Prvního závodního děluji chybu, pádláklok Krivova a Honza Kolaarík. Mně je sr. Rostlá Bráček a měli vám, a jsme z dnftými. Protože představíte se třeba dnes dělává čeština, které se dělává. Máte dělává. Protože jsme všichni na samým pědě, co jsme třeba třeba dělává. D&F je pak package manager, který třeba třeba třeba třeba dělává čeština, a měžete se v tom, že se dělává na svět nejlepších levelů. Máte rpm, které se třeba dělává a všichni na svět nejlepších levelů. Máte dělává. Máte dělává. A dnes dělává. Máte dělává. Máte dělává. A dnes dělává. Máte dělává. Máte dělává. A dnes dělává. nějsou tutovačyváho světeřního sv urgently bylu. Přesného postoji to je o dnv. Proto začnáme nyní o dotuji svojeho dnv. Jdeme, či se dneští dneští dnv. A co je to dvoje dn? Tady máte struka originální dnf, takže to není dnf5. Můžete vidět, že je to velké komplikace. V mětě se je to velké box, který je dnf. A je to dnf, které je dnf povědět. Myslíš, že se to velmi vlastně zvukává. Protože to to bylo všetké věci, a to bylo věci s hlavními, ale to bylo hlavní také budou. Protože se to bylo věci hlavní a to bylo věci s nájem, aby představili dvět, takže můžete vidět, jak to bylo problém. které se pozdělali nějaké doblizitice. To nevěděli, že se to nevěděli. Některé bylo hodně vytvědětné, ale nevěděli... To nevěděli, že se to nevěděli. A když jste vidíte, když se je zpětný kit. To je dnfd1. microDNF. A to je všechno výjštěný tím, který je tím, který mám výštěný tím, které je to. A tím výštěný tím, které je to. Je to výštěný, které je to. DnF se zbou závodila, že se vysvědá hodinou. Je to hodinou, které je to. Ale je to tím, že se nevětá Python. it's not very suitable to use in containers when you want minimal installation. And that's where MicroDnF comes in. But MicroDnF on the other hand doesn't do everything that DNF can do. Also that's because they both use different parts of the library. So for example, when a change is done in DNF, it doesn't get automatically done in microDnF. Tudověj, jak se to potravit.  Můžete vzít nejproducí, ale jak se příjam byl byt ozvuk, It was very difficult to make improvements without breaking compatibility. So this is where DNF 5 comes in. Yay, now this is DNF 5 structure. And you can already see it's much more simple. This big box is just the library. Doesn't compose of different sub libraries that don't fit together very well. Vypadá se na plně, a je to pokaz. Už se je největné, co v tomto všechno je podležitá appy. Je to zvršené v zvršeně z vzážené a... ...je. Někte se, že se to vypadá... ...a dvěná výzutí, která se těch, když je výzutí... ...a pěkná těch, která se těch, která se těch, když je výzutí. Vypadá se, že se to vypadá, která se těch... ...výzutí, která se těch, když je výzutí. Vypadá Vypadá v sobě výjel je veliky, protože je to všechno veliké, že Vypadá výjel, ale je to jen zelo na výpad, protože je to než nám přijde v Pythoniu. Ale nezavřeď, ale Python mám vývědné výraty. Takže to potřeba vyvědnit vývědně. a to je všechno vyjel, protože všechno tých dříve vyskává výstře i takhle výstře, takže jedna dřívla je zvukat za všechno tých dříve. Přesně se jste hrozná, že jsou dve knovali na plágin. Ale to je kámo, protože tyto vlastně vyskává. Je to c++ plugins for the library a then there are plugins for the command line interface so for example adding a new command would be there while something that would alter the run of the whole DNF would be in the plugins for the library and it could be also used by the daemon. Current DNF plugins, if they will be compatible with DNF5? I believe not, yes. So they will need to be revertent, but we are reverting many of plugins. OK, I will hand over to Jada. OK, there is another question. Well, the question is whether CLI plugins use SWIC or whether they must be in c++ yet, they must be in c++. The reason is quite easy. If anyone will write an important plugin for your distribution in the Python, then you will depend on the Python and then you will lose one of the advantage of the whole spec. Therefore for us it is much more better to write or to help you to convert your Python plugin into c++ than to support Python interface for the command line plugins. I am sorry, let's wait for the question and answer section with other questions. Maybe it will be better to have it in the one place. Well, when we talk about improved API that we suppose our new library provides, what it means? We try to provide a better workforce, safer workforce. What it means that if you run things incorrectly with your new code, DNF5 should alert you, stop you and explicitly say you do things wrong. You should call it in a different order. Why this is important? We have experienced many reports from the users, like it doesn't work. The simple answer is you run things not according to the description in our one page and so on. Therefore the workflow was not guarding. Or even worse, no one reports anything and you think everything is working according to your settings. For example, you modify settings at the time when it makes no sense. But then every time when you ask what was the setting for the operation, you receive the new value that was not used for the operation. Therefore, that's why we have some locking mechanisms, for example, for the configurations. Of course, we also improved transaction reports. Formal DNF4 use or overly use logging. Therefore, if you have any problems, then look to the log. But your application is unable to handle such a report. Because parsing anything from the log, well, it's hopefully wrong from all sides. Therefore, if something will get incorrect with your request for the transaction, then there is a structuralized logger. And you can list it anytime and make a decision according to the log rather than to just depend on the written value from the transaction result. Well, what is also different? DNF itself has its own configuration, but if you use API, you will discover that many configurations, many API methods require parsing configuration directly to these methods. The reason is, as Paola presented, the difference between C and the Python path. Configuration is in the Python and the logic is in C. And it's not capable to pass the original structure defined in the Python. What it means? You need to pass less arguments. It's more transparent. Therefore, you cannot have a configuration and use different set of the values. Sometimes you can override it, but again it will be transparent. Therefore, you can get the original value that you use for the request. Well, with what we also did, we tried to listen to you to the community what you need. In pass, we closed many of your requests that we cannot do it right now. But with the design of the DNF5, we remember your use cases and tried to modify the design to be able to provide or to support additional use cases. It means that we try to use less hard-coded settings and values in our code and move these values, for example, for the transaction to the configuration. Additionally, well, doing the looking to your code to your projects, we discovered that, okay, you have some bundle of our code. Therefore, sometimes it makes sense to provide it as API. Then you don't need to, for example, parse arguments. It's like, I would like to behave like a DNF, but the API or the argument parser is not available. Okay, let's use the same logic like DNF does. And then our users will get the same touch with the DNF. The problem is that it's, again, code bundling. And we usually improve this code because we find some edge cases when original parser failed. But it's not updated at your site. It's hard-coded at your parser, at your application, and you have to maintain it. And usually it differs. There are, of course, many improvements in DNF 5. And let me just share a few, for example, performance improvements. For example, one of the sites is loading of the repository. With the DNF, you can see that it downloads the repository, and then it's somehow freeze, and then it's continued with another one. And that you cannot experience with the DNF 5. The trick is that we split downloading and processing metadata into two processes. That runs in parallel. It means that when you download the first repository, you directly started downloading the second repository, and the first metadata for the first repository gets processed by our sole work. This is not only improvement, but another thing, and very important thing, is that DNF 5 does not download filings by default.  And DNF 5 is not downloading these things. It has two sites. Less downloads, less requirements for your hard drive, and infrastructure also is used much less. OK, downside is that in some cases, that I will be not available. It means that some packages, for example, require some strange files, for example Fedora. Guidelines, they do have a problem, because DNF 5 by default will not see these dependencies as satisfied, because the metadata that were used by DNF, they are simply not available for the DNF 5 in default. The good news is that if your downstream, if your third-party repository requires such a metadata, it's configurable. Therefore, it's not hardcoded. You see that you end up in need it, OK, then you will pay the price. But don't, we should not pay the price for this rare, or hopefully rare, use cases on all systems. Oh, additionally, I have a few examples of the performance improvements, and this is, let's say, the long improvements in our DNF stack, that, well, we improve according to the DNF, and of course, DNF 4 was much faster than DNF 2, and DNF 2 was much faster than DNF 1, and it is much faster than DM in many cases, especially for the transaction. And we continue with the same way, therefore, well, as you can see, well, even a repo query, if you ask for the multiple arguments, or if you run, for example, what requires for the repo query, or even even update with many arguments, there is a huge difference. But please take it as an example. There are many differences, and hopefully you will get satisfied with the result. And, well, let me move to our roadmap, because I think it's also important. Where we are? We are at the Federal 38. I will happen at the Federal 38. Micro-DNF was absolvited by DNF 5. You know, no one complains, and we have received not complains for this change. It means that if you install new containers, well, you will have a DNF 5 inside. Well, also, what happened? Well, of course, the Fedora, that's one important location. Fedora 38 was also a milestone for the DNF 5 project, because this is the first time when it appears in Fedora repositories. Well, upcoming release, Fedora 39, what happened? There is a huge change, because DNF 5 will absolvit DNF. What it means? By default, anyone will start by default using DNF 5. Also, this is the time where users, or users of the command line interface, it means other components, are supposed to work on the adoption of the DNF 5. It means if your app is using anything from the DNF, then, well, check, verify at this state before the release of the Fedora 39, that everything works with the default package manager in distribution, it means in DNF 5. If it doesn't, well, then please report it as soon as possible, because there is nothing like unresolvable problem. We are engineers. Resolving problems is our job, not creating a new one. But if you will not report to us what you need, then we cannot help you. Sorry, guys. The next release, Fedora 40. Fedora 40 is the time where we would like to absolute microDNF or remove microDNF from Fedora. We will set up the standard process.  