Cloud Native Computing Foundation Serverless Working Group, 14 May 2020

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: CNCF Serverless WG 2020-05-14

Description

CNCF Serverless WG 2020-05-14

A

Hey everybody look like hey.

A

Clements ginger are you there? I am.

B

Good morning, Doug good.

A

Morning, mr. Mitchell good morning, good morning, that's too else different, uh Lance I'm here, hello, all right.

C

D

Francisco, hello.

A

E

A

Timur I think it was hey I, don't think I'm, spelling that right, but I'll fix it later. Eric hey good morning, Christian, hey.

F

A

Hey Heinz good.

G

E

A

E

A

I'll get it I'll, get it Mike, Oh Mike! That's on my campus.

E

B

A

Hey Mike chorim.

A

B

A

Amen will either I, though, and Brian are you there.

H

Brian Young, yeah, sorry muted, but here now thank you is.

A

This your first time on the call it is my first time in the call cool G. Do me a favor and I paste, a link to the doc, if you just put your company name in there, son needle and so attendees. If you want to be associate with a company that is okay, I'll just do for a suffer thing, all right! Vinay are you there.

I

A

All right, one more minute that.

G

Sorry Doug Oh like what you say, I have to put it because I don't know. Maybe we have already done it again.

A

Yeah I think already have you in there like. Okay, all right, cool, I, think you're good, but I have you're from pivotal. Is that right.

G

Vmware pivotal, thank you. Okay,.

A

Yeah I wasn't sure what to do with you guys so I just pick one well.

G

I'm still pivotal, because France is not yet me required. Okay,.

A

All right, let's see we are three after. Why don't we go ahead and get started? Let make sure I'm the missing anybody, Oh Kent, hey Kent, you there.

A

We don't have a microphone, you don't guess what I'm litter all right. Let's go ahead, um no eyes worth mentioning about community time. Anything from the community. People like to bring up.

A

C

A

Hearing any so I think I mentioned this last time. The TOC would really like to see us become a cig, not just a working group under cig app delivery. We had an initial meeting with them, Monday or Tuesday this week here which woman and they gave some suggestions in terms of how to maybe tweak the Charter a little so I'm gonna. Take it another pass at that. They still really seem eager for us to be our own little cig, because service is such a hot topic and they didn't want to.

A

They don't want to seek after their rudeness they get too big either. So I'll do my best to try to find the right wording, we'll see how that plays out. Okay, SDK, so just a reminder, we will have Oh. Was there a question? Yes,.

I

I tried to follow some of the email threads on this differentiation between runtime and cig runtime and see gaps, and could you just maybe talk about what the general consensus is going forward in terms of how the differentiation is is being facilitated like for cloudiness? Is that still that I'm assuming it comes, it would come under the sink.

A

You're asking a really hard question is, which is why we're struggling with this so as best as I personally can explain it, and someone else can please chime in as best as I can explain it sake. Runtime is more for things like kubernetes, where its base level, infrastructural thing, low, low level type stuff, okay, cig, app delivery is meant to be I, think a user experience, which is why you're gonna see things like helm show up there.

A

If Cloud Foundry were to appear under scene CF one day, I'm, not saying it should I'm saying as an example, I found, you might appear under there that kind of stuff. So it's meant to be it's simple of her I simplified. The developer experience the app delivery, it's all about delivering your application in the easiest way possible. Now that the challenge then comes in to how you distinguish app delivery from service because well service, you can focus on oh well, it's about. You know functions of the service, it's about scale, to zero.

A

It's about pay-as-you-go and those are all true.

A

As we've seen, the line between serve lists functions of service container as a service platform service is actually getting very, very blurred, and a lot of the stuff that we talk about in the service world nowadays can very easily be applied to say platform as a service right, because, if you look at say something like K native versus cloud foundry, if you ignore some things like the scale to zero stuff that K NATO brings to it, they're actually very, very similar right, and so the line between those two worlds of app delivery and service is very, very blurred.

A

And that's why we're struggling with this right? We can't come up with a crisp definition of what a service sig is versus app delivery, sig, but we're gonna try and to be honest, the wording we may have in there may end up being something along lines of we're.

A

Gonna try to make an attempt to turn to to split the the definitions, but in all reality, we're probably gonna have to take each project that comes to the CNC F on a case-by-case basis to see whether it's best fit for service versus app delivery, and there may not be a good rhyme or reason other than each one is a special snowflake that needs to have its own decision made. That's the best I could do right.

I

No that's very helpful, and also maybe, if I could just taking on that community time. Just ask another question: I know we called this working group or the the sake working group as the serverless working group, but we have most of the focus has been on. You know, for example, that power I mean I, think the last two months we focused on cloud events. So how is that distinction handled?

I

Is there a separate seek for the service, or this is and or do you just see this as a critical piece of the the the massaging ecosystem that is fundamental to service? So.

A

Again, this is just my opinion, but the way I've kind of thought of it is until we become a full-fledged sig I've, been kind of ignoring the question, because once we become a full-fledged sig I think there's gonna be a fair amount of more bureaucracy. We need to deal with for lack of a better phrase, and at that point we probably will have to spin up a dedicated service.

A

Sig phone call that's, but from cloud events for the most part, we've been kind of lucky in that most of the work that's gone in the service working group has all been focused on one particular task right. We don't have multiple things going. At the same time, however, if you look at the workflow stuff that did spin off into a separate, not working group, its subgroup under service, and they even have their own phone calls and their own slack channel stuff like that, so we can fork as necessary. It's just we've been lucky in that.

A

For the most part, everybody who wanted to focus on the service side of things has said: okay, let's all focus on cloud events and that's why? We've only had one phone call, but we will spend up other phone calls as necessary. Hopefully that answers your question. Yes,.

I

Thank you. Okay,.

A

Any other questions or saying I just want to chime in there to give alternative point of view.

A

All right, thank you right. Okay, as I was saying, SDK call. We will have one every week going forward, starting with this week. We did have one last week, I life--my can I remember what we talked about. Did somebody who's on that call? Remember we.

G

Talked about the typescript, oh yeah,.

A

Yeah that took up the whole called into basically yeah. Okay- and we are gonna- continue that discussion today. If we have time on this call we'll jump into it. If, if we don't have time when this call, then we'll just do it again on the sdk call, but there is a whole discussion about whether we want to keep the typescript as a separate sdk from javascript.

A

No, on last week's call, we agreed to create the typescript sdk repo as a temporary measure until we have a formal decision just so, we don't hold up those guys when you have that work done, but if some reason we decide, we don't want it and we want to merge the two into one repo. We can kill off that repo, but that's the discussion for later in the call, okay and just reminder: we will have a ck column immediately after this one. Even if this call it ends early will start up all right.

A

Timur is there something you want to mention status wise from the workflow subgroup.

C

You sure we had our meeting with the Argo team and I think Manuel. If you can give us an update on that.

C

F

We reached out to aqua slack and Alex Collins, one of the founders, and we are meeting on Monday with 17 people attending three of them from into it was Alex Collins, then at Lee and Malika covers this. We are from Intuit, they were most active in the discussion and they seemed pretty interested in the idea to have a common standard language that is also not bound to the platform, as in kubernetes custom users descriptors.

F

So they are going to join us from our next community call, and maybe also on our next primer discussion, starting again on Monday, to drive forward common specification and thanks to Timmy's work. It seems that would argue us in a goo workflows and our events. It's pretty much aligned with the capabilities of the current dot, one release of surveillance, workflow language and we're pretty positive on finding some agreement with them. That'd be cool, excellent.

F

H

C

I may just like we're doing the same now with the brigade project, so we've started working on examples as well, but I do want to ask you Doug, like with the server list cig, like we're currently going through the sandbox project proposal with the sig app delivery. Is that have any implications or not with their thoughts? This.

A

You think it would, but I wouldn't worry about it until we figure out what we're doing with the service sig. Okay,.

A

Okay, any other questions for the workflow team, all right moving forward, then just a reminder. While we I do take attendance and we track these things, we've had a lot of new people join. The group recently I, just wanna, make sure everybody understands the reason we do this. We don't often take formal votes. We try our very very best to get consensus for most decisions.

A

However, obviously there will be times that we can't necessarily agree and we have to take a formal vote and the way voting works in this group is not through PRS and stuff like that, because we don't have a final. A daily stream. Apr is like a normal quote: open source project would rather, we do it based upon attendance and typically also its associated per company.

A

So what ends up happening is I, do take attendance and that's why I ask for people to associate themselves with a company, and each company has a primary and alternate as long as one of those two people show up for the last three out of four phone calls, then that company gets voting rights?

A

Okay, so that's why it is kind of important for one for me to make sure that for you to make sure that I hear you on the call or say something in the Xoom chat and I'll mark your attendance there, that's what the little asterisk means up here. Okay, also make sure that you have somebody who tends on a regular basis listed as your primary alternate. Alright. So, for example, let me pick on RedHat for a minute here for a long time, both of the red hats, primary and alternate folks did not attend. The call.

A

Where is everybody at so I died, I reached out to Lance and said you may want to change that, so he became the primary this week. I have no qualms about changing it around as necessary and he didn't lose. You know his his attendance like that, so right now, they're green, so they can vote the only constraint that we have in terms of switching these things around is, if you end up asking to have the primary and alternate change on a weekly basis, because every week a different person shows up.

A

That's not within the spirit of things right we're trying to get people to show that the same person is show up on a fairly regular basis so that they have a continuity in terms of understanding. What we're doing right, because we don't want people who show up just to get voting rights because, first of all, as I said, we don't well very often so voting rights really doesn't matter that much and it's very rare that we actually need it. So, as I said, you can change around as necessary. It's just on a weekly basis.

A

You're gonna get some eyebrows raised so that it's thinking you're playing games and that's what we're trying to avoid. Okay,.

G

That quick question the questions on this on the subject. I actually see my name and no 0, no 2, no 3, nothing there so and we've been in the list for hold pose. Yes,.

A

G

To me, because.

A

Mark fishers, you're just reach out to me and I'll I'll bump you up to be primary and then you're good to go. Oh Marcus.

G

Actually, maybe joining us within like three minutes ago, but anyway, that's not the bigger. My other question wasn't probably more important. Sometimes there will be people letting loose a subject matter expert who maybe one off to join the call to discuss a particular PR or something and or and that may get into into a bind, but that person effectively doesn't have any voting rights because he just got in there for the first time. How does I mean? Maybe you just never encounter that situation before no?

G

A

And so obviously, this is an open call. Anybody is free to join.

G

A

If they just show up once that's fine, actually, if you look down here right, we have a whole bunch of people who actually once I, you know, wait over here, a little yeses for them. I keep trying.

G

A

In case they show back up again, and so that's that's perfectly fine, it's just if they don't show up again or they're not supposed to be the company that shows up a real basis. They won't have voting rights, but it doesn't matter right. They don't show up off enough that they really care. I will point out, though, for some people like take Vlad fraud. They pick on him.

A

He is not a socially the companies, he does his own stuff, so it is possible for people who don't want to be associated with a company either because they don't have a company or because they're doing this on their own they're, not officially part of the company. They can show.

G

A

Self and that's fine as well, and they will give voting rights you can see. We have four people right here: okay, okay, it's not a big deal. I! Don't worry too much about this stuff. As I said, we.

G

Do know I just yeah yeah.

A

Now I wasn't focusing on you, it's just in general. I know some people get nervous about this stuff, but, like I said it doesn't really matter. We've had I think less than 10 votes total for the entire lifespan of out events, so it's very very rarely actually take votes, which is I, think a good thing.

