
They are included here as a time stamp cross-reference for the recording only!  The notes above this line and the actual recordings are authoritative.

06:05:21 sprint number seven.
06:05:26 Okay.
06:05:29 As usual, we will go through our little housekeeping bit.
06:05:36 Please keep yourself muted, unless you're speaking to keep the noise down after using a dial and you can use star six. If you send me a private zoom message that will become part of the public record.
06:05:52 And we'll start by mentioning, or any trust policy. You can find this linked from the LFM project websites policies important where the multiple companies including potential industry competitors are all participating in these meetings.
06:06:07 Please review. If you have any questions please contact your company's legal counsel, members of the lF may also contact Andrew up the group at the burn up growth LLP, which provides legal counsel to the Linux Foundation.
06:06:23 That I will stop the share.
06:06:28 And I will start the share of this.
06:06:35 And one of the things that is really important and we're celebrating
06:06:48 his work four years old now.
06:06:51 Yes, so well remember for years ago on the thing that segment date I was thinking to send them a note on the 23rd, then I've been too busy, but I wanted to celebrate, again, on the TLC the fact that it's a four years.
06:07:15 On the 23rd 2017, loneliness Foundation was overshadowed using the fact that pulling up was born. Soon them It has been a great adventure with a lot of you have with everybody here.
06:07:30 And I'm constantly impressed by the innovation by the collaboration, by the great ideas that the team and the commitment.
06:07:40 We have seen in the project team with the subcommittee's with the CSC just wanted to make a bold and say thank you to all of you. Because we would not have read this for years milestone.
06:07:53 With both your support. So, um, I so I will make a post today and just say happy birthday going up community.
06:08:02 We never met before, I think, but never too late to start to celebrate our success. And the way we have been able to grow this community. So, thanks to all of you for your continued dedication and for and innovation.
06:08:30 So before we kick off all my son radio. Today, the Honor Code three.
06:08:52 I have been reviewing your feedback your comments, especially how we, we should also continue to improve the TLC.
06:09:06 And more importantly, the, the TSP code. So discussing with David and Kenny.
06:09:09 I would like to suggest that the day of the milestone we really dedicate.
06:09:15 That's my son that's my soul state to review where we are, from a video perspective, or the wise, maybe I was already sharing that last week I cannot remember.
06:09:27 I would like to suggest that we will not focus on the here is acceptable to see members really want to deep dive.
06:09:35 And we will provide a silence update, as part of the minute, or as part of the agenda will go into the details. So, it will give an opportunity to the community to bring to peak.
06:09:47 We are shifting from execution to was thinking for worse than trying to define in a better way of vision.
06:09:56 So, it can start with a TLC, but I also expect that the subcommittee's continue to be proactive collect the use case save you, the impact on the architecture has was so or shift on the TC because over the last four years, one of our key commitment was
06:10:16 to ensure that we are delivering to mature ladies and men and skinnies when it is needed per year.
06:10:26 It will still be a commitment, we might be able to at 1.2 release major release, a year, we don't know yet.
06:10:34 But we will shift the focus of the TC code to really dedicate to what you want to discuss.
06:10:44 Not only focusing on execution.
06:10:47 Call after call given more place for innovation and for hope map discussion as well. Is that Is that okay with everybody.
06:11:04 Alright, we're back to you.
06:11:07 Back to you, David and Kenny.
06:11:13 Good thanks Catherine, um, so today we'll talk about Honolulu, we'll talk about TLC to Dotto and then just cover a couple of housekeeping items.
06:11:26 I will go ahead and turn it over to David at this point.
06:11:33 Alright thanks Kenny.
06:11:40 Alright.
06:11:44 As was mentioned earlier today is our scheduled date for him three.
06:11:51 Let's start out taking a look at the milestone status.
06:11:58 See
06:12:01 me pulled it up. That's okay.
06:12:14 All right.
06:12:21 Okay.
06:12:23 Starting out with project status.
06:12:28 We're currently at 80 81% of the tasks for him three have been completed.
06:12:40 Looking at tasks for requirement owners.
06:12:43 We're actually I just checked this earlier, we're actually at 78% and 11 out of 17 so if you count the requirements and that have reached three in this column there's there's 11 requirements that have
06:13:04 met that met that goal by today's date.
06:13:15 So, I wanted to.
06:13:20 It says, Christophe is the architect of the new release process, and I know he and I have talked about him three and the importance of them three and and how it really makes a difference between the new process and our previous process.
06:13:43 Because stuff.
06:13:45 Can you talk to us a little bit about em three, and how we evaluate progress and move forward at this point.
06:13:55 Sure.
06:13:56 So, basically the goal of three, is that it's really the point where we end up our functional code week. It means that all the, all the functionality that we wanted to have included in this release should be completed by this date.
06:14:15 If something is not completed, then there is no big deal with that. You can we will simply, we can simply postpone that to the next release, unless we have some important box or something that has to be fixed.
06:14:31 And that can be included, even a story that can be included, even post entry, because we will still accept bug fixes.
06:14:40 So, the really the goal for entry is to make sure that all of the requirements owners have completed they work if they wanted to have their features included into this release, and that project that won't operate their containers with functional changes
06:15:02 that they have created an online review so that we have two weeks to merge everything. And then, FC zero be able to provide a first ship herbal master to the integration team for testing.
06:15:19 All right, thanks Christoph, and that's fairly clear to me with regard to the requirements. But how do we how do we treat the projects in that, you know, we have, for example, right now we have 81%, meeting the goals for him three.
06:15:41 So, I believe it would be good to try to discuss that case by case if you could try to open the table, and we can see what kind of tasks are left, and they are really blocking us from moving forward.
06:16:02 So now,
06:16:02 for the project it's, it's quite easy.
06:16:06 I just want to even a job that maybe the status that you see now might not be the status in the sense that all the projects.
06:16:17 I've been yet, under the preview. Some items have been healed from this morning and might be reopened that is a bit later.
06:16:27 What one of the reason of the opening is sometimes the, the items have been closed and there is no in the location, how the task has been completed.
06:16:39 So, The what we have been observed in believe you with that. There is a dependency, which is no man on the team.
06:16:49 And I was suggesting that maybe instead of putting in progress we could put in submitted. If the team has already submitted their school teams to the team so we can talk, better.
06:17:03 The other aspect is usually we are tracking.
06:17:10 I is how you read the books.
06:17:13 Know what we asked to the team is really to solve.
06:17:17 I pay any fees and I use piracy issue with an income simulate a big user stories, who old Bible for Jihad issue. And that could be the reason why some people so they have completed thinking the, the, the six old books, but if they have a big staff can
06:17:39 use of cohesive task math is.
06:17:44 Then, it could be the reason why the ticket has been reopened.
06:17:50 The other aspect, and I think for that one. The ticket have been closed.
06:17:55 We would like to ask the sitcom to review the CI budging because it was difficult to confirm or not, if this activity has been performed by the team the update to the CI information has been performed so sick of my be decide to do from this guy that's
06:18:25 bit later. For the moment I consider it closed, except one where the platform maturity was not updated. And finally, some deep some people.
06:18:29 I don't see it in this category, but some, some team are still trying to complete their.
06:18:46 Is it. We just lost your audio.
06:18:48 Go.