It's the standard process of Fedora. And I'm using this channel just to share it with you, because it is important. Get ready. If you depend on something that it's not provided by DNF 5, please let us know. We are taking these requests as a priority. It means if any other software is blocked or adoption of the DNF 5 is somehow blocked, it's our priority. Well, I've heard several times why we are removing any functional software from our stack. And the answer is, I remember YAM. I remember when and in which state we removed YAM from our distribution. Well, it was removed at Fedora 31, and at that state it was completely broken. The problem is that if you will search on the Internet what to use with the Fedora or REL, often you will get a YAM. Therefore, you will install YAM, you try to use a YAM, and then you will get the phrasebacks. Yeah, because it was not functional, and that's what we want to avoid. Remove software before it gets broken from the distribution, because it macro DNA is not going to be supported by upstream. And the next stack, the next milestone is, of course, the removal of the DNF. DNF from the Fedora is the repository from the same reason. Therefore, if your application depends on DNF API or LibDNF or Hockey API, then during the Fedora lifecycle, that would be good if you will start or if you will finish adoption of DNF1. What's your risk? Standard process in Fedora when you remove the package is, well, you know, we are not going to support it, and well, what's adoption? You can take it, yeah? You can take it, you can start with support, but, you know, you have to support it. Yeah, that's the trick. Therefore, thank you very much, and I'm passing the mic. Do you hear me? Okay, so let's see the DNF5 in action. First, we have prepared some command line examples comparing the original DNF with the new DNF5 experience. So we have prepared, like, two separate containers, both with the same configuration, and on the left side I will show you the command using the original DNF, and on the right side I will run the same command using the new DNF5. So let's start with some common usage, like installing a package, for example, the gilipsy devil package, and the same one with the DNF5. And what's happening now is that, yeah, the DNF needs to fetch the metadata from remote repositories before being even able to tell that the given package is available. So we have in the system configured the links to remote repositories, and from there we are, like, downloading the metadata files about what are the packages available, what are their sizes, and what's the relationships between the packages. And we can see the first difference that Jarda was talking about when we look at the Federal 38 repository, there is, like, 34 megabytes on it for DNF5, while for the DNF there is, like, 83 megabytes of metadata on it. It's mainly because of that files are now not downloaded by default. And here we can see also the calculated transaction, or in other words, what's going to happen if a user confirms the installation. So DNF tries to find, like, the best available way how to install the package of the given name. And if it wouldn't be possible, it tries to provide the reasons why it is so. We can also see some differences in the output, like, we have some more information regarding the DNF5, there is, like, what is being replaced, and also the sizes here now refers to the installation sizes of the packages, while in the DNF it was the download size. Yeah, so we can just install the packages, and we can see that there are some connectivity issues, but, yes. So, yeah, there are some changes in the output, but hopefully for the better user experience now. So, when using the command line environment we don't probably want to type a lot, so in the DNF there was already some support for auto completion, for example, want to auto complete the mark command, we provide with some suggestions there, when we press the double tap, but if there is some sub command for the given command, we want to use, the DNF doesn't provide any suggestions, and instead it incorrectly provides already the, like, installed packages as the arguments for that. We can try the same thing for the DNF 5. You can see that the mark command is also completed, and also the sub commands are provided for the user, also with some brief description what each command is doing. So this is also hopefully for the better experience. And now let's try to compare how fast is querying the information about packages. So we will first run the most simple query command which is the DNF repo query which basically lists all the available packages from the connected repositories. So we can just run it for both commands. We could see that there was, like, a little bit fast for the DNF 5, but we can measure it precisely using the time command, so we can use the DNF repo query and also we will suppress the output so we will actually really measure the execution time on the command and the same one for the DNF 5. We should see there the improvement. There is, like, more than two seconds and less than one second for the DNF 5. We can also try something a little bit more complex, so list all the packages with what depends on libcoral library and the same thing for the DNF 5. And there the the difference should be more significant in this case. Yeah, there is, like, six seconds for the DNF 5 and there should be, like, more than three times slower for the DNF. Yes, it's like 18 seconds. OK, now let's try the same use case as I assumed before by installing a package but now using the DNF 5 API. So this is how a simple Python script installing some of your favorite package looks like but let's look at it step by step. So first we need to have installed the DNF bindings package for Python in order to simply import the libdnf5 library like this. Then we need to create a base object like the center point of the DNF and tell that we want to load the configuration file from the default system config file and apply it. Then we need to prepare a data about repositories. So we prepare a stack with the data about all connected and configure repositories from the system configuration file and then we will download the need in metadata and parse it into the objects. Now we have, like, everything prepared to tell the DNF what we want to do or what is our goal in the script and here it basically means installing a package of a given name. In this case it's the Nudoku package in the CLI environment. Then when we have the goal specified, we can resolve it meaning calculates the whole transaction what's going to be installed, removed or upgraded which is followed by downloading the needed packages from remote sources and then actually running the transaction which will perform all the needed actions in the system. These two actions here are separated because in some use cases we actually don't want to change the system and, for example, just download the packages. So now we can just run the script I will just show that there is no Nudoku command yet and I will just run the API script and it will simply hopefully maybe and yes it should be now installed and here we can play the Sudoku all day long in the CLI OK, nice OK, so now we are heading to the end of the presentation so I would like to briefly introduce our core team members that are participating in the DNF5 development so here Marek Bohá, David Cantrell Evan Goudy they are our presenters today Oliš Matěj, Jardam Ráček is our great tech lead Jaroslav Ruhel and Nikola Sela and I would like to also mention our QE team I think we have a nice and tight cooperation with them and they help us improve the CI stack and implement the API tests for the Python and now I would like to invite you to connect with us and collaborate on our projects our main interface is on the GitHub channel so we have their issues which we would like to invite you to discuss what things are bothering you and what you want to improve the pull requests the review process and also we want we try to make label all the things we think that are good for the new contributors with a good first issue label so watch out for these on the Kevin board you can see all the progress on the work items like what is being reviewed or what is working progress and the plans to be done soon in the to-do list and for general Q&A there is the discussion session also we are on the bugzilla which we watch this for the Fedora bugs so yeah and we try all the items from these channels regularly every week so we can provide the answer like the response to reporters quite soon ok so thank you well the question is that we turn off downloading file list by default but why did not we use file list from the primary is it correct? we do we do therefore everything is in primary we read if you require it means that if you require something from PTC from the configuration or if you require binary from user bin standard directory it's not from Fedora, yes, weird, yes everything will work like charm and you will see these file provides the question was when I run repository whether it downloads a file list in background well not yet but for example if you request file I mean install and any file DNF automatically downloads a file list therefore this already is present and I think we will extend for example if you want to list files and so on that there will be a logic but it will take a time to implement it everywhere oh I don't know who is there maybe it's bishek I'm sorry can you share the question you mean hardwife or RAM RAM well the question is well that there are some rumors that DNF5 is using more RAM memory than microDNF I think this is not true because microDNF by default download also file lists and the most requirements for the RAM is a file list before you process them therefore it means there should be a significant decrease in the default behavior of DNF5 in any operations but you cannot count on that I mean if a user will try for example install a file then it will download the file list and again it will require addition memory for processing these metadata well we have no other choice well the question is that there are some rumors that modules are going to disappear and the question is what's the plan for the DNF team well we have no other choice we have to support for the legacy reason or modularity use cases because it is expected that on one system you will be able to handle non modular staff therefore we have no other choice than to implement modularity like it was in DNF last more question ok well that's your answer well you can read the history in the fedora deva and you will find why well the question is why not rust the long answer rust wasn't an option at the time when we start with the development of DNF 5 and we have good reason why to not start short story, long story is on the fedora deva please read and thank you very much and please don't hesitate to ask questions after the session we will be happy to answer any of them