A

Okay, but I do want.

J

A

For people who don't understand what the heck we're doing and why I care about so much about hearing about people from the attendance list, all right, any questions on that alright, now, let's get into some real work. um So so we talked about this last week and Fabio was indicated that next, let me show you the comment, so you guys can read it yourself.

A

He indicated that, while this is a breaking change in terms of from a code generation side of things, it's not a breaking change for what's on the wire and he if I'm interpreting his comment here is saying that means we don't necessarily need to create a 2.0 of the Avro spec.

A

So this is more of a maybe an SDK impact kind of a thing or a coding and kind of a thing if you're, if they're using the schema, it's my interpretation of it, I want to hear from other people in terms of what they think about that. Do they think that's a satisfactory answer for us not to have to worry about this being a 2.0 or is he playing fast and loose with terminology here.

G

America reading yeah yeah.

A

Okay and I will pick on people if they don't want to speak up. I know we have some quote standards like people who think about these things. Often- and you know who you are.

A

Clemons I want to pick on you, it's your price for not being on the call. Last week.

K

If I think this was the this, this was to disambiguate the or to make clear. This is just the avro encoded way of doing a cloud event, and it's not the cloud event as it should be memory right.

K

A

He's did these changes he's making yeah. He.

K

Claims this is not.

A

Affect what appears on the wire.

K

I believe that's true. Okay,.

E

K

Of the schema is to avoid it is not to have the the names in on the wire. So.

A

This sounds like it's more like impacting SDK or just customer coding, stuff up type things right. Yes,.

K

Okay, so so it needs, it needs a version. It's it's a breaking change, but it's not. It doesn't have wire impact so either schema should.

K

Well, we I'm willing to trust professionals so so I'm not I'm, not gonna I'm, not gonna, question and I'm, not gonna question the statement, if he, if he says so because I mean the easy the easy way to prove this is to basically Cyril eyes out and one with a one schema and then serialize back in with the with the other schema and see whether it breaks but I guess. That's.

K

So I'm, assuming that has happened, I.

H

G

The way I read fabulous comment because it was a little confusing word erica sales to PR does not change and I say so. These breaks, but the way I read it is the usage itself for somebody who expects something may break or will break, but on the wire. The context of this cloud event will stay the same. So I guess that's! Yes,.

K

So I don't think it's breaking from the sense that it's from the, if, if it doesn't have wire impact which I believe yeah it's.

B

Not that I say.

D

K

Just that I I believe the theory. Let's put it this way, then then right, nothing breaks until you take on this, and until you take on the schema right, it's up to you. So those two schemas, the old one and the new one are compatible on the wire which mean right.

G

K

Can now go and take this new schema, which is which can also be you, know, 1.0 a and, and that was that will work well. What they will do is it will for the future and for everybody who takes on that schema clarify that whatever you co generate is just the the the avro serialization of the cloud events, and it's not the the actual cloud event object that you would get if you are seeking the SDK.

K

So this is it's effectively clarification, so it's fixing a bug, and so therefore it's it's not a breaking change in that way.

A

Yeah I, like the fact that you said it ate more of a bug fix yeah, even though it feels like we're being a little bit generous with that.

G

Standard excuse will do that, but it's a breaking, she would say. Well, actually it was a bug we have to say it's.

K

A it's a breaking change. It's it's a breaking change in the sense that yeah, if you previously relied on the the Avro sterilizer spitting out a class with that or or an object with that particular name. Then. Yes, that is a breaking change. So that's why we need to have a new version number, but it's not a 2.0 I! Think that's the argument here. Okay is.

A

There anybody in the call that would look at this situation and say we're kidding ourselves. This really needs to be a 2.0.

A

G

Good idea, we've been more like a sort of a standard scheme evolution case I mean it's constantly used in messaging, inventing apps where schema changes, and we have a dynamic way of retrieving schema and applying a particular specific schema on the object that may have been through the schema evolution change, so I mean there may be like a different way of even approaching it, but maybe outside of scope of this discussion, but I mean I, don't see it as a your classic breaking change this from my opinion, I see it more as a developer.

G

You know there are breaking changes, but if it's a it's not like something in the production of all time, just crash I mean it's something. They were really discovered. In my opinion, your linear development phase and once a dress, no longer an issue, Jam your hands up, yeah.

L

I think I was gonna say the same thing actually um for me. A breaking change I think it's really a change to the wire yeah. Well, if you remember it, we changed the JC schema right upper yeah. I know we hadn't released mundo at that point, but we changed the JSON schema.

L

We didn't change the format on the wire, but it did change the way we represented it from a schema gen perspective, so that would have changed code, so I would I would tend to sort of let this one through on the assumption that the wired format isn't actually changing and I. Don't think I can comment on that.

A

Okay, anybody else have any alternate point of view on that.

A

Okay, in that case, is there any objection, then, to approving this PR.

A

All right, thank you, everybody next one! Thank you here we go okay next, so this PR, unfortunately I meant to get it done Tuesday night, but I, don't think I did so I end up doing it yesterday. So it's too soon to merge. However, I did want to have a discussion about it and particular mic you're, so on the call right. Okay, good, so not have any high comments first.

A

So basically, what I tried to do here was I thought that the I think okay, I always get the the P words mixed up.

A

There's provider and producer I think it was very confusing having both words in the spec and I tried to actually eliminate that, and what I then also tried to do was to talk about and I stole classes idea of using a term called source class which is sort of like source, but it's not as specific right so in the in the crowd, event, source, world or usage, the source actually gets down to. Maybe something like the actual bucket name.

A

If you have an object, store, source class is something that's a little bit more abstract in the sense that it's method represents the object store itself, not necessarily the actual instance of the thing inside the object store that produced the event and that's why we I use the word source in there. But then we call that class simplify it's it's related to it, but not quite the same thing. However, it is meant to be a unique identifier for the thing.

A

So if you actually looked an example down here, you see source classes example.com, but the actual event itself might be example.com, slash bucket, slash, foo or something like that right and what I wanted to then do was to show when, if once you did that, if you took all the other properties that I think Mike defined and just show them in a very pseudo yeah militia type format. It's not a hundred percent ya know it was like you know.

A

The a strikes on question mark show whether it's if it's cardinality and stuff, but I thought this gave a nice very quick overview in terms of how things would actually appear. If, for example, this word appear in yamo on the wire, ultimately, you probably would want to convert this to something more like Jason of Jason is the preferred format we want to support, but I wanted to take a step forward in terms of producing something that was a little more concrete than just a list of attributes that Mike had and show them in a format.

A

So we were going to understand what would the data model, at least conceptually look like, and let me sort of pause there since Mike, you have your hand up.

J

So I I, really don't like the word source class I think it implies abstraction like I, immediately go to like the idea of a class and a programming language right. It's hey, wait: I I, put a comment on the PR I suggested source system, but I like inner. In reality, this would indicate like a specific product that somebody is subscribing to events from I.

M

G

Literally gonna complain with the same class.

N

As a developer, I was like what.

G

And what does example.com? That's? There was not a class, so let me I as a late comer to the overall discussion. Let me ask a stupid question, example.com or whatever, that down below that you example.com.

G

Could it just be any kind of immunity, because your documentation states uniquely call it unique name, so it could be any kind of unique name as long as it's unique, it is where it should be of certain format. Like a you know, like a domain name or whatever I.

A

Think I think so a couple things to Mike's comments about the name honestly I'm, okay, with source system I, think that that actually probably is a better phrase for it. I know: I'm not married to the name. I just was really bothered by the two words that start with P provider and producer being so close together. That was not the.

A

L

A

The second one is, we need to go through make sure for all of the properties, what their actual types are, what the scope is now. My interpretation of this particular thing is that I believe cloud eventsource is a URI okay. This.

G

A

Be a URI as well and in terms of uniqueness, I think it just has to be unique within the scope of this particular disc discovery. Endpoint! That's that's!.

O

A

O

G

Again, maybe a stupid question: why? Because see the people don't like source system source group? So since group is one suggestion but source URI I mean go for a simple one. Well,.

A

So the reason I know it's funny, I think and I'm.

G

Throwing it out there no.

A

It's all good, it's just I think at one point in theirs in the chat. I actually didn't mention using word source there, but the problem was Kimber who it was. Where was my core core class mentioned that may be confusing for people, because they may look at and say: oh, what's the cloud event source? Well, it's not right and I. Don't want that confusion either. So, but.

J

I think it's important to think about where this would be displayed. So, like my my thought, your thought process here was that, whatever, whatever we call, this string that might show up in a UI for somebody to like drill down to oh I, can pick events from my storage provider from my database provider from my audit log provider like they're gonna, be identifying it by the name that they know that system bond.

A

G

The suggestion, based on what I'm here, yeah.

A

We can we can rattle on the name itself, but I think we should let Scott name it. I know how much he likes naming things yes, but the other thing that I did change and Mike I wanted to make sure you you were aware of this was in Europe in the current form of the spec.

A

You actually have what I call description as sort of the main key as a human, readable string and I flipped it so that the machine, readable thing is the URI that way it's guaranteed to be the same, hopefully not something you can search on I didn't like using it the human readable string as the search string, because that could change over time right companies get bought out or there's a fat-fingered, the name at one point. They need to rename it right that kind of stuff.

A

um So I want to make sure that you notice that- and you didn't have any concern with that because later on, when I do talk about samples, I talked about using the source class as the search string, not the description thing. You know you could support searching on description. I thought that wasn't the primary use case.

J

I think you probably want to support searching over multiple fields, but yeah.

P

A

Okay, um I thought I saw a hand, go up there for a second Oh Thomas.

E

Yeah I was also looking for the unmute spacebar right now behind source class. You write unique identifier for producer right, so I was thinking of. Why? Don't you name it either producer or producer ID.

F

Just as already taking yeah.

A

G

A

This issue right, yeah.

G

K

Producer, the producer is the one who's putting the events on the wire, but the source may be something else. Yeah.

A

I I probably should not use the word producer here. I honestly, I, don't care about its wording. I just did not want to have two words that look so similar I, probably should have said unique identifier for the entity, making the event or I don't know something like that. Right, yeah, yeah, I think.

E

That's exactly where I struggled as well with the producer and to provide to rent a source and yeah I. Think that's exactly where I that that issue a couple weeks ago, but I didn't have time to work on it.

J

I think the problem arises because of the way source is defined in the cloud event, spec and I personally think it's defined incorrectly Oh Mike keep.

A

Going down someplace, you don't want to go I.

J

A

I wasn't around for.

J

When those discussions were had but I think the source is used as weird okay.

Q

Q

In yourself, Mike I.

J

Think a source I think of the system like oh this is coming from, or this is coming from MongoDB and instead we've made that to be something more like what subject should be like. So you have this weird combination of source and subject to actually find out a little bit of the thing that you have, and the origin system is mostly described by the event type when event types are not required to be unique by origin system. It's.

K

There are scenarios where that's not so easy, for instance, if you have a industrial machine, that industrial machine may have something that's happening kind of deep in the bowels of that box and that you want to go and report out, but the the part that actually does the reporting. That is the producer. That's the one who's formulating the cloud event is something completely different. That's that's far away so that producer may actually be responsible for 500 different things that exists in in in that machine and they're, not all the same thing.

