►
From YouTube: CHAOSS.Community.March.3.2020
Description
CHAOSS.Community.March.3.2020
A
A
B
B
We
had
gotten
to
a
point
where
we
had
you
know
who,
what
when
and
where
as
our
focus
areas
and
then
we
didn't
actually
have
clear
consensus
on
what
each
of
those
meant
and
what
to
put
in
those
categories.
So
we
put
much
more
clear
descriptions
around
each
of
those
focus
areas
so
that
we
at
least
have
a
goal
statement
that
and
now
I
think
it's
hopefully
clear
on
what
that.
What
that
means.
B
C
The
second
topic
that
we
discussed
was
a
metric
toolkit,
and
my
urban
proposed
this
on
an
issue
to
have
a
easy
to
use
toolkit
for
how
to
start
implementing
metrics
taking
the
metrics.
We
have
defined
and
boiling
it
down
into
actionable
steps,
and
then
the
third
and
last
thing
we
get
is
a
worked
on
the
documentation,
accessibility,
metric
and
advanced
that
it's
a
metric
we've
been
working
on
for
a
while
now,
and
so
we
revised
it
last
week.
A
A
So
I
think
the
toolkit
that
anybody
could
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
the
toolkit
that
I'm
understanding
is
trying
to
create
ways
that
people
can
come
to
understand
the
DNI
work
through
just
a
series
of
fairly
simple
steps.
When
you
start
defining
like
this
activity,
will
take
a
half
a
day
or
this
activity
will
take
a
day
or
30
minutes,
and
here
the
the
simple
things-
and
this
is,
as
you
see
like
you-
need
a
paper
in
a
pen.
This
is
for
one
to
three
people
that
difficulty
is
low.
A
D
A
D
A
C
The
idea
is
to
have
similar
things
just
for
metrics,
so
replace
the
heading
where
it's
and
jobs
to
be
done,
and
we
call
this
the
contributor
diversity
and
then
the
purpose
is
our
description.
The
outcome
is
where
we
describe
what
you
will
have
afterwards.
We
have
the
small
best
version
of
how
what
we
think
it'll
be,
what
tools
you
will
need
and
then
detailed
steps
we
describe.
How
do
you
get
contributor
diversity.
D
I'm,
looking
at
these
and
I
think
I've
done
everyone
but
mobile
moments
over
my
career,
so
so
I
think
I
think
another
approach
might
be
to
say.
These
are
really
good
strategies
for
drawing
out
ideas
in
different
ways
and
what
are
some
questions
or
framings
for
applying
these
strategies
to
DNI
so
what
they
like?
Instead
of
writing
our
own
leverage.
A
Maybe
tell
me
that
yeah
so
I
think
it's
as
Garrett
was
pointing
out
that,
like
jobs
to
be
done
would
be
like
approaching
a
particular
metric
in
DNI
mm-hmm,
but
less
about
kind
of
formulating
what
the
metrics
can
be.
And
it's
more
about
thinking
about
the
metrics
that
have
been
put
forward
and
how
you,
as
a
person,
can.
C
So
kind
of
it's
describing
the
metrics
as
methods
so
taking
this
format
that
this
toolkit
has,
but
just
using
it
as
a
template
and
creating
methods
for
each
metric,
so
that
we
can
describe
step-by-step
how
you
actually
go
about
collecting
each
method
so
throw
out
the
methods
that
are
here.
We
are
not
doing
jobs
to
be
done,
we're
not
doing
a
quick
market
research,
we're
not
doing
the
competitive
review.
Those
are
in
the
toolkit.
That's
not
what
we're
doing
we're
just
using
this
format
for
showing
how
we
can
collect
metrics.
A
Why
don't
I'm
gonna
move
on
so
this
is
part
of
it?
Yep
is
we
have
this
is
kind
of
going
on
in
the
DNI
working
group
right
now,
okay,
that's
meeting
tomorrow
at
10:00,
u.s.
central,
so
I
mean
if
you
I
think
we
can
talk
about
it.