I grabbed the footage from his twitch channel I all have his twitch and his YouTube linked in the video description below But I'm gonna intersect the two so that you get both the support perspective and the carries first Carries perspective throughout which is kind of nice because Windu landed some really great double snipes throughout this game I'm on my way back historically I do get way too many kills. I Go in I go hard, right? I feel that One thing I found out as soon as they get one hit literally literally to stop myself from doing it and support as soon as they go One hit you'll literally see me do a 180 and walk backwards Like I'll still chase backwards, but I'm like don't hit it. Don't hit it. Did you get him? Hold on. Let me see if I can do this, right? Yeah You can do this watch watch watch. You don't got it like me. Look at me. Look at me. Look at me. Yeah I've been training on a halo reach to do that one Venice, okay Yeah, I was like, hi, where are you buddy? Oof the wrong way, did you get hit by that? Mm-hmm I'm gonna get word spicy be careful Herd, thank you.  I didn't pick up Brad. Oh my sound is My son is so delayed if I say I'm gonna back. It's okay.  I did. I did but she's so low Oh, he says, oh, he got the ball runs I got gadget coming over. Yeah I Mean who's got got that that Richter PTSD. He heard the word pull and reacted You just saw a clay pigeon running flat flying right through the air, but oh you got a bear right behind you, right? Times are a little delayed also an audio bug as well I don't know what it is robot like right now. I it might be a capture card thing Maybe I need to like hard reset the capture card But holy shit, I am I'm I'm very much struggling with with the late audio bar Go one hit her.  Oh that works Yeah Okay, that's awkward.    Oh Jesus.    Oh these minions. Oh look at the minions. All the minions are shredding Give me up. Yeah. Yeah, I don't have any pots or anything Those minions did more damage than they ever did they're back in two There we go rad pulse. All right How do you reset a capture card without resetting your whole PC? Oh Deactivate I can't hear you guys cuz I deactivated capture card Raptors are up All right, we're back. Damn. She did a lot of tower damage.  Oh, yep, there's three there minimum. Yeah. Yeah Make it make it four probably because I don't see Carrie. I don't know where the hell that bellica is going though Okay, yeah, there's four here for here for here that bear needs to die Oh Smite it. It's late. Now. They all die. Nice. No, I Nice might Again, yeah, nice smite good. No, yeah, say again. No, I'm not gonna say it again.  It goes one hit for you And I'm coming. Oh, did you land that? No, no, no. Oh Okay, okay Quite close. The gold just gives you life steal now, right and attack speed Yeah correct No more extra gold Yeah, we're not we're not gonna talk about it. I don't know why I honestly thought our solo's name was Steve Harvey I'm tripping. Oh, she got both of us Yeah, a little awkward just a little All right, Sparrow does not Have the damage to be able to fight this by the way So we're we're at a moment where we might want to force it. You just got to fix the minion disadvantage Oh She can land that though and poke me. I do water for you guys Should I snap her back? Yeah, Bangalore. Yep. Mm-hmm. Oh That whoo, that was a drunken bull right there.  I'm tired of Deckers.  Oh my god, I don't have a ward by the way Can you wear the north side of the stairs? I do ward at the back end Towards a red they're pushing that means she's got old careful. Yep landed that one.  Don't get this Bears on our side. Look at that trying to stun through the fog wall Somebody get this Bruce Lee out of here. I respect it. I respect it. I do have it. Can I can I hold that grace soon? You could My wings just got here. I think he does. I think that's what that symbol next. Oh, you probably can't see it that far But I'm pretty sure that's what that symbol next to his name is. I'm coming to your side Oh, I got bear here. Are you guys want you guys on the road? Say don't bear with me Does not I'm a girl Yeah Where's comes to worse I popped his old. Yeah. Yeah, he's always popping out. Oh, I'm in trouble I shouldn't be here too many minions Hey Thank you All day thirsty. Oh Man, oh, there's your bears here a little bit longer over here behind you The bear is a good target Honestly, if they follow you we could probably bait even more but yeah, yeah, I'm still good It's probably time for me to back Today speak for yourself. I was max distance the whole time be like nah, bro, not pimping not today Not today Satan What did that crack me up so much I think we need to have a chat that's the why Where's that from movie? I think so Stay safe. I'm gonna back. I think they're taking raptors heard nothing to think about it.  Yeah, at least Decker. Yeah.  Oh Was that a bear? Is that a bear? Oh, yeah, and a gadget. Oh, y'all got that. Whoo. Look at him. He's scared.   I Mean I'll meet you I wrap some I'm away I'm gonna say I'm 15 seconds out though. No, we got I still got some right Oh, okay, I'm liking these new purple boots.  Yeah, because they they I think they increase the look this I don't think shade boots have been adjusted in a while, right? I don't know the last patch They did they did something like that Yeah, it's just 65 65 Slave No, he didn't know he didn't I almost body blocked them in there Lamal. We're not gonna talk about it. Oh You got the nerf just done Did you actually get that kill? I did is the the second part of my ultimate Claps then and grabbed her. I I'm pretty sure I basicked her. Oh, okay. Yeah, this is just awkward I'm pretty sure I stole that from me Unless they literally said man goes got the kill on the screen and that said that I got the kill on the screen And I'm at 2 now. Mm. Mm. Oh No, let's go step back here and watch it back Yeah, let's that to me. Oh, it's like it's like that And I think they're gonna try and fight. Oh, yeah, they're trying I still melt her Has been slain Yep line them up Oh my god, this bear better not show up, bro This bear better not show up. That's where the god Oh, you're wait a minute, you're recording me. Yes, I'm recording you No previous warning, that's illegal in Florida Yeah Actually, I don't know. I don't know. I definitely feel like Florida is one of those southern states where it's definitely not illegal I might definitely not illegal. I might just be talking.   Did you really leap on him before he leap? No, I had to keep my health going dude.  Oh Jacked up my audio on that Goodwill status. You know what? Why aren't we shoving me? Look at all the minions?  It's just I definitely did not expect the double oath to go on me. That's a rip You don't have sniper you mean smite You said sniper pimp Totally says sniper Oh, I bet bet bet I have to go to the dock on that one Hey man Sparrow standing still like she's hitting F1. I'm just saying or like she typing She was straight standing still She gets her flavin in chat. She was either typing. Yeah, she was either typing or Hitting F1 Yep, you're watching me right before I get gang. That's what you're seeing Trying to come to origins, but I don't have cursed at health yet. I got 16.  Oh that mess that mess that mess. He healed healed and unlucky I got the Decker though. Get back in these minions boy.   He's thought is one interesting motherfucker. I tell you what Yeah On the guy with an old no, no time we're gonna get him still gonna come up behind them Yeah, these yeah, okay, I'm in the right. Keep shoving the right. I'm on my way They're all literally focused.  I'm coming.   No, man Both getting off. You're chilling bro.  No, my food just got here I got I really got to set up this thing cuz I you know, man Shout out to channel members foolish bloodhunter jelly knees and me out mix for men


Hi, and welcome to another CUBE Conversation, this time from BMC's Helix Immersion Day at the Santa Clara Marriott in beautiful Northern California. We're going to be spending the entire day having a series of discussions about what it means to do a better job of both digital services management and operations management, and how those technologies are coming together to dramatically alter how business operates, how customers get value, and ultimately how profits are generated. We're going to start this conversation with a CDO, a Chief Digital Officer from Genpact, Sanjay Shrutavasta, welcome to the CUBE. Thank you very much. So to start, tell us a little bit about Genpact, it's an interesting company going fast. Absolutely, we are indeed. Genpact is a large global professional services provider for digital transformation services. We serve many of the Fortune 500 companies around the world, and we help them think through their business processes and their business models, and digitally transform that to take advantage of so all of the new capabilities that are coming through. So digital service outcomes is a very important feature of that because I presume that when you have those conversations with customers, you're talking about the outcomes that they're trying to achieve, and not just the services that you're going to provide. So tell us a little bit about what is a digital service outcome and why is it so important? Yeah, well I think the reality is that what technology is doing is it's disintermediating the ecosystem so many of the industries our clients operate in, and they have to go back and re-imagine their value proposition at the core of what they do with the use of new innovative technologies, and it's that intersection of new capabilities of new innovative business models that really use emerging technologies, but intersect them with their business models, with their business processes, and the requirements of their clients, and help them rethink, reimagine, and deliver the new value proposition. That's really what it's all about. So a digital service outcome would then be the things that the business must do and must do well, but ideally with a different experience, or with a different degree of flexibility and agility, or with a different cost profile, have I got that right? Correct. So when we think about that, what are some of the key elements of a digital service success? We like to think about three critical success factors in driving any digital transformation. The first one is the notion of experience, and what I mean by that is not user interface for a piece of software, but the journey of a customer, an employee, a provider, a partner, in engaging with you and your business model. When we think about journey mapping that, scientifically, we think about design thinking on the back of that, and we think about reimagining what the new experience looks like. One of the largest things we've learned in the industry is digital transformation on the back of costs, take out of productivity, or efficiency is insufficient to drive and optimize the value that digital can bring. And using experience as the compass, it's sort of the north star in that journey is a meaningful differentiator and driver of business benefit, so that's number one. I mean the second area that's become increasingly apparent is the intersection of domain with digital. And the thinking there is that to materialize the benefit of digital in an enterprise, you have to intersect it with the specifics of that business, how users interact, what clients seek, how does business actually happen? You know we talk about artificial intelligence a lot, we do a lot of work in AI as an example, and the key thing about machine learning is goal orientation, and what is goal orientation? It's about understanding the specifics of the environment so you can actually orient the goal of the machine learning algorithm to deliver higher accuracy results. And it's something that can often easily get overlooked, so indexing on the two halves of the whole, the yin and the yang, the piece around digital and the innovative technologies and being able to leverage and take advantage of them, but equally be founded in domain, understand the environment, and use that knowledge to drive the right materialization of the end outcome. And that's the second critical success factor I think to get it right. I think the third one is the notion of how do you build a framework for innovation? You know it's not the sort of thing where large fortune companies can necessarily experiment and it's a little bit of a go happy, go lucky strategy, doesn't really work, you have to innovate at scale, you have to do it in a fundamental fashion, you have to do it as a critical success factor. And so one of the biggest things we focus on is how do you innovate at the edge? Innovation must be at the edge, this is where the rubber meets the road, but governance has to be at the core. Let me build on that for a second because you said innovations at the edge, so basically that means where the brand promise is being enacted for the customer. And that could be in an industrial automation setting or it could be in just making a recommendation to be any number of things. But it's where the value proposition is realized for the customer. Correct, that's exactly right. And that's where innovation must happen. So as a large