K

It might be reporting on behalf of a sensor and might be reporting on behalf of a drive. It might be reporting them on behalf of a whole universe of things. So there is a producer and that's the one, who's formulating the cloud event and then there's a source, and that is affecting what that event is about, and those things are clearly distinct right.

J

But the producer doesn't appear anywhere in the payload. That's correct: okay,.

K

Now they say that that.

J

Can be hard to talk about well.

C

J

I totally get why the use of source in its current form, the name has always bothered me, but.

K

Yeah, but it's not so so yeah I understand that, but we have. We have things that that are affecting producers, and that is, for instance, authenticating towards a party where that event gets being sent is being sent.

K

That's something that the producer has to do and not the source and then there's other aspects like how do you- and this is something that this that this year describes where another role is touched, and that is the subscription manager, which actually is the point where we are distributing those events from so that thing is neither the producer nor the source, because the.

G

K

Which is which is helping the producer distribute its events.

E

It's an interesting discussion because we also interpreted source as really the Machine which actually sends out the event and not the sensor which triggers the occurrence. So we.

K

E

I think exactly the other way around.

K

We meant source to me literally, it is the unique identifier of the thing or the context where the event comes from, so that might actually so the source might be very rich description of a detailed description of you know. A sensor that sits inside of an industrial machine welter producer is the thing you configure to go and send those things out to map this concretely into something that is in the industry. Alum Brown in OPC way, where we're introducing OPC UA Susannah duster standard we're introducing cloud events.

K

There I wrote the the binding specs in for obviously way for cloud events. That's currently floating around as a proposal over there and they're. The producer is really the OPC UA publisher, which is collecting events from within the OPC UA outer space where those are getting getting raised. So the the the source your eye is constructed based on the identifier that is exists in that OPC UA outer space. Well, the producer itself is identifying itself with its identity, identity towards the old network actors.

K

So that's why those things are really need to be different, so I.

A

Don't want to rattle too much on this I think I. Think everybody's agreed source glass is not the right phrase for it and I'm. Okay, with that yep I will I will and I'll remove the word producer: okay, I'm, okay, with I, think someone said: source system, I kind of like source system, just because the word system in there implies to me it's like the the bigger entity, but to be honest, this a lot of these field names may actually change as we go through the cycle right and so right now.

A

My bigger concern is whether the overall direction of this PR is heading in the right direction or where there is something fundamentally wrong with it, because at this point in time, in our life cycle, we have to get to the we have to sort of assume that each step is just better than we have right now, and it may not be perfect, but it's a step in the right direction is what the biggest criteria is. Okay. Well, we're strive for perfection as we've closer to 1.0, so Mike in particular.

A

Pick on you, aside from the naming aspect, does the direction I've taken here seem sort of okay with you so far, Mike.

J

A

And don't don't worry that said this is too soon for us to approve today, but I didn't want to bring it up to people's attention and I'll obviously make these changes to it. Provide feedback in the PR itself as we go forward. Just don't get too hung up hung up on naming if you have a good suggestion, I'm all ears, but don't get hung up on thinking that once this PR is accepted or if it's accepted that everything's set in stone. As Jim mentioned, we changed lots of stuff right.

A

41.0 relatives adjacent schema, so we had no calls about that. We're just trying to make forward progress. Okay and I did take us. Take a quick stab at trying to show what some sample queries might look like not set in stone. Just my quick rough idea, cuz I wanted to show how I didn't think the query format would necessarily very complicated the questions I had for the group and I.

A

Don't have to have an answer now, but the questions I had were things like when you specify two different attribute names, is it an or or an and.

J

A

J

A

Have no idea I forgot about that I just this is just the one that jumped my head as I was typing up the PR.

J

162 yeah so before you would have been able to say, like you know, host name, slash, source class, slash example.com, so just fired if I get by a trespass. Give me all of the the data models for that provider home so.

A

In that model, I understand how you could do that for something like source class. When you get down to something like protocols and types where there's more than one, how did you see that playing F I want to say I want the the source of the source system that has to to event types and I want it to be an and or an or how do you do that kind of stuff with the path thing I.

J

Mean you can have queries on top of on top of paths for sure, but be you know the hope. The whole. The whole point of rest right is that you have canonical paths or access to objects.

A

Yeah and I think that that that I guess I'd like to see how it looks, because if you searching on source class, that makes sense to me, because that is the.

G

A

That, if the next object in the in the path, but if you wanted to instead search on description, which you said you did want to be able to support, how would you see that happening? What said the other.

J

New common cases are searching on on source class and searching on type right, so in the in the original PR there were a rest paths for both source class and type. You could go in and say, give me, you know, give me get at /type /page, upload, alright, and it would give you all of the source classes that match that.

J

But there's that, like there's, no reason that you can't have a rest path with a query filter after it or or for that matter, you know, get source clash. Question mark query string right, which is also I, think in the original as well. It's very listing. Okay,.

A

I'll, take a I'll take another look at that. Like I, said I just completely forgot about that as I was writing this up.

O

A

Okay, any other questions on the direction I was heading here. Obviously it's too new for deep comments, but anything that's jumping out of people in willing to answer questions now.

A

Okay, guys, please take a look at it, I'm open to any suggestions, let's just not rattle too much on naming it's. My only request, let's see in terms of other pr's of francesco, did you want to talk about this one or not I.

R

A

Okay, that's fine! In that case, Before we jump into the typescript discussion yeah. There are any other topics related to any of the specs we have Oh Clemens. Did you want to talk about the schema stuff, or do you want to wait until your proposal? You sent that you're gonna send out before Wednesday next week, I'll.

K

Just mention it because not everybody may have seen the email so I'm. So thank you very much for approving forming the working group. We'll see how big that is. I will turn that issue detects in the issue into a spec and also provide a swagger document along with it that describes what the shape of that is.

K

I wanted to do that for this week, but there's a lot going on and so I couldn't I'm also asking for some help from our engineering team and we'll hopefully have that then for review next next week, Germany has a holiday on Thursday at least where I live, so I'm not gonna, be on the call next week, but I'll have that for review for the schema registry.

K

If, since schema registries are not necessarily novel, if any of you have an existing implementation of a schema registry, it would be a good idea to raise your hands and potentially also point to any existing documentation. You may have a condition for that is obviously that their schema registry is one that you own and that is not unencumbered, not encumbered by licenses that are not open so that we can take that in because, ultimately, that's going to be owned by the CNC F, and so that would be the only only condition for that. I guess.

K

But whatever we're going to propose here from from the Microsoft side is not necessarily the last word I think and we're totally open to whatever solution comes out of this so and then I'm obviously also interested in folks who are interested in driving. That forward with us in this group and I. Think we need to go decides whether we're going to discuss that on in this group here in that forum or whether we're going to make a sub working group, as we did, that for the discovery and subscription documents to at least boot it.

K

So if it would be great, if you could think about whether you are interested in participating in that effort and I said, I'll have a proposal out mid next week that formalizes effective what the issue is. But if you look at the issue, then the shape of this will not deviate from from what we proposed there. Any.

A

Questions for Clemens all right! Thank you coming forward that all right with that I have a very strong suspicion that we will probably not come to any kind of formal vote on whether we should keep the SDK repo I'm. Sorry, that the typescript SDK repo or around or not I, have been this gonna be a long discussion. So if you are not interested in the SDK side of the group feel free to leave, we're not gonna take any formal votes.

A

If we end up Anna miracle happens, we come to a decision, we'll just defer the vote until next week, so you won't miss it so feel free to drop off. However, if your name does not have an asterisk next to it in the attendee list, just put a comment in the zoom chat, so I know you're here and I'll put a star there. Okay actually hold on I'm. Just do I normally do hold on kento you, there yeah I'm, here: okay Dustin, either howdy I'm, here, hello, Remy, great.

Q

A

Nick, okay mark hey Samri there Sam.

A

Okay, what about Sir, J, yeah, okay and grant I'm here? Okay did I miss anybody.

P

Believe me I'm sorry.

A

P

Lydia stupid.

A

It's yes, okay, okay, oh hey class. How did I miss you I even talked about you, okay, anybody else.

A

Okay, Remy, you might be near the group. Do me a favor paste, your company name in the zoom chat. If you want to be associated with a company and with that's typescript who would like to lead off the discussion here, a quick.

G

Question before we jump into that, if I may yes, sir, is the typescript for the next time. What is the only thing we're gonna be discussing or there's a because the document has no agenda. That's why I was.

A

Gonna check that, if there's nothing on the agenda, then this will probably be the only topic unless someone in the next hour can come up with one a lot of times. We do play it by ear. I mean.

G

I have an agenda that I want to discuss, but so that's why I was waiting for April I mean made for keen thing to be created, but it oh.

A

Sorry, sorry about that, tell you what, while we're talking about the typescript thing, I will go and out the section header and then you can add it to their own. Oh okay and.

E

Thomas your hands up, oh yeah, I, wanted to ask actually my zoom client crashed, but I wanted to quickly ask an SDK question: would that be possible before your heel into the transcript sir.

A

E

Tried out the c-sharp SDK and quickly need to switch my screen.

E

Since my client crashed it's difficult to get out here, we go.

E

And my question is a used content, load, binary and then I also tried content mode, structured and in both cases, all the HTTP header fields were filled in and I wasn't sure whether it is this intentionally or this is rather an issue. That's.

K

That I wrote that that is intentional, so we kept it. We kept it optional in the in the specification, which means that even you, even though you send star, if you're, sending structured mode data, it's permitted to also send the attributes in the transport headers and I.

E

Thought it's the other way around. Isn't it because in the structured mode you use Content, ID cloud events plus Jason? Yes, whereas in the binary you're only use application, slash Jason!

E

K

You're sending if you're sending Jason that's correct. Yes, yeah.

E

K

So but the headers so which headers? Are you confused about yeah.

E

I was just confused because I watched a video from Doc, actually where he explained HTTP binary, which showed the header fields and on the structured slide. There were no header fields, so so.

K

This specific, what the specification says is that if you send in structured mode and you're sending it over HTTP yeah.

E

K

It's still permitted for the for the headers to appear as if you were sending structured mode. Okay,.

E

K

So I'm choosing to do that in the in in in the c-sharp SDK. Okay,.

E

K

There may be an intermediary like a proxy mm-hmm who's actually interested in in in some of that information to do whatever it likes and so independent of what you choose as the encoding for the end-to-end relationship that you're still enabling the proxy to go and take a look at those headers. That's that's why that's what I'm doing is arguably I could I could go and add a switch they're, not.

E

Fine, it's fine, just I've wanted to know whether this.

K

Was intentionally.

E

K

That's no accident that was so.

E

Any intermediary should actually check for the other fields, no matter what the content type is right,.

K

No, it doesn't have to because.

E

K

E

K

Irsay the content I per se is a clear indicator of what you're looking at okay.

E

But nevertheless they can look for the HTTP header fields right. Yes,.

K

So they could look at c c e, subject: yeah or see their source and make some decision based on them. Okay,.

E

Thank you very much. Let's answer the question so.

A

To the main topic on the agenda, typescript I seek a glance grant when you guys want to kick off the bring everybody up to speed on what's going on, and what the question is.

S

A

S

Can everyone hear me mm-hmm, okay yeah, so there is an outstanding issue and the cloud runs SDK for JavaScript, and that issue is around typescript support. Type trip is a superset of JavaScript used by many companies that allows you to have static types during a developing time to ensure that your code is is more pick-proof and safe, and it provides a great well virtually right now. There's no support for typescript in the JavaScript SDK.

