WEBVTT 1 00:00:01.960 --> 00:00:08.669 Stephen Curran: All right. Welcome to the July 1123, Aries on user group meeting. 2 00:00:08.950 --> 00:00:14.200 Stephen Curran: number of topics to go through. I've messed with the order in the agenda 3 00:00:14.230 --> 00:00:19.759 Stephen Curran: in the lower part, but I realized I didn't update it in the summary. So I'll fix that as we go. 4 00:00:19.990 --> 00:00:35.900 Stephen Curran: we are recording. So we'll be posting this after reminder. This is a Linux Foundation hyper leisure meeting. So the code of conduct is in effect, as is the Linux foundation it trust policy. 5 00:00:36.280 --> 00:00:40.780 Stephen Curran: I'll post the agenda link in the meeting 6 00:00:41.510 --> 00:00:51.580 Stephen Curran: people are welcome to jump in there and help out with note taking, and add their names to the attendees list. 7 00:00:51.870 --> 00:01:10.270 Stephen Curran: for those new to the call. Welcome! Glad to have you here. If you'd like to introduce yourself and talk about what what your project is, and what what brought you here? We'd love to hear from you, so I'll leave the mic open for a few moments and let anyone introduce themselves. 8 00:01:11.030 --> 00:01:11.920 John Nathaniel Jr.: Okay. 9 00:01:16.610 --> 00:01:39.299 Robert Simpson: yeah, I'm I'm new. I'm Robert Simpson, and just went through the areas developer. course on edx. And so I'm looking to develop some verifier verifiable credentials. Kind of apps with images involved. So that's the E direction. I'm headed. 10 00:01:39.650 --> 00:01:43.259 Stephen Curran: Okay. you see, go. Just added 11 00:01:43.690 --> 00:01:49.509 Stephen Curran: a a photo to the person credential that is being used. 12 00:01:49.630 --> 00:01:57.300 Stephen Curran: within the problem so definitely workable. There's just a new of Rfc. About using a a you only one of it. 13 00:01:57.310 --> 00:01:58.320 John Nathaniel Jr.: So 14 00:01:59.720 --> 00:02:05.229 Stephen Curran: right good to know. Thanks. Okay. 15 00:02:05.430 --> 00:02:06.840 Stephen Curran: Next up 16 00:02:06.870 --> 00:02:11.319 Stephen Curran: any, or sorry anyone else want to jump in. 17 00:02:14.990 --> 00:02:15.820 John Nathaniel Jr.: Okay? 18 00:02:17.200 --> 00:02:19.040 Stephen Curran: All right. 19 00:02:19.680 --> 00:02:48.790 Stephen Curran: as far as announcements go. So I'm going to try to keep this meeting relatively short, the areas framework. Javascript. workshop is on right now. Just started. So I am. I had signed up for it, looking forward to it. So I think I've I've kind of kept the agenda a little bit shorter than it had been and hopefully we focus on the right things. for this, and people can jump over to that that are interested in that. 20 00:02:49.410 --> 00:03:11.670 Stephen Curran: I can't really 0 8, 2 and 1 0 0 R. C. 3. The release candidate. 3 have have been released. So those are out in the wild and and recommend updates. one of the the last minute things that it really is is part of the dependencies of 8, 1, 8, 2, 21 00:03:11.670 --> 00:03:25.060 Stephen Curran: But if you're using the images, artifacts, you know, container images. 0 8 2 has been updated with this, which is, there was a bug noted in 22 00:03:25.090 --> 00:03:35.430 Stephen Curran: and in and non cred, when using ascar and the credits library where a verification with multiple 23 00:03:35.760 --> 00:03:40.450 Stephen Curran: revocation registries involved would fail. 24 00:03:41.300 --> 00:03:56.729 Stephen Curran: because of the handling This was something in the python wrapper has now been fixed in credits been fixed in and being fixed in the and on credits. Rs library. 25 00:03:56.790 --> 00:04:07.590 Stephen Curran: but be aware of that one other than that. There's a a, a change log in a number of of new updates in the 0 8 2 release. 26 00:04:08.140 --> 00:04:20.670 Stephen Curran: likely we'll have breaking changes and we're gonna talk about one of those a little bit later in this. So the next release is probably 0 9. Or or perhaps we get to 1 point. Oh, we'll see. 27 00:04:21.079 --> 00:04:33.999 Stephen Curran: 1.0 0 r, c, 3 is identical to 0 8 2 It was an important decision that that I made to start releasing release candidates at 1.0. 