corporation you must be, it's important to set up a framework that allows you to do innovation at the edge, otherwise it's not meaningful innovation if you will, it's just a lot of busy work. And yet as you do that and as you change your business model as you bring new components to the equation, how do you drive governance? And it's increasingly becoming more important. You think about we're going to be in an AI-first world increasingly, more and more that's the reality of the world we're going in. And in that AI-first world, you know I work here in Palo Alto, I work in my office, there are a couple of hundred people in any given day. If tomorrow morning I walked in and a hundred people didn't show up for work, I would know right away because I can see them. Now fast forward to an environment where we have digital workers, we have automation bots, we have conversational AI chatbots. And in that world, understanding which of my AI components are on, which ones are off, which ones showed up for work today, which ones felt sick. And really being able to understand that governance. And that's just the productivity piece of it. Then you think about data and security. AI changes complete dimensions on that. And you think about bias and explainability to become increasingly important. And the notion of a digital ethics board. And thinking about ethics more pervasively. So I think that companies and clients we serve that do really well in digital transformation are those that keen on those three things. The notion of experience is the true compass for how you try transformation. The ability to intermix domain and digital in a meaningfully intersecting fashion. And to be thoughtful, proactive, and get governance right upfront in the journey to come. So let me again build on that a little bit. Cause people are increasingly recognizing that we're not going to centralize with cloud. We're going to go to distribute. We're going to distribute data more. We're going to distribute function more. But you just added another dimension that some of us have been thinking about for a long time. And that's this notion of distributing authorities. So that an individual at the edge can make the decision based on the data and the resources that are available with the appropriate set of authorities. And that has to be handled at a central in an overall coherent, governed way. So that leads to the next question. And just before you go to that, I mean I think the best example of that is we do that. Most corporations do that really well in the financial scheme of things. Businesses at the edge make decisions on a day-to-day basis on pricing and relationships and so on and so forth. And yet there's a central audit committee that looks through the financials and makes sure it meets the right requirements and has the right framework. And much in the same way, we're going to start seeing digital ethics committees that become part of these large corporations as they think about digitizing the business. Governance at the end of the day is how do you how do you orchestrate multiple divergent claims against a common set of assets? And being able to do that is absolutely essential. And it leads to this notion of we've got these ideas of digital business, digital services and operations management. How are we going to weave them together utilizing some of these new technologies, new fabrics that are now possible to both achieve the outcomes we're talking about at scale and at speed? Yeah, well the technology capabilities are improving really well in that area. And so the good news is there's a set of tools that are now available that give you the ingredients, the components of the recipe that's required to make dinner, if you will. The work that needs to happen is actually how to orchestrate that, to figure out which components you to come in and how do you pull together a vertical stack that has the right components to meet your needs today and more importantly to address the needs of the future because this is changing like no other time in history. You want options with everything you do, now you want to make sure that you have a stream of options for the future and that's especially important here. That's right, that's exactly right. And the quick framework we've established there is sort of the three-legged stool of how do you integrate quickly, how do you modularize your investments and how do you govern them into one integrated whole and those become really important. So I'll give you examples. Much of the work we do, we'll work with the consumer bank for instance and they'll want to do a robotic process automation engagement. We'll run them for nine months, they'll get 1,800 robots up and running. And the next question becomes, well now we have all this data that we didn't really have because now we have an RPA running. How do I learn some machine learning insights from there? And so we then work with them to actually drive some insights and get these questions answered. And then the engagement changes to, well now that we have this pattern recognition that we understand the questions that we can be asked, how do I respond to those questions? A, automatically, and before they get asked, this notion of next best action. And so you think about that journey of a traditional client, you know, the requirements change from robotics to machine learning, to conversational AI, to something else. And keeping that string of investments, that innovative sort of streak true and yet being able to manage, govern and protect the investments, that's the key role. And especially if we do want to look at innovation at the edge because we want to see some commonalities, otherwise we freak people out along the way, don't we? That's exactly right. Sanjay Sridhavasa, thank you very much for being on theCUBE. Pleasure, thank you for having me. And once again, I'm Peter Burris and we'll be back with our next guest shortly from BMC Helix Immersion Day here at the Santa Clara Marriott. Thanks very much for listening.


So we are at quorum Okay, sorry recording. Did you want to go down? Oh, yeah Well, I'm sure that it got going. All right. Well, I the end of the Nino's everyone Welcome to the hyper ledger technical steering committee call Everyone is welcome to attend this call and participate So long as you abide by the antitrust policy and our community code of conduct We've got a fairly action-packed agenda for today Kick right into things with the project life cycle task force at the end of or during last week's call what we discussed doing was getting ready to vote on the four least contentious or the four most completed resolutions and One of those we ended up having a little bit more dialogue on and one of them was Referred to the marketing committee Which leaves us with a couple of issues? So I'll turn things over to our know here to describe things further and then we can All right, thank you done So the first one is actually fairly straightforward. I believe Issue four was about this notion of you know, can you move a project back onto the into the life cycle onto the life cycle? path and There wasn't actually much controversy over that I actually suggested we move back in certain condition but the vast majority of people who express themselves in the task force said no and so the proposed resolution is That a project never goes back And it can stay as long as it wants in Incubation or active status because that was one of the key question, right? It's like well, you have a project that's in incubation It seems to never manage to qualify and graduate to graduate to active status Should it go back to something like a lab or something and or if it's an active status, but you know Getting go back under certain circumstances So the proposed resolution again is that we stay clearly that no they can stay there as long as they want That means the only way if things really derail though, they're kind of abandoned There's another path which is to move forward Towards deprecation and eventually end of life, but it's a one-way street. I Guess my only question with this is if you have an active Project that becomes I guess like uncompliant Like so for instance like Dan had mentioned lower. I think on like the CII and that sort of thing Well, what would that entail like it's still act it's still active in terms of contributors, but it's maybe uncompliant for some reason. I Think we would have to take that up in the TSC and try to work with the maintainers to make it compliant Maybe there's another resolution that that somebody could put forward with what we do with a bad acting project, but I'm willing to cross that bridge when we come to it And I mean, yeah, so and you know, hopefully in the in such a case we would find some kind of you know Amicable resolution otherwise You essentially kick them out by saying, okay, we're going to move you to end of life and get we shut down the project There's not much You know on the way to deal with that if that really can't do this If you cannot talk with them and find some reasonable compromise that isn't we find acceptable then that's the only outcome possible Okay, so I move that we take a vote on this Seconded All right, let's do this Viva vote chase. So we'll just do All in favor and then you say Everybody says that in unison more or less that kind of thing. So all in favor That was anything but in sync Actually helps when they're slightly offset and kind of get a rock. Yeah, that's true Opposed all right not hearing any opposition any abstentions All right issue number four or resolution four passes with unanimous voice vote on to issue five and resolution five Yeah So there was also this discussion about the beginning of a project I mean so far, yeah, obviously we started with the hip process to start the project So you submit a proposal to the TSE and then if it's approved you start in incubation but we also introduced the labs and This makes it easier to start projects with that much TSE oversight and so the question came up at some point whether you know, we should kind of push everything to labs as a first step and Again, I think in the end the discussion was pretty short in the task force people said no We shouldn't do that. There are plenty of cases where it wouldn't make sense It'd be odd and so we should keep things as is So the proposal is that no not all projects should be required to start as a lab and On the other end it does provide for the case where the TSE might still in its deliberation, you know About a proposal might say, you know what we don't think this is ready for a project But feel free to go create a lab So that's what the proposal basically says Okay. All right. Well, I move for a vote on resolution five. I second it All right again by voice all in favor All opposed Abstentions all right passes by unanimous of voice So issue seven is off to marketing for their feedback, but it is otherwise Complete from the committee's perspective. Is that right or no? Yes, that's correct And I mean basically it's kind of trying to endorse what has happened today to believe is you know Regarding the the how names gets our project gets name, right? So We can talk about that hopefully next week. Oh, well the week the week after All right, and this is the one that we wanted some discussion on during this meeting and we'll I Think we have enough time for for a reason of dialogue here before we go into Yes, so That's right. So this is issue eight. So the issue eight is about how we deal with new project that are coming that would be you know basically with that as a pretty Strong history where you might have the case where there's actually a company that has even shipping products and Now they are coming to hyperledger and say hey, let's start a project We're happy to contribute all our code and there was the question. Well, how do we deal with this, right? so The you know based on there was