S

Their hub has been a lot of discussion and a github issue around it, and there have been proposals around annotating types, but there's been some I I want to say resistance on adding Ted script. The fascial change would be changing the file extension of the files from jst TS and then adding a watcher compilation step.

S

Given that there's a lot of interest and pet wraps and personally, it affects my work and a lot of other work and there's not been any progress. One of the recent decisions.

S

Temporary decisions was to create a separate repo called a sticky type script that would in fact fully adopt egg scrip and it would still be a module that's published to NPM, but it would love for some of the features or just support touch kit that that's families, state I created a pull request recently to initialize the typescript repo, and that's what you see there and yeah I.

S

Think one of the biggest advantages is that you'll get a escape, IDE auto-completion and don't get like lint tears and they'll get a lot of things that you don't that you really can't get without providing types. I think they'll. This will be really useful for developers personally.

B

S

I work with that are consuming cloud events, okay,.

A

Thank you so just pick on lance in a sec, but just from my point of view and I made it perfectly clear and every comment they make I, don't Nick said nothing about this stuff and I wanted. However, I do think it's important that we don't necessary and escutcheon about whether typescript versus javascript is one better than the other. Anything like that to me.

A

The overall question is: can we do both in one repo or not because I've from my outsider's point of view, I feel like I'm hearing slightly different versions of what's possible on one hand, I hear somebody say: yes, it's possible to do it. We just need to have compromise other times, I hear nope. It would be better for the end users if they were separate I, don't know what the answer is, but I think that is the ultimate question.

A

We're trying to get here's does that make sense of do it in one repo versus not whether one is better than the other. So now, let's look on Lance, so I know you have a you, have an opinion on this entire discussion of.

N

Course I have an opinion. Yeah I personally would not I, don't think it's a good idea to have a separate repo I mean I. Think if that's the, where we land that's where we land but I agree. That's what's the community, you know this conversation has been going on for about two and a half three weeks now and I feel like I've, compromised a lot and put together a PR yesterday that introduces typescript in a way where it generates type definitions and does the sort of type checking the grant.

N

You were just talking about, like your little screenshot there in the in the yeah that one that you know works with generated type definitions and stuff like that and personally I feel like this is a nice compromise on a path towards potentially switching over completely to typescript the way I look at typescript is there's sort of benefits on in two different communities. You've got your people who are maintaining the repository and you have your end.

N

Users- and most of this discussion has revolved around what is the benefit for the end users and as far as I can see doing, type definitions and- and you know, good quality, Java Docs, which can all be enforced through linting, is a nice compromise on a potential path towards what am I trying to say. No, the end users yeah so for end users, I think it gets us there, or at least it gets us like 95 percent there I, don't know what that other 5% would be.

N

I haven't been able to see it, but it seems to me like it gets us there for the developer side of the art of the maintainer side of the community.

N

You know: there's have a much much larger pool of JavaScript developers who would potentially be able to contribute to this repository if it were, if it maintained the pure j/s implementation, with type definitions and good quality j/s Docs.

N

The question has been well okay, if you go that far, why don't we just change the files? 2.2, yes and have the translation step every time? I guess! My question is: if we're just sticking with pure JavaScript, then why have that intermediate intermediate transpilation step because we're going from a dot TS file with pure JavaScript to a dot J's file with pure JavaScript, and it doesn't seem to provide any benefit that I'm I'm? Aware of?

N

Maybe it does I just don't know, you know I'm, not a typescript developer and that's part of the reason why I would like to find a compromise that doesn't require us to completely change the repository to type script, but solves the problem for end-users.

A

Let me your hands up I.

T

Think, like the Sun of prominence, was pretty good. I think it for the end user, the PID blast yesterday and basically kind of solve it from the VVT from the annuda I really think. For an end user point of view, it's really bad if we end up having a split repo, because that means you have to package on NPM and it's gonna be really hard to track. What is the official? Even if it's two of your shorts packages, it's kind of really weird, to see that nothing in the world and then on.

T

The comment like I would like in fact to join and maybe contribute a bit, but it's kind of I don't understand how we try to split the community between JavaScript and typescript programmer.

T

Maybe it's me who oversimplify stuff, but for me, if you know how to develop in JavaScript, like you know how to debug in typescript, it's not like a crazy change, so I will think it's a good benefit for the community of mansion else to switch to type suite. But of course, like I, just join this discussion, I'm new here so I, don't want to like I'm no one to to voice. Obviously, but yeah I think you lens did a great job of looking at typescript and I.

T

Think the next step is basically to just migrate and my advice would be I just go for it, but it's still to you as an end user. I think what he proposed would be enough. Okay,.

A

Thank You Lancer hands up yeah.

N

I guess the only thing I wanted to address is the the thing about about typescript being a superset of JavaScript and if you're a JavaScript developer, you should be able to write typescript, that's true. Unless you don't actually know what those superset bits are you know you can you can write all the JavaScript in your TS files? That's totally fine, but like there's code in in the SDK typescript repository, that is not I mean it's part of that superset and that's what I'm trying to avoid, at least for the short time.

A

So probably a stupid question, but is it not possible to have in essence two different sort of build or deployment paths within the same repository, meaning if you're writing typescript? This is the path you used to to. You know, compile your code and then run it, but if you're doing JavaScript here's the path you use and it's more, which is a bundling step I mean, is that does that make any sense? Is that not set?

A

Is that more confusing to people, because I still can't wrap my head around whether there actually would be common code that would be used at runtime and it's more of just a development build time difference that make any sense.

S

I mean it's all the same, all just running JavaScript and node Union. Today.

S

It doesn't really make sense to have the same implementation of a spec and two different folders in the same repo I mean ideally they're just be typescript and it would just compile to JavaScript, and that would be one folder.

A

Answer hands up oh.

N

Sorry that that's old, oh it's, okay, sorry.

T

Yeah I do agree with Grant yeah.

S

I mean I I. Can it's it's literally like a block like I? Don't know what to do. It's! It's a blocker for tons of projects, including a little project, and a guy like like there's, been discussion about my personal compromises and like adding tooling but I I. Don't really see that working I don't understand like this is not done. It's very common to just write.

S

Convert your module too. Tight skip, yeah, I'm, really sorry about splitting the community and I. Don't want to do that and that's why I've held like that's. Why there's been so much discussion, I rather not go public, separate, NPM module, but I mean it's literally a blocker and and there's no like proposed solution, we're up interoperating with other new typescript modules. So I don't really know what to do. At this point. Yeah.

A

Okay, Francesca cancer, first yeah.

R

So I'll say that I have a little knowledge about JavaScript, Lester's typescript. But to me this looks like saying that you will create a Java library from scratch because you wanna add column bindings I mean. Can you just create a little shame between typescript and all the transcript implementation, because I think then creating it's quite a lot of work to create a new SDK from scratch. If I just accomplish.

S

All this sorry Sheila yeah. It is a lot of work and that's why it's been held off for such a long time like. Ideally, we don't have to maintain two code paths. One is the type system and one like which is I, think I dot, J s dot or some external, like interface type file, which nobody wants to read a or you just straight a typescript and so and which is literally just the minimal weight thread.

S

Type script is just to change your file from jst s and the tool TSC can auto generate type bindings such that you get some nice out of completion in your IDE and so that that was the first proposed change of well. If, if we really don't like to write interfaces which I understand, I, being able to understand, tie script isn't as intuitive.

S

If you write some of the extra features, but if we simply just just change the files from that gesture, dot TS and introduce this watch or build command, then that's when you're writing tape, script and- and you don't have to use any of these extra features and your daddy will still work and it it won't really be any different than your normal developer cycle.

S

A

Erica hands up I.

U

Wanted to make few comments, I've been a bit vocal on there and I've been trying to cut through I've got a few years behind me in JavaScript, I've just started picking up typescript but I from type languages primarily.

U

So the two options that seem to be floated around are that strictly JavaScript, with a lot of type annotations in the form of Jo stocks and other tooling around it could spit out the type script types and TS lint can doesn't. You know clearly doesn't have to care what the file extension is and can look at JavaScript as though it were typescript and analyze. It there's as far as I've seen, there's a little more volume in the code in order to provide some of that and it it would be a lot of duct tape. Invensense.

U

The alternative that could potentially satisfy, but still be a compromise, would be converting to type script and then enforcing using the track. Script, linter that none of the or at least a large set of the type script constructs would not be used and in that way, maintain the kind of JavaScript look and feel of the repository. I think something that that Lance brought up it isn't. A important point is that the JavaScript community is very large and tends to have a huge diversity.

U

It's one of the on-ramps into programming for a lot of people and if somebody came to the repo and was hoping to contribute, but it's not something that was really unfamiliar, that might put them off, and maybe that's okay, that might not be the greatest strongest expert in the world and but that that is one of those things. That would be an impact of switching whole-hog to tighter grip, using all the type annotations and all the strengths and capabilities that language offers.

B

Anyway, I just wanted to share that kind of perspective. Okay, thank you. Eric sergej.

H

Here, hands next, just wanted to maybe ask a question that was already asked, but I wanted to get back to it. Since typescript here is actually two topics, one is typescript definitions and another one is writing the SDK in typescript, which one are we aiming at, because I believe the real issue is that the SDK is hard to consume from JavaScript.

H

Oh sorry, from typescript project, because there are no typing for me. There's no type information at all, but I. Don't think that rewriting the SDK in typescript is the only solution out there. As someone already mentioned, there is an option to just ship the type definitions next to JavaScript sources and that's what react team was doing if I remember correctly before they migrated to touch creed, but anyways and a few other popular popular libraries are doing so I, don't remember that we agreed that it's not an option, so maybe we can reiterate on it.

A

Before I get two answers, anyone comment on that specifically I. Think.

T

When you say it was before they migrate to type three is something good to know it's like. Basically, their end goal was still to migrate to to type script, and the way like the code base was probably too big to do it in one stress, while basically, we have a couple of PL that show that you could do it in one shot and yours Rico, because at the end this Rico is not like huge, it's quite small reposes, not that many contributors I think it's more.

T

H

Wasn't the case for Sam they were using a flow for quite some time and they did ship typescript definitions just to said. Typescript users are not complaining about react being hard to consume from time script, but they were fine with JavaScript for many years before they decided to migrate typescript, and there is long stories.

H

I, don't think it's a good example of migrations, rather just a history of a project, and there are many other projects that stewardship typescript definitions without having to rewrite everything into typescript and they're having the same station in java world or some new fancy languages start appearing at Kotlin, groovy, Scala and others. But I would like to ask like people involved into this conversation. Why not CoffeeScript, let's say I'm fan of copper, CoffeeScript and I want to have CoffeeScript.

H

You know support in SDK, so why shouldn't be revised in CoffeeScript? So so wait, wait. Wait! Wait! Wait because yeah.

A

I, let people speak up there just to answer searches, question but I think we're gonna hit it first. Let me get to Lance because since his hand was up he's been patiently waiting so jump your hand up. You want to answer that question, but Lance here, I think you're. Next, okay,.

N

Thanks I just have a couple of questions and then, when I address a couple of points so grant you said that Google won't use the existing SDK is that they won't use it if it's not written in typescript or they won't use it if there are no type definitions.

N

That's one question. Another question: is you said something about it? Yeah you can't integrate with other typescript modules and I. Don't quite understand what that means.