There,
okay,
a
little
bit
more
detail
just
looking
at
the
list
of
things
we
have
to
get
through,
so
evolution
working
group
or
any
updates
regard.
D
They
have
been
working,
I
missed
the
last
meeting
because
of
a
meeting
another
meeting
I
was
at
and
so
I
don't
know.
My
understanding
is
that
they
are
large,
that
they're
largely
working
through
developing
metrics
for
the
next
release.
Okay,
that
the
and
that
is
all
visible
on
the
spreadsheet
of
shared
love.
Sure,
okay,.
D
Okay,
risk
same
same
bat-time
same
bat-channel,
we
had
a
we
have
it
I
think
it's
an
interesting
discussion.
There's
three
metrics
that
were
actively
working
on
developing
and
there's
one
I,
wouldn't
call
it
a
metric
old
I
think
we're
gonna
frame
it
as
that,
because
that's
what
we
do,
which
is
accumulating
and
mapping
the
freeform
tags
that
exist
on
github
issue
repositories
in
into
some
kind
of
bag
of
words,
where
the
50
words
for
bugs
or
50
words
for
snow.
D
To
quote
a
Kate
Bush
album
that
exists
on
github
or
gitlab
get
mapped
into
sort
of
a
single
category.
So
if
I
wanted
to
look
at
a
thousand
github
repositories
that
all
have
their
own
tagging
systems,
because
they're
from
40
organizations,
this
bag
of
words
would
give
us
a
a
map
to
understand
pretend
probabilistically
similar
thing
sort
of
overcoming
some
of
the
freem
free
for
madness.
D
D
Yeah,
so
the
so
the
it's
interesting,
though,
I
have
to
figure
out
how
to
frame
it
as
a
metric.
But
yes,
it
would
be
a
metric
for
percentage
of
issues
classified
according
to
some
taxonomy
from
the
literature
and
also
potentially
from
our
experience.
And
then,
if
you
find
a
word,
that's
not
in
the
bag.
Pull
request.
Add
the
word
to
the
bag.
Gotcha
moving.
A
A
E
So
I
would
say
there
are
a
couple
things
certain
interest.
The
first
one
is
the
discussing
about
migrating
to
get
lat
the
we
just
have
and
we
can
open
the
conversation
now,
if
you
want
to
everyone
to
chaos
and
the
second
one
probably
sandy
can
help
with
more
than
me,
which
is
very
last
advances.
Remark
lab
in
the
last
week
a
couple
of
weeks,
so
something
or
yours,
yeah.
F
A
F
F
We
include
the
I
think
we
worked
on
this
a
few
weeks
ago
in
the
Criminal
Code,
which
was
to
to
create
an
overview
panel
show
with
the
soft
contributions
and
hard
contribution.
I
think
we
did
it
to
win.
Several
me
Danny
I
think
you
are
there
Matt
yeah
I
was
there.
It
was
a
couple
weeks
ago
yeah,
so
we
glued
up
on
it
in
there
in
in
the
stock.
F
E
D
Sean
Parker
hugger
is
continuing
to
develop
and
we're
collecting
more
repositories
for
more
people
all
the
time
our
docker
container
is
available
in
our
dead
branch
and
ready
to
go
the
only
thing
we're
waiting
to
test
to
release.
It
is
the
UI
that
we
built
so
that
you
can
just
take
a
list
of
repos
from
anywhere
and
add
them
automatically
into
order.
C
D
That
new
UI
for
ya,
so
basically
you
can
copy
and
paste
any
number
of
URLs
forget
repositories
into
it.
It'll
clean
them
up,
put
them
on
a
list,
let
you
put
them
in
groups
and
then
run
your
own
collection
on
whatever
those
repositories
are
we're
only
going
to
release
it
in
the
docker.