06:18:56 When did
06:18:54 it Oh, can you hear me. Yeah, yeah.
06:18:58 So where did you lose me.
06:19:01 Not sure.
06:19:02 At some things.
06:19:05 Okay. So just to recap, in progress, only select.
06:19:11 Probably the issue we do have, we are the team we're thinking to solve the books only.
06:19:21 And here the request is really to look at the epic stuff, excuse of story mark as eyes are the worst. It will be open this ticket.
06:19:27 The other problem we notice some team are nearly there with this this coverage but there is no exception.
06:19:35 So we invite them to play the exception if they feel they cannot meet the test coverage goal which is 55% at the entry, and probably have a plan to figure that out the sex.
06:19:49 At one point, that would be nice to document with an exception process.
06:19:52 When we look at the delivery, which is also another stage you will notice that the item which are in delivery is because people have provided, probably, if I remember well.
06:20:10 An exception, or the ceiling a waiting mood for them. They have submitted the information that they're waiting. They need to work with us.
06:20:20 And some of the delivery of not be necessary. Have you yet.
06:20:38 Katrina, he find me common just, just for the record, I already clarified in the mailing list that I think it's important to clarify that.
06:20:36 Nicole.
06:20:37 So the task for entry is not to get your all and review merge. Its to start the review rank so that we as an online team know that ever that what we have in the pipeline is basically everything that we need to deal with.
06:20:54 For the next two weeks, right so you need to get that marriage before FC zero, and we will do our best to review everything emerged. But if you created the review, that's all that you need to do for empty.
06:21:10 Okay, but there is no a good number and the person of marketers close that the reason why the ticket have been reopened.
06:21:18 Yep, Yep, you, it makes perfect sense to me.
06:21:23 Okay. And again, if you look at the delivery, I'm probably Sure.
06:21:28 Later today. Some of them will be closed. In this question of looking at all the details.
06:21:34 The team is very great to do a great job for the milestone release, but it, we don't have enough time to him.
06:21:44 The staff cuz that's the challenge.
06:21:47 So anyway, it's been an easy one for them at this stage, in comparison to the previous cities, it's already pretty good. I tend to see if we can bear with it so he gets his story can data.
06:22:07 See
06:22:07 it if I may add something to that. I believe that for em three we have to the most important items that we need to review.
06:22:19 And the first one is that all projects, managed to make their global requirements that we have because empty is a checkpoint for that.
06:22:28 And the second point is that that all team who want to ship, an outdated container image that contains new features have created the online review that are from, from my personal perspective that are the two blocking points for the release all of all
06:22:49 other tasks, I believe, are more.
06:22:52 The administrative work and they do not need to hold the room, they're passing the milestone.
06:23:12 Say me ask a question just to BD I'm sure. So that means that, let's say we will be back in three today.
06:23:14 So, if I say tomorrow I'll let the stage two people at the end of today. I have a new,
06:23:25 new review on functional change on vision bumper on component with Baker. I didn't know which takes good enough, because they know they have already have already push that to that one didn't.
06:23:44 I should say no, because of that, unless it's a big issue that's, that's right. Because I think some competency that they have to something unto me, I'm not sure to achieve them so that's why I went to be sure.
06:24:14 What they do if, let's say, one of the components is the thing that he has done it but I don't see
06:24:09 you.
06:24:10 Go on.
06:24:11 So, we open so that's why I think all the projects have not been deeply the view. If we not defy a project close. And in fact, we cannot find the number of the view, it will be the open.
06:24:30 I think 60% of the project has been deeply the view, but I don't think more has been done.
06:24:46 That's okay. But I'm a very sufficient story but what does it mean for me so that means that places that I don't know I don't want to shame on someone so let's say NBA again, and a rooster already but let's see as the boost.
06:24:52 Tomorrow I see a NBA review on the.
06:24:59 If there's been a few open forum three so should I accept it or should I not accept it.
06:25:06 That's where I'm able to understand.
06:25:08 So, from the process perspective of the day. Sorry, of the day where we POS entry, we should stop accepting functional patches for this release and, but because this is a new process and we have a bunch of tickets reopen.
06:25:27 I believe we should give a grace period, till end of Sunday, right for people to create and on Monday, if there is a new review, containing for example a functional version bump or any kind of functional change in the container.
06:26:00 You just do nothing with it. So for next two weeks, you can just put a comment. Hey this is past entry, if you want to get that marriage, go to TLC and ask for an exception, but by default, We did not marriage that until we branch out our release branch
06:26:03 which is going to happen at fc zero.
06:26:08 Okay.
06:26:10 Basically they are late for the train and, and that's it. They are the next one.
06:26:16 Yeah. Okay, so let's go. We have a great time. Up to Monday and.
06:26:21 And that's there. So that means. So, if I may, for the other two kids that are here, please, if it's from burger changer so you're you're bumping your Russian for the exchange.
06:26:36 Please put it in the comics.
06:26:40 If you could meet message.
06:26:56 As always up for us to go into the change and not the function of change. So, by default, we will ask you see the comments but by default if you can put that here, if you do that faster for us to, to understand that and to to move you into the, into magic.
06:27:00 if everything is.
06:27:05 Hi Savannah spawn here from CPS a show where this is all quite new to me. I was given the impression that documentation, could be delivered after the entry milestone we started this week we we have close to ready but I'm not sure if we get it all done
06:27:21 so if we need to bump the diversion just for documentation is that okay so documentation that the, the goal for my for documentation for em three was preliminary documentation, so that just means, and that's primarily aimed at New documentation being
06:27:44 introduced, and that means having the directory structure set up, and a placeholder document, which could, you know, essentially be, you know, a document with the title on it, just so that you have the infrastructure for the documentation, set up and
06:28:05 then there is another milestone for documentation later in the process which is the final day.
06:28:13 Ok.
06:28:14 Ok so now we don't need more and more than just a placeholder. Yeah, a little bit more, we're putting a little bit more in, and Sylvain is also very aware that we started the process the overview quite a while ago, but it's still ongoing.
06:28:29 So, I think, actually I heard earlier today that I think it's now being merged.
06:28:34 But we we yeah we've made.
06:28:37 The original commit has very old images at this stage so we need to bump up release because of that as well.
06:28:44 So, that that's not an issue.
06:28:49 We are, we are advancing your visa, so don't worry about that you are under, under, under good before the it is It's okay. Don't worry, that, that, that will work and we just have to finish the data.
06:29:08 We are met, we haven't been that close
06:29:16 to changes and it should be ok ok ok ok thank you sir.
06:29:23 Yes, the crystals Elizabeth I mean I do have a pencil, with the enforcement you're planning right now in the empty is a function feast not just from om perspective but it's also for all the projects right.
06:29:33 We do have a lot of reviews also coming in the last few days so I think it'd be unfair for the product team to be closing on those comments and a short timeframe and going through and submit an om release this in the three or four days window.
06:29:48 Right. I mean, technically all those comments coming in. By entry are valid for the release scope. So, but I think we still need additional buffer to review them and see if they are valid for the internal notes, itself, typically, I mean, the container
06:30:03 updates and post what happens at RC zero. I mean I understand we wanted to shut up a little bit, but I don't think that helps the project team, and especially if there's a valid feature enhancements, come to a project, just a day or two.
