►
From YouTube: CHAOSS Weekly Community Call July 25, 2023
Description
Meeting summary is here: https://chaoss.discourse.group/t/chaoss-weekly-community-meeting-summary-july-25-2023/218
Meeting minutes are here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PMDWc6xMe0fNE7shxTK5_HE_ykRBG5w55_Zx5hvzsEY/edit?pli=1
A
A
B
A
A
B
Space
here,
if
you
have
not
attended
one
of
these
meetings,
I
do
see
a
new
face.
Welcome
Winifred
good
to
see
you
again
thanks
for
coming
my
buddy
in
newcomer
hangout
this
morning
we
had
a
good
chat
about
sports
and
getting
excited
about
your
team
doing
well
how
it
gets
your
heart
going
anyway
yeah.
So
if
you've
not
been
to
this
meeting,
if
you're
watching
this
for
the
first
time,
this
is
our
chaos.
B
Community
call
where
we
kind
of
get
together
as
a
large
community
and
just
talk
about
things
that
are
pertinent
to
our
community.
We
bring
up
issues
or
questions
or
topics.
Sometimes
we
do
announcements
here,
and
this
is
part
of
the
chaos
code
of
conduct.
So
just
keep
that
in
mind,
as
you
interact
with
us
today,
you
can
keep
your
camera
on,
keep
it
off,
whatever,
whatever
you
want
to
do,
whatever's
more
comfortable
for
you
and
if
you
want
to
just
interact
in
the
chat,
that's
also
completely
valid.
It's
really
up
to
you.
B
B
Okay,
so
the
first
thing
is
oh
and
if
you
have
not
added
your
name
to
the
agenda
as
an
attendee
and
you'd
like
to
you
are
more
than
welcome
to
do
that
again,
just
completely
up
to
you,
you
don't
have
to
you,
don't
want
to
okay.
So
the
first
item
on
here
is
something
that
I
did
not
add
so
I.
Hopefully
the
person
who
did
add
it
is
here
today.
C
A
C
That
is
the
main
branch
on
the
platform
and
so
commits
that
never
make
it
to
the
platform,
don't
get
counted
as
contributions
by
individuals
who
who
make
those
contributions,
and
that's
that
is
sort
of
an
assumption.
That's
been
embedded
in
the
tooling
around
chaos
from
the
very
beginning,
really
more
out
of
I
mean
the
concern
about
well,
what
is
a
contribution?
How
do
you
determine
that
and
we
identified
the
main
branch,
and
so
that's
a
design,
Choice
and
then
another
motivation
for
this
design.
C
Choice
is
pragmatics,
because
if
we
were
to
look
at
all
of
the
branches
and
all
of
the
forks
and
all
of
their
commits,
it
would
significantly
it
can
exponentially,
expand
the
scope
of
analysis
required
for
certainly
for
very
large
repositories
and
also
just
to
a
lesser
extent,
smaller
repositories.
So
the
fact
that
these
design
decisions
are
not
sort
of
foregrounded
or
visible
to
the
people
who
use
our
tools
means
that
if
somebody
wants
to
understand
the
full
scope
of
a
developer's
contributions
to
a
project,
there
is
not
an
opportunity
to
do
that
with
chaos.
Tooling.
C
C
Yeah,
like
I,
think
it's
I
mean
I,
think
it's
sensible
to
just
make,
and
this
is
one
example
of
a
design
choice,
but
there
are
probably
other
design
decisions
that
that
are
made
in
each
of
the
tools
that
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
after
talking
at
some
length
with
Sophia
I
think
it'd
be
helpful
for
people
who
are
trying
to
consume
the
tools
with
a
particular
objective.
Just
to
know
what
the
constraints
on
the
data
collection
are
in
in
each
case,
yeah.
C
So,
for
example,
this
is
related
to
everything.
I've
talked
about
is
related
to
commits
when
it
comes
to
pull
requests.
We
do
not
constrain
that,
based
on
what
the
polar
which
branches
or
Forks
the
full
requests
emerges
to.
So
when
we
look
at
pull
request
activity,
it
gets
everything
even
if
it's
a
pull
request
between
two
non-main
branches
or
between
a
fork
and
a
non-moon
branch.
E
Yeah
I
guess
thank
you
for
sharing
that
Sean
I.
Think
I,
guess
the
the
sort
of
conclusion
here
and
the
recommendation
that
we
kind
of
came
to
is
just
having
more
transparency
on
the
design
choices
and
the
data
model
behind
the
tools
and
I.