N

Like does that mean if, as a dependency for something in SDK JavaScript, we want to pull in some other thing: that's written in typescript, I, don't know what that would be, but we want to pull in some other thing. There's like like. It seems to me that we could do that right because, like once, you pull it once you do NPM install what you're getting is to transpile javascript from that dependency, you're, not getting the type script, then the other two points I want to make the Jas doc part I.

N

Think we need to do anyway. I, don't think that that is a burden specific to typescript. We need to have our code well-documented and publish it. You know I mean I kind of don't think, that's necessarily a burden specific to typescript. That should just be something that we do and then I think I already said this, but if we're just sticking to pure JavaScript for the implementation, what is the point of going through the translation step and changing everything to dot TS files?

N

What's the point of going through that translation, if we're transpiling from JavaScript to JavaScript I, don't honestly I, don't understand why why we would do that? So those are that's! That's where I am okay,.

A

Granted some question: isn't there for you? Did you want to try to answer those.

S

Yes, I think I captured five questions of the two questions: Thursday, okay, so.

S

You want one of the questions is educating with other typescript modules and like another, coming about like when you and cam install you're, getting JavaScript typescript well for dependencies that are using this SDK you, you are getting just JavaScript, but if you develop so NPM has this feature like directly within node, with an NPM of specifying your type definitions along with your package. Usually these are auto-generated.

S

If there's some other way, that's that we can do that with that using typescript. That is okay, although that's what that's.

N

What my PR does right, it generates the type definitions.

T

N

T

Commit the old definition, like the thing that grant was saying, is correct, like basically, you see in the modification like all the files going through. Why? Basically, we don't really care when you do a peer review. I, don't see how you want to do it because you're gonna have to read like skip, basically all those guys, because you don't really care and that's kind of we're in love walk through in my opinion. Well,.

N

It's pretty straightforward to to generate those at publish time when you're publishing the module and and include them in the publishing and I'm sorry to interrupt I just have to say one more thing: the fact that I don't understand everything that we're talking about is I think a good enough reason to say: let's don't switch fully to typescript today, I mean I've, contributed 20, substantive pull requests in the last two or three weeks like I, don't like spend all this time, trying to figure out how to deal with typescript and that's.

N

Why I'm proposing a graduated approach to this like I'm a developer with more than 20 years of experience- and you know like like to me: I, it's sometimes a little confusing, and so can. Can we not just acknowledge that? Maybe not everybody has that level of typescript experience and that converting a repository over to typescript might just be a little bit alienating. Okay,.

A

Okay, good good question, because I'm not sure if I got lost, grant but I think that one of the questions in there was does that the SDK itself need to be converted, ty script or just support typescript, that's through like an API level using my dumb terminology. What was the answer to that question? The answer.

S

To that question is yes: if there is some magical way that is like that, can produce these type definitions? That is easy for consumers and developers, then yeah sure, but literally like the authors of typescript, do not recommend any such solution and they recommend, and there will like there'll, be plenty of bugs and dependencies that are not supported by any major contributors. If, if we do go this other route of using jaaa stuff to generate typescript, because it's not used by 99.5% of normal grant in.

N

My PR, it's I'm, using the typescript compiler to generate those those type definitions. That's why I don't understand why you're saying it's? It's magical! It's it's happening right there in the PR yeah. If.

S

I may say the whole point of using like I'm, so surprised that we're we're now we're okay was using the typescript compiler for a feature. That's really meant to just support legs, see modules using TS CT generate types like the only reason like this is like an issue like 3-4 years ago, when the world was only just JavaScript in, and people were migrating to typescript.

S

It's so much easier to just change your extension and not and get all the other benefits, but you don't see with with just using TS c with javascript. Okay.

A

Clemens actually hold on comes before you start grants. Did you answer all the questions that you thought you that was asked of you, or did you have a little more to say.

S

But there are some questions like: why are we tense piling if we're just using javascript.

S

There's a comment about I've, contributed to a quarter class and 20 years of experience, and it's sometimes confusing I didn't hike address those. But let's.

A

Stick to the original ones that you rest I think you probably trust those I think, if not I'm sure, there's someone raise their hands so Clemens. So.

K

Remy Remy actually makes the point just made the point in the chat that I've been waiting to make, and that is the struggle you you guys are having seems to be so. I have no opinion on the concrete matter, I have to say I'm neutral to it. So I'll just give you the observation, and that is that this is the same struggle that C++ and C have where C existed and then C++ came around and then people who are doing starting to do C++ things, starting with you, know different kinds of of calling conventions.

K

And then you know, even even without doing classes. We were writing C programs using simple sparks and all of a sudden stuff ended up being incompatible and where that ended up was that people were then starting to build libraries that were hard C++ and c99 camps like this and they're doing hard, CP, C libraries and C++ and C it.

K

They do cross each other, because you can, you can use C++, but that's pretty much it so I do wonder and that's and that that's been a star has been going on for a while and I feel like that's what we're living here, this typescript of being you willed. This were the super language. That's the C++, like one and Java being the foundation beans like see where that sort of in company incompatibility exists, so I do run or whether it's really just two K's, which might be sharing some code where there might be.

K

You know a core in JavaScript that the attachment implementation might use. The might step in implementation might also just go and deviate, because that's that's what that's what's happening in C++ the seal and I.

A

K

I'm not taking any I'm, not taking any any positions, otherwise, but it's that struggle will continue and you can keep pulling on either side and if there's a JavaScript and typescript, you know you know, factions with different interests, then forking into two different language abilities makes accepting typescript as its own language might just make sense. Okay,.

A

Thank you, Tim.

C

Tim, are you there I'm, sorry guys I'm not really involved I'm, just a user of the both of Java in the JavaScript SDK. So from my point of view for what it's worth, I work on visco Visual, Studio code, extensions with typescript is enforced and I used the library and I created my own data bindings, like you, would what the P R does at the end of the day.

C

I just want to say, because then I have to maintain both the JavaScript libraries and bindings, and they have to be in sync the point that I'm trying to make it's I decided to just use straight JavaScript to create a cloud events, because to me it makes no sense. Having the data binding separate is a separate library, user or separate dependency requirement.

C

That's that's. All I wanted to say that from the user perspective, sometimes things are a little bit different, where I have hundreds of dependencies. I just don't want to deal with this. You know when, with cloud events updates version, I don't want to have to deal with the data bindings as well. So to me it would make sense if it was typescript and then compiled down to pure JavaScript, which I, if I, wanted to use it in the browser. I can do as well, but again I'm.

C

Just it's just my opinion from this perspective of where what I'm doing, but, of course, other people might have a different perspective. That's all I wanted to say. Okay.

A

Thank you, Eric you're up next.

U

To address the last point, something that has been broadly agreed upon as far as I can tell is that tight script ID should be created and published so that this need for the consumers of the library to do any work is completely gone. I raised my hand to address the point that Clemens was making, and one of the one of the problems is, if you're using C and C++, then you do need distinct libraries because of the calling conventions and such what, with with typescript, it's compiled down to JavaScript, and so what?

U

What would likely happen is that communities that, if, if there were pipes published in both the communities of typescript and JavaScript developers would consume both.

U

If only types were only produced by one, then all the typescript would go, but the JavaScript would probably also sweat itself across, and one of the things that would then result is, users would have questions and they would show up on Stack Overflow, and now we would have bunch of questions asked about potentially incompatible implementations, and this is this is something that would be very public and very confusing and require a whole lot of knowledge around these decisions that are being made that really are impacting maintain, errs only and contributors as they come by so I think.

U

That's really an outcome that we need to avoid for fourth, that, as well as reasons of the duplication of effort and other things like that, there does seem to be a pretty good. The set of compromise options at this point and and I I have a pretty good amount of confidence that we can. The group couldn't work through that.

U

A

You Eric will answer up next.

N

Yeah I mean I, guess I guess my question is: who who is meant to benefit from a conversion to typescript? Is it the end user who's consuming the SDK, or is it the maintainer for me personally, I feel like a conversion to typescript. Would today not benefit me in a positive way. This is why I'm proposing a transition that may not necessarily be 100 percent on the first step, if.

A

It's like me, did you we speaking as an SDK developer or as.

N

A user! Yes, sorry as an SDK developer. Okay, like it I, you know, I, don't really want to write my code in typescript and that's just a personal preference, but it seems like the the important thing here is: making the module high-quality and consumable in a way that typescript developers are comfortable with it and it does what they expect it to do from a tooling perspective right. What what the IDE is supposed to do?

N

Stuff like that, I'd like to think that the proposal that I put forth yesterday actually achieves that and if it doesn't, can someone tell me how it doesn't.

A

Okay, before I put grant on the spot, Olek uriens up next yeah.

G

I'll try to be quick. I know we have a very limited knowledge of JavaScript, absolutely no knowledge of high script, but I think based on just observing it from last week and this week. The reason why we haven't is discussed. We even have the discussions because there's some kind of implied relationship between that script and JavaScript life. We.

S

G

About JavaScript versus Java or C, sharp, or go or whatever, so maybe that's where the real issue is I mean we're looking about split up the community but you're not looking at us a little the community between Java and c-sharp right. So maybe we should just look at it as lab script and JavaScript right and and be done with it because, like don't it's not splitting of a community, if there's just two communities and you free to go with sure where you want it, that's I'm done I mean.

A

I know your hand is up there, but I wanted to force grants I think if it's okay grant yeah try to answer this question so.

S

A

No, it was I think it was Lance. I think Lance was asking. Why is PR can't be a step in the right direction? I think Lance. When I rephrase it I mean.

N

That that's it like impacting the PR I say this could be a possible path to a transition to full typescript, but just not ready to go there today. Does it achieve what we wanted to achieve for the end user for the end developer, experience.

S

S

Yeah I believe I made some comments on the original PR, as I was happy to see the PR hanging in the right direction.

S

So I think I mentioned earlier that it's quite weird using.

S

The typescript tool TSC, which is the Thai script compiler to compile JavaScript, to generate these definitions, I.

S

I mean I think it's in the right set again. One of the issues was I already created a PR which seems like it was ignored. That would directly have merge conflicts with this PR and so like what? Why are we purposefully creating PRS that have merged complex.

A

Yeah Green Green: can you elaborate a little on that I understand the customers conflicts? It's just your PR. Was it to rewrite the SDK in typescript or was it as a or was your pair more of a comprehensive position, but it was just a different way of doing compromise position than what Lance is suggesting.

S

So my PR introduced one one file: I renamed one file from index data index, top TS and setup tooling, which is basically the same tooling as in the other, as in Lance's PR of adding typescript as a developer dependency.

P

Does that make I.

A

Think you've got a little too low-level I'm, just trying to figure out whether your PR, we would still allow a JavaScript developer, whether it's an SDK JavaScript developer or a user from JavaScript developer to to feel like they're still using a JavaScript SDK.

S

Yes, but the Buckeyes are basically the same really I they both I mean y'all. There's like no interface changes. You I appeared JavaScript well for y'all gonna, be a JavaScript developer. If you're an SDK, maintainer you're, still gonna write your normal JavaScript, but no code changes really.

S

A

T

Answer yeah just to same direction like the thing is for me, there is like there is only one community is like there is justice between some people use type spit on top of it, some don't. But if you look at like how I would define the community is, where are the package store? It's all on NPM? They are all using the same infrastructure. It's not like it's on my even or there is a typescript different repository, it's using the JavaScript history, so it's basically JavaScript is just superseded Annette and for the number of contributor.