06:30:17 I mean, it's been in revenue but we have having back and forth comments on it to address that and it's not. I mean, for right for us to say it's not going to be part of the release because we didn't complete the review on time.
06:30:27 Right. So, I think that's something to be taken into account.
06:30:33 So, the main issue with that is that if we postpone creating the container to oversee zero. It means, usually, as we have seen in previous releases that the om review with update of those containers is going to arrive, less than 24 hours before that the
06:31:03 Cole where we should approve RC zero. And then he usually takes us let's say at least a week or even two weeks. If this is a major update to get that marriage, and that way we are always sleeping during the release, because we do not have the final version
06:31:15 that we should provide to the integration for testing.
06:31:22 Yeah.
06:31:21 This is Dan, I think, I think this is something we've been struggling with for a while and I think one of the issues that we have is that there's really not a milestone that we publish them the official project schedule for like window or code reviews
06:31:43 do so so people misinterpret that and those of us that attend this call understand that that data is not the empty date. But, you know, casual, you know, contributed that doesn't attend these calls often things well feature freeze or code freeze that's
06:31:49 my last day to submit a review right it's like no, I think we, I think it would be helpful if we published what that date was right i mean typically that has been the code freeze right that's the helium for now this empty right now, we are changing the
06:32:17 of what expectation of entries to also start finalizing the containers by empty which means that code has to be reviewed and approved, at least a week before to get through the cycle right so yeah, that's an especially with this little with such reduced
06:32:20 short time frame, we're all learning with the new cadence but I think that's something to be taken into account. I mean, I don't think the expectation of having empty to finalize our submissions ready for the new containers, is practical.
06:32:32 I mean, that's something we have to adapt, based on the Facebook is submissions we having.
06:32:37 Yeah. Yes, I think I mean, you know, it is what it is for how to love, first of all, though I think we may want to have an additional milestone between m two and three for like code is due on a project level we enforce that but, you know, we also get
06:32:55 details also get a lot of flack sometimes from contributors like, what do you mean date that it's on the official schedule isn't that date how unreasonable Have you come on your PTO right.
06:33:09 You're the one who has a blast right and you're the one who has the final word here. I mean here in your project right. So,
06:33:19 yeah, I hear what you're saying I'm, I am giving feedback as a PDF of what support I need from the TSA.
06:33:25 Okay, So I understand that. Yeah.
06:33:29 So, I would say that it's up to TC to decide whether we grant some exceptions, but as a rule, I would prefer that you stick to having containers ready for em three because rest of the release is scheduled in a way that we really need time to get everything
06:33:49 marriage and provide to the integration team, otherwise we will really end up sleeping the release and we want to get as close to shipping on time as possible.
06:34:02 Yeah.
06:34:04 Just to be clear, by the way, I'm not pushing back on that dumb, my, my request is for the next release that we had, we changed the process a little bit to formally document when code is right for this release I want to make sure that's clear right that
06:34:17 is at least 20 submissions payment for DCA in the last couple of days right so we are in the process of reviewing it and preparing to get through it and as soon as possible but it'll be unfair for us to say no your comment cannot be intuitive and the
06:34:38 they did complete the review on time, or we didn't have the container ready on time by empty which is, which was not the original expectation for the employee. So, that's my challenge I mean, I'm okay to reject them but I don't think it's right because they empty
06:34:44 they empty officially. How long has been the code completion date right i mean that's different from when the containers will be ready and the volume submission can happen in for DCA we have been doing several submissions already I think festival and
06:34:56 you're helping with that many of them, but there is still late requests I mean there's always something coming, the last week's towards empty there'll be a bulk pushing just like om team has towards zero, the past so that's the challenge of embracing
06:35:11 here. Yep, it's kind of that is a new process right and people may be unfamiliar with that so I would defer this question to TLC and allow them to decide whether they want to grant some exceptions for projects that were unfamiliar with the process and
06:35:29 didn't manage to prepare.
06:35:34 They reviews and they were containers.
06:35:39 So, as Chris mentioned we are prototyping. This new release cadence we are learning about a new way of of delivering of release.
06:35:51 I think it's extremely important to gather feedback from the project team so I want to thank them and BJ to raise their voice today.
06:36:03 Because if you don't say anything we will consider everything is okay.
06:36:08 So it's very important to gather feedback concern. And I was wondering if we should not already start to have a kind of listen and listen to your own page somewhere.
06:36:19 So we don't forget.
06:36:21 The good thing, because I think they have been a good suggestion about merging, a couple of things together to, to, to improve the efficiency.
06:36:33 But I also understand, maybe we are trying to challenge the team a little bit too fast. And as I said at the beginning, I was already nicely surprised to see 81% from the project team considering the time they had between the milestone.
06:36:53 I was concerned last night when I look at the equivalent owner of because we are 50% was glad to see this morning that the look of them were considering that he comment over the night.
06:37:09 Unfortunately generate another issue for the people who are reviewing.
06:37:14 We are, we are, we don't have enough time to be sure that what we see is correct. So again, We are prototyping.
06:37:24 I will let the with to complete the review.
06:37:30 And that's why we spend a lot of time on it, because we need to understand what is working, what is not working well.
06:37:37 And then we need to conclude, but I I am beyond for the CSC the GST need to step up as well. I can feel that we are moving to either.
06:37:51 I would not say go with the exception, I think we should give a little bit more time to the team, and try to reassess the milestone, not necessarily with the TSP between the execution team at the picture call on Monday, but let's complete the review.
06:38:08 Again, I was pretty impressed by the project team to be already at 80% at that stage, considering that we squeeze them a little bit. With the release cadence and happy to see that overnight, the requirement owner, catch up quite a lot.
06:38:26 But I'm still concerned about some requirements, because I'm not sure it'll be on on piece of feedback, do we need to suggest to describe them, or to maintain them so maybe we can have a look at the requirements, which, which are still in a public state.
06:38:44 Back to you, David.
06:38:49 Thanks, Catherine.
06:38:52 So we did have some exceptions that we want to take a look at.
06:39:00 And incidentally, my apologies for getting this page up late I, I realized.
06:39:08 Last week I think that we're asking people to document there are exceptions and they actually set up the exception page so so my apologies for getting that up late.
06:39:20 So we have one here from the JBJ Are you available.
06:39:29 Hey, yes David I'm on. Yes. Okay. Do you want to walk us through this exception that you created.
06:39:36 Okay, sure. Yeah, if you want to pick it up again.
06:39:43 I didn't realize I would go into that in more details on it but okay yes I'm sorry to put you on the spot.
06:39:49 No show so I think Yeah, the main, main items I'm requesting exception is for the Java 11 upgrade, I mean DC has close to about 40 containers and we had done a lot of improvement, the last couple days to make sure they are updated and compliant with the
06:40:02 latest libraries and Firstly, there are three containers, which we are using in more project, which is a design platform which is sort of introducing the more of the class families and in the incubation stage itself and for those three components we have
06:40:19 an upstream dependency with Apache knife I basically made which is still only based on Java eight. So that was one of the reasons we couldn't upgrade those three containers and we requesting exception for that.
06:40:35 And the second item 14 nine.
06:40:39 Again, this is not a must.
06:40:42 This wasn't a DC global requirement for 49 it was based on the SEC com identification of the new libraries recommended version for the say competence will be upgraded so on that.
