Alright. I think we have 11 people on the call. I am going to start the recording
Oh, welcome everyone to the October thirteenth.
Technical oversight committee. Call, as you are all aware, a couple of things that we must abide by.
The first is the anti- trust policy. Notice that it's currently displayed on screen, and the second is our code of conduct.
which is like specifically in the agenda, so as far as announcements go today, we have the standard announcement, The hyper ledger.
Deb We think telephone newsletter goes out each Friday.
If you have anything that you'd like to be included in, that, they usually comment on the wiki page and link in the agenda.
the second announcement, that we may have already noticed some changes happening, but the charter changes have been approved, and we are now the technical oversight committee, not the technical storage thing.
So I have the charter linked here in the agenda.
If you want to see the specific changes that were included, there were a few other changes besides that.
besides that renewal that happened, any other announcements that anybody has
Okay, So if there's no other announcements, we do have the outstanding Ursa report.
I did send a reminder on the discord Channel about a week ago, and we're still waiting on that.
I also included links to the reports that had basically had.
You had a whole lot of reviews that had happened. I did notice that, but most of these have been almost completely reviewed by everybody.
But if you still are outstanding, please do have a look at those particular reports.
the only one that I saw that had any sort of question was that question that I had on the Firefly one related to the organizational diversity of the main cares.
I have not yet seen an answer to that, so I don't know that we have anybody here from firefight today.
I don't see anybody on the participant list from Firefly, so we'll we'll wait to get a get that, answered on the report.
We do. Have, Yeah, go ahead
Did they say that? I wonder if that changed after that?
But, Tracy, I thought the report actually says that it's all the Maintainers are from Colorado
so maybe the question has been answered. Oh, no, okay, yes, it does say that.
So I guess the question is answer We will assume that I didn't miss it, or maybe I did use it, and either way it's there now.
Yeah, I was't sure
Yeah.
So thanks for that learning.
No. But I saw your question, and then I thought, Oh, but I think it's censored, and I had the same thought.
Alright.
Maybe they changed it and say, in response to your comment. But so it's there, anyway.
Great
Any other questions that anybody has on the reports
And then I saw you kind of mute, but we couldn't hear you if you were speaking
Can you hear me now
No, you're very paid.
Okay, Yeah, I did see Jim's regrets since somewhere I think we may have been this board. So Thanks.
For that data. Okay, Any other questions on the the reports
Okay, So if there's no other questions on the report, we do have the fabric in the cactus reports that are doing today so we'll look forward to seeing those show up in well, the including those on the on the agenda for next week.
So the only thing that I have for topics today is the Toc election, or it is upcoming before we, before we get. There Are there any other topics that anybody would like to add to the agenda
Okay. So let's take a look at the the Poc election for 22.
I did copy in the the charter here. Into this document the composition, as we probably recall, there'll be 6 individuals that will be elected by the maintainers of the projects and then 5 appointees that will be appointed by the governing board to make
up the 11 Poc numbers for next for the next term.
So that's directly from the charter as it stands today.
so I have put together this document belonging with the help of Brian Min just exactly what this process and timeline is going to look like.
So if we look at the nomination process and timeline, I'm hoping that we can start this process next week and have people nominate themselves through the end of October to run for the the Poc.
I'm hoping this timeline works is kind of quick turnaround, but I'm hoping we can manage that as far as What it.
What is required. We need to together the Github ids for the active maintainer and the active contributors.
I have done some changes to our what was what's called our voters check site.
It's now an eligibility check site that will allow you to use the if you're eligible to run, or in, or eligible to vote in the upcoming Poc election we have some standard templates that are that need to be updated through like the 22 dates
and we like to send out communication to people to let them know that the Trc.
Nomination is happening, and then reminder sort of communication to ensure that people are aware that they timeline is ending, and then the nominations would close end of day pacific to get the list of nominees so any questions on part of This
nomination process, or in concerns with what you see here.
so I have a question. The second thing there, I thought I thought part of the plan was to avoid, having to do this, so I'm a bit surprised that it's there.
Yeah. So if we go back up to the charter, we'll see that the I think it's 4 dot a dot.
I. It says that individuals who are active within within the scope of the Hyper Ledger foundation and who have nominated themselves for the Tsc.
So I guess the the challenge was, How do we determine who's active?
And that that one, that the active people are the people who have contributed bye.