We're
gonna
release
it,
but
only
have
it
build
under
the
docker
build
right
now,
because
there
is
no
SSO
behind
otter
at
this
point,
so
you
would
not
want
to
put
that
onto
your
public
website.
D
We
do
have
a
parallel
project
taking
place
right
now,
where
we're
using
glue
and
hyper
ledger
indie
to
create
a
SSO.
That's
on
the
blockchain
for
use
of
logger
you're,
doing
that
or
you're
talking
about
it.
We're
physically
yeah
we're
doing
it.
I've
installed
hyper
ledger.
Indie
and
I've
got
a
developer.
D
D
A
D
A
All
right
so
good,
thank
you
working
groups
and
thank
you,
software
in
terms
of
moving
down
I'm
kind
of
in
the
middle
here
on
recent
discussions.
So
so
congrats
I,
don't
know
that
we've
had
the
official
call
or
maybe
it
was
last
week
but,
as
you
all
know,
we're
part
of
google
Summer
of
Code
and
outreach
e,
which
is
pretty
awesome,
so
I'm
really
excited
about
both
of
those
I
was
thinking
about
google
Summer
of
Code.
You
know
last
year,
if
I
recall,
we
had
four.
D
D
C
D
C
D
Comfortably
five
all
right,
I
mean
I.
Think
if
I
get
over
that,
then
it's
just
like
the
management
overhead
on
to
it
was
was
significant,
but
I
had
I
had
my
most
experienced
honor
people
full-time
on
it
last
summer,
I
have
so
I.
Think
I
think
this
is
a
practical
matter.
I
can't
manage
more
than
five
well.
D
A
F
D
D
With
this
I,
one
thing
I
would
say
with
my
five
number
is:
if
there
are,
if
they're
shared
things
for
the
chaos
community,
that
can
be
framed
as
ji-suk
projects
that
would
serve
auger
and
grimore
lab.
So,
if
there's
things
that
we
both
want
to
do
and
I
think
we
both
use
Python
pretty
heavily.
But
if
there's
so
there's
things
we
post
one
on
you
I'm
open
to
saying.
If
I
can,
if
I
can
manage
five
have
one
or
two
of
those
beyond
shared
projects
that
and
we'd
have
to
define
those.
D
A
So
then,
this
leads
to
kind
of
the
other.
With
respect
to
outreach
II,
you
know
we
have
a
number
of
projects
proposed
projects
that
are
kind
of
augur
focused,
some
that
are
more
lab
focused,
and
so
we
may
want
to
think
about
how
we
go
about
identifying
that
student,
because
that's
just
gonna
be
a
single
student.
A
Kind
of
allocating
the
resources
to
that
mentee,
we
haven't
really
talked
about
that
right.
So
if
we
have
I
mean
the
reality
is,
if
we
have
five
people
interested
in
now
reaching
projects
we
have
to
come,
come
to
a
wage
right
now
we
only
have
one
when
we
have
enough
resources
for
a
single
individual,
so
it
doesn't
have
to
be
solved
now,
which
is
something
that
I
want
to
put
out
there.
Our
Ricci
has
a
it's
a
it's
a
finite
thing
right,
it's
so
just
one
person.
A
So
from
my
understanding
there
are
a
couple
issues
that
have
kind
of
been
brought
forward,
so
one
is
there's
a
kind
of
a
workflow
issue
that
the
grimore
lab
is
looking
to
overcome
in
a
move.
To
get
lab
appears
to
be
able
to
overcome
that
workflow
issue
and
it's
around
issues.
So
so
far,
so
good,
there's
there's
a
concern
about
issues
when
using
github
and
the
ability
to
kind
of
aggregate
and
identify
those
issues
and
github
the
get
lab
would
be
able
to
provide
number.
One
number
two
is.
A
A
A
D
Yeah
and
I
think
I
think
that
last
one
is
the
one
that
has
a
like
the
first
two.