quite a bit of discussion about that one in the end I thought you know what captured the the seem to capture What people were thinking of a way to do it would be because so you don't want to give them a pass and get You know blow up all the the normal safeguards we have built into you know the incubation process with the exit criteria and And you know at the same time you Knowledge that well, they may be able to To be far along what you would expect from a normal project which starts from scratch So the proposal that's actually drafted basically says hey People are free to you know if you happen to believe that your project already meet the Execute area for incubation You're free to submit a proposal to graduate or request to graduate to active status at the same time essentially as you make a heap and I thought that that the advantage of making sure you know basically they go through the process faster But they still have to meet all the criteria that I required of any project and then But then pointed out, I don't think it's possible because you wouldn't be able to meet the criteria on day one because Part of the exit criteria is actually to be you know part of the hyperledger community and You wouldn't be able to have done all of that on day one and I think it's a it's a valid point so I'm kind of like you know Changing my mind of the proposal But when I looked so it led me to look very carefully at the exit criteria for incubation And the problem is the way it's written You could argue no, I can't meet those criteria Because we say well you should have created a repo for instance, but we don't say well it should be a hyperledger repo so Depending on which filter you use when you read the exit criteria, you know, you might argue well I don't it doesn't have to be within hyperledger and I can already meet this criteria And so, you know, I think it's a bit of a stretch My my my position is well, you know, the exit criteria need to be read within the context of hyperledger So when we say for instance, you must have a repo you must have a CI Setup with test all this stuff It is implied that all of this has to be within hyperledger Which makes it impossible indeed to have to meet those criteria at the same time as you just start the project Even though you may have a long history outside of hyperledger where you have a CI and where you have a repo and all of that But I thought it was an interesting kind of fact and I wanted to Bounce it with everybody here You know Do people agree on this basic principle that the executor you have to be read within the context of hyperledger And when we say you must have a repo it is a hyperledger repo So I very much agree that the conditions need to be met as a hyperledger project When a project moves from being hosted in one place to another the community doesn't always move with it And so it makes sense that you know, you may have met these criteria before but moving to hyperledger might have been For a reason that we don't know about like maybe the community has been struggling or maybe the company that was sponsoring it has gone away and so That I mean some of the contributors and maintainers may have also gone away. And so Seeing it in that light makes a lot of sense All right. Thank you anybody else I Think Nathan put it really well Okay, so that that seems where if conversions start there and so I will realize these proposal Accordingly and then next time we pray we should we should be able to close it great I for one am liking this process of having some Well-worded issues and resolutions put forth that we can go through this format on on the wiki with and get some good offline conversation Thanks. I agree. All right Navigate back from that to the Agenda here so the next thing is we've had the the CICD task force in flight for some time and I think we got a No doubt late last night or really this morning. I guess in time zone Yeah, and so I haven't had a chance to review it in detail. I did get to skim it a little bit I'm not sure where others are but Dave if you'd like to walk us through some Motion of that. Sure. Yeah, I can just hit the key point so that Going through the whole report. This was just a quick wrap-up based on all my notes that I had in front of me at the time Apologize for the you know not giving you guys more time to read it, but the upside of that is you know, we're not actually ready to make a full proposal to the TSE and have votes on it because There's still some outstanding investigation being done by the fabric team. However, the key points here are that like I said last week This is This is basically a sycophane task the problems are that no two projects are alike in their needs for CI and because we haven't required all projects to Get over on to the existing Jenkins and Garrett CI system a lot of teams have gone off and built their own so Trying to find one CI system that solves everybody's problems is basically impossible so to eat this elephant we decided to Look at short-term solutions versus long-term solutions We listen to a lot of the team's pain points and there are some short-term solutions that we're considering doing right now But We're not exactly in the right place to pull the trigger on it We're still trying to figure out what to do in the short term the fabric team is investigating circle CI and We've talked to sawtooth and Rohan talk to Indy about their needs and basically the short-term solution ideas are Well, let me put it this way so the goals that we were trying to achieve that's probably the best way to start here was to get all of the teams together on to some kind of CI system that the Hyperledger CA staff has Visibility into one to collect metrics. I have a number of security Checks automated checks and stuff that I'd like to put in there in place And we also wanted to try to use Hyperledger resources to try to reduce the burden on the existing corporate run CI pipelines So initially we wanted to look at trying to get everybody on to a single CI pipeline and that's where we got to the point where Everything like that that seems to be somewhat impossible Without some degree of pain, I should say So the short-term solutions were things like maybe we can Start reimbursing money-wise for The existing CI systems kind of release reduce the resource for the money burden Another idea was take the existing system of Jenkins and start running minions over on AWS to speed all that stuff up and another solution was maybe see a circle CI we or like GitLab or something we bless that as the The one CI system that all Hyperledger uses and we slowly start migrating everybody over Like I said, there's a lot of trade-offs here the long-term solutions That we were looking at we're doing Kubernetes clusters so everybody could just lift and shift their existing CI pipelines over on to a Kubernetes cluster There are some technical reasons for why we can't do that Again, some of the needs for some of the projects require having like bare metal VMs rather than containers, so that is You know again, not a perfect solution, but definitely one we can consider there were some concerns about being able to scale this up in the future right took a lot of initiative on working out the exact IT requirements and Money that we would have to put at this to have a unified CI system for all projects Turns out the budget would have to significantly increase if Hyperledger was going to pay for all the resources for all the teams to jump on to a CI system and by Significantly increase what we're thinking not 20% but like 200% We don't know the exact number, but that's just the rough scale of how it would have to increase So I would like to have the the 200% figure. You don't have to do it live here, but I Don't think it hurts to put all options on the table for the board Right. I'm going so this is just a draft and I was going to go Get rise numbers and and put more stuff into this the board report is a lot more detail This is just for the TSC and it was just a summary but the the full reports going to contain all the numbers and and March more detail on each of the teams. So Are you saying that the there is no sort of open source freemium capability to Engage or you know, have we have we had any negotiations at all with these companies? Yeah, we have been talking to Circle CI and There was no open source freemium kind of thing like they We were already talking about budgeting some money to Support moving over to CI CD or sorry to Circle CI to see what that would cost and it's it's significant It's not a normal Savings. We're still trying to work out what exactly they're per user Licensing term means in the term in the context of an open source project. So like I said, there's some ongoing investigation about some lingering details I think it's also kind of too early to even said guidance like like, you know, that the budget has to double I mean We're still trying to figure out if the quote we got from Circle CI is for a number of users That would that would have to grow linearly as we add projects or for unlimited Just in the way they define users is is just a little hard to Understand that we're working on that but also, you know get lab CI and and and Azure pipelines and some other things Are still viable candidates and we don't even have yet. So, so I don't it don't set any expectations right now I think about you know budget being being different. There's still a lot more research to do on that Figure out if it's more if it's less Yeah, well, okay. Yeah, thanks, Brian We just know that if we were to try to pay for them all we're we're trying to figure out how to do it cheaper and There is no obvious like ha ha we can save a whole bunch of money, right? The circle CI one is really interesting because that one makes it very easy for community Contributed hardware to join into clusters. So if teams had people with spare hardware under their desk or whatever They could put those all together Mike Water and I ran an experiment for the Ursa team I have a spare server under my under my desk and within a few minutes. I think like less than five minutes I was able to spin it up and Run a virtual machine on it and join the Ursa build cluster and it immediately started doing Ursa builds So that aspect of it was really exciting. However, you know, relying heavily on Community source resources like that is also has its problems, right reliability and being able to bring to bear enough resources to actually make a real impact. Sorry. I Guess the the the important thing for the the TSC at this moment is that we looked at all options and there are no good and this report is going to be fleshed out here over the next day or two once I Get all of my notes dumped into here and Yeah, I just wanted to update the TSC that you know The reason this has been slow coming is because there's no obvious answers And we're trying to eat an elephant The one thing I might want to get some feedback from you from the TSC members was is that we are Thinking that if we wanted to meet our requirements for doing metrics and security and transparency that in the long term We should probably look towards getting everybody on to one CI system Not only does that create like a tacit community knowledge about our CI systems So any new projects coming in would be able to talk to just about anybody in hyper ledger and and you know Get help on getting over to our CI system But it would also unify all of our tools and we'd be able to do better integration and and All of that right however moving everybody to a single CI system would be exceedingly painful from an engineering in time standpoint, so But that's where I'm gonna leave it off if you guys got any more questions I'll be you know paying the TSC mailing list as I put more detail in here. I Just have one question. I apologize, you know, maybe I should know that but I mean this Got not to be a very specific question