I agree I don't know. I think that's always been a concern.
Building. This list of active contributors
But yeah, we do still need to figure out if people who nominate themselves should be nominating themselves
So wait. Let me make sure I understand this article. Phone.
The active contributor is to do what it's those who are eligible to run for.
The talk right
Yeah, So I think that's what we need to be clear.
Yeah. So for the 8 I. This is that individuals who are active within the scope of the Hyperlider Foundation, and who have nominated themselves for the Tsc right
It's like active contributors can run, and maintainers can vote
But so I yeah, I would. I was wondering. I mean, if you know, the stuff should really go through the process of building this least of active contributor, which may be very time consuming, as opposed to just check that the people get dominated are 25
And it may sound like it's the same, but I don't think it is the same, because you don't need to.
You know, Go out of your way to figure out the whole list of possible active contributors rather than just checking specific individuals, whether they are, they qualify or not.
But it's detail in implementation. But you know again I I one of them Motivations of the change was to try to simplify the process.
And I'm afraid that this is the worst pop that was from the previous process.
If we carry it over, we've kind of missed the boat somewhere.
so I kind of agree that we shouldn't gather the contributors. Hey?
Project, but I think we could flip it, kinda our being if you nominate yourself one of your duties.
How about a quick thing there? Please describe your contributions to hyper lever or
That's correct.
Alright, so thought good thought I think that's right.
Yes.
Yep. Sorry I'm to hyperloader community, and I share my screen
So I have this d 0, where I've been running scripts that download the Github event logs every day back to 2,016 and then I have scripts in here that are running to extract the people that have done anything so
that's fairly already automated. I agree with the rewarding.
It was proposed. You know I also have this maintainer list that gathers all the Maintainer files on today.
And then I have a list of the maintainers from those.
so those lists are already exist. The list of maintainers already exist, and I I also have a Yeah.
Of course.
Okay, So the recommendation is that in the nominee email. We change it to say, please include your contributions to the Hyper Ledger Foundation The past year
yeah, maybe we probably can hate that. Maybe it's simply providing your github, you know, Id with the activity is good enough for most people.
I think that will do it. And then the edge cases. They may re.
So David and I discuss this earlier for the previous election.
We had, I think, 22 nominations. We had maybe another half dozen people that requested to run, that had no activity.
so it's fairly easy to to get that. What I don't want to do is because a contributor is defined as people who do stuff in the Wiki and and stuff, like that It isn't like it was before where we had to check a 1 million emails So yeah.
Do that works for any any comments or concerns on that
Okay, I just update it this page, not originally at all answer to you. But if you wouldn't mind refreshing
Yeah, scroll down. So I added, the contributions that I have had to the Hyper Ledger Foundation It kind of goes off the page here.
On the email itself. But it basically says, the yeah, the contribution.
I don't know why. It's not showing quite right.
But, anyway, contributions that I've had to the hybrid foundation in the past year is that that dot?
It may require a bit more, but
Let them fill it in right. So I hope that's exactly what you're looking for.
Yeah, But see, this is, I mean, we don't want to have people go through a whole archaeological. They only need one thing that qualifies right
Okay, do we want to include a checklist? I mean, you know, What What do we?
The the That's why I'm trying to. I I don't want to mislead people into saying they they need to go back for the whole year and look at all the things they've done, and compile all of this this is not what we're asking for either, so we need to be careful the
way we phrase the question they just need to provide some evidence that they qualify, and it could just be, you know, here is my Github idea, and you can go look at the Oh, the Prs.
And Ca: a in. You know that I've done something along those lines, and if I mean, I suspect that there are many cases where we already know the answer, and is just.
There may be cases where rice is. I've never heard of that person.
Who are they? What are they doing? And they may look a bit beyond that.
so for the the script emits this stuff, and this this is for the Maintainer Is not the the people who do things.
But you know, on a per repo basis, I can look in here and see, like, what did somebody do?
So the the check website is gonna Look at at this, this list of people that have done something I haven't written the script yet to automatically update this to.
So when I when I did this by hand, the the number of people that had done a qualifying activity this year to to run were around 1,900.
So I think that's gonna get almost everybody. So what I will do like soon is, get that list into the voter.
Website, So people can check I I said, voter the the Toc.
But so
check my status website, and that'll be something that gets updated once a day by get of actions or whatever.
and then it would be the further edge case would be, you know, if they don't have a github, Id.