Think
now
that
you're
saying
it,
Sean
I
have
a
whole
new
view
on
it
now,
which
is
great
in
that
I.
E
A
E
So
if
we
can
make
our
sort
of
design
choices
more
visible
and
and
the
project
that
I
think
that's
just
what
helped
for
our
understanding
of
the
tool,
the
platform
and
also
how
it
compares
to
other
tools,
how
results
or
metrics
might
compare
to
calc
like
different
types
or
styles
of
calculation,
knowing
that
there
is
Nuance
here
and
so
just
kind
of.
If
we
could
make
that
clear,
that
would
be
great.
It
could
be
like
a
I,
don't
know
like
something
like
a
design
doc.
E
It
doesn't
have
to
be
a
super
detailed
on
the
data
model.
I
know
I've
had
a
couple
conversations
with
the
comora
lab
team
too,
as
well
in
terms
of
being
more
having
more
public
documentation
on
their
data
model.
Just
so
again,
people
can
be
more
aware
of
these
these
nuances
and
how
they
might
compare
to
other
things.
A
A
C
B
C
B
C
If,
if
there's
somebody
I,
don't
think
there's
anybody
on
the
call
I
can
I'll
just
message
in
the
gumor
lab
chat
that
we're
going
to
update
that
and
I'm
going
to
take
a
shot
at
it,
but
for
more
lab
folks
are
also
welcome
to
do
it
like
I
I.
Think
I
know
enough
about
grimorlab
to
take
a
punch
at
it,
but
obviously
nothing
that
I
write
about
for
more
lab
should
be
published
without
their
review.
A
E
Assumption
again,
based
on,
like
a
conversation
I
had
six
months
ago
with
some
granola
lab
folks,
but
there
was
interest
in
creating
more
documentation
around
the
data
model
on
their
public
sites,
so
I
think
they
might
there's
a
chance.
They
could
be
working
on
something
like
this
already.
It
might
not
be
exactly
like
this.
It
might
be
more
detailed,
but
I
think
it
would
be
roughly
the
same
information,
so
I
think
it's
worth
reaching
out
before
you
write
something
just
in
case.
They
might
have
it
already.
F
C
F
C
F
D
F
D
D
Is
this
point
and
then
like
further
on
that
point,
like,
as
we
have
a
group
of
people
that
maintain
the
knowledge
base
and
the
website
via
WordPress
as
soon
as
we
get
several
layers
deeper
of
needing
information
from
other
people,
it
just
gets
harder
and
harder
to
maintain
that
on
the
website,
so
I
mean.
Maybe
it
would
be
something.
D
A
D
F
F
The
information
that's
being
pulled
right
now
is
being
pulled
from
the
from
the
knowledge
base,
but
we
can
pull.
We
can
pull
information
onto
the
website
from
any
GitHub
location,
so
we
can
pull
it
from
auger.
We
can
pull
it
from
the
more
lab.
We
can
pull
it
from
the
community
repo,
which
is
what
we
do
for
the
knowledge
base.
So
the
this
document
that
you're
creating
or
this
information
that
you're
creating
we
could
pull
it
into
the
knowledge
base
or
we
could.
F
C
A
A
B
B
C
B
D
I
had
posted
something
I
think
on
Friday,
we're
looking
for
a
couple
context,
working
group
Liaisons
and
it
was
kind
of
a
long
post.
So
I'll
explain
it
a
little
bit
here
if
we
have
three
different
context:
working
groups,
so
corporate
ospo's
corporate,
open
source
program
offices,
scientific
software
and
universities
and
basically
in
each
one
of
these
different
contexts,
people
use
metrics
to
in
different
ways.
D
So
we're
asking
these
contacts
groups
really
just
to
talk
openly
about
things
that
could
necessarily
benefit
the
work
that
they
do
there.
There
are
situations
where
they
talk
about
metrics
or
metrics
models
that
may
not
have
been
developed
so
far,
so
they
don't
exist,
but
they
they
feel.
These
members
of
these
contexts,
working
groups
or
context
groups
feel
that
these
metrics
are
metrics.
Models
could
really
provide
value,
but
again
they
don't
exist.
D
So
what
we're?
What
we're
doing
is
we're
not
asking
those
context,
working
groups
to
develop
the
metrics
or
metrics
models,
we're
kind
of
trying
to
abstract
the
details
of
like
working
with
KS
templates
and
going
through
the
chaos
publication
process.