to hyper ledger. How do all the projects within the links foundation do with that? So it depends on where you're where you're at in the Linux Foundation Obviously the if you're talking about the kernel project in the git project, they actually have External resources that Run against that project, but the project itself doesn't manage them so which is really interesting I talked to Constantine who Coordinates a lot of the infrastructure for the kernel project And there's actually external companies that run the the kernel tree against the CI test battery and things like that And the kernel project doesn't even run one Which is interesting I thought that was very very interesting. They were just like you know what we're not gonna do it All their developers are constantly building so I don't know they didn't see the need for it I guess As I understand it CNCF has the CI pipelines that were set up for Kubernetes before it came over So I think they just adopted that as their standard and and I don't think they Force all of their projects to do it, but they make it available. So there's that's sort of a middle road It's like yes, we have one if you want to use it. This is what you use, but you don't have to and talking to Chris Anna check there they Have had a negative experience with circle CI and a positive experience with Azure pipelines. Yeah, so so no Yeah, we've reached out. It's it's there's not a consistent Kind of repeating kind of clear answer on this either everyone kind of you know figures their own way out through this But we are trying to to learn from other projects All right, thank you You're welcome any other questions like I said that the Long-term recommendation I think for hyper ledger because we do have such strong security and metrics Initiatives would be to head towards one CI system for everybody Now whether we force all teams to use it or not that would be a TSC decision Whether we do a single blessed CI system would be also a TSC decision If that's what we think we're gonna head then right and I will have to do a lot of Financial resources analysis, you know, what would it take to get all the teams over on to this one that we're thinking about? And what are our options for scaling and and saving money in the long term? So I would appreciate any of the TSC members to you know reach out to me if you've got questions or any suggestions Yeah, so and we're gonna I'm probably gonna take this discussion of the TSC list and get it out of the meeting here When as all the details go in and we've discussed this So keep an eye there Yeah, and I hope you're getting good participation in the the committee itself I Think that the way that that some meetings go is when when nobody speaks up then whatever River whoever has spoken up ends up being maybe Disproportionately influential But that is only It's nothing wrong with with with that Voice, but if you don't speak up and you don't offer your suggestion, then you can't hope That the conclusion is gonna be what you what you have in your head. So I really yeah, we are getting good participation there Thanks for pointing that out then I did want to thank the community for their engagement on this we did Get feedback from all of the teams that have existing CI pipelines We've had consistent attendance from the fabric team and the sawtooth team I've been able to get Good interaction with the Roja team over email because what they were kind of time zoned out And the Ursa team always made themselves available. So they're Ursa, you know Indy areas teams were always made themselves available. So This was one of the the cases where getting participation was not hard Everybody has their own opinions about CI which also makes it difficult so Yeah, thank you guys for for engaging and participating and And think if there is a model not unlike what our know has done with With the The project life cycle task force that as you have some options on the project life cycle Right as you as you have a proposal coming together or maybe some some alternative proposals If you could put those up as individual pages and then that gives people something concrete to support or Suggest changes to yeah, that's actually a really good idea. I like how Arno did that We have these options. We have questions we want to bring to the TSC, but I want to loop back with Rai first before we do it and you know The member summits coming up too. So it would be really nice to talk to people Face-to-face. So I was just trying to get this report together for the board of like, here's everything we know about this So that the board can discuss it, but I don't know that we're gonna be able to make any decisions At the TSC here before the board And so but I do think that we should be weighing in from the projects certainly I mean You know it Certainly budget and everything is one aspect and that needs board approval understood completely But we shouldn't be choosing a solution that the projects don't want or are uncomfortable with and so I think there needs to be a staged Approval process where the projects are saying a verily this works for us and then that gets ratified by the board Yes, as opposed to the other way around where the board makes a decision and then the projects are like what the hell Yeah, I think the intent was that the proposal would come up to the TSC and It would have had the input of the projects and then we would bless it and recommend that board for new funding Right right and and you know, there's many projects represented on the TSC But I do think we also want to make sure that in fact all of the projects have Had an opportunity to weigh in if we're gonna go with the one C. I to rule the law Yes, that's nice. It's like rather than it being like, you know Like like this cliff where there's like this decision-made and impose on everyone else that what we'll do is Like you know with the short term Fix which is you know fix this for the current Jenkins kind of pipeline, you know We'll get that and we'll make a decision there and get it adopted Keep an eye out for making sure this is priced and configured so that other projects can pick it up as well And and and that we can start to get closer and closer to an ideal solution And it may be the case that there's still one of the R14 projects that decides that it's it's not what they want And they want they're happy to do their own CI and that we might decide that's fine You know, I Will continue to do the kind of long-term research on on other candidates Even as we solve the short-term problems and those two solutions may converge at the same point. They may differ. I think that's fine And to your point Chris the teams some teams including well specifically the fabric team is already investigating Potential alternatives to what they have now. I think they're they're playing We had a right and in Brian's note he linked to the presentation we had yesterday and there seemed to be You know again broad agreement that we could move off of Garrett and so But Conversely, you know, the other part of this is We can't let this drag on forever and ever For a variety of reasons that you know, but You know ideally we get a resolution fairly quickly Because I think the fabric team would like to do this before 2.0, which is the end of September October ish time frame So that we can then have a you know a consistent approach going forward Yeah, in fact a question I had asked in my email was To approve fixing what's currently broken, you know The Jenkins plus Garrett Kind of combo, you know or once once the group of people involved in effected kind of decide I think here's here's the answer to the short-term thing. Can we pull the trigger on? Signing a contract and and moving over that sort of thing, you know Or even even such smaller details as you know before making a decision That's the ICD can the fabric team move from Garrett to get hub You know those kinds of things probably could be Delegated out or or handled without without waiting for you know a master proposal Yeah, moving off of well. Yeah, but I Don't think it's it's necessarily that simple because then moving from Garrett to get hub would mean re-implementing a bunch of web hooks and stuff like that to trigger off the existing Jenkins pipeline I'd rather think we would want to do that one swell food as opposed to having to do it twice If you understand me, so so that decision combined with you know a move say to circle CI or Azure Pipeline That decision could be separated out from the You know solve the 90 percentile, you know CI CD problem for the whole of the problem Just trying to be iterative about it remove blockers try to get progress made It's helpful like with all the the working groups and committees to have the minutes there to walk through So to keep those things valuable This applies to all the committees and working groups. We try to make sure that the those minutes are actually Capturing the the useful bits of the message and are accurately reflecting attendance Kind of thumb in through those it looks like maybe that attendee list is probably cut and pasted from from one of the original meetings Yeah, I had heard that actually there's some of the other projects sort of drifted away And I understand if that's because they don't like where the direction was or they don't care I honestly don't know Well, I Mean to be honest some of the teams were like we like what we have if you're gonna make us move We're not gonna that was some of the initial feedback at the beginning and I'm not gonna name names but it was not just one project it was multiple projects and So we tried to lure them back into the conversation with the carrot of well, I feel like you does have resources for this and This could help depraise some of the costs that you're already incurring and That got them to the table at least but you know it largely The uniform response from all the teams was we're good. Thanks Right like nobody wanted to change That was pretty much the only universal agreement here and I had to convince them and ride did a you know a lot of work here Behind the scenes trying to get people convinced that you know on one hand We start we start talking about all these metrics we want to collect about Contributions and having automated systems around who gets to participate in the TSE elections and what our community looks like and all this stuff We have these directors from the TSE Then we need to collect all this stuff One of the best ways to do that is through the CI system, you know and the automated like merging of Patches and then building them and all that kind of stuff We can collect Statistics through that system and then I have a bunch of directives about doing ongoing continuous security checks for the the continuous delivery aspect of this and It would be nice to someday be able to issue a verifiable credential or verify will prove that says no known You know security vulnerabilities in the software or its dependencies are known at this time, right? And make that an active signal that users of our software can test or verify And it would be an automatic signal to them if we ever found something I mean, there's some really cool capabilities we could do through the dog-fooding process if we were all onto a single CI system But that's our long-term down the road. They're not something you face tomorrow and a lot of the teams were very skeptical so it was a very difficult task force to move forward and The participation was piecemeal It wasn't like everybody showed up in the same room at the same time We were constantly chasing down teams and asking questions and trying to get Participation however, they did make themselves themselves available even when they didn't want to and that's what my think. Thank you To the community was earlier. I did appreciate not just completely ignoring us So it's a difficult task that we were given. There's no easy