06:40:57 We did complete almost 95% of that library will play to the recommended version except for one component, which is the inventory API, model, which is a platform component, and it does use third party software.
06:41:15 I think we want to bring up that notes on food.
06:41:20 Yeah.
06:41:27 Yeah, so you can click on the 551.
06:41:28 This one.
06:41:31 Can you open the tone load the same page. Sorry, sorry, sorry for going back and forth. Yeah, the first link on that.
06:41:39 Yeah, there's a whole load DCA second page.
06:41:45 Sorry. Oh this one. Yeah, that one.
06:41:50 Yeah, so I did comment on that.
06:41:52 I think, Amy, if you scroll down on that so pretty much everything what has identified from the recommended version has been completed.
06:41:59 And if you scroll down there is a component inventory API which is using the drop wizard version of 1329 which is not supporting and that is a major refactoring needed if you want to upgrade to the recommended version for that reason, we have identified
06:42:15 that eating exception. Pretty much all the other items are in this list has been completed. So, these are the two main items of.
06:42:23 Yeah, requesting exceptions, except one is the global requirement for Java, the other one is more of a I think the best practice recommendation from second.
06:42:34 Okay, thanks. DJ and then in terms of recovery.
06:42:39 Here recommending using the gray Lynn version for these components, but in terms of completing the, the upgrade.
06:42:49 When, when do you expect to complete the upgrade is that for the symbol release or what do you think it depends on the upstream project. I don't have a timeline on that although we do have a different transformation and project or initiative on the DC
06:43:02 we are looking to also replace some of the AI components, but I don't have a timeline again. The goal is to get as much done and I released but I am afraid I cannot provide an exact time for God.
06:43:15 All right, I'm set calm team. Amy are possible any comments about this.
06:43:22 no in fact we provided comments already with Amy.
06:43:27 The JIRA so well done. Thank you. VJMEO and the DCA team for all the efforts.
06:43:36 All right, great.
06:43:38 And any, any additional comments for the TASC about this exception requests.
06:43:46 Okay, Christophe Are you available.
06:43:51 Yep, I'm here.
06:43:53 But, which crystal.
06:43:56 Sorry.
06:43:58 I think it's, it's me right, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Can you walk us quickly through these two exception requests.
06:44:11 Sure, so can open it. So the first one is about the CSI tickets.
06:44:16 So we have, we have to open. Hi, orgy si tickets are gc 1994, which are about unprotected API's, so some API's of SBC back ends, have no integration, or not collect authentication we fixed one of them are gs 990 but would you say 94 is more complex.
06:44:44 Not that we cannot enable complication but the way the SEC front and manage the exchange of requests requires some more some more work.
06:44:58 And some technical issues so we've met according to the community but unfortunately, there were no, not enough resources to compete that for this release so we've included, but not fully completed.
06:45:12 Have you discussed with the second team.
06:45:17 I think there were some updates made to the tickets, haven't brought this formally to the second team that we can have a dedicated Coalition's panel possible.
06:45:33 Okay I propose we have some some short offline goal on this, we could arrange it like tomorrow or next week, you can join our second session if you want.
06:45:46 Yeah, no problem.
06:45:53 Okay so so
06:46:07 just to mention, I've been reading those updates and they all make sense to me right so I believe that, you know, it's always better to fix something permanently any new correctly rather than try to push some is, you know, I've read the or unfinished
06:46:14 right and they are really pushing for a proper implementation. So, I believe, if they need more time and they're working on that. It's probably to request.
06:46:27 Okay. Yeah, sure. So, so what I suggest, please Chris of joining us on Tuesday, so we could just briefly review it and yeah I'm pretty sure it is fine.
06:46:39 Yeah, we'll share with you all. Technically, she was the one in case you have some ideas. Yes, please.
06:46:46 Thank you.
06:46:48 As a reminder, I think we were accepting of the new courses exception and good SC zero. I think the date of March 4 is the date, where the team needs to submit their final exception for this release.
06:47:03 And then the sitcom can analyze and provide their recommendation, and to the TSP on the, the SEC is all level. We don't need really to read anything today.
06:47:20 We could we, the team is still time to submit any exception until March for, is it corrected in the date us yeah we confirm that with follow last week.
06:47:28 Yeah, we did.
06:47:32 Yeah, okay. This second one, Christophe. Yeah, the second one is about code coverage.
06:47:38 So, as disease is a big piece of kids, and we we've every worked a lot of places in the codes for opportunity that broke quite significant amount of tests, and we reworked it.
06:47:56 But we are below the 55% mark, something like 54.1, I think.
06:48:03 So it may look small but it actually with the size of the code it's it's quite big.
06:48:08 We have some improvements on in on the bike. And as this is only affecting test code really, We don't plan to change the, the feature.
06:48:20 We just asked for a bit of time to to complete that.
06:48:28 All right, thank you.
06:48:31 Any comments questions from the TASC.
06:48:35 We will do a combination of the sitcom and SEO
06:48:43 sitcom any comments.
06:48:50 I'm happy that you are, you know, improving the code coverage and again let's, let's have small chats on Tuesday. I don't think they would be in a specific problem on accepting this exception.
06:49:05 Alright.
06:49:06 Thanks, pal.
06:49:08 Krishna, are you available.
06:49:13 Yeah, I'm here.
06:49:13 Okay, could you walk us through this one.
06:49:15 Yeah, so the exception is mainly related to the high priority bug which, which is created during last lays I think they more than. So on removing all the details we three components from the main so, so, so always mainly has these three components CMS
06:49:32 so hey Chase and noise df sort of this I think for him as we already updated to the like integration image so which like takes off a half of the work.
06:49:43 So we just need to identify the components that are GPLv three and then remove it like for HS I think we should be able to complete it before the before offseason or at least.
06:49:55 But for lawyers here flick it's it set another Python component. But the problem is when we switched to the integration base image so, which is Alpine based.
06:50:05 So, which creates some problems like the Alpine and Python doesn't go well so like the builders taking a long, long time longer time than the usual.
06:50:15 So, like, because the libraries that we are using this taking too long to install in the Docker image in the basement so we need to do some refactoring in the image itself like maybe what we are planning is to have a separate base image for the boys df,
06:50:32 which, like, which we don't build often, and then use it for the other coaches just like when we do any code changes like it will use that base image.
06:50:42 So, but we need some time to refactor that.
06:50:48 So I don't know that this is actually an exception.
06:50:53 So the exception is if you're going to miss milestone, or if you're not able to meet one of the, the, the EQ requirements that you've committed to. And I don't see that here yesterday but what the problem is that this is a high priority bug.
06:51:16 So, how to handle this like, if a fair to close all the high priority issues for girly so.
06:51:26 Okay, I see what you mean.
06:51:30 Yeah, I'm not sure I have to think about that a little bit.
06:51:34 Whether that should be addressed by the exception process or not. Exception process is really designed to deal with exceptions to either missing the schedule a milestone, or if you're unable to meet one of the aq requirements that you've committed to.
06:51:58 So, I'll have to think about that a little bit.
06:52:05 David how young.
06:52:08 We love something.
06:52:09 If I apologize if I'm not able to, I mean my voice is not coming up.