28 00:04:34.510 --> 00:04:57.040 Stephen Curran: I'm thinking we were closer to that than we than we were. And so what I've decided to do is just continue the release candidate stream for anyone who was on that but but just simply make it compatible with whatever the latest occupy release is so identical to it. So you'll see those as they go. 29 00:04:58.030 --> 00:05:22.610 Stephen Curran: I don't know, Daniel. If you want to share any updates on the and on credits rust and occupy. we did a presentation last 2 weeks ago. pr, 276, which is the main work that's gone into that is, has been merged into a branch in Acupy, and there's a project board, and we're getting more developers on that. 30 00:05:22.780 --> 00:05:45.589 Stephen Curran: Jason, sure. But I'm not sure if he's here today. But we'll be starting on that today. wrapped up something that got merged earlier today. So he's gonna be jumping on that and and pushing on it. And we'll add more people as we as we can. And anyone who's interested in helping out 31 00:05:45.680 --> 00:05:52.440 Stephen Curran: with this work is welcome to join in and and put up your hand and we'll 32 00:05:52.770 --> 00:06:12.950 Stephen Curran: help you get started and get moving on that. this is a very high priority one for us. I'm getting in on credits. Rs, it's a a big effort, and we need to It involves a bunch of clean up and so we'll improve the overall state of occupy. And we're looking forward to getting that in time 33 00:06:14.970 --> 00:06:30.530 Stephen Curran: as well. work on, did Pierre, and 2 did pier 2 and 3 supported occupy continues not too much Updates to make. And and Jason Cyrotak, who is doing the work, is not available today. 34 00:06:30.590 --> 00:06:35.269 Stephen Curran: so I will get much more of an update. But he continues to work through it. 35 00:06:35.850 --> 00:06:58.109 Stephen Curran: with more and more success. But it's a it's a bit of a struggle through both a learning curve and in wiping up on this, and then the sort of dynamic nature of it. Pier 1, 2, and 3. And how Different implementations have come out. So we're really trying to nail that down into a single implementation is consistent across all of the areas libraries. 36 00:06:59.750 --> 00:07:06.269 Stephen Curran: this came up this week. It issue 2289, which is to switch over to poetry. 37 00:07:06.420 --> 00:07:17.980 Stephen Curran: this is a purely a developer's question. And and so I've sort of open it up. Maybe, Daniel, you could talk about it, or others that are proposed. 38 00:07:18.260 --> 00:07:27.180 Stephen Curran: This idea of using poetry. I know I've seen it more and more in projects, but I don't know the implications of it. So I leave that open to others. 39 00:07:30.250 --> 00:07:31.350 Daniel Bluhm: I I'll 40 00:07:31.510 --> 00:07:36.799 Daniel Bluhm: I guess, briefly comment and say that. So I was one that raised that issue. 41 00:07:37.760 --> 00:07:56.219 Daniel Bluhm: if if I'm being honest, I don't feel too strongly about this. If, in fact, by continued using the standard pip stuff that it's been using for a while. I think that's just fine. but poetry does bring some nice to have. It's a it's a better, developer experience, I would say overall and has slightly more 42 00:07:56.570 --> 00:08:06.590 Daniel Bluhm: it. It's dependency resolver, and all the stuff around, like resolving the tree of dependencies and stuff is is slightly better for 43 00:08:06.900 --> 00:08:09.670 Daniel Bluhm: poetry. Then, as as compared to pit. 44 00:08:09.870 --> 00:08:15.189 Daniel Bluhm: so yeah, it. It's just kind of a nice to have. 45 00:08:19.740 --> 00:08:24.730 Daniel Bluhm: we've got a lot of experience using it on the team, and we we use it 46 00:08:24.930 --> 00:08:43.319 Daniel Bluhm: in our plugins. And it's there's no issues with like mixing it matching between, you know, installing a package that was built using poetry and then using that from Pip or the other way around, so that there should be no change ultimately, in terms of like the actual usability of the package that gets published. 47 00:08:45.760 --> 00:08:46.550 Stephen Curran: Okay. 48 00:08:46.770 --> 00:08:52.809 Stephen Curran: anyone else? want to comment on poetry versus Tip. 49 00:08:53.700 --> 00:09:08.199 John Nathaniel Jr.: I, internally, I agree with Daniel. The the resolver is a absolutely, very, very beautiful. So I think that direction is it is very welcome. 50 00:09:08.540 --> 00:09:09.360 Stephen Curran: Okay. 51 00:09:12.480 --> 00:09:19.459 Stephen Curran: what is the type of effort to do? the transition. Is it just a single Pr to 52 00:09:19.810 --> 00:09:24.689 Stephen Curran: basically go through everything and change it? Obviously the Github actions change 53 00:09:25.200 --> 00:09:25.930 Stephen Curran: alright. 54 00:09:26.830 --> 00:09:32.679 Stephen Curran: It's a breaking change. So this would be a good time to do it, because we have breaking changes going into this release. 55 00:09:33.300 --> 00:09:50.699 Daniel Bluhm: I I guess it depends on how you define a breaking change. It's a it's a breaking change in the sense of. If you're a developer on the project, then there's a bit of a change in work, though, but as a consumer of of either the container images or the package that gets published to pipe by, there's no change. 