It's
a
question
of
part
of
the
switching
costs
worth
the
trade-off
of
switching,
but
this
the
third
one
is:
do
we
have
an
opportunity
to
contribute
upstream
to
get
lab
in
a
way
that
would
make
chaos
metrics
visible,
to
get
lab
users
right
there
and
get
lab
because
I
think
if
that's
possible,
that's
that's
a
game
changer
and
we
should
talk
seriously
about
it.
A
C
A
One
of
the
things
that
came
up
was
and
I
don't
I,
don't
know
the
scope
of
the
open
source
code
base
at
get
lab.
You
know
like
where
you
make
contributions
to
so,
for
example,
making
a
contribution
upstream
such
that
the
get
lab
API
provides
a
particular
metric
or
a
particular
way
of
looking
at
the
data
is
that
within
the
scope,
yeah.
H
I
mean
yeah,
I
mean
that's
a
good
question,
I
mean.
Obviously
we
have
an
open
core
model.
We
have
an
Enterprise
version,
opiate
lab,
that's
I
mean
the
source
code
is
available,
but
this
has
a
proprietary
license,
but
I
mean
a
lot
of
our
code
base
is
basically
you
know
it's
it's
MIT
base
and
I
mean
traditional,
like
open
source
like
a
friendly
license.
H
C
H
H
H
I
think
it
is
at
the
LF
member
summit
or
whatever
used
to
be
call
last
year.
I
think
the
number
has
gone
down
because
we
hired
a
lot
of
people.
The
number
of
community
contributions
when
I
looked
at
at
some
point
in
2018,
was
around
fifty
percent
like
if
you
look
at
the
code,
that's
been
merged
into
our
code
base
about
fifteen
percent
came
from
outside
of
the
company
and
the
the
number
has
obviously
gone
down,
because
we
like
I
tremble,
the
triple
the
number
of
engineers.
H
So
yeah
sure
and
I
mean
in
the
meantime,
I
don't
know
if
that
directly
answers
your
question.
I,
don't
know
what
the
acceptance
rate
is,
but
all
the
contributions
get
looked
at
on
a
daily
basis
and
they
get
triage
by
our
bots
and
a
lot
of
times
by
me
and
I'm
gonna
paste
the
page
here.
If
you
look
at
the
top
portion
of
that
page,
it
shows
you
the
number
of
contributors.
A
number
of
requests
said
of
me:
we've
been
getting
from
the
wider
community,
so
hopefully
that
gives
you
a
sense
of
where
things
are.
E
Another
conversation
we
had
before
on
each
related
to
this
is
have
not
even
contribute
in
upstream,
but
opening
some
discussion
about
having
good
luck,
more
research
friendly
from
McKay's
point
of
view,
like
I,
don't
know,
I,
don't
remember
all
the
specific
metrics.
We
cannot
have
from
good
luck,
but
in
github
I.
Remember:
there's
two
brink:
another
example
that
if
you
want
to
have
like
download
or
a
number
of
clones,
you
need
to
create
kind
of
a
github
they
are
requiring,
and
this
is
not
possible
to
have
you
API
directly
for
a
chattering
member.
E
H
Don't
like
I'm
not
sure
if
I
understand
the
full
details
of
your
question,
but
obviously
I
mean
you've
probably
done
this
before
anybody
can
open
issue
is
about
you
know.
Can
we
like
tweak
this
feature
somehow
and
then
I
mean
usually
that
gets
triage
by
somebody
in
our
productivity
team
and
I
mean
if
it
doesn't
get
any
like
a
immediate
attention.
H
You
can
think
somebody
like
me,
but
because
somebody
from
the
product
team
will
definitely
take
a
look
at
that
and
see
hopefully,
within
a
few
days,
comment
that
you
know
this
is
this:
is
gonna
break
something
else
that
we
can't
quite
do
it
or
like
ask
clarifying
questions
so
yeah
I
mean
feature
request.