06:52:13 Are you I can hear you. Yeah. Yeah, go ahead. So, one thing is actually the Krishna sir issue I think is valid because without solving that he cannot meet the target right he cannot meet the target of the milestone reason so we thought he competing higher
06:52:29 and higher speed issues he will not be able to meet her into target and that's where he will he has to skip the milestone.
06:52:34 So from that perspective, I think it's valid, we have to still consider exceptions like this which are valid from meeting the target code and make it right.
06:52:44 by Krishna if I change this to milestone.
06:52:47 Yes, sure.
06:52:49 Okay, because that will affect the three criteria.
06:52:57 And so it affects him three in. Am I understanding by you.
06:53:02 Some of them might affect the release itself like might skip the release itself as I was mentioning just like for one of the components I will be able to complete it.
06:53:10 But for the other two it might be difficult to Krishna better to not confuse it and take step by step so we can first start it off empty, it's gonna target empty right now from where we stand and for the thing is we still have risk right.
06:53:23 So that part we can take up later. That's better to take it. There is going to confuse look.
06:53:28 Yeah. Okay, okay. Yeah. And this might also deserve an entry in the Honolulu risks.
06:53:36 Yes.
06:53:37 And then maybe link it back here, if you could, yeah okay okay.
06:53:42 Let me do it.
06:53:43 All right. Okay. Terrific.
06:53:46 Thank you, Krishna sushi.
06:53:53 Okay, So that's.
06:53:55 Any comments from the, the TASC on any of the exceptions that we reviewed and and remember that the exceptions are considered accepted unless there's a specific objection from the TASC.
06:54:14 Alright, hey, there's been, I just create an exceptional customer for multi cloud.
06:54:40 On this page, I don't know why
06:54:42 this one. Oh yeah.
06:54:49 Okay, so you're asking for an exception for
06:54:55 record three seven the Python language update. Okay, so what's the issue.
06:55:00 The issue is the mic all the components, use and parcel and using the own log, but you have package, when you can only sell upgrades pass on 3793 dot h test that you're limited by an upstream component.
06:55:21 Yeah.
06:55:23 Or I guess own app log.
06:55:26 His own app log part of multi cloud or set as another project.
06:55:32 So sort of party component, developed by computers.
06:55:39 Is upstream to two people report.
06:55:46 It's a third party component that's called own app log.
06:55:51 Right. Yes, I don't know maybe is have already been coming to log project, I'm not sure, but upstream to people report
06:56:07 upstream.
06:56:08 Could you give us a link. If you say that he eats upstream than it should reside outside of Garrett on up. org.
06:56:18 Yeah, I can, I can have a look what I can put it in this table as well.
06:56:25 Yeah.
06:56:26 Yeah. And then, I think it should be also part of their voices, if it's upstream things we should also be part of it versus manga.
06:56:35 Hello.
06:56:36 Hello.
06:56:38 I'm saying, because you mentioned it's upstream which roads to be part of a voices list, your, don't forget to keep it in the voices restored. So
06:56:49 the third party library usage.
06:56:57 If you save it up shaped I'm saying if it's upstream I want to pivot is there, that's what is my point, you're trying to say good. Yeah, yeah. And good see that actually an epilogue.
06:57:08 You know, it starts of the look project.
06:57:15 I think it's a person from DT was taking v stocks back.
06:57:23 And I'm pretty sure there are some.
06:57:26 There are some projects that are using them that are using the project with Python. Three there's some things maybe not treated a better.
06:57:44 Pretty sure that there are some components that are using it for some discussions with assumptions. As long as it is free build something.
06:57:47 This is, this is still, let's say, almost okay and
06:58:01 as long as it is not to that seven right so you have fitted six or seven okay let's keep it as it is. And try to plan, as, as soon as the component you're mentioning, you can support, like the latest version we recommend them to plan ramp rate but if
06:58:14 if you're already running freedom, seven, it is fine.
06:58:26 Okay, now we have our
06:58:27 at it from, from geeky walking on that, and I'm pretty sure I am putting the link in the chat room. Just give me a second. That's
06:58:43 true.
06:58:44 Yeah.
06:58:52 And I've seen a permit from
06:59:02 2019, which says, make it compatible with space and so I believe it should be.
06:59:02 Okay so, bam, it looks like we need a few more details here about the component where it comes from. And also, I noticed that you put not applicable for recovery plan we need to have something here.
06:59:16 So, you know, if you're going to look at it again and assemble and see whether it can be upgraded or need to have something from you about what how you're going to address this going forward.
06:59:35 Okay, I can dig into the majority are in the survey have have to post the link ready.
06:59:42 Okay.
06:59:45 I mean if you have questions to Eli, or to my, Michelle. I think you can also contact me so Andreas, I will forward that to you read to them, and they would support you if you, if you need.
06:59:59 Okay.
07:00:01 All right. Thank you.
07:00:04 Okay,
07:00:12 so.
07:00:09 So, let's see.
07:00:12 So we aren't taking a vote.
07:00:14 We are right, looking for objection so I'm going to have multi cloud to that.
07:00:19 And if there are no objections the vote turns into a pound agreed.
07:00:29 Know what, Yeah.
07:00:31 Yeah, we, I think where we we agreed that Kenny is that we're going to take a look at this at the HL meeting on Monday and review the milestone status again.
07:00:43 We come aboard because it's not only a portable project exception. If you look at the requirements, we don't know why some people did not provide your feedback.
07:00:55 Does it mean that they are shifting or whatever so I don't think we are in a position to vote. I would not suggest that the TSP has to come on Monday to vote.
07:01:08 I think what I would like to suggest is one try to continue the discussion of line, especially on the requirement, because I think formal project team, they know exactly what they have to accomplish but from the requirement, it's not totally clear what
07:01:24 they missed, and what they want to do next. Right.
07:01:28 And then we provide offline information to the DSC because we try to shift the focus.
07:01:37 As discussed last week. So we will not discuss those eVx activity as a member wants to bring a concern. We will continue offline, but for the team they need to keep going.
07:01:48 And we need to continue to fix the employee gap on Monday. I think a couple of steps have been defined here. What I would like still to to complete it, to understand from checker.
07:02:02 that's also an important step that we needed to complete from previous will be the guest on excuse me the.
07:02:19 I sent an email out yesterday day before yesterday.
07:02:25 I lived in where we are so we're all done all the reviews have been done with the architects have committed over 45 reviews so at this point in time, all the reviews have been completed and documented on the architecture subcommittee page wiki page.
07:02:47 So,
07:02:54 yeah, thank you. Well thanks to all the people that did all the work. It's a great teamwork, because we had the local have played so let's at least the neighborhood this so we can mask.
07:03:02 I don't have my page anymore open, we can mark that the second bullet is complete and great job to all of you, because at least it's a good accomplishment we know where we are from an architectural perspective, neither porn that I think we should also
07:03:17 just touch I don't know if we have Jessica. I just would like to soft though, where we are with the supercomputer heights, which was counted by the GC on January, 11th.
07:03:30 Is there something that stuck or need to trigger, or is this you guys working on it.
07:03:34 So it's the bullet just before the TSP recommendation on this page.
07:03:48 And we will speak on the call, do we have a ticket number.
07:03:53 I don't know I think it's more.
07:03:58 I think you check.
07:04:08 And you, it is not yet implemented right so it's jack hi sit on the call or we have missed him with Mr.