56 00:09:52.890 --> 00:09:54.290 Stephen Curran: Okay, okay? 57 00:10:00.820 --> 00:10:03.650 John Nathaniel Jr.: I I would say I would say 58 00:10:04.420 --> 00:10:12.669 John Nathaniel Jr.: but I don't do it now, but I change as much or not as some point going to happen. So 59 00:10:12.750 --> 00:10:15.479 John Nathaniel Jr.: Radically ped for litter. We can just 60 00:10:15.800 --> 00:10:23.760 John Nathaniel Jr.: go ahead. So I'd leave a big change is not much for those that are not developed by. 61 00:10:24.120 --> 00:10:24.950 Stephen Curran: Okay. 62 00:10:25.270 --> 00:10:26.270 John Nathaniel Jr.: so 63 00:10:26.380 --> 00:10:33.179 Stephen Curran: I would say we should encourage someone with to poetry, experience to code in a 64 00:10:33.330 --> 00:10:41.699 Stephen Curran: make the change. and then we'll announce it and and just make it known to all developers working on occupy about the change. 65 00:10:43.130 --> 00:10:44.250 Stephen Curran: And right 66 00:10:48.200 --> 00:10:57.180 Stephen Curran: any, I guess. The other way to put this is from any of the developers, any any issue with doing that 67 00:10:57.830 --> 00:11:02.730 Stephen Curran: any anyone against the idea of using poetry versus what's being used now. 68 00:11:05.970 --> 00:11:11.329 Stephen Curran: I mean, it is, it is 2 extra characters when doing an install. 69 00:11:12.180 --> 00:11:13.070 Stephen Curran: It's like. 70 00:11:17.000 --> 00:11:22.710 Jason Sherman: I guess my only comment would be, What's what's the scope? Are we changing all the images? 71 00:11:23.420 --> 00:11:30.790 Jason Sherman: to use poetry, or we leaving all the requirements text in there. So basically using poetry to do the 72 00:11:30.950 --> 00:11:41.620 Jason Sherman: dependency resolving and then just exporting them as requirements up. And just like I. I'm using poetry. So I'm fully on board. With that I just kind of want to know what the scope is 73 00:11:42.520 --> 00:11:48.599 Stephen Curran: my assumption. And but I could be wrong, my assumption would be, we basically change. 74 00:11:48.780 --> 00:11:55.610 Stephen Curran: we include the Github actions that are producing the dependencies to also use poetry. 75 00:11:57.290 --> 00:11:59.869 Daniel Bluhm: Yeah, that's what I would recommend. We could. 76 00:12:00.130 --> 00:12:11.290 Daniel Bluhm: as Jason was saying, we could, you know, just export a a requirements, file from the lock using poetry and use that to install. But I I would definitely recommend just 77 00:12:11.480 --> 00:12:17.490 Daniel Bluhm: doing wholesale shift to poetry wherever we use it or where we where we're using Pip right now, that is. 78 00:12:17.960 --> 00:12:20.279 Jason Sherman: okay, sounds good. Yeah, I just yeah. 79 00:12:20.440 --> 00:12:21.240 Jason Sherman: it's it. 80 00:12:21.400 --> 00:12:22.790 Stephen Curran: Yeah. Okay. 81 00:12:22.980 --> 00:12:36.690 Stephen Curran: so invite anyone to make the change. If someone wants to say they're gonna do it now. so that there's not multiple people working on it. That would be great or tag yourself on issue 2289 82 00:12:36.760 --> 00:12:38.790 Stephen Curran: and a Pr is welcome. 83 00:12:39.610 --> 00:12:48.350 Stephen Curran: we've got people with lots of experience, obviously from different organizations that can could evaluate and review 84 00:12:48.520 --> 00:12:51.370 Stephen Curran: So we'll welcome that. Pr. 85 00:12:55.870 --> 00:13:02.760 Stephen Curran: I may. I had a comment in there. just recently yesterday. 86 00:13:03.430 --> 00:13:18.710 Jason Sherman: there's some. There are some dependency conflicts with what's going on in occupy and other assorted things. So you kind of have to pick specific versions of packaging and whatnot. So maybe as part of this, we can smooth that stuff out. 87 00:13:19.070 --> 00:13:30.799 Jason Sherman: so I'll leave a comment in there if I can remember exactly what it was I did yesterday. But it'd be nice to not have to have poetry. Say, Hey, I can't do this, because. 88 00:13:31.880 --> 00:13:38.400 Jason Sherman: yeah. So I'll try. I'll try and remember that it wasn't. Put it in exactly. But it yeah, we can smooth that stuff. That'd be great. 89 00:13:38.680 --> 00:13:39.450 Stephen Curran: Okay. 90 00:13:43.890 --> 00:13:45.880 Stephen Curran: John, do you want to add something? 91 00:13:49.460 --> 00:13:54.000 John Nathaniel Jr.: No, no, no, not at the moment. 92 00:13:54.630 --> 00:13:56.140 John Nathaniel Jr.: Sounds good. 93 00:13:56.290 --> 00:14:04.339 Stephen Curran: Okay. Next topic is a couple more pr, that we want to process 2295 today. 