I I want
Okay, So the other thing here, I'm making one last change
to this page. But if you wouldn't mind refreshing again, Sean, sorry about that.
Okay.
So I included kind of the please check all that apply.
of what it is that you've done, that would qualify you to run for the the Poc.
Election. It's I don't know if it's a complete list, but I did include the other, and they please provide details.
Okay.
So maybe this will address the concerns or no of not having to say. Here's a 100,000 min that I've done over the past year
Okay, any other comments in the nomination process or the timeline.
Here.
Okay, So then for the election process, the voting period for the 6.
T Poc. Members are from November first through November thirtieth.
so we were obviously announced. The slave candidates We're going to use a new new tool this year.
Okay, helios voting. It's a tool that has been used by other Linux foundation projects.
it uses your github id in order to allow for voting, and since all of the voters must be active maintainers, that shouldn't be a problem for people.
and then the email will be sent out to those eligible voters, on how they will cast their ballots.
Ballots will be cast, the election will close at 1159 Pm.
Your Pacific time. On November thirtieth.
I believe this tool sends out reminders, so there's no sort of reminder email that has to be manually done.
it's automated through the tool, and then that vote will determine that the 6 elected Poc members who's whose names will be removed from the appointment boat.
Yeah, Okay, that's fine. Yeah.
Questions are kind of the election timeline and process
So Tracy. I don't have a question I ever comment or good observation.
I wanted to share with everybody. This is the first time we have this kind of setup, where there's a number of seat that actually gets selected, and The others.
Are pointed by the board. I you know I just want to say. Say.
Obviously I cannot speak on behalf of the board, and I cannot predict how they will actually do it.
But I can share from my experience in another foundation, where there is a similar setup, the way they do it, unless there is a need to do any different, they will basically continue down the list of the election results, and as long as they're happy with what the mix.
That this gives them. They will just do that. They are not going to bother going for other people running another election like any of this.
They will pick the people from. You know, Web being Re running in the election anyway, because that's kind of like by default if that gives us the right mix.
Okay, that's extremely interesting. So I guess one of the things that I was thinking about your owno is that I don't know that we should be distinguishing and letting people know whether or not that voted in or appointed if you will so I wasn't expecting
to share the results except internally within the Hyper ledger staff.
They are hoping for that makes it very easy for them to do so.
Yeah, So that's interesting. I mean, that's the way was done in openness. Is that I see?
the actual results of the vote. But if I hear what you're suggesting, you're suggesting that the those remote results would also be shared with the governing board members so that they could determine whether or not they want to to choose the next 5 or choose some other folks
I you know again, I mean every foundation can decide to run it whichever way they want.
But they, they in the case of opennesses, have they announced the people had been elected, and then they say, Okay, there is.
I forget this is 3 more seats, or 4 more seats will be a pointed by the board and the board.
Say, Okay, these are the people. But I actually, I don't know.
Maybe public to be honest, but I know for a fact that you know, they just took the next people on the list
And they were happy with the mix that it gives them. So they will agricate.
That satisfies us anybody. They are the vote quickly within the board to say, Yeah, happy with that good.
And then announce the next. If you know, people had been appointed by the Board as being also members of the attack.
And that's it. So again, I mean, you know they may.
It may go differently here, but based on my experience, the left staff will tend to say, Hey, this is how we do it elsewhere.
You might want to consider doing it that way, too. And again, I mean they will exercise their right to or variety the results, if they feel like, this is not giving them the right.
Yeah, interesting.
Mix, which is the whole point of saying this: this feature right, they may say, no just using this.
Too many people from the same project, the same company. We're better off going down further into the least of, but most likely they want, you know they they will stop from there at least right because They know these are people who have nominated themselves and We linked to the job to start with which is easier than going
to fish for other people, and say, Hey, you didn't run for the election, but really we'd like you to be on this on this talk, so that there is diversity.
Yeah.
it's not Yeah, again. I mean they They may very well do it, but you know it seems pretty clear to me that they will try to find the easy way first to feel those seats
Yeah.
Yeah, we we specifically, I made sure that the based on our conversations previously that the charter specifically says that the Governing Board has to choose from the nominees that they cannot go outside of the list of nominees because of the whole like you didn't find out
maybe you didn't want to do the job, and now you're being forced to do a job that you didn't really right.
but I I do think it's an interesting sort of perspective or no, and I think we have a governing board meeting on Monday, and I think I'll bring that up Daniela.