solutions. It's an ongoing discussion like Brian said and I I guess the the thing we should do here is figure out what we can Approve from the TSC on the mailing list this week ahead of the board meeting So that if there's any budget changes we can we can take those to the board Next week. So that's it for the discussion here, though I don't really have anything else to discuss unless there's more questions And there's not going to be a change in the budget between in this next week That's correct. It would be more of an advisory of this is what we're thinking about We're still we're still way early for that. Okay. Okay. Sorry misspoke Okay, well, thanks for the updates and I hope Everybody can take a look through The stuff that was emailed and is now linked on the committee page in greater detail offline And we can get some proposals up onto that committee page That people can react to in their own time zones We can move things forward All right, the the last thing that we have on the agenda for today is to start to talk about the project pipeline and I'll get that underway and Then we can get a little bit of discussion going there. So our sort of unofficial policy all along has been That the the bar sort of goes up continuously as the ecosystem matures as the hyper ledger projects themselves mature so that we're always trying to get New capabilities into hyper ledger and not necessarily get redundant redundant projects. We've in the past had redundant projects at some level of abstraction, but that's that's usually been because We have unique capabilities at the lower levels of those projects We wanted a degree of experimentation that can take place in the marketplace By by letting these different projects grow and thrive on their own merits So as we will continue to get new projects, it's beneficial if we can give a little bit more direction to the broader community about what kind of things We're looking for at hyper ledger and what shape those things should take on What we've been talking about a lot this year is componentization or convergence and our good accomplishments since fall of last year are bringing on Ursa and transact to start to Look at things that are common across the projects and make Things that are more like libraries that the frameworks can consume with with maybe a more distant vision that There's sort of a cohesive hyper ledger that people will build applications against as opposed to More proliferation of silos where there's fairly independent offerings from from hyper ledger under the original umbrella notion Want to get some more dialogue going on that? probably On the email list of course But also getting some of that back and forth here. Well, we've got people's time So like to hand things over to Chris To kind of continue this discussion at this point Yeah, I mean I think so You know my perspective has has been that You know just adding top-level DLT projects in particular is Sort of counter productive to Driving towards the consolidation that Dan talked about You know we set up, you know the architecture working group and various other working groups to try and drive You know aligned thinking around some of these topics to get a better understanding of you know You know what these things should look like and And yet, you know after you know three years now we still have sort of you have like five top-level DLT's if you incorporate, you know if you include indie Plenum as a fully-fledged DLT and and And Not a lot of alignment, you know a little bit with you know burrow EDM getting baked into Seth and fabric I think that was a good start and it gave me a lot of Hope you know that you know we could start driving towards alignment I think transact is you know and and Ursa are also Sort of moving in that direction where we're thinking about as a community How do we drive alignment around?  Can we incorporate the same thing into?  Depending on what you need, right? as opposed to should I use this one or that one or that one and And then you know sort of having the projects pitted against one another as In some sort of a you know bake-off, which I think is counterproductive and you know, we had the conversations at the At the hackfest in Where were we? I think we were in I think No, I remember where with the where the hell we were it doesn't matter Amsterdam I think maybe and you know, we were talking about you know, should we you know have You know sort of differentiating things about each product project and you know, basically the well, certainly the sawtooth and the fabric teams were sort of completely against the idea of trying to sort of Say, you know, which one is better for that or the other thing because they're very similar, right? And you know, you know, I think it's it's unhelpful if we're competing against each other It doesn't lend itself to You know trying to drive towards much more of a cohesive and collaborative community that's You know exploring innovation together as opposed to trying to compete with one another for You know for eyeballs so Adding, you know more projects to the to the top level doesn't excite me adding more trans acts and urses and You know raft plugins and stuff like that. That's you know built on a common framework That that excites me that gets me a lot more It gives me a lot more hope for hyper ledger generally if we're kind of aligned in our thinking about some of these things it doesn't mean that we can't have an identity flavored thing and you know supply chain flavored thing and a You know finance or token flavored thing, but You know hopefully built from a lot of the same component tree Thanks for that crypt. I wanted to put Been on the spot next been I think you'd communicated in the past that you know, we need New functionality or at least the entirety of the hyper ledger feature offerings Isn't yet So what if you've got some thoughts about that to share? Okay, so I don't I guess I Didn't expect it this to have the floor So I'm gonna say whatever on my mind And in the past couple of years I've been trying to to build a very sophisticated, you know enterprise grade application on top of blockchain and You know as part of the company we certainly Not tie into any type of implementation, so we certainly evaluated Different different frameworks if you will or different implementations of blockchain And and certainly we pick one to go and we pick fabric for for a number of reasons because you know I was part of it Well, I am still part of it But the Even with that there's still lack of you know key basic key functionalities that are needed for an enterprise application and and not not just fabric All of the frameworks out there so because of that I Have to keep my mind open because this is a very we are still very early in the development Blockchain of BLT I'm looking at the history of the database, you know, it's been like 40 50 years now But new databases still come out You know back in the 90s. We never heard of the databases that people are using today So, you know, why would we say that we are at the plateau now that the frameworks existing today Are going to be the framework then we need to focus on last number of frameworks, but more on collaboration That that's that's one side of it the other side of the coin is that you know, I feel like I Competition is really good thing for the community You know, certainly it can bring up they can competition certainly can can bring about some other things and Un desirable things, but if we manage it carefully internal competition is always good because competition is what drives the next evolution or the next revolution In whatever we do So because of that I want to keep an open mind What what what Chris said and you know what we've been set forward to do I In general agree with that that is more collaboration is better But that doesn't mean that we shut down, you know on accepting new things into the community to enable that next ways of motivation That because of that people might think about something else different than because of think be able to think about something else They find it would take us to the next level That we might call it evolution or revolution depending on the technology that we encounter at that point Or we be able to create at that point So, you know, I wouldn't at this point in my mind I wouldn't sit back and and say, you know, we We have enough here and you know, we need to think about collaborations that competition at this point Because it's just too early You know, whatever we have out there And I'm very sure it's not going to exist in in the short future because new things are going to replace Whatever we have today You know the same as any other technology that we have seen over and over again in the last, you know four or five decades New things are going to come and replace whatever we have and because of that We have to have the community to be able to to to be vital to be to be active We have to bring new stuff in Okay, great. And I think thanks for that, Ben. I think those are two Two good forays into the the beginning of the conversation here that we pick up on Mail and so forth as we move forward. We have a few minutes left that we can Call for any questions on the identity working group update. I Suspect will have to hit the fabric report next time But first off, are there any questions on the identity? quarterly report Okay, not hearing anything. Maybe we can actually quickly hit the fabric Order the report as well. I was able to review the identity one, but I don't think I've gotten to this one yet myself Any Questions from the the TSC on this. Sorry. I was on mute. There's not a lot Sort of new from from the past although again, you know, we we did do 1.4.2 release that last week That includes the migration from Kafka to raft As the sort of the major new functionality The diversity has increased A little bit more than the last time we have I think we're plus 3% Minus 3% if you depending on how you want to look at it, but IBM is at like 36% now and We still we want to grow You know, we're looking at various things with Salona and team on how we can improve You know diversity how we can grow our committers and contributors rather and how we grow our maintainers had open Invitations to a few people, you know to step up and do some reviews, but that hasn't happened. So Yeah, it's basically We're chugging along and things are improving just not maybe as fast as I'm gonna like them Kind of thing into the year kind of thing Sorry the the 2.0 is that a this quarter next quarter and a year kind of thing We had been planning to do so we have released a 2.0 alpha and Now that we finished the 1.4.2 work to get the migration to cough from Kafka to raft Focus now shifts back to 2.0 the major new functionality there is the the revised sort of chain code lifecycle But we also want to get in sort of the the validation pipeline refactor Because that enables things like tokens and you know post-order execution things like that that I know people are interested in the question becomes What what do we call 2.0? There's gonna be some things that are be ready in the fall and maybe we can do 2.0 there Or maybe we wait until the end of the year and try and get a couple more things in to make it a little bit more distinct from 1.4.2, but that conversation is going to be happening over the next couple of weeks is Based on what we talked about yesterday Okay, great. I think that brings us to the end of the time So if anybody has additional questions, I think you all know how to find Chris and the other Fabric maintainers on chat and email And thanks again everybody for your time and we will talk again Not next week, but all right Joe. Oh Thanks everyone