94 00:14:05.180 --> 00:14:08.640 Stephen Curran: so let's get down to the 95 00:14:08.670 --> 00:14:16.719 Stephen Curran: allow any bid to be public. This touches on the gaming resolver with the vlogging. 96 00:14:17.520 --> 00:14:27.880 Stephen Curran: for instance, did web to be a web to be a a. The public did 97 00:14:28.250 --> 00:14:35.139 Stephen Curran: So we encourage folks to look at. It looks like we have some. 98 00:14:35.480 --> 00:14:36.579 Stephen Curran: some updates. 99 00:14:37.300 --> 00:14:38.730 you being done 100 00:14:39.090 --> 00:14:45.530 Stephen Curran: that. And then if we like this we can get it works. So this looks like a good. 101 00:14:45.640 --> 00:14:51.009 Stephen Curran: a good change, as far as I know, any comments from it, Daniel, or anyone that is taking a look at it already. 102 00:14:53.900 --> 00:15:02.429 Daniel Bluhm: I I've only glanced at it so far glanced at it deep enough to to know that it overlapped with work that I know sic but was was doing so. I invited 103 00:15:02.470 --> 00:15:08.840 Daniel Bluhm: Clement on the sick, the team to comment, and he's now left some. I just haven't gotten a chance to to follow up on that. 104 00:15:09.630 --> 00:15:10.310 Okay. 105 00:15:10.810 --> 00:15:39.160 Stephen Curran: it also may. I don't know. Overlap with some of the work. It's it's did related. So I did want to get CSIRO to look at it. Jason's heart attack to look at it in relation to the did pier. Yeah, I had the at the same thought. And then I I back steps because it was specifically talking about handling of public dids which I know did period. Yeah, so yeah, but I think it would be valuable to have 106 00:15:39.760 --> 00:15:44.130 Daniel Bluhm: his insights, especially because of how much he has been. 107 00:15:44.150 --> 00:15:52.039 Stephen Curran: Yeah, okay. it's pretty good. What you said that described exactly my thoughts today on it. 108 00:15:52.910 --> 00:15:59.269 Stephen Curran: Okay, next one was this one which is a classic example of 109 00:15:59.550 --> 00:16:14.339 Stephen Curran: why not to have too many discussions in a task when you should be getting together on a phone call to talk about this. So I'm hoping the right players are here. So the overall issue is 110 00:16:14.590 --> 00:16:21.409 Stephen Curran: a while back. We made it a default to remove 111 00:16:21.850 --> 00:16:26.669 Stephen Curran: credential issuance records 112 00:16:27.330 --> 00:16:29.200 Stephen Curran: from a. 113 00:16:29.570 --> 00:16:43.889 Stephen Curran: and we did it by having a fly called Preserve Exchange records, and the intent, I I think, at the time was that we would also do this for presentation. It's exchange records for 114 00:16:44.440 --> 00:16:50.999 Stephen Curran: for not only issue credential but present proof, but that didn't happen initially. 115 00:16:51.070 --> 00:16:53.759 Stephen Curran: we do want those removed 116 00:16:53.990 --> 00:17:05.999 Stephen Curran: and in in some cases, but we do want some fall back to allow specific instances not to delete those records if they don't want to. We now have 117 00:17:06.240 --> 00:17:22.600 Stephen Curran: sort of 2 schools of thought and there's been back and forth on this with me, going particularly far back and forth in in deciding which to support. So basically, Jason has implemented this idea that we would remove it. 118 00:17:22.880 --> 00:17:23.920 Stephen Curran: and then 119 00:17:23.940 --> 00:17:29.670 Stephen Curran: and implemented a way to allow the removal to be requested. 120 00:17:30.330 --> 00:17:32.729 Stephen Curran: which is 121 00:17:33.090 --> 00:17:39.539 Stephen Curran: this approach, which is, there are, he has implemented 4 flags. 122 00:17:40.100 --> 00:17:42.120 Stephen Curran: auto, remove 123 00:17:42.470 --> 00:17:47.820 Stephen Curran: for example, prover or sorry 124 00:17:47.910 --> 00:18:03.430 Stephen Curran: presentation and and then the role of the person. So whether it's a a verifier a holder. or whichever. So auto remove it. Those type. So there's there's quite specific control over these. 125 00:18:03.440 --> 00:18:11.119 Stephen Curran: And that's one way we can do it. The other way is simply add a flag that says by default, we're going to remove 126 00:18:11.150 --> 00:18:23.110 Stephen Curran: any present proof records once they've completed. If you want to retain them, you would use this preserve exchange record. This is their exchange record would apply to both 127 00:18:23.130 --> 00:18:25.500 Stephen Curran: issue that I of them present proof. 