T

What I do understand is like no judge there, but and if ever I see, that grant is contributing. Also to that we pursue I, don't know I, you need to find a way to match together. I, like the new typescript repo, like I, like the code hosted by a grant on the side, which is, in that case a complete rewrite, but the PR I did on the SDK. Javascript is not a rewrite, is like also a migration, but please find her way together.

A

Yeah: let's go on okay, Eric Europe, yeah.

U

I would ask that you grant interrupt me if I'm wrong on the points I'm about to make, but, as I understand it at the the compromise, physicians have effectively made it so that, despite the choice, we make the user experience of a consumer. The library will not be different.

U

Yes, I would say at the top level that grants PR is converting to typescript, and that was its intention.

U

The and, of course lance's is an approach to maintaining JavaScript and using the typescript tooling to produce the types automatically.

U

Eric, oh yeah. Sorry, that's pretty much what I wanted to say: I.

G

U

That what maybe you had to summarize I think what we've gotten the point we've gotten to is that there is a maintainer experience in terms of the approach taken to providing those types and then what language constructs are allowable.

U

Okay, fundamentally, it's a good position. We've made good progress, I think, okay,.

A

John your hands up and we're probably got to call time on this soon and I have a proposal. That is a proposal but a statement so John.

O

So so, as I as I wrote in my comments in the thread on github they'd, be as when he was signing saying it's really one community as far as JavaScript as an ecosystem right, so a split is, is materially different than the C versus sequence.

O

Blast issue: okay, they are, they are merged in terms of the you know what I was trying to get to is I think, as eric has been been saying, the answers PR using J stock and TSV to create these type definitions right versus grants, original PR, not just new repo PR as a separate thing there it.

O

You know it feels like it's 48 percent, one way and 52 percent the other way like they don't seem very far apart right, and so what I've been trying to hear is: what's the material difference right, if we're going to put the constraint that the the actual code and the repo, at least for the time being, is limited to JavaScript and whatever we need to support typescript usage with the annotations or the auto-generated whatever like like it, it feels like we're we're we're we're bike shedding on on.

O

What's effectively no difference score the end user experience right and I think I think moving the ball forward, like you know again, I'm not in their day-to-day on the JavaScript, either way they so like. In that sense, I, don't care they like. What's the what's that you know, what's that swing of a couple of percent of they, you know switching it to dot TS files and the regular TS flow okay. So you get the transpiration step, but you're you're.

O

Still, if you go the other way, you have jazz doc and you're you're doing the extra tooling to generate and package and all of that for the typescript developers right so I guess I'm missing. Why why there seems to be such a such a visceral dispute about what seems like a very small difference.

A

Okay, I'll go to surgery and then I'm going to ask people the current directly on that question. Sergej.

H

Okay, so I don't have anything but I just wanted to state one thing: I check the project state and I sees that the project was not created by Lance. He just joined the development, but he did quite some contributions in the past few days or a few weeks, and he was contributing value I believe were I can be wrong here. But if the project being typescript and Lance said that he has a very limited, absolutely experience, he may not.

H

He may not have decided to join the project and we would miss these contributions and I questioned how many other contributors we may miss. If we revive project in language that is as popular isn't, typescript even thought. Typescript is very popular, but still.

A

Okay, thank you. Well, Lance, your hands up.

N

N

Sorry I was talking to my muted microphone, III guess I just wanted to address the you know the question of like why digging your heels and or you know why is this such a you know a big source of friction. You know it inserted a I. Think said a little bit of that, which is you know if this had been typescript a month ago and I came to look at it, I would have would have probably not started to contribute to it.

N

I'm, just not comfortable with it and I feel like in the course of the last two or three weeks. I did start like I will never do this. I will never ever go this way and have made a lot of concessions along the way and all I'm asking for is a single concession to like take this a little bit slowly, if we can still provide the end user experience that we're looking for that, typescript developers are looking for.

O

That's not the question I'm actually talking about right. Oh.

N

Okay, I'm sorry in.

O

The thread in the thread we already got to the point where at least I think not to put words in Grant's mouth right, but my understanding and I think Eric comments were echoing. This is I think there was agreement that we're not going to just add all these typescript features into the code. It was exactly about this difference in the tooling right of basically jazz doc.

O

Plus, you know the TSC hacking in the pipeline to generate things versus letting the TS pipeline do its regular course of business by changing the file extensions to TS and putting the link restrictions to keep it restricted to court. A javascript as the the base language features.

S

Yeah I mean you really the differences in tooling.

P

A

And we want to get comment: okay, so I'm, not necessarily sure that either side is necessarily moved and I'm I'm kind of at the point now, where I feel like it's gonna, just come down to a vote and I guess what I'd like to ask, though, is between now and next Thursday, meaning the regular server. This working group call or conference call if lance and grant would be willing to at least continue the discussions they've been having on trying to find that middle ground in the hopes that maybe a miracle will happen before Thursday.

A

But if it doesn't happen, then come Thursday. We'll just gonna have to take a vote and see what happens. I mean.

S

That sounds fine I like like we already started it both in the big long thread. I, don't know how many months ago and then father's dead, which ship wins all the rainforest I feel like, even if we take about like like will we all lead on on one way or another? How does that comport? Well.

A

To be clear, in my opinion, the vote isn't within the SDK. The vote is within the cloud events and I understand what you're saying, though, that you know you sort of had a vote already in the SDK and and it long as that decision was limited to just the SDK, then I would say yeah you know yes, the Java SDK guys can do whatever they want to do. That's their it's their repo.

A

However, now that is what, for better or worse that that decision or that vote was never executed on and so we're at a different point in time. Unfortunately, and now we're at the point where, in order to keep the the typescript repo I, think that that question is now bigger than just the JavaScript SDK, it has to be I. Think the answer by the broader group. So that's why I think it is a different vote.

A

Okay, but John is your hand older new, its.

O

New okay, good, so so to follow on your point, the the question is: will it sounds like there's there's two votes right: one is more or less around what I'm trying to talk about is. Okay, like it seems like to me to simplify it. It's a question of: do we go with jazz doc and TST hacking and keeping the extensions dot J s versus changing the extensions to dot TS and tweaking the pipeline to enforce the source language staying JavaScript?

O

That's one! That's the technical side of the discussion, which is I, think where we're at I think there's a separate discussion, which is what you're bringing up Doug is if, like we blow up the whole world, because everybody is upset on a technical argument, then there's a cloud events project level argument of. Do we support to overlap.

O

You know heavily overlapping and user communities with having two different repos mm-hmm yeah.

A

Eric your hands up.

U

I was basically going to make reinforcing those points. Yeah, it's it's exactly that we there's a dachshund public experience, a decision that I think is very much a cloud events, discussion and decision, and then the tooling decision I think, is something that only maintainer should make okay.

A

So maybe a co-packer I think I heard you guys say to make sure I heard right. It sounds to me like you're, saying that within the SDK it's within the JavaScript SDK itself, you guys need to figure out whether you can resolve it yourself, whether that's a votes or something else. You guys need to figure out whether you can resolve yourself and if you can't resolve it within the group itself and the yeah you can't resolve within the group theirself.

A

Then it has to bubble up to the full-blown working group in terms of whether we're going to create a set of repo, because because, if you, if you don't resolve it yourself right now, I think you're gonna go on the path you're on right, which is grant, wants a separate repo and he's asking for that, and if he doesn't get a resolution in the JavaScript SDK that he can live with I assume grants. Requests are still gonna stick, which means the working group itself has to resolve his request, which is a formal vote.

A

My opinion don't make any sense. Er I've completely mess up my words. I raised my hand again: okay, glad I would.

U

Say that if, if the problem is that I think there's fairly broad consensus for the group, especially because of the ecosystem, that two repositories is not a good outcome, that's problematic in a sense, I think the I am I. Don't think. I can say this in total good faith, but I, but I think that the decision of the cloud events group would be that these two have to figure out how to live together and- and we would very much hope that it's peaceful and that everyone's needs can be satisfied exactly how those needs get satisfied.

U

I, don't think the group most of us aren't maintainers and won't be impacted by that, so that the vote would be whether the external community is impacted based on whether there are two repos or one well. I.

A

Guess I'm trying to figure out the concrete next steps here right, because it seems to me that we can't decision linger for much longer. It's on it's been out there, a while. Actually John is your hand up new rules, its.

O

New go for it, so I've tried to 2-channel Doug do to help Corrales right. They can.

O

Is it fair to say to both grant and Lance as the champions of their respective groups that the the argument as of right now is really what I said before right: it's Jay s: dot, plus TS d, hacking on the pipeline and keeping everything dot; J s, extensions versus changing things to dot TS and the regular t s pipeline, plus the lint restrictions. And, if that's the case, can we can we?

O

Can we focus on that as the move, the ball forward argument under under review, and you know, can we can we I, don't know flip a coin like whatever beat each other up and just pick one of those two and move forward, grant you're handsome.

S

Yes, I'm not really play on. So how are we going to buckle this up? One of those sides I know we're sort of trying to figure that out right now, I guess like so we're going to have a vote on that.

A

Right we're trying to figure out the next steps and I think we're trying our best to keep it within the Java SDK sphere. First, as best we can, but if, if that completely fails, then it has to bubble up to the full cloud events group I think can.

S

I ask Lance a question so I guess if we had, for example, a vote and the working group that but in poor typescript support full typescript support with that, would that be respected.

A

Well, keeping my advance don't answer that yet yeah because I, don't think that'd be the vote. The vote will not be convert to the JavaScript SDK to typescript. That would not be the vote. The vote would be. Do we create a typescript SDK.

S

Okay, well, this.

G

I think this would be branded.

S

Typescript SDK, then, if the vote is denied, what guess? What what is the expectations for the non majority that wanted typescript support.

A

I guess so, if, for some reason, this bubbles up to the cloud events, SDK, I'm, sorry, the cloud events group for a vote for the tight-roped SDK and the vote fails, then we kill the tie scribe repo and normal github repo process rules apply in terms of when PRS or merge versus rejected, and you guys invest in the Java. Ok need to figure out which of the two PRS live on if either okay.

A

Okay, but Lance I think your hands up next yeah.

N

Things John, I, I, wasn't gonna, say it the first time, but I have to say it the second time you said it I, don't think my solution is hacking. The typescript compiler it is, you know a documented way to generate type definitions from you know the typescript compiler documentation. So it's not hacking.

N

When we talk about typescript support rant, you mentioned typescript support, that's one of the questions I'm trying to get to is like what does typescript support mean. Does that mean that for the end user, for the consumer of this SDK, they get the type def missions and and all of the the stuff that you have there in your screenshot from the IDE? If that's the case well, then both of our PRS solve that and then the last thing is. If we go to like the you know, rename everything duck.

N

Yes, everything goes through the typescript pipeline, but we add these linting rules to ensure that we're just using pure JavaScript like what does that get us I, don't understand why we would go through that process of a transpiration step before we can publish or before we can. Even you know do something in the node CLI to test locally. You know as we're running code like you for it. If we're just writing pure JavaScript I, don't understand why we would need that translation step.

A

Okay, we're cool we're running out of time here so John and then Remy I. Think about that point. We got to probably call it quits yeah.

O

So so yeah at this point, I'm agreeing I from my my understanding like when he caught a hacker, not find that that's on me. But that's why I say: I think the grants original PR and your PR are literally like 48 one way versus 52. The other I think it's solving these end-user issue types and annotations and code completion, support and those sorts of things right.

L

O

I think the the forcing function is. We should just resolve to pick one of those two as the step to move forward and go from there.