Mark, I am delighted to personally congratulate you on what I deem to be the most disruptive news in the rare earth industry for 2023. It's going to propel you forward in 2024. Congratulations on your MOU for a JV with Astrone. Impressive. Thank you, Tracy. We're very excited about the news. Well, let's talk about the news. I mean, basically, I believe, and I'm not quoting you exactly because I'm not reading anything here, that this will provide a supply chain for the U.S. for decades to come in the rare earth industry. Did I misread that, or is that correct? No, you did not misread that, and I think that is one of the most important differentiators here. This is not a small deal. It's a huge deal for reducing the United States dependence on critical elements, particularly rare earths, by signing a deal with a well-advanced project in Australia to supply monazite for the white mason mill in material quantities. My phone lit up after your news release happened. Of course, I'm the founder of the Critical Minerals Institute, so of course it did. I received, for instance, a phone call from Peyton Jackson in Denver, who said that he didn't believe the public understood how competitive your rare earth processing is because price, it's all about price. If you listen to Jack Lipton, he's going to compete with the Chinese. We have to be able to produce at a cost-effective price, and Peyton's angle was how cost-effective your processing is. Is he correct? Can you comment on this? Yeah, I think the biggest issue for us is that when you look at establishing the capability to process rare earths, you're talking billions of dollars, billions of dollars to establish that processing. We've been able to start what we call phase one for 1,000 tons of NDPR per year processing for capital costs of less than $25 million because we're utilizing existing infrastructure, existing infrastructure with people that understand SX right now. The competitiveness of being in the United States, in Utah, where there is low cost of power, abundance of water, and the infrastructure is a differentiator that nobody enjoys that I know of in the world. I'll tell you, someone in Denver does, but I have this list of questions. I also had a very long conversation with Christopher Eccleston out of London this morning who was going on about monazite and the competitive angle of this news release pertaining to the monazite. Can you explain to our audience what he means? Well, when you look at monazite, and if you go back, say, four years ago, five years ago, monazite was a waste product because it was radioactive and nobody wanted it. Matter of fact, people buried it and it had zero value. Well, people have woke up and realized and particularly the Chinese woke up a long time ago and realized that monazite was a key foundation for the rare earth supply chain that they put into place over the last number of years and energy fuels was really a first mover when it comes to realizing that we could handle the radioactive aspects of monazite, extract the uranium and produce a rare earth carbonate. So really, the focus on monazite is relatively new, at least recently. I mean, people have processed monazite in the past and they've got upside down on the radioactivity issues that are not an issue for us at the White Mesa Mill. So the combination of the low capital costs, the low operating costs in terms of working in Utah with very skilled people and low power costs, water, as I mentioned before, is a magical combination to come up with a very, very competitive processing costs for rare earth globally. I still remember doing an interview with Constantine Carinopoulos about how this was the 800 pound gorilla in the room, which you've solved. And Christopher actually mentioned to me that he perceived this deal to be the catalyst for revolutionizing monazite as a source for rare earth because you can do this and deal with a radioactive aspect of the extraction process. Did I get that right, Mark? Yeah, yeah. And again, monetize the uranium. And anyone else that's looking at monazite sources other than China, they're looking at putting uranium back in the ground. And uranium prices are up, and that makes a significant contributor when it comes to things like transport of whatnot of the Class 7 monazite to White Mesa. So no, you're absolutely getting it right, the ability to deal with the radionucleides, the deal to monetize those radionucleides to add additional value are all key elements. And the fact that monazite has great distributions of NDPR and heavies, the DY and the TB, mainly, you know, those are the secrets to going forward in a competitive way, particularly with the Chinese. And you just went in the same in the right direction because that's where the next question was headed was, I don't think people appreciate that you've got the magnetic materials. You've got the heavies, you've got the neodymium, you've got the Presidium, you've got the Turbium, and some of the companies that get a lot of press coverage don't actually have that. They have the lights and the U.S. government, what we need for our defense production is we need the magnetic materials and as Peter Cashin calls them the marketable commodities, which is what energy fuels has, has and has. So again, do I have this right? And should you not be the front runner here? Everybody should be looking at energy fuels because you've got the most valuable of the of these commodities, of these marketable commodities and magnetic materials. Yes. Correct, correct. And yeah, it's really the distributions. And that is the key element here is having the distributions of those magnetic elements required for electrification and being able to deal with the radioactivity. And and and as I said, I have said before, is that White Mesa is a solvent extraction facility and it's been recovering uranium vanadium for over 40 years with SX. So the addition of our phase one solvent extraction system, which is absolutely well advanced right now. People are bolting it together and plumbing it and wiring. The phase one is in our wheelhouse as a company. Mark, I've I've looked all over the world for rare earth beach stock opportunities and potential. This is something that I've done for a living for 15 years. I was unfamiliar with the Astrone project, the Donald project. This is phenomenal. Can you tell us a little bit more about who found it? Because this is an incredibly impressive project. I've reached out to analysts in Australia this morning and they're just going on about it. Can you tell us a little bit about this?  But it's a project that that has been had some technical issues with the fact that it's very fine grained and over the course of the last few decades, they come up with better ways of dealing with that fine grained nature. But it also has very high concentrations of monazite. It's a very high concentrate, straight, heavy mineral sand deposit with with high concentrations of monazite and and it's very large. And I think one of the key aspects of it, it's in Australia. It's already permitted. It has the all the licenses required to to to move forward. There's some final engineering work that has to be done and it's permitted. So, you know, this is something that that we can invest in potentially. We still got to complete the due diligence and be, you know, advancing and securing monazite in the next couple of years in material quantities. And and I think when people look at the hundred twenty two million dollar potential investment, we're basically about half of that is just the buy into the project. So everything else from there on is shared equally with our partner on the project. So it's really around sixty one, sixty two million dollars to buy into this project to have up to around fifteen thousand tons of monazite per year for potentially up to fifty years. So it's not a small deposit and but it is in a good jurisdiction and being permitted in advance is absolutely critical at this point in time, particularly when you're looking at securing off takes with, you know, some of the automobile manufacturers tier ones globally. Jack Lipton, the number one technology metals expert in the world call this move genius and I, the founder of the Critical Minerals Institute, am saying this is the most disruptive move for this sector in twenty twenty three. Congratulations, Mark. It is a pleasure to get this update from you. Thank you. Thank you, Tracy, and it's our pleasure to give the update.


Welcome back to Kids Fun Science. My name is Ken. Today's experiment is leaf transpiration. As always, adult supervision is required. What you need for this experiment is some leaves, a ziplock bag, bread ties, or a string. So to set up this experiment, you need a ziplock bag. I'm using some bread ties. You can also use some string. Then you're just gonna find a plant with some leaves that are gonna be in directly in sunlight for two to three hours.  So there's no air coming in and then seal it off with the bread tie or the string. Did you know plants transpire? It's kind of like people perspiring, but not quite. A simple analogy to help explain the act of transpiration is that plant transpiring is like a human sweating. Humans sweat by exerting water through pores to cool down. Similarity, a plant that goes through the transpiration to help carry the nutrients through the plant and maintain its structure. So what really is transpiration? Well, transpiration is a process by which the moisture is carried through the plant's roots. Then the catapult reaction goes through the stem and to the small pores to the underside of the leaves where it changes the vapor and is released to the atmosphere, which we can't see. So we can see that the experiment's set up and ready to go. The bag is on, it's facing down, so the water will drip down to the corner down here and it's securely tied off with the bread ties. And so we're all ready to go and it's in a nice sunny area, so we'll let it sit and we'll check back on it shortly. So here it is, about 15 minutes in, maybe about 20, and a little bit of water is already starting to evaporate. It's really amazing because you wouldn't have saw any of this in your backyard of any of the vapors going up as it evaporates. But by trapping it, we're able to really see this, so it's really cool. Transpiration is essentially evaporation of water from plant leaves. This happens faster and humidity is low, such as on a hot day, a windy day, or like today when it's about 100 degrees. So we're in perfect condition.  Studies have revealed about 10% of the moisture found in the atmosphere is released from plants through transpiration. The remaining 90% is supplied by evaporation from oceans, seas, and other bodies of waters like lakes and rivers and streams. What I find amazing about this experiment is how much water is on the leaves and in the bag. Plant transpiration is a pretty much an invisible process and that's what makes it so cool. Since the water is evaporating from the leaf surfaces, you just don't go out and see these leaves sweating. Just because you can't see the water doesn't mean that it's not being put into the air though. During this growing season, a leaf can transpire many times more water than its own weight. An acre of corn can give off about 3-4,000 gallons or equivalent to 11-15,000 liters of water each day. And a large oak tree can transpire 40,000 gallons or 151,000 liters per year which is just truly amazing. So there's our water where you can go inside and measure it. This can be used to be drank as a clean water source so as long as it's not a toxic plant, you're able to drink this and is a way to survive out in the wilderness when you have no other water as long as you have a bag or a tent that you can collect it in. So here we are. We have just under a fourth of a cup which is pretty amazing. Look in the description for a little bit more information. I hope you enjoyed this video. Remember to click thumbs up and to subscribe and let me know if you try this experiment and how much water you're able to transpire. Alright, thanks for watching!