07:04:10 Thank you, is having some problems joining earlier, Catherine. It wasn't able to get onto the call for some reason.
07:04:17 Okay. I believe that the height of the been granted, but I don't know if there's a particular ticket that we need to follow up with this request.
07:04:26 So maybe Can Can you follow up with him offline, whether we know it. If he can provide the nighty tickets, with this with this request I think that's what Kenny's asking.
07:04:46 Yeah.
07:04:49 I will add it as a next step.
07:04:52 So to see based on what you have heard, if we look quickly. The next step, which is one finalized remaining tasks for the project and the requirement owner pyrotechnics ppl call.
07:05:05 We will continue to work on the execution level. During this call.
07:05:11 And we might need to do some conclusion for this feature. If we don't have seen back by that time sitcom will continue to review some of the inputs submitted by the team not only the exception, which had to be provided known as the other platforms.
07:05:28 But I would like also to ask sitcom, to see if they're the, they're happy with the CI budging input provided by the team because that's something.
07:05:56 Somehow, David could not validate so the, the tickets might have been closed because we were not sure how to validate the CI budget.
07:05:49 And then our team will continue to support the project team
07:05:56 based on what they are submitting, and I think we we need to ever some type of discussion.
07:06:02 Maybe we need to consider employee of the closure of the new feature code, but leave some bandwidth to the development team for improvement, so more to come on the call to discuss about the listener.
07:06:19 In 95 today.
07:06:20 And then from the team we have, or green so far, we have some.
07:06:25 Feel free to kick off your camera assisting. If you get your container and shift to the CTO, so that's what has been highlighted of the next step.
07:06:36 Anything else from the DNC that they would like to know offline status.
07:06:43 Based on what has been discussed in detail today.
07:06:54 Alright, take a week to treat a
07:07:08 question from the IM perspective so have we passed entry or not, should we continue accepting patches with new functional container changes or not.
07:07:13 I don't think we buy them three, they're still too many unknown, but we need to solve on Monday.
07:07:20 Okay, so we are deferring the decision to Monday. Right.
07:07:24 Yes.
07:07:25 Okay, thank you for the clarification.
07:07:36 All right.
07:07:37 Thank you, Catherine, and I did just want to mention that our c zero issues were published yesterday.
07:07:46 Our c zero scheduled for March 11, that's two weeks from today.
07:07:52 Alright, so I think that's yet for the release status. And as mentioned will discuss again at the PTO meeting on Monday.
07:08:07 All right, Kenny.
07:08:10 Back to you,
07:08:19 David.
07:08:22 Okay, I'm
07:08:26 shifting gears to our discussion of
07:08:37 USC composition
07:08:38 had some pretty good
07:08:42 interaction, last week.
07:08:45 Couple priorities came out of that.
07:08:48 As I heard them.
07:08:55 Um, and that's particularly around the two that I've
07:08:59 just made bold there in the window.
07:09:04 There's a desire to ensure company diversity.
07:09:10 There's desire or level of contribution.
07:09:19 With regards to the company diversity.
07:09:25 It sounded to me like there. Well, no. The.
07:09:30 There was input from a number of folks that they felt that the company should be able to select the candidate that they put forward for the TASC.
07:09:45 The implication, if we have, you know, one, one, only one candidate allowed for company.
07:09:52 I do need to point out to everyone.
07:09:56 And this is something that is often highlighted in the, whenever we brought up the discussion about the composition of the TASC. Since then, in 2018, when one of the companies, put forward a less known candidate, rather than the person that was most active
07:10:18 most visible and most respected, to the own app community.
07:10:24 They lost their seat.
07:10:27 And a very public protest resulted at ones.
07:10:35 As a result of that company losing their seat, and ultimately they pulled out of ownership.
07:10:44 Now, this was a management decision made by that particular company on who would be the candidate.
07:10:54 So, I want folks to take that into consideration when talking.
07:11:05 When considering this.
07:11:10 So that's, that's the extent to what I will say there.
07:11:20 I think on the topic of reserved seats.
07:11:27 I think this is a yes or no. Do we want them on.
07:11:32 So that's an open question now
07:11:47 reserved for him.
07:11:51 Right now we have reserved seats, or the original 2017 Platinum carriers by name.
07:12:05 So this isn't this isn't even a reserved seat type for a particular company, probably, or business. This is companies buying name.
07:12:22 And there are the named 920 17 carriers.
07:12:30 So I think what it is important somehow it's maybe not the seed anymore because my problem with doing the seat.
07:12:37 When some company does appear on not contributing does not show up.
07:12:50 We are blocking others to join the community. I think what we need to consider it's a good balance with different coefficients.
07:12:52 So when I say professional between carriers code infrastructure party vendors.
07:13:00 So at least we can combine the use case that will deserve all of our all these different position. I mean every, every type of work.
07:13:13 We have different needs.
07:13:16 But we are all working together to build up that will benefit from each other for each of us at one point so I'm sorry I'm not speaking good English to the.
07:13:41 is the balance, because we don't want to book seat for nothing, but for people who are not there. And with appearing. I think the abundance of the TSA the problem that this might be, where we want to go.
07:13:51 That's only my personal perspective, but
07:13:56 I want to be I just want to preach in one more point to it, we require carriers because they are the ones who are surely be taking forward or not that's one thing for sure.
07:14:05 So instead of reserving the carriers to the main 2017 initial ones maybe we can actually rename them to the contribution based carriers. Because still have the resources for carriers but based on the contributions like top nine carriers, based on the
07:14:19 contributions could be taken into consideration. And from the current situation I'm talking about the middle series of course we can surely debate on it and come to a conclusion, but I think, instead of naming them or fixing the carriers just from the
07:14:31 point of who they were initially we can keep them variable, based on the contributions for cars. I mean our could be X number of seats for operators and the election determines, you know which ones, make that cut.
07:14:48 Rather than basing it on the operators total contributions,
07:14:54 could be as one.
07:15:00 So overly active contributors, their active contributors are the election will be within the PSC I just want to reassure what, when you talk about elections, who will be elected those carriers.
07:15:12 The.
07:15:15 Well that's up that's up for discussion. I mean, right now, as the as the community document reads the active community members across the community elect the TLC members, and one one thought on that and then I also think that I said last time as well,
07:15:37 And just one one thought on that and then I also think that I said last time as well, right, we do not have an TC any way, which differs for vendor influence versus service provider influence right, we do have a way for service provider to influence YUAG.
07:15:52 Right.
07:15:57 And I guess I mean as I said I don't have any strong view on reserved seat and I would even say that if any of those service provider would say that, you know, having not having to resort to see it affects its company adoption upon up I would actually
07:16:13 suggest the key by the best M is for the vendors, but But in general, I think that here.
07:16:21 You know, as it then that argument of actually adoption of on up influence from the TC for vendors and for service providers is quite equal, right. The only difference is from a UI perspective, not here.
07:16:42 Right.
07:16:43 I agree but the problem is, even the people who responded were actually people who were given our own app right that people who are carriers and what are they are those carriers who responded to the US or those who are actually active in on that.
07:16:56 So it might be vice versa. Also I totally agree with what you're saying but I just want to us at this point that there was also, if you see the statistics, and most of the carriers who respond to us equation cautionary were actually people who are already
07:17:09 contributing to an app.
07:17:11 And we're actually holding Casey patients also from that site.