128 00:18:26.580 --> 00:18:28.770 Stephen Curran: there's pros and 129 00:18:29.070 --> 00:18:39.609 Stephen Curran: a lot of back and forth. Let's have a discussion here to analyze this. Jason, do you have a 130 00:18:41.390 --> 00:18:44.300 Stephen Curran: Indian on what ought to be done. 131 00:18:47.360 --> 00:18:51.660 Jason Sherman: not really. 132 00:18:52.740 --> 00:19:12.460 Jason Sherman: I mean, I agree that there's a there are a lot of configuration flags and learning how to configure occupy is difficult to top the way through, so adding 4 more flags as opposed to enhancing the existing one is, I can see, an argument against that. 133 00:19:12.670 --> 00:19:21.459 Jason Sherman: the the reason for having the flags. I I particularly because I'm coming from traction, which doesn't want to retain records. 134 00:19:21.650 --> 00:19:41.730 Jason Sherman: My thought was more along the allowing the flexibility to do anything. So that's what that was. I don't really. If if the community feels like, Hey, let's just do what the original intent was to have the 135 00:19:41.740 --> 00:19:53.869 Jason Sherman: preserve exchange go across all the exchanges. I I'm fine with that. It's really it's more of a community kind of thing. So you know, having former flags is confusing. Potentially. 136 00:19:53.940 --> 00:20:08.750 Jason Sherman: Flexibility comes at confusion. I guess so. But that that's really it. It's That's where my head was out with And with adding, the flexibility was that I, coming from where I came from, not really being wanted 137 00:20:09.320 --> 00:20:10.100 Jason Sherman: bye. 138 00:20:10.490 --> 00:20:17.020 Stephen Curran: Awesome enhancing that current flag would still, I think, achieve the goals for the traction team regardless 139 00:20:17.200 --> 00:20:18.090 Jason Sherman: the so 140 00:20:20.530 --> 00:20:21.360 Jason Sherman: okay. 141 00:20:22.220 --> 00:20:23.750 Stephen Curran: okay, 142 00:20:25.910 --> 00:20:27.719 Stephen Curran: I I think my! 143 00:20:28.520 --> 00:20:37.590 Stephen Curran: I'll jump in with my views. I I I'm really back and forth on. This is as you can tell from my ridiculous comments on this. 144 00:20:38.030 --> 00:20:49.749 Stephen Curran: My feeling is generally that occupy, and the storage should not be for long. Term. Storage that occupy should be strictly for 145 00:20:49.820 --> 00:20:53.099 Stephen Curran: you know, protocol 146 00:20:53.110 --> 00:21:04.020 Stephen Curran: for tracking in flight protocols, and once a protocol completes, it's up to the Controller to preserve any information necessary. 147 00:21:04.220 --> 00:21:12.839 Stephen Curran: So I like the default of removing them all I like the ability to save them if if you want. 148 00:21:13.150 --> 00:21:24.190 Stephen Curran: So my leading was sort of where we were, to begin with, of of having that preserve exchange record as an option to keep both issuances and 149 00:21:24.420 --> 00:21:30.109 Stephen Curran: and exchange. You know a present proof records 150 00:21:30.240 --> 00:21:32.560 Stephen Curran: often. 151 00:21:33.580 --> 00:21:42.239 Stephen Curran: Well, while any particular agent can do all of those things. often they they won't do both, so there won't even be any crossover. 152 00:21:42.930 --> 00:21:45.380 Stephen Curran: So 153 00:21:45.840 --> 00:21:54.850 Stephen Curran: I I think I would go with one option. One of these 2 options would be mine. Daniel, you've weighed in 154 00:21:56.350 --> 00:22:06.979 Daniel Bluhm: So I I just kind of thought while you're talking there. so I I think I'm in agreement that I think we should have the preserve exchange record the the 155 00:22:07.170 --> 00:22:09.460 Daniel Bluhm: command line argument that controls the 156 00:22:09.850 --> 00:22:14.769 Daniel Bluhm: or that influences the removal of these records. 157 00:22:14.790 --> 00:22:42.210 Daniel Bluhm: with the only remaining question that I I really had, as I was thinking through this was, Do we really need the granularity of picking and choosing, which records we did or and did not preserve And and I think a better answer to that rather than having more command line arguments, is in the Admin Api. We make sure that we continue to respect the auto, remove parameters on the presentation, and in credential exchange, 158 00:22:43.570 --> 00:22:51.439 Daniel Bluhm: endpoints. And so, if you need that granularity, you have the option to do that through the Admin Api and then otherwise, you know you can. 159 00:22:51.490 --> 00:22:52.569 Daniel Bluhm: You can either 160 00:22:53.030 --> 00:22:57.380 Daniel Bluhm: turn on the hose or turn it off, and that's it. And and I think that would be preferable. 