On this call, but I'll try to talk to Daniela before the call, just to let her know that I'll bring up because of this election, process, so that there can be some discussion about what the governing, board, wants to do whether or not they want the the results from the vote, or whether
they want to start with the list of nominees minus the the 6 elected Tsc.
Okay.
Numbers.
Okay, other other comments or questions on the election process itself.
Okay. So then with the appointment process, this may change based on that conversation with the governing boy, but the intent was to take the Poc nominee These exclude the 6 selected Poc members and have the governing board vote for a period of about a week which was
what was suggested by Min. We had. I had this much longer, but she suggested, just a short period for the doubling board.
so will I guess the intent was to use opaque, which is what we've used in the past for the few elections. It's what the governing board uses for any sort of elections that they have the process really is to send out an email a reminder email And to have the
election close on the night. The ninth is a Friday.
So I did say that on the twelfth an email would be sent to the Yes Poc mailing list announcing the newly elected and appointed numbers.
it's that group of people would elect the the new toc chair and vice chair.
Now I gave her a long period for that. I don't know that it's gonna take that long, but this is obviously the holiday period, and so there are vacations and things that I expect people to be on and so I want to make sure that we gave time on the from in the back end, of those
holidays to ensure that everybody had a chance to express their desire for the Toc.
Chair and vice year, and then, as far as the the election goes, it'll be very similar to what we've done in the past.
Where there's an election for the chair, and then the person gets the second.
Hiest votes would get the vice chair
Questions on the appointment process, or that share vice year, election.
Quite through today. Either that means things are good or things are so bad that that you don't wanna Comment: Okay, Got it
oh, sounds good! If if I may, A little question, is it okay?
Okay. So I had some small contributions to Iraq, and I was actually supporting with all the questions people hit.
yes, for sure
Hmm. So, even with that, am I allowed to participate
You are definitely allowed to nominate yourself. Given the contributions that we've had, as far as the voting process, I guess the question is, Victor, are you listed as a maintainer?
In the Maintainer's files, in the real hot
Okay. So if you are listed as they need later, that you would be allowed to vote, assuming that you've had active contributions, which it sounds, like, you have
yes.
Other questions or comments on the election crashes, and they don't have to be on this page like to be very similar to What Victor just had
I have one who is eligible to vote And basically.
Yep.
Okay. So it's Shawn. If you wouldn't mind going back up to the top way we have the charter.
so cord a dot, reading 2 elections will be administered that would be invited herec.
All maintainers or similar technical role in the case of supported projects which we don't have any.
Currently a supportive projects. So all manators and any technical project who have been active in the past year will elect 6 individuals.
So if you've been an active maintainer in the last year, then you will be elegant to vote.
you are not required to vote, but you are eligible to vote 5.
We've never had any sort of form for people to vote, and we still don't have any sort of form for people to vote
Other questions, comments.
no problem for me. It's just a quick thumbs up.
Peter! Hey, I
Alright thanks Peter
Anything else that anybody would like to add on the poc option
Okay. So that was the end of the official agenda.
Is there anything else that anybody would like to cover
Alright.
yes, so this is related to the security task force. I know I missed the previous call, but or not caught me up.
It's the I mean this weekend. Then he updated the discussions that he had with heart, and then he also brought in some all day in turn conversations from open as it, said the tools that are being worked upon within that foundation and there will be few explorations going on in the coming days.
from by by the task force which we'll come up with as proposals here.
There is one pending attitude, but it is overdue, for now I know I promised it soon after that.
Alright, and the global forum event. But I could not do it.
That is related. To how do we and the the security process itself right?
The reviewing. How can somebody come and report? And what are the actions to be taken by each team?
It's again listed under open Ssl. We had one deep conversations on that.
When think few weeks ago, and the heart that suggested that we should probably incorporate the ones that are non controversial.
Yeah, that's against on something that I'll be putting up definitely this week.
That's an overdue item
Okay.
Alright thanks for the update. Anything else that anybody would like to cover
So before I let you go, I know you guys don't want to get out of there, but before I do let you go, one of the things that I wanted to bring up was our backlog items that we do have still open one is on the security process which is being handled
via the security task force, but the other one is is related to the project to have not submitted their Tsc quarterly project updates and moving them to adornment. State.