A

Is that possible, lancing grounds grant.

U

Is your PR actually provide the core JavaScript enforcement I? Think if we're going to go that route, we should probably make sure that it does include what is up-to-date in the disk.

S

My PR simply introduces the typescript tooling what Lance also introduces and it renames one file in desktop. They asked him to stop TS just to prove that it's literally the same code. We can add this enforcement. If we want to and developers developing the touch, script or the JavaScript library will be writing the same code and it won't impact end-users at all.

S

That's the difference.

A

Okay, Remy I'll, take your hands up next I'm, assuming grant your hand and Lance your hand, your old, correct me if I'm wrong, though yeah.

T

I tried to be quick public.

A

G

T

Full Fred and the issue 9 and I'm just surprised, because I would like to have information from like the old contributors, because for now I only see two new contributors that are kind of fighting against each other, sorry, I'm, French and the way I feel it and I his breathing and all those other people that could probably have an idea and when you look in the Fred I do understand what grant refers to when he see there was a virgin August, 2019.

T

Well, basically, fabio Jose, who is basically the biggest contributor, were saying: okay, B wins and that's good, so I do understand why there is some frustration from grant now, like maybe I, didn't read enough before, but it's just it looks like they. They found the solution together just inside that Baku and then it was brought to that broader audience. So, like again, I at the end do whatever I. If I can contribute, it's fine, well, I'm, not consider myself as the main contributor.

T

So it's just the other contributor I would like to have understand what is their opinion, because it's not only length our grant who contribute to the repository. Most of the people. Jury was not even built by users, surprised yeah,.

A

So grant I apologize sounds like your hand, wasn't old uh yeah.

S

No, it's it's: okay, I've been where's my hand, so yeah Fabia, or he just committed to master hundreds of piya commits and, as you can see in the original issue, nine he was okay, looks converting to touch came after bedding, I, don't I've talked to him. I'm slack a bit. He serves seem indifferent and that's that.

S

Yeah I, don't know why you doesn't contribute anymore and and yet I feel like it's me and Lance talking. Okay, so.

A

Is it possible to come to a resolution on those two pr's in question before end of day Wednesday next week either merge one of them find a new solution, verges the two of them kill both of them.

A

Is it possible to resolve those two PRS before Wednesday, because to me, if you could resolve those two PRS, either accept or reject one or both of them, then that would be the answer of the SDK right either you found a solution that you can both live with or you could not find a solution and then things are gonna bubble up to the full cloud events working groups for decision I.

S

Mean by I I created a PR seven days ago that introduces typescript in the least possible way after it, parking and and basically after request of, will just show me like Tara, rather than talked about it from Land's and I, don't know I I I mean it was reviewed, I guess twenty-one hours ago, but then different PR conflicts with it from Lance and like both like. If, if you want me to disclose my PR and go with Lance, it's a step forward, but I don't like it. This is.

A

S

Or something I, don't know what not.

A

So let me clear: I'm not I'm, not gonna, get into the process or any that stuff. Okay. What I'm asking for is from you guys on the call- or they add people in the SDK group itself to find a way forward here or come back and say we can't and therefore we toss our hands up and now it's for the work. It's for the C group to decide and I and if you guys can come to a resolution on those two PRS by next Wednesday I.

A

Think that's going to lead to the next step in the process. Either you came there resolution and at PR was merged and you're. Both happy great, then there's something else to be done. But if both PRS are rejected and the issue is still there in grant, you still want to have the types of capacity K. Then, okay, then the C group will vote on whether the SDK, a new SDK, should be created on I'm.

A

Just asking for you guys whether it's you two or the group of large, to go off and by next Wednesday, try to come up with a resolution, because by next Thursday I want to have a vote. If, if a vote is necessary and be done with this I know, that's blunt but I, don't think we I don't think is fair to anybody. Let the sink linger on for much longer, especially when I don't hear either side industry moving. Okay,.

S

Well, I I, don't think, given the introduction of a new PR yesterday that intention of cooperating and I don't think they'll be any progress.

N

Okay last year, so I mean I, guess I, guess I, don't feel that's very accurate. I think that PR actually is a representation of my ability to compromise and my the fact that I've I've learned things over the last couple of weeks about about what typescript can bring to an end user and I feel like it creates that end user experience that we want, while avoiding the potential alienation of me and one or two of my colleagues who are also contributing to this repository.

N

So in terms of finding a middle ground. I honestly feel like I've, taken a few steps towards that middle ground and and have even stated in the PR and in other threads, that this is a possible path towards full conversion to typescript. But personally, I'm not ready to do that. Right now, I'd like to see you grant, take one or two steps towards the middle ground.

N

A

Okay over time, I think we need to end up. Let me let me.

N

A

Say can you guys I know it's getting painful to ask I know, there's strong feelings on both sides, but can you guys please try to have some offline conversations and I don't mean through github issues, I mean like voice communications, to see if you can understand each other's position better, find that middle ground or something because I just feel like it. Nothing else at least a voice communication well at least have faster communication turnaround.

A

Then then, going through github issues and see if you can find that that middle ground position, because I mean for all I know, John is right. You you, you guys really aren't that far apart, but for some reason you're not seeing it I, don't know we're.

N

Not that far apart, I've taken a bunch of steps towards grants, position well.

A

Okay, so that so that so can you guys take it offline and see what you can do in terms of you know, working or trying to to come to a resolution?

A

I know grant that's been very frustrating and, and there in several times, when you said you know, you're done you're frustrated I get that, but as painful as it is, if you can possibly come to a compromise on both sides, you can both live with, not saying it's ideal, but it's you can at least live with to see how it plays out, and maybe one or both of you will be surprised- that hey it actually isn't as bad as you thought.

A

It's gonna be that might be the better solution, then creating a home of the repository right off the bat I.

N

P

S

uh It's easy where we have to say that we shouldn't I mean I, don't think we should either but I'm literally blocked and I can't answer my product manager and figure out. It does nothing. She is what the spa pitch. Okay,.

P

So Dan I really need to go around the calls.

S

And I just you can get a different call. I, don't know if there's anybody else here we could just talk yeah.

A

You got yeah, you guys did this. This room will keep going. So you guys if you're free, you know, keep talking, but please find some way to talk offline. If you can't, if not on this cover here, but try to find that middle ground, if you can and then I'll ping you guys offline later, either today or tomorrow, to see what happened and see if anything was made in terms of progress.

N

A

Yeah, good luck.

N

So grant are you sticking around.

U

S

Around for a little.

U

Bit I do think that Lance is correct. I think that what his PR represents is his understanding of some of the compromise ground. That's been discussed and, and certainly I. It's clearly sorry grant that. That's not your preferred I.

U

But it does make concrete and specific what it is that we have been discussing in the threads and and whether it's the right option is separate and I. Think that is I, think basically Lance's and showing good good.

U

N

I'll just start by by saying the concerns that I have with, and these are all things that we've said before, but I just want to say them vocally. The concerns that I have with moving fully to typescript right now are that myself and other Red Hat developers are not typescript developers and whether we and if we say that okay well, you can still just write pure JavaScript and we're and we're going to enforce that with linting rules.

N

Then I I don't understand what the whole point is of running the transpiler to convert javascript to javascript I mean I've said that a number of times on this call. For me at least as far as I understand it, that the big concern is the end user experience and I.

N

Don't really I'm, not clear, I think that what I've proposed is gets us to the same end user experience and is a step towards getting what you want grant. It just doesn't mean it's happening tomorrow.

S

Yeah so I mean it's definitely an improvement again. I I think one of the issues was I proposed serve same improvement seven days ago and then I didn't know exactly like well.

N

Seven days ago, I mean I clearly and still have some issues with that repository and I felt, like I, wanted to express what I thought might be. A good compromise through my PR and I mean come on submitting PRS is like that may or may not conflict with other PRS. That's just open source programming that just happens like this is not like yeah.

S

But like like I I I feel like this is just gonna leave more issues if, if there's a situation where, just because you're not familiar with the tooling or are making a lot of learning, a lot of new cooling doesn't mean that, yes, it's a hijack the additional step of getting type support and not accept yeah.

S

N

When you say support, what do you mean? Are you talking about for the end-user I? Don't think that you're representing my position in good faith again, I am absolutely trying to provide typescript support if.

U

I might from the repositories standpoint, especially because it's an official repository of the group, the.

U

Clear glass about to stay what I? What was important? The the point is not actually about Lance Lance is a convenient voice and an advocate, but it really is about the far larger set of JavaScript developers that don't feel comfortable. You do typescript now I've been pretty mum about it, but personally, if I were to make this decision for myself, I would go with typescript I'm comfortable, changing language and since then it, but a lot and I feel like everyone.

U

I learned, I learned a lot of new things, so that's where I'm coming from, but but I think it's not a small point that a number of developers who might become contributors would feel excluded if they came into the repository and saw something they just wasn't. Part of the wheelhouse wasn't comfortable and familiar to them. Now that is not the greatest way to make decisions, but it's also a very pragmatic concern and I got a state of the things that has surprised and delighted me.

U

The most in getting into the JavaScript ecosystem is the deep level of pragmatism that is present just the amount of cruft that the community is going to put up with, in terms of all that, you know back in the day, detecting what browser and then writing different code lines and for for dealing with certain things in different browsers, and just all of that garbage that you just never had to deal with in in more tight spaces.

U

um It's been a space of bad compromises and a lot of pragmatism, and that pragmatism has created a lot of value and clearly there's a lot of at stake and or revenue and everything else in there in the way that has led to that. But it would be a big thing to to say that that community is not a bit of welcome.

T

Well, I think if I may, the switching to type it doesn't exclude the JavaScript a blocker like, in my opinion, it's not the case and we are like I hear you referring to like potential contributors like basically, if I had a preference, if I see the troop here, no I'm, sorry too, it's not gonna, be nice. I, don't have a nice way to say that. But the lens contribution is not a sexy. It's not really clean.

T

So if I come as like a contributor, I will be less inclined to join the repository, because for me it's less clean. Maybe it's I'm the it's just my own opinion, so I don't want to say that I'm not coming or present. Anybody else is just a man trying to work on the clean repository that something that stuff I King, because it's kind of I still kind of like, and it doesn't have the feeling that it's a clean repository.

T

What do you mean by clean? That's like what like.

N

T

I would say: King it's it's really not like I. Don't want to to say that I'm, the one knowing what is clean, honor, because I think it's really a subjective opinion. But when you look at other project like types, Crete and JavaScript project the way they are what you expect to see in a repository that it's not gonna match exactly with your PR, because I will not expect to see those kind of act, 4 type scripts.

T

It's not natural to me like if you look on the other type script or JavaScript project I know so like I'm, not pretending, I know all the projects, but it doesn't. It doesn't have the feeling to be like cutting-edge repository, and that's just my opinion again like is that is that.

N

T

N

The this PR specifically is is just generating type definitions and we're not dealing with that, or is that the like layout of the repository and code choices and things like that? It's.

T

A bit of both and again, like I, didn't contribute so I I, don't want like I will not specifically like myself. If I, were you what I'm saying because it's I'm in the world position I haven't, contributed yet I'm, trying to understand and trying to it, but without contributing yeah.

T

My position is a bit it's just yeah, like I was looking at the PR that Gwen did and it had more bad feelings. So that's I'm! That's why I expressed my preference there.

N

Well, I would agree with you in terms of how you know the repository is laid out and some of the choices in the implementation.