161 00:22:57.810 --> 00:23:00.970 Stephen Curran: Okay, gotta make sure I write a note down here. 162 00:23:01.780 --> 00:23:13.550 Jason Sherman: Yeah, I mean, I I'm that sounds good to me. And I really think that the like say, coming from the traction world the I think they can write a plugin 163 00:23:14.150 --> 00:23:28.629 Jason Sherman: to do to change that behavior right? It's not. It's not a huge deal, and I think at the end of the day the real behavior they want is actually slightly modified. and that they don't want to retain the whole record. 164 00:23:28.630 --> 00:23:53.630 Jason Sherman: They only want to retain a subset which would be like preserved with transform or something, because they only want some historical context to know. you know, when this was sent, whatever, and the conversation, not the all the encrypted stuff. So a very small payload. So I think to me that would be, let let them write a plugin, or we can write a that's kind of specialized 165 00:23:53.630 --> 00:23:54.570 behavior. 166 00:23:54.750 --> 00:24:10.699 Jason Sherman: So I think if we stick with the occupy behavior being option, one respecting the auto removes on the Api and then letting additional funky behavior be in a plugin. I think that's probably the way to go. 167 00:24:10.850 --> 00:24:15.430 Stephen Curran: Okay, do we need to do anything with this to enable that 168 00:24:16.150 --> 00:24:23.840 Stephen Curran: plug in capability? Or could we just move forward with this one and then that can be done at a at A as needed. 169 00:24:24.080 --> 00:24:43.289 Jason Sherman: I would say they they can do it when needed, that As long as right now they have the ability to keep all the records they want, which is, I say, are massive right now, which is not what they really want. But that's just that's just the way it operates. So I think just by having the the Preserve Exchange record option. 170 00:24:43.500 --> 00:24:52.089 Jason Sherman: We'll keep them working just fine until they have time to address like what it is they actually do want to save, which is a small subset of that data. 171 00:24:52.480 --> 00:24:53.960 Jason Sherman: Sounds good. Yeah. 172 00:24:55.260 --> 00:24:56.200 Stephen Curran: Okay. 173 00:24:59.790 --> 00:25:03.630 Stephen Curran: Any other feedback from where they would want to weigh in on this one. 174 00:25:05.250 --> 00:25:12.939 Stephen Curran: At this point we say, we go with one, and we make sure that the admit Api has the necessary 175 00:25:13.030 --> 00:25:21.629 Stephen Curran: find great functionality that that could provide this, if necessary, that a controller could do what they needed to do. 176 00:25:25.810 --> 00:25:53.110 John Nathaniel Jr.: Yeah, I I think I think it's the optimal solution right now, because I think respecting the auto remove and giving the that guys log in to be able to like, keep what they want. it I I think it makes them more in control. So we don't actually need the full transaction history. Just like it. It's sort of But if we to track about the 177 00:25:53.110 --> 00:25:57.570 history of those stuff. So I think, like, it's the optimal solution. 178 00:25:57.720 --> 00:26:00.350 Stephen Curran: Yes. okay. 179 00:26:08.080 --> 00:26:11.159 Stephen Curran: yeah. I know that topic has come up before which is 180 00:26:11.880 --> 00:26:17.980 Stephen Curran: that even after you preserve the record, it ought to be. 181 00:26:18.330 --> 00:26:21.690 Stephen Curran: Well, maybe we should talk about that 182 00:26:21.920 --> 00:26:28.530 Stephen Curran: you know, as Jason said, if you preserve the entire exchange record, you've got all the messages that went back and forth. 183 00:26:29.570 --> 00:26:43.450 Stephen Curran: Does it make more sense to, for when you preserve it to preserve a minimum sub a subset of the data, or do we for preserve the entire protocol and leave it to a plugin to do 184 00:26:45.170 --> 00:26:47.230 Stephen Curran: the proving essentially. 185 00:26:54.240 --> 00:26:56.990 Daniel Bluhm: I think I linked towards leaving it to the Plugin. 186 00:26:58.260 --> 00:27:00.629 Jason Sherman: Yeah, I sorry, Daniel, go ahead. 187 00:27:00.650 --> 00:27:13.129 Jason Sherman: No, but that's really all I had to say. I think, okay, because right now I know in traction there is a plug in that tracks. The status change time stamps. 188 00:27:13.530 --> 00:27:30.659 Jason Sherman: So that's something they want to have. they just. I don't think they've sat down to determine what's the end. At the end. We've got this whole thing. What do we? What's the data we need out of it? So I think they can just enhance that the history Plugin to say great when it hits complete stage. 