We're
kind
of
trying
to
abstract
that
whole
process
from
these
context
working
groups
not
get
into
the
details
too
much.
So
as
a
result,
we're
asking
for
a
few
people
to
serve
as
Liaisons
who
could
attend
these
context
working
groups.
D
You
would
pick
one
that
you're
interested
in
attending
say
corporate
ospos
or
scientific
software
or
universities.
You
would
listen
to
the
conversation
and
kind
of
make
notes
of
where
new
metrics
are
being
talked
about
or
new
metrics
models
are
being
talked
about.
It
really
just
kind
of
make
a
note
to
yourself
or
make
a
note
to
the
group.
D
You
would
then
also
attend
the
chaos
Common
working
group
meeting,
which
is
where
we
do
a
lot
of
the
actual
development
of
the
metrics
and
metrics
models.
So
if
I
was
a
liaison
for
the
corporate
ospo,
I
would
attend
the
corporate
Hospital
working
group
meeting
I
would
listen
to
the
metrics
and
metrics
models
that
are
being
talked
about,
and
then
I
would
also
attend.
The
chaos
Common
working
group
meeting
and
tell
that
group
hey
here
a
couple
metrics
and
metrics
models
that
came
from
that
context.
D
Working
group:
these
are
the
ones
that
need
to
be
developed.
Finally,
the
liaison
would
help
provide
an
initial
draft
of
the
metrics
or
metrics
models
that
need
to
be
developed.
It
would
not
be
perfect
by
any
means,
but
just
using
the
chaos.
Template
kind
of
you
know
filling
out
the
description
component.
What
the
description
of
this
new
metric
would
be,
or
this
new
metric
model
would
be
why
we
would
need
this
new
metric
or
metric
model
just
kind
of
following
the
templates
that
we
already
have
have
constructed
so
the
liaise.
Hopefully
this
is
making
sense.
D
D
We
do
have
a
volunteer
for
I
see
Ruth
is
volunteering
for
the
ospo
context
group,
so
thank
you.
Ruth
Jen
has
also
volunteered
to
participate
as
the
liaison
for
University
Jen
cool.
So
thank
you
Jen
for
that,
and
we
can
have.
It
would
probably
make
sense
to
have
more
than
one
liaison
for
each
of
these.
So
in
this
case
like
if
somebody
would
like
to
be
a
liaison
with
Ruth
yep,
we
definitely
can
I
think
it
would
make
sense.
In
fact,
Mary
blessing
to
have
two
Liaisons.
D
A
D
Would
be
great
you
don't
have
to
in
all
of
these
cases.
I
think
this
is
so.
Thank
you,
everybody.
This
is
really
great,
like
it's
I,
don't
know
that
you
like
have
to
be
an
expert
in
any
of
these
areas.
It's
mostly
just
about
listening
to
the
metrics
and
metrics
models
that
these
groups
are
talking
about.
So
yeah.
C
I
think
it's
we
we're.
Those
of
us
who
are
here
have
some
knowledge
of
chaos
that
many
people
in
these
other
communities
don't
have
yet,
and
so,
when
it
comes
to,
how
can
GS
help
me
your
questions
about
how
to
approach
getting
metrics
in
chaos
or
chaos,
tools,
I
think,
just
whatever
knowledge
you
have
of
chaos,
even
if
you're,
relatively
new,
is
likely
greater
than
many
of
the
participants
in
these
working
groups.
So
the
like
what
you
consider
yourself,
an
expert,
because
you
are
here.
D
F
Away
Kevin,
so
the
liaison,
for
example,
go
to
the
university
context
group
and
listen
to
the
university
group
talk
and
when
the
university
group
comes
up
with
a
metric
or
a
model
that
they
think
is
really
interesting.
The
the
liaison
then
becomes
the
point
of
contact
for
that
metric
right,
so
the
the
liaison
can
describe
the
metric
to
them.
If
it
already
exists
in
chaos,
if
it
doesn't
exist,
then
the
liaison
was
taking
that
metric
to
the
Common
working
group
to
have
in
mind.
F
D
Right
on
well,
this
is
great.
Thank
you,
everybody!
So
much.
You
could
take
a
look
at
the
I
think
we
actually
have
all
three
context
working
group
meetings
this
week,
so
you
could
take
a
look
at
the
chaos
calendar
and
they
should
be
there
and
in
the
meeting,
I'd
be
happy
to
introduce
you
as
the
liaison
and
just
kind
of
the
role
for
everybody
to
understand.