Your
questions,
obviously,
like
I
mean
those
issues
are
all
public,
so
you're
welcome
to
Oakland
edit
and
the
other
I
mean
question.
I
mean
the
this
is
I,
guess,
sort
of
stepping
back
a
bit.
H
You
know
I
I,
don't
think
I
replied
to
any
of
the
email
discussions
on
the
mailing
list,
but
I
mean
the
question.
I
mean
this
I
think
this
sort
of
even
came
up
during
the
early
formation
stages
of
of
chaos.
I'm,
you
know
we
obviously
have
like
a
number
of
different
software
communities.
Right
and
you
know,
I
mean
I,
mean
grimoire,
lab
I.
Think
they're
there
for
variety
reasons
like
it
might
make
sense
to
look
at
a
different
alternative,
but
rather
I
mean
I,
don't
know
Shawn.
H
Let
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
for
Shawn
I
mean
you
might
prefer
they
have
all
of
your
sews.
All
of
your
things
like
still
in
github,
and
how
do
we
like
reconcile
that
if
different
software
communities
have
different
preferences
like
I've
seen
this
in
other
communities
and
it's
a
difficult
conversation
I'd
like
to
move.
D
Together
and
I'm
open
to
moving
if
the
community
is
behind
it,
like
I,
don't
stand
in
the
way
I'm
concerned
about
the
switching
costs.
Only
because
I
write
small
team-
and
we
talked
out
in
the
call
that
I'd
like
to
incur
those
switching
costs
after
the
summer,
instead
of
have
to
absorb
them,
while
I'm
doing
google
Summer
of
Code
and
a
slightly
different
summer
work
force,
I
mean.
H
So
I
mean
there's
an
other
alternative.
I
mean
Sean,
for
example,
like
your
community
or
your
software
developers
can
stay
on
github,
because
the
switching
cost
is
obviously
a
concern.
Some
can
use
something
different,
but
have
everything
mirrored
on
on
github,
so
that,
like
there's
a
place
where
people
can
go
like,
even
if
it's
not
yeah,
if.
D
Users
submitted
issues
that
are
not
correctly
classified
and
also
the
lack
of
being
able
to
see
all
of
the
issues
in
one
place
and
that
that
those
are
two
features
that
can
be
hacked
to
some
degree
in
github
but
which
it
sounds
like
gitlab.
It
has
a
better
solution
for
so
if
the
community
decides
that's
worth
moving
for,
then
I'll
get
right
behind
it
and
make
it
happen.
I
just
ask
it
happens
after
summer.
D
A
Flat-Out
yeah,
so
we
had
you're
talking
about
trying.
If
this
is
gonna
happen,
right,
I'm
also
of
the
it's
all
or
nothing,
so
it's
all
repositories
or
no
repositories,
I,
don't
think
being
split
is
a
good
idea,
developing
a
transition
plan.
So
what
would
that
even
clavia
doesn't
have
to
be
this
long
extended
document?
But
what
are
the
first
refers
repositories
to
move
and
how
do
they
report
back
on
that
move?
A
C
A
F
A
A
C
D
D
Okay,
you
know
I
mean
mechanically
I
think
we
would
first
start
by
just
moving
all
our
stuff
over
to
get
lab
and
figuring
it
out,
while
maintaining
our
primary
site
on
github.
And
then,
when
we've
got
things
worked
out,
we
move
everything
over
to
get
lab.
Okay,
like
I'm,
some
kind
of
pilot
like
we
need
some
kind
of
like
I
need
to
do
a
pilot,
so
I
have
a
better
understanding
of
what
your
lab
does
for
us
and
okay.
F
My
my
big
concern
is
about
the
continuous
integration
because
so
far
we
have
been
using
Travis,
so
there
are
no
restrictions
with
Travis,
but
in
the
case
of
good
luck,
it's
if
we
want
to
do
something
like
that.
Maybe
we
ran
out
of
time
and
we
need
to
buy
more
time
so
so,
especially
if
our
also
use
the
continuous
integration.