189 00:27:31.370 --> 00:27:45.490 Jason Sherman: Let's remove all the unnecessary stuff. I just don't know if they've reached that stage yet in their getting user feedback on what? As a business, I need to see, to be able to know what? 190 00:27:45.740 --> 00:27:58.860 Stephen Curran: As transpires the question, which is, if you want to preserve something, you can decide what to prune and what not to bring. What? What do you want to keep? So if we do something in occupy itself 191 00:27:59.220 --> 00:28:09.389 Stephen Curran: to prune the record. we're making that decision globally. And that's probably not the best idea. We're we're gonna go with that strategy. So that answers that question. 192 00:28:10.070 --> 00:28:15.859 Jason Sherman: Yeah, I would I would think it could get very specific for different groups very quickly. 193 00:28:16.340 --> 00:28:17.340 Stephen Curran: That's good. 194 00:28:18.180 --> 00:28:28.049 Stephen Curran: Okay. okay. The last thing I wanted to do then was, are there any other pull? Requests the other one, that is this one? 195 00:28:28.530 --> 00:28:35.610 Stephen Curran: Are we at a point where we can merge this one, Daniel, or you still looking, you didn't get input 196 00:28:37.350 --> 00:28:39.719 Stephen Curran: for anyone on that. 197 00:28:40.260 --> 00:28:42.409 Daniel Bluhm: Yeah, that I would 198 00:28:43.700 --> 00:28:44.920 Daniel Bluhm: just that of. 199 00:28:45.080 --> 00:28:49.680 Daniel Bluhm: I don't know. observance of 200 00:28:50.230 --> 00:28:56.559 Daniel Bluhm: convention and protocol. I I would appreciate having some review some others, since I I had a small hand in that. But 201 00:28:57.700 --> 00:29:15.689 Stephen Curran: Jason got that one, I guess most likely you're the one to do it. So over to you to take a look at that one. Yeah, I can. I can look at it from a a a coding point of view. But I really, quite honestly, don't know enough about signatures and stuff to if there's a technical 202 00:29:15.850 --> 00:29:20.910 Jason Sherman: thing in there related to that I probably be able to weigh in on that. But certainly from a 203 00:29:21.150 --> 00:29:33.170 Jason Sherman: you know, a, a, a code perspective of what's going on, which I'm sure is fine. But yeah, it's if someone's more an expert in signatures than I am, which I'm sure there are. that'd be great. 204 00:29:33.340 --> 00:29:41.899 Stephen Curran: Okay, you go ahead way in. And they just put in whatever you think is appropriate as a comment. Let's take a look at it. 205 00:29:42.050 --> 00:29:49.569 Stephen Curran: and then we'll decide from there if if we need someone else to take a look at them. Okay, sounds good, awesome. Thank you. 206 00:29:53.580 --> 00:29:58.740 Stephen Curran: we've talked about this one. This one is gonna be stopped. 207 00:30:01.100 --> 00:30:11.449 Stephen Curran: So there's a few players that are are down in the list. that are quite old. so we'll probably take a look at some of them. 208 00:30:13.080 --> 00:30:23.989 Stephen Curran: this one is is pretty small and and just to do with an OS separator. So I really like. 209 00:30:24.650 --> 00:30:40.580 Stephen Curran: I I just don't have enough knowledge on this one to to decide. But maybe somebody to take a look at that one as well, just to to to clear it off the list. that that's the last important 10, Daniel. 210 00:30:40.970 --> 00:30:42.829 Stephen Curran: this one! 211 00:30:45.030 --> 00:30:48.240 Stephen Curran: I'm guessing we want to 212 00:30:49.570 --> 00:30:51.920 Stephen Curran: remove this one, I think. 213 00:30:52.490 --> 00:31:01.910 Stephen Curran: but a decision needs to be made as to whether it has anything that helps with what you're doing with the and on Craig's work. 214 00:31:02.500 --> 00:31:05.060 Stephen Curran: I mean the goal of it was to use 215 00:31:06.160 --> 00:31:11.870 Stephen Curran: the existing things for leisure agnosticism. We now have an ipad where that's 216 00:31:12.100 --> 00:31:16.840 Stephen Curran: that's the basis of it. I don't know if we want to do anything like this. 217 00:31:17.420 --> 00:31:20.400 Stephen Curran: We just close this one 218 00:31:21.270 --> 00:31:32.179 Daniel Bluhm: so I can go back and and do another quick scan. It's been a while since I've looked at it. But I I think from my memory, I think we're probably 219 00:31:32.470 --> 00:31:39.669 Daniel Bluhm: gonna just end up closing that one. they they very much went in the direction of 220 00:31:40.160 --> 00:31:56.089 Daniel Bluhm: They matched the same interface that existed previously. That was very much defined by Indie, and so anything, anything you would plug into to their interface would have to more or less resemble Indie which is. 221 00:31:56.310 --> 00:32:07.279 Daniel Bluhm: you know, achieving the same goals of pleasure. Agnosticism, I suppose. But