After a Tsc. Discussion and possible votes. I do know that there were a number of comments on this back when it was originally open.
We haven't made any sort of further progress on what we want to do specifically with this.
with this particular issue, whether or not we want to implement this, whether or not we want to close it.
And then maybe we could have a quick discussion on any thoughts that people might have on this particular backlog item.
I'd like to see if we could address it before the end of this term, one way or the other, be it close it, or take action on it.
So just as a reminder. The idea was to for those who had not put in their quarterly project updates.
do you have the Ts advice to reach out to the projects when they're missing?
The the project updates via either reaching out to the last emitter of the project Quarterly Update reaching out via the project mailing list, and reaching out via the Project's official chat.
To and then we're unable to read someone for an entire quarter.
We would have a discretion within the technical, oversight committee to come in.
We should vote on the the project to adornment state.
so I I know this came up when we had some projects who hadn't submitted their Hey, It was borough.
Actually, when they had each minute they report, for probably about a happy year.
And so this was something that I created as a potential action that we could take.
And I want to see if we want to. You know, implement this, or if we think this is not needed.
you're like. I I think I kind of remembered this discussion with it.
Got diverted to another discussion as well, where people started asking, Should we even make this decision?
Because project teams could be busy on doing some things, and then there was other kind of discussion that went into asking if report any.
Expect from each of the project every quarter. Then what what is it that we expect from each of that report?
Can we extract that for time being, and then ask project teams to update when they when they can?
But then the others, thinking that I also have, is, we will be reaching out to project maintainers, and it they're not submitting quarterly report or at least they should be responding back to the question that T.
Will see Members would ask them thanks. If they're not even responding to the questions.
Then it's it. It's equal link to That project is not responding to any concerns with their project.
Any thoughts alright
Right So if they're not responding to the TV itself, how can there is point?
so we can imagine, like what kind of response structure would they have for new contributors, or somebody who is new to the project?
It's it's a concern like they should be at least some response.
It cannot be. That project has not responded to any of the questions itself.
yeah, I mean I My My debt reaction is, we don't need to add anything, because this is this is why we have this quality reports.
And it was to, you know, make sure that you know projects are still going on, and you know I have a heartbeat, so to speak, and so it seems to me that this is a natural you know possible outcome.
Of a project, not responding, not feeling out the quality reports, and I don't know that we need to add a special rule of stating, that but I I have.
I was trying in the back to go to the website, I would
It depends on whether we specify the way we specify how you enter.
The woman states basically exclude the talk doing this, then we would have to change it to say, Oh, one of the possibilities is the talk has not heard from the project such as you know not receiving any quality, reports and therefore the talk might decide to move the project to dormant but I think in a sense.
We've seen this actually happen already without that rule. Right?
That we we've seen in the cases of the existing projects we had, like borough, and where we knew, you know, every time we had to like.
You know I could ask them repeatedly, Hey, where's your report Where is your report?
And then eventually pay themselves at beat. That's okay. Forget it.
We can't keep doing this. So I yeah, I my, you know again.
I I think I don't feel like this is necessary in general.
I think we shouldn't just keep adding more rules for the sick of it.
Yes, completely. It's a big concern. We want people to be able to get responses from the project if they have issues, or they're looking to make contributions or no
Okay, and I know it. Project and are the dominant state when the normal functions are suspended, or so down for a period of time, the Tsu decides to move a project to or from the dominant state upon request or does not say who requests that just says upon request so I think you
know if the Tsc. Is requesting it, then the team obviously can make that determination as to whether or not it makes sense to go to the German state.
So sounds like we want to close this issue. Any anybody wants to see this issue made open, and that we take action on it.
no, I think we should close, but put a statement, saying something along the lines that you know the current rules already.
Okay, then we will close this issue, since nobody I wanted to take action on it.
Allow us to do this
Okay, works. For me. I will do that. Oh, no, thank you.
Any other I don't used to discuss today
Okay, Well, we will then close out the meeting and thank you all for attending hopefully.
Next week we will be talking about the non-prints project.
should. Stephen is attempting to get that ready for us.
We also do have the prune lab that would like to present to us at some point I'll decide whether or not that's next week, depending on whether Stevens ready for us next week.
Or Not I don't want to do both of them at the same time.
So with you could have both of those on our backlog, those agenda items for upcoming meetings.