D
F
D
A
I
think
maybe
something
we
can
do
is
kind
of
like
have
a
document
that
describes
I,
don't
know
if
we
we
have
that,
like
the
document
that
Pender
describes
this
like
the
tags
or
what's
in
liaison,
will
do
and
so
that
we
also
always
like
reference
back
to
it,
and
you
know,
have
yeah
documents
or
templates
themes
that
we
use
on
Google
or
quiz.
So.
E
E
Yeah,
so
the
the
short
version
is
the
the
risk
working
group
has
had
a
small
But
Mighty
crew
for
the
last
couple
of
months.
Maybe
three
to
five
people
per
meeting,
always
good
conversations,
but
we
have
noticed
that
a
lot
of
these
sort
of
risk
oriented
conversations
are
now
happening
in
other
places
and
all
of
us
are
ending
up
participating
in
many
meetings
as
a
result
of
that,
and
so
the
thought
process
was
that
we
don't
want
to
have
too
many
meetings.
E
We
would
like
to
have
less
meetings,
but
we
recognize
that
risk
is
still
a
really
important
topic
that
we
would
like
to
discuss
and
have
a
chaos
outlet
for,
but
try
and
trying
to
balance
those
two
things
we
figured.
We
would
cancel
our
regular
meeting,
but
instead
still
having
a
document,
an
agenda
document
that
people
can
add
to
and
if
we
hit
enough
things
on
that
agenda,
then
we'll
float
a
meeting
more
ad
hoc
versus
a
regularly
scheduled
meeting,
more
specifically
risk
and
sort
of
viability.
E
Conversations
have
been
happening
in
the
also
working
group
very
much
around
sort
of
understanding,
consumption
risk
around
open
source
software,
and
then
it's
also
happening
in
openssf.
There's
a
risk
dashboard
working
group
that
is
attempting
to
design
a
dashboard
to
assess
the
risk
of
any
project
that
a
individual
or
company
might
want
to
import
and
use
in
their
own
context.
And
of
course
there
are
there's
a
metrics
component
to
that.
So
I've
started
going
to
that
I
know.
David
wheeler
is
also
helping
to
run
that
effort.
E
E
D
D
C
I
I
think
that
that's
kind
of
what's
been
Sophia,
pointed
out.
That's
exactly
what's
happening
like
we're
having
these
discussions
elsewhere
so,
but
but
I
think
Sophie
also
made
a
point
in
our
meeting.
I
think
is
important,
which
is
that
we
still
think
there
is
a
role
for
chaos,
and
so
that's
the
purpose
of
the
document
that
when
we
do
have
enough,
for
we
need
a
metric
or
metric
model
around
risk.
C
D
C
F
C
A
D
D
Yeah
and
I
think
too
I
mean,
as
we
talk
about
this
like,
if
there's
nothing,
to
bring
to
Common
you
could
that
would
be.
You
don't
have
to
attend
as
the
liaison
like
if
there's
no
new
metric
or
metric
model
or
a
new
new
task,
I
mean
you
could
just
kind
of
put
that
on
the
notes
and
just
say
nothing
to
report
and
I
think
that'd
be
okay.
A
C
E
D
F
D
A
F
D
F
A
D
D
So
if
you
have
an
interest
in
participating
in
really
the
development
of
a
series
of
courses,
you
know
hello,
World,
open
source,
open
source,
101,
whatever
it
might
be
kind
of
those
very
early
engagements
with
open
source
and
how
classes
might
help
people
kind
of
address
their
early
engagement
with
open
source,
not
just
the
chaos
project
but
open
source
in
general.
I
encourage
you
to
to
join
that
I
think
we're.
We
do
have
a
onboarding
course
doc.
D
C
D
C
C
C
D
C
D
D
D
D
D
C
D
C
A
D
That's
it
from
from
here.
That's
it
for
the
agenda
I'd
like
to
thank
everybody
for
coming
yeah
great,
to
see
everybody
and
Austin,
but
there
isn't
even
a
website.
Yet
all
right
and
we'll
see
many
of
you
in
for
all
of
you
that
participated
in
those
context.
Working
groups
later
this
week,
maybe
see
some
of
you
in
Dei,
but
nonetheless
we'll
see
you
all
around
thanks
for
coming
thanks,
everybody
bye-bye.