07:17:26 Also, to all this point, if I've captured it correctly here respective is that the EYAG is where the influence of carriers
07:17:40 can and should be made.
07:17:44 And whether or not the carriers are contributing to own Apple not real. Right now, the situation is, as you pointed out, most of those that are really active are contributing to own it, but there are others on the EUAG that are also contributing that
07:18:09 in, in that area that are participating in the EOG that are, that are certainly present in most of our own at meetings, but not necessarily on the code on the code or, or content contribution side.
07:18:40 So I don't know that there is a one to one perspective there.
07:18:50 I want to be honest with you up to know.
07:18:54 I'm not sure which you ag user story, we have implemented in our own opinions but I can be wrong right I can be wrong I think he has been promoting a lot owner to the different technical white paper, but I don't recall the, the community as necessary
07:19:26 one use case suggested by the dg, and one of the main reason is that if you suggest and you don't provide the developer and the tester, your suggestion mind.
07:19:27 They in the backlog, but but I understand, and I will send what Allah wants to convey.
07:19:34 But I'm not put that he convince
07:19:40 that use case raised by UAG as being considered or two now, but maybe has been missing something.
07:19:49 Of course they haven't tried, I'm on the talking about for years. So, you know, if then scores of resources at theoretically, Well, practically speaking, even she can influence the decision of what we implement in the release right based on their priorities.
07:20:06 That was the idea, obviously they haven't contributed directly into on in terms of, you know, use cases requirements.
07:20:17 Just just on the priorities say,
07:20:28 okay, proposal to maybe take it back to the basics I think from, from my perspective we welcome participation from any individual or company. As long as they're active, this is what I'm hearing and I think everybody agrees.
07:20:42 We don't want to have people just warming the seat and not taking up seats and preventing others from participating. So what are some person comes from an operator or vendor or an operator contributes code or upper currently does not contribute code.
07:20:58 I don't think we have to get into that as long as the person who's willing to actively participate in PC activities I think we should welcome them. And I think it's a benefit for the community to have representatives from operators directly involved etc
07:21:14 so we somehow should find a measure to gauge the participation and keep the participating or involved, individuals in the TC and avoid having people who are just taking up seats that's that's our motivation.
07:21:35 This one.
07:21:42 Okay, so is the.
07:21:47 I don't think that we need to change the current definition.
07:21:55 From my perspective I don't think the changes are needed. The current definition of what an active contributor is, which is you know anyone that's made 20 or more contributions to your merge code to code reviews and Wiki pages, who heroes.
07:22:22 And as long as you've got 20 over the course of the year that qualifies somebody to both run and vote in the election.
07:22:34 So, Randy Do you think that there's any, any changes needed to that definition.
07:22:44 No, this is exactly what I suggested to keep question of how much contributions, other members of this company or making is irrelevant for DSC.
07:22:50 I mean, it could be an individual contributor is just involved in the TSP, which is great. And he could represent a company with 100 developers, which is also great, but it's irrelevant.
07:23:02 We're measuring the contribution of the individual.
07:23:05 Yeah.
07:23:28 Okay, so
07:23:32 I'm, I get the feeling that the concept of reserve seats is not something we want to continue with
07:23:43 is their agreement on that
07:23:55 market and such.
07:24:00 Just to come back on Ronnie's point, maybe to offer, I don't necessarily think I've got a solid opinion here but. Was there a discussion last week about whether the individual individuals are extremely active in the community maybe don't want to take
07:24:16 on the extra responsibility of TLC roles or that that is maybe companies that have a lot of people contributing to it or not one to ensure that they have representation of the broader decision making
07:24:32 is I was reflecting on the because sometimes you have a indeed the team lead to try to shadow which is the rope of the stir and take this responsibility to not overload.
07:24:49 The effectively the tester and that's something to be considered.
07:25:00 So, yeah, to that point and it's a extremely valid point. In, in that context, the folks that are country that are the most active in the community as far as you know, cranking out code and things like that and in doing testing, anything and such.
07:25:18 may not have it.
07:25:22 And given the construct of the business that all of us are in here.
07:25:33 It is having somebody at a different level. That is, maybe making less technical contribution. But as long as you meet that threshold of, of, you know, the pointy updates, which, you know, can be any, any one of those things.
07:25:56 creation of a new wiki page or comment on the wiki page, I think, 20 years as a reasonable pretty low barrier to entry.
07:26:04 Yeah, So so that.
07:26:08 I think it provides.
07:26:11 It provides ample opportunity for those folks that may be in a different position that are looking out for how the company is is contributing to the project is probably covered there.
07:26:33 Hey, Kenny, this is shocker Are you so listen feedback from just the TLC members or from everybody on this call,
07:26:56 open call open conquer.
07:26:47 Okay, so I'll give you my perspective, I think we have to go back, you have to go back and revisit the expectations in terms of when a company to join own app.
07:27:05 That could be an expectation is that if I am a company that joins at a certain level, then
07:27:14 the implied expectation is that I should be. They should have a, the right to be represented on the TLC.
07:27:29 So, If you don't, if we don't go back and revisit the expectations. Whatever we do at this level is going to take somebody off one way or the other.
07:27:43 Okay, so soccer I'm sorry.
07:27:48 I would say I think with the shift to. lf in, I mean that's companies join LFN, and they get things like you know lesson governing board seat.
07:27:56 For now, they still get a taxi.
07:27:59 So, you know, the fact that they don't get to see seat on every project and then they shouldn't expect that i mean i don't think there's any expectations being said, when we're recruiting new members telephone that they should get to see since I'm any
07:28:14 any of the any of the projects so I guess I'm less worried about that like I don't see Walmart knocking on their door saying, Hey, we want to be on the PSC for now.
07:28:25 I have had a previous tracker, I, and that's true that you know the fan is bigger than on but if you look on overall interest and you know, even by the number of sessions, you're in the past detail for when.
07:28:40 Then, on by far, perhaps. Now, it may and it'll be a change, but so far, at least on the has been, you know, the project, you know, getting the most interest from the communities, I found that impossible.
07:28:57 So I would say that the majority of participation has have came to elephant because of phone up that's my observation.
07:29:09 And I you know government board see this fine but you know the I guess that you also know what has been discussed by the government board, and those decisions are not related directly related to what we do in specific projects, and you know which features
07:29:25 are getting into release which are not and so on so I really think that that's another level of expectation and they're not making any such decision so I would actually support what checker said and also spoke about it last time.
07:29:39 Yeah, but I think you know we just need to be clear with those companies, you can still contribute I mean, we're not, you know, you know, telling people you can't, you know come in and contribute requirements and make your voice heard.
07:29:53 You don't necessarily need a voting seat on the TASC to make that happen there are ways to, you know, influence and contribute to the community and if you earn that, you know, respect and reputation through your contributions, you will get it to the SEC.
07:30:09 And we just need to be honest with them. And I agree with you, Jason. I agree with you, Jason, right no question. Right.
07:30:16 And I think we need to make this clear to the entire community.
07:30:23 Excuse me. And the other, the other angle, if you will, that exist and maybe perhaps implied or explicit or implicit is that the, we could be mixing contributions with influence
07:30:44 people. If we said the expectations from the day one that your participation is going to require contribution versus being there just to influence the decisions that would be, I think that would be a good clarification to have.