it is a different approach from the non credits interface where we we went back and simplified. And then. 222 00:32:07.740 --> 00:32:09.770 Daniel Bluhm: yeah, yeah, all the complexity of 223 00:32:09.800 --> 00:32:16.050 Daniel Bluhm: in these specific stuff is is behind the scenes as opposed to being right up front in the interface. So 224 00:32:17.880 --> 00:32:39.360 Stephen Curran: yeah, I I can go back and and give that another quick scan to see if there's anything that could really benefit from still. But yeah, almost certainly it's it's it's to be close. So, and that that's a fine outcome. Don't don't be stressed about that, but it would be worth you having a quick look at it. You're the best one to look at it, if you don't mind. Yeah. 225 00:32:39.510 --> 00:32:40.340 Daniel Bluhm: for sure. 226 00:32:40.510 --> 00:32:43.990 Stephen Curran: Awesome. Okay. I think that. 227 00:32:45.220 --> 00:32:57.239 Stephen Curran: Yes, us through these 5. this is being worked on. I don't know about this one. I don't know about this one, so there's a few others we can look at. But I they're not urgent right now you can let them long enough. 228 00:32:57.750 --> 00:33:00.930 Stephen Curran: So We'll look at that 229 00:33:02.570 --> 00:33:16.660 Stephen Curran: and I think that wraps us up. If anyone as I mentioned earlier, anyone is interested in helping out with the inspiration of the and on credit Rs work that has expertise in in occupy internals. 230 00:33:16.680 --> 00:33:19.379 Stephen Curran: I'm pleased to raise your hand, let us know. 231 00:33:19.470 --> 00:33:24.240 Stephen Curran: and we'll be glad to issue with all good that 232 00:33:25.310 --> 00:33:30.429 Stephen Curran: with that, I think. Are there any other topics people want to raise at this meeting. 233 00:33:34.580 --> 00:33:48.960 Stephen Curran: So the the only thing I wanted to follow up on that was on the agenda. There was the extra meeting plan for Maintainers each week. Yes. So one of the things we wanted to do was to have a Maintainer, an extra Maintainer's meeting. 234 00:33:49.340 --> 00:33:57.410 Stephen Curran: I was thinking, I in the off week, for this is the in the developers meeting. I was thinking. 235 00:33:57.510 --> 00:34:09.650 Stephen Curran: maybe the half hour after that meeting we could have this one. So 9 specific 236 00:34:10.260 --> 00:34:16.160 Stephen Curran: for 30 min on Tuesdays. Would that work. 237 00:34:16.870 --> 00:34:20.010 Stephen Curran: Daniel? You're important, Jason. You'd be important 238 00:34:20.050 --> 00:34:21.159 Jason Sherman: works for me. 239 00:34:21.610 --> 00:34:22.879 Daniel Bluhm: Works for me as well. 240 00:34:23.110 --> 00:34:24.250 Stephen Curran: Okay. 241 00:34:25.469 --> 00:34:28.199 Stephen Curran: awesome. I will put that on 242 00:34:28.330 --> 00:34:33.850 Stephen Curran: on the This is a Maintainer's week meeting. he. 243 00:34:33.909 --> 00:34:36.460 Stephen Curran: the key thing we want to go over would be 244 00:34:36.550 --> 00:34:43.360 Stephen Curran: work in progress and the processing of the Prs. 245 00:34:43.880 --> 00:34:50.610 Stephen Curran: I. I do encourage maintainers at any time to call a meeting with the set of Maintainers. We do have a list 246 00:34:50.630 --> 00:35:18.060 Stephen Curran: and where we're working on things to to get discussions like we had with this presentation exchange record. So we're not going too far back and forth. So I do encourage that. And those can happen as well. But it's but let's have a meeting every week to to go over what what we're doing from a security development perspective. This can be more focused on sort of end user things and and Demos and things like that. 247 00:35:19.150 --> 00:35:32.539 Stephen Curran: right now, Maintainer, if there's a list of of Maintainer A and B, there is a process for becoming a Maintainer. If you feel like you've done the work necessary and want to be a Maintainer. 248 00:35:32.720 --> 00:35:38.760 Stephen Curran: Yeah, it definitely occurs that. Or if you simply want to join in on the Maintainer's meeting. 249 00:35:38.870 --> 00:35:41.899 Stephen Curran: I would encourage that as well. We welcome you 250 00:35:44.940 --> 00:35:49.070 Stephen Curran: with that. Any other topics to go through. 251 00:35:54.740 --> 00:36:06.449 Stephen Curran: All right. Thanks for joining I will set up the Maintainer's meeting for next week, and, as they say, if anyone wants to join ping me on on discord, and I'll add you to that meeting. 252 00:36:07.680 --> 00:36:09.220 Stephen Curran: Perfect thanks, folks. 253 00:36:10.640 --> 00:36:11.560 Jason Sherman: thanks. 254 00:36:12.460 --> 00:36:14.689 John Nathaniel Jr.: Yeah, thanks for having us.