So
the
perfect
yeah.
G
F
D
F
D
F
My
my
point
of
view:
we
we
can
also
install
like
a
continuous
integration
demon
but
will
run
all
the
worker
that
can
run
all
that
stuff,
but
we
will
need
to
have
a
server
to
run
the
thing
and
what
it's
it's
more
complex.
What's
so,
but
it's
a
it's
a
probably
a
different
conversation.
So
what
it's
part
of
the
conversation?
But
it's
not
something
that
we
need
to
figure
out
the
when
we
finally
move.
We
need
to
consider
how
we
are
going
to
do
it.
Okay,.
A
C
One
is
to
highlight
what
are
the
different
roles
and
responsibilities
that
we
have
so
someone
coming
to
the
community
can
learn
about
how
they
can
help.
What
is
possible?
It's
also,
as
we
are
all
in
the
community,
seeing
who
is
doing
what
tasks
we
can
start
to
talk
about,
maybe
sharing
the
workload
or,
if
someone
leaves
the
we
don't
have
to
guess
what
is
it
they
did?
C
C
C
Yeah,
it's
in
the
community,
gotcha,
okay,
great
and
so
moving
forward.
I
would
like
us
to
continue
just
expanding
on
this
and
then
maybe
at
some
point
describe
what
are
the
different
tasks
which,
within
each
of
these
responsibilities,
so
that
we
have
more
detailed,
step-by-step
instructions.
So
anyone
can
follow
and
we
don't
lose
lose
out
there.
A
C
C
I
would
also
like
to
have
some
information
about
how
we
are
organized,
how
the
working
groups
work,
what
the
relationships
are,
so
that
the
handbook
becomes
the
central
place
where
someone
can
go
to
learn
about
how
the
project
works
and
operates,
and
if
they
want
to
help
what
are
the
things
they
can
help.
Okay
and
I'm.
Guessing
on
that
organizational
level.
Okay,.
A
C
So
the
podcast
as
an
idea
I
know-
we've
talked
about
this
for
a
long
time
where
I
have
at
least
talked
to
several
of
you
about
this
for
a
long
time
is
to
take
what
that
all
the
stories
are,
that
you're
hearing
about
how
metrics
are
used
in
practice
and
share
this
out.
We
have
thought
about
other
ways
like
blog
posts
in
the
past,
but
that's
I,
don't
know
it.
A
You
also
in
the
podcast,
like
things
that
we
might
be
missing
in
the
project.
You
know
like
the
Col
goals.
Question
metrics,
you
know:
are
there
certain
goals?
Because
right
now
the
working
groups,
as
you
know,
are
organized
around
Google's
questions
metrics,
but
we
obviously
don't
cover
everything.
Just
fine,
so
trying
to
identify
those
areas
of
darkness
to
shed
light
on.
C
C
H
C
Then
one
thing
that
I
also
hear
takeaways:
why
don't
you
have
a
metric
on
whatever
right
answer
is
always
well.
You
haven't
gotten
to
it
yet
yeah
we
have
the
framework
for
it.
We
can
start
working
on
this
but
mediator,
starting
with
the
more
hanging,
fruits
and
so
in
the
podcast.
Maybe
we
can
start
to
circulate
some
of
these
more
complex
ideas
that
take
us
very
long
to
that's
great.
D
H
G
C
We
have
a
rotating
set
of
cast
members
on
the
panel
at
least
two,
maybe
three,
each
time
we
do
a
podcast
and
then
we
just
record
it
through
zoom.
We
have
one
person
that
we
interview
and
then
let
that
polished
you
know,
remove
all
the
thinking
in
gaps.
I
would
create
the
what
are
they
called
show
notes
and
then,
where
be
hosted,
I'm
asking
the
Linux
Foundation.
If
we
can
have
this
on
our
website
so
that
we
just
self
hosted
and
there's
a
word
press
plug-in
that
gets
it
into
all
all
the
platform
do.