N

You know I I would have made different choices if I'd written that back when it was first started a year ago and I hear the fact that you, you know, obviously prefer a typescript project again I'll just say like I'm, not 100%, comfortable with it and I'm, proposing this as an alternative possible step towards moving in that direction, while at the same time trying to solve the concerns for the end user.

T

Like the following discs, or anything like that is I, think you have like a good community like if you have issue you with typescript I, don't think that grant will say like and again I explain you the few things that I need. Okay or even myself. I can spend a bit of time to do the same kind of thing.

G

T

G

T

Not as an individual I think the team could do and like the migration that we can do it efficiently with elk. So that doesn't mean that you can do it on your own, but I. Don't think that you will be on your own, that that was the feeling I get from. Those calls is I'm. Quite surprised like there is a good community and, like people speak together, so I would expect you to be able to reach for some help. If you need some absolutely I.

N

Mean I think so: hey I also think that I would like to take it slowly. You know maybe maybe I'm being irrational, but again like I said a few minutes ago. I do feel like I've made a lot of concessions and tried to take steps towards a middle ground and I am speaking to some extent for my colleague Helio, who has no experience with typescript and and has expressed reservations, and you know I, that's just where I'm coming from.

S

They didn't exist, this typescript thing and like most languages and new technologies, I and lots of people don't like adopting them without a very good reason or looking at them, and I really appreciate all the different levels of conversation and even using some detective like legacy tooling, of generating types from JavaScript I mean it's done, I shouldn't say legacy it's less conventional these days, but I'd really like to I, mean I, know he's out here a large contributor contributor, but I'd really liked you hey, like the end users in prospective and and just like I feel like it's.

S

It's very useful to just remove yourself from the conversation ever remove.

G

S

From like appears a bit like software is literally like five years from now. It doesn't really matter. It has an end user who wrote the software like for me.

S

This highly affects my work because I'm trying to support a product launch of an event system at Google and JavaScript is the most popular language and I literally can't do that and I know we're getting there, but I feel like especially with the most recent PR that they're like there's an unwillingness to work on a PR together, I and I, but I'll just create more and more complex.

S

It I mean I can go and close my PR and and like say, okay, girls, let's get but I, it's just creating it's creating a really unhealthy relationship and I feel like I have so much I could help contribute and and the people that I know at my company that can contribute to this project. But if, if there's a resistance to just like learning type script or or accepting cures or making progress in a timely matter, I think I really need to spend my time elsewhere and office on other languages.

N

G

N

N

I, don't know I can't I had a lot of questions like it sounds to me from from what you're saying that that the expectation would be not actually to have to restrict it using linting rules to pure JavaScript all.

S

Right, no all I think it's brilliant. It's most important to work with all contributors and make everybody feel comfortable. I, don't think it'd be wise. I mean I I feel like present repository I have my types, capacity, SDK and just kprs for that, but I, don't think that's gonna be really wise. It's like the like community I, really have technical technical reservation. I! Don't think that these added extra lip I mean we can definitely enforce the just use JavaScript but renamed to TS. So we get all the extra cooling and goodness with that, what.

N

Is that tooling, it's.

S

Tse and it's Visual Studio code with the language server that understands the file type dot yes, and so.

N

How does the generation of type definitions not get us there.

S

Well, the generation had definitions, you won't have types, it won't be with JavaScript, it does not infer types but with typescript you can infer type and that's really useful for auto-completion or your Hydra developers. Yeah.

N

I'd like to see that, because basically everything I've seen is that using vs code and and type definitions in this repository gets me all the way there and maybe I'm missing some other thing that my IDE might be able to do if I'm.

S

So yep, yes code, this code is written in typescript, but for the language labor for BS code, it will do the very best. Well, basically, in the background, rename you the JavaScript to typescript, because all typescript is about JavaScript and there's extra cooling.

G

S

It'll ill provide a very similar idea experience, even if you use ojs extension, I.

N

Guess I still don't understand what the benefit like if you've got the type definitions like to the end-user? What is the likely to me? It's we're arguing about is what the sdk maintainer experiences, because I don't I have yet to be clear on what the end-user experience, how it would change if we.

N

S

Here, you're right yeah. If everything is perfect, it's all you're doing at the end of the day is just running some JavaScript and node. But there's your unless you have you tell me a an excellent case. Study of someone using this I mean I've said a and I'll still say it, like other people have said it like cranky solution of using TS c for compiling JavaScript and and using the legacy out of completion and not ideal, cooling or just pure JavaScript.

S

If you provide the same developer experience, that's great easiest way to get that developer. Experience is just a rename our files dot. Yes, we can add and like read-only fields and like all all sorts of great extensions that are beneficial.

S

That use typescript features at a later point. If you really want to provide even better tooling but but I I literally, don't see like like show me any company or any like look every much. Every company major companies is JavaScript, something any company that either this or this other just jeaious way of enforcing.

S

Types and just care javascript and create such hates a modern, ide, yeah I, just don't know of any tooling like that.

N

I'm really confused, to be honest, I mean like it sounds like we're talking in circles. I, like you, keep saying legacy, I mean I, wouldn't whatever. If we get the same experience for the end user using type definitions, why is that bad.

S

So I'll say this again like it's the same you'll get if you can magically create an SDK that has definitions, there's no difference, you're right, but.

N

It's not magic, I mean it's there, it's I'm doing it right now, it's already happening and what you said about, like changing your file, names to TS I mean that's doing exactly the same thing right: it's generating type definitions from those ts files and then you transpile JavaScript from JavaScript to JavaScript, which seems silly to me. If we take the first step that it that the TSC does in your implementation, which is generating those type definitions and stop there, can't that just be like a step along this continuum.

S

Yeah I mean they're, both they're, both both ways, they're steps but you're. Just taking like you need T steps rather than my solution just needs one step well,.

N

Your solution needs two steps in other scenarios right in order to like run amok like.

S

Lily, you can just ask the typescript authors what they recommend if nine out of ten of them will recommend just using type script like I. Don't know why are we using the tooling, but not the actual language.

N

That we need to have type definitions and I agree like it's fine, it's great. We want to work with typescript I.

N

Don't understand why you can't accept a step in that direction, a step.

S

Okay, I said I can go and load. My PR and just approve years and or I could just abandon any involvement in this project, but that's nothing to be ideal like there are other issues. Besides typescript definitions in this project, I want.

N

To say three trying.

S

To fix them for three weeks and not.

N

Have this argument.

S

Well, this SDK has been around for two years and I didn't get involved because their commitments to master and I- don't I mean you know I think like if you say Lance like all these other issues will be involved and all can't figure out that definition, my like and you provide that to end-users by like next play. There, like I, just abandoned being involved in these discussions and and I'd, be happy like yeah I was like I, understand your willingness to to be able to grab the definition, though, and that'll satisfy the end.

S

Users need, if I'm, a contributor which I hope to be able to I, make any contributions. I need twelve various improvements in next year. It'll be a lot harder for me to just like it'll, just be a lot more code and I. Don't know if all that extra cooling will be great because it's not as maintained like J esta and it's just a bit more of a rip.

G

U

Have a piece of ignorance there is: is there an alternative to Jay s doc for providing that kind of intellisense knowledge about? How do you something it semantics? Well,.

B

I, don't think jeaious doc.

N

Is providing the intellisense I think what's happening is and I could be wrong grant. You can correct me if I am, I I believe that TSC is using the Jay s talks to help it infer types. If the J s talks aren't there they'll still try to make inferences, but the Jay s Doc's help to sort of solidify the inferences that it's making I think and oh and.

G

N

Was about? Is there an alternative? No, not really I mean the the code. Documentation, ecosystem and JavaScript is not great.

S

Question about definitions and J stock I. Don't I would guess that death does not affect a technician. I.

S

Think the tech definitions are just considered usage of the JavaScript within the library, but I'm not sure like. If you.

F

S

If you just because I could type a single like attribute can have like multiple types and if you only have okay, if you mess up your dog or I, forget like this can be a string and a number that will be I. Guess that'll just be either inferred from your code or the j-stop and go into the type definition.

S

Anyways I I hope that added something to the conversation.

U

S

All right one concern: this is Jeff my a developer concerned, but um dan, how we resolve is already again cleared in forests. Make sure that Jays dock is right, 100% right, basically, there's some tooling I. Think you mentioned I can do that yeah. How does how do even like that type script, like tiptoeing, enforces definitions, all the way down, I type.

S

Types I guess all the way down.

M

Sorry was not a questions. It.

S

Yeah so I guess land like how so we're we're playing to use drea stock right.

M

N

Already are I mean genius, doc runs in ball.

S

Are planted specifically we're planning to use J stock to generate typescript definitions? No.

N

We're using TLC to generate type definitions, but.

M

You mentioned that TSC might use the gesture that right, I think.

N

That TSC might use the Jo stock to help it make inferences. If it's, if it's not clear in the code or maybe it starts with the Jas doc, I don't know, I don't have that branch checked out on my repo right now. I've got some in flat work, so I can't test it at the moment. But if I recall correctly, you, like you, change the type in the Jas doc and and but don't change the you know. The code type TSC will complain, but I need to confirm that.

S

O

Well so then question to follow up with you grant and he is in a pure type requirement our docs bitten in a typescript specific format right or is this PS doc? No, an orthogonal issue.

S

Now that I mean yes, socket, you've been typescript, there's really not that many differences between types from JavaScript.

O

Yeah that that's my tip, that's my understanding right from what I've done, but that's my question right. You because I would guess my what I'm trying to get to is teasing apart like okay, if the J s doc is really just a documentation issue right, then you know we can sort of get rid of more more of this extraneous things to try and cleave to you know what what's the real distinction benefit of one side of this line or the all.

S

Right well, one of the issues is like to live with dead dog. Let Ted grip. You do not have to end annotate the types because it's automatically inferred by the tooling. That's one great benefit where you can have less code. Let's comment and have the tooling this automatically work and it'll and will work at like when you're writing your code, such that it can to called to string on a calling.

O

Like well, so let me jump into that right. You know, I, don't use BS code in JavaScript, so is this sort of the difference of a we're, we're using Lance's approaches using the PSE, compiler and first stage or whatever, to get that information, but it's basically a batch process versus the s code is doing it fully dynamically, as your you're going right is that is that a difference in the experience.

S

Well, you can, you can generate the tape.

S

Again, the if you sort of well while you're developing the fdk, if you I, mean that any user well I'm actually get just the compiled typescript definitions and the note module such that it won't make a difference.

S

I'm I'm not super familiar with. Writing actually was writing JavaScript anymore with the IDE experience, but but with writing. Typescript you'll get all crucial getting force. Types it'll always be accurate like so. If you mess up it will never desert like it doesn't use those it uses, but in the types directly from the fourth kit, not from the column mentioning.

O

That vs code is basically internally translating or you know whatever it does it internally, it's its IR or whatever the JavaScript ends as types its perspective. Even if it's looking at a right, that's why I'm trying to what's the what's the difference in the bad experience right? Is it hitting you from you know? Is it inhibiting vyas code is the example doing factorings just because it's a difference I'm the extension of the file right or or is it gonna do the same inference.

S

Yeah I'm not familiar exactly with what features there are with waffle script. Actually they haven't been I, usually write a script, but you can do factorings like rename a member field throughout the file throughout all the tests everywhere and they'll always be completely accurate. You can move classes, you can move functions all because it can be safely object. I, don't.

U

Think a little bit from the JavaScript experience on this particular subject, because refactoring