07:31:04 So we're that clarification be different because when, when
07:31:11 a company joins.
07:31:16 ls n. Yep.
07:31:18 Right.
07:31:19 No one tells them, you get a seat on the tears on any PC.
07:31:27 It's, it's not part of the conversation.
07:31:31 And I open source being a democracy.
07:31:36 The best way to have influences to make money.
07:31:43 Well, the point I just make one more comment. That's it. This is the reason I made the comment is that we're trying to change a model that we started four years ago.
07:31:56 It's not like we're starting with a brand new process. So if you were to tell it paying a, I'm just giving you an example of Platinum paying member.
07:32:06 A, I'm just giving you an example of Platinum paying member. If you're telling that flat, non paying member that oh by the way, the seed that you've held for the past four years.
07:32:15 It may no longer be used just because you don't have enough contributions may not go too well with that with that member, or that representative.
07:32:27 But am I missing something that was the case all along.
07:32:32 There were, except for the original nine operators. not all Platinum members automatically got a seat on the on a PC, we're not changing anything yeah after 2017.
07:32:44 That was quite the case except you know I think for dt, who joined like two or three weeks after we voted so DT has to actually to run for position, and one wonders, but all the rest were a polite and a member at the point of time when we both got, actually,
07:33:07 the resources and three of those three of those that feel have reserved seats, through that mechanism or no longer Platinum members of elephant.
07:33:22 Yeah, that's, that's a different point try that, you probably have to revise the list, even if you consider to keep I fully agree you know this check that, you know, thought that ways of influence and of course if you influence human.
07:33:40 You can eventually run for the seat but eventually there might be an expectation, definitely by the Platinum members to get the seat and as I said to me, that's the key metric goal that we need to achieve to to see that our membership that our members
07:33:54 basically as a just five this what they get so they you know have enough motivation to actually adopt on up right i mean that's that's the key think you know precision in my view, all the rest of the arguments.
07:34:12 I'm a little bit concerned because if we, if all the senior members, including myself, we just sit and we do not think
07:34:24 I don't think things we move forward anymore.
07:34:27 So for me, you can be affecting your member of that if you don't contribute.
07:34:32 And you do nothing. So, why you should reserve a seat for you.
07:34:38 Right.
07:34:41 to be pragmatic what Allah is saying there were.
07:34:44 There are six remaining operators Platinum operators that still hold seats in the TC, and we need to get their explicit agreement to the new model, and getting rid of the reservation.
07:34:58 And you're representing one of them is baby already giving us your consent. So there are five more at we need to get consent from and should be good to go and get.
07:35:10 And by the way, I think that all of them are very active right. I don't know that email.
07:35:17 No, no, no. Okay, been missing since a long time, right, some of them never show up during one year.
07:35:32 So, if you look just today. Some of them I don't hear them since I don't know what right so keeping their feet, because then the other active people to ever made your whole.
07:35:48 Yeah, that's the last thing we need to be realistic.
07:35:53 And just to point out that this isn't a new thing. Right.
07:35:59 Open it be made this move, almost three years ago.
07:36:31 Yeah, we're five minutes over.
07:36:29 So, on the point of reserve seats.
07:36:37 Can we just have a straight up.
07:36:40 Yes, or no vote
07:36:48 on the concept of of reserves the man on the cons, but to be some changes which we might introduce that on the Mount, and on the list because, let's let's follow what separate that out.
07:37:01 Okay.
07:37:02 Right. Those are the details of, do we, you know, let's just get a yes or no agreement on. do we want to have a reserve see provision.
07:37:13 If the answer is yes, then we talk about what the languages, and what the requirements are. If the answer is no, then we removed the reserves the provisions dropped from the, from the community Dr.
07:37:29 Kelly whichever way we vote, we need to make sure that the five or six DNC members coming were sitting on this reserve seats vote.
07:37:42 So we need to like a special majority for this vote I guess to believe it. Yeah, you need to do, it is a two thirds vote to change the contents of the technical community document.
07:37:58 Two thirds vote of all members.
07:38:03 So I think we need.
07:38:05 But we at least need to publicize the vote beforehand.
07:38:11 And we probably should be a little more clear on exactly what we're voting because I'm may or may not be open to some reserve seats for the operator category name seats.
07:38:27 people are actually voting, you know, most likely that we will get to the point that you know we will not change opinion I do not really expecting it as a responsive entity to serve the world for changing, and those all those who actually have reserved
07:38:42 seats. As of now, a voting right.
07:38:50 I'm sorry I didn't get that last night but most likely okay let me, let me explain. So, most likely, half of the TC whoever exalts it will not, or at least big part of it will not want water for removing the resources, right, and then additionally some
07:39:09 others will also fall for that so that eventually means that like you know almost 100% that we will keep a resource here, we probably can go from that voting but to me it looks like the result is quiet office.
07:39:25 Okay, so from that perspective, then what you're saying is you want the current provisions remain as they are.
07:39:35 I did not say that I say that if the voting is for changing of the charter.
07:39:44 And all of those who have reserved seat vote, then, to me, the result is quite obvious
07:39:58 three options now, we have. Keep the results today's they are follows sexual and Jason's proposal to have different type of reserved seat or to remove the reserve seats all together so there are the three options not binary.
07:40:14 And still you would need to have to sort by at least one option right in order to proceed.
07:40:20 But anyway, let's let's exercise that right.
07:40:26 Okay so, from what what Jason was saying
07:40:32 his feeling is that we need more actually more details around what the was reserved seats would look like.
07:40:41 Yeah, I mean my, my preference and we're kind of focused on this one issue, and I don't know if this is the best way to attack it I mean I know in the past we've come up with a comprehensive options.
07:40:52 And we did an initial vote on.
07:40:54 I don't know remember how many we had three or four options that included numbers and reserved reserved and all that and devote to kind of see where the TASC what direction they were going in and I think we did a final vote on the changes right and I'm
07:41:09 Right. And I'm just not sure about voting on this particular issue in isolation without knowing what we're going to have a larger number of seats, we're going to have a smaller number of seats.
07:41:21 You know, some of that yet that yeah and that's absolutely fair when I was trying to what I was trying to get at and perhaps did poorly
07:41:33 was is, is if this one aspect we want to tackle.
07:41:42 And if so, then yeah we need multiple options so
07:41:47 this this, the, the, the kind of up down vote that I was asking for does not
07:41:58 does not imply that that immediately changes.
07:42:05 The technical community document what what that implies is okay now. Now let's talk about what that might look like.
07:42:13 So, maybe it's a chicken and egg situation.
07:42:26 So what I would like is somebody from the TLC, or a couple people from the PSC to come up with a some suggestions that then we can actually put to a vote,
07:42:43 not necessarily the language but what the options would look like
07:42:54 this we don't get that then I guess we, the consensus I would take away from that is that to leave things as they are now with the name nine.
07:43:23 Like we have an action item, I can, unfortunately not see any longer, because people are already paying me to join another call so you can have an action item to the TLC and, and I will continue offline.
07:43:40 To find these three options, or x option.
07:43:47 And
07:43:47 Thank you, everybody. Just before we recruit your, what we have already lost a lot of people I think we need to send an email for cold concerning the max representative, because they cannot play the whole anymore so we are looking for, people would like