H
I
mean
what
can
just
even
post
it
like
a
live
cast,
a
dare
even
right,
I
mean
I,
don't
know
if,
like
I
mean
editing's
nice,
but
that's
a
lot
of
work
right,
like
a
mess
like
you
know,
goes
like
the
recording
those
horribly
wrong.
We
can
just
you
know
like
after
they
recording
zone
it
gets
just
automatically
posted
on
YouTube.
That's
pretty
easy.
A
Just
an
update
on
the
DNI
badging
be
really
brief
here.
So
georg
Ildiko
and
I
have
been
having
meetings
with
Steve
Winslow
at
the
Linux
Foundation,
so
some
of
you
may
know,
Steve
he's
helping
us
through
conformance
documents,
and
the
idea
here
would
be
actually
conformance
as
available
across
all
the
metrics.
This
is
where
we're
starting
to
think
right
now.
A
A
Conformant
in
the
area
of
DNI
events
or
chaos
can
form
you
get
the
idea
and
so
building
out
the
necessary
legal
documents
at
the
moment
to
actually
allow
people
to
submit
requests
for
conformance
patches
like
the
DNI,
badging
and
then
kind
of
a
legalese
that
goes
into
it
in
terms
of
how
reviews
are
done,
we're
still
a
ways
away
from
it
right
now,
but
just
just
so
you
know
we're
slowly
working
through
what
this
might
look
like
as
structure
via
health
from
the
Linux
Foundation.
If
we're
actually
gonna
do
a
conformance
program,
err
do.
I
Something
to
add
to
that,
if
I
we
do
just
a
reminder,
we
do
have
the
organization
on
github
called
badging
and
we
have
a
we
actually
saw
and
I
are
working
on
templates
right
now
too,
if
we
wanted
to
add
more
types
of
badges,
we
have
templates
for
submission
templates
for
for
the
pull
request,
template
and
things
like
that-
that
we
can
build
easily
build
now
more
badges
out
of
that.
If
we
need
to
for
the
future
yep.
A
I
A
We
just
have
a
couple
minutes
left,
so
does
anybody
want
to
bring
anything?
That's
remaining
on
this
list
forward
at
this
point
sounds
like
conferences
are
a
little
bit
up
in
the
air
at
the
moment
and
we're
gonna
have
had
not
heard
back
anything
just
so
folks
know
from
the
Linux
Foundation,
with
respect
to
open
source
in
North
America
in
terms
of
a
room.
So
it's
very
silent.
C
A
I
mean
they
probably
are
so
I've
I've
taken
a
couple
different
tax
to
get
feedbacks,
but
we
see
at
the
moment
we
don't
have
a
room
at
all
for
open
source
in
North
America.
So
we
may
want
to
think
about
this
a
little
bit
with
a
little
bit
more
urgency
because
that's
coming
up
in
June,
if
we
actually
didn't
want
to
do
a
call
for
papers,
I
mean
that's,
it's
coming
up
very,
very
quickly.
A
We
are,
and
then
we
do
have
in
the
last
minute
here
we
already
were
booked
for
open
source
summit
or
kiosk
on
Europe.
We
have
our
venue
set.
So
thanks
to
Tom,
Benz
or
setting
that
out,
it's
gonna
be
a
bigger
venue.
I
think
it's
gonna
hold.
It
can
hold
nearly
twice
as
many
people
and
it's
very
fancy.
Looking
so
that's
about
it
sounds
good.
Alright,
if
does
anybody
have
anything?
You
have
a
minute
or
30
seconds
on.
C
A
I
person
who
interview
you
today,
all
right
cool
all
right,
everybody.
Thank
you
very
much
shelby's.
Were
you
good
to
see
everybody
and
very
insightful
and
I
may
or
may
not
see
some
of
you
in
California
next
week
right,
depending
on
apparently
of
whole
variety
of
factors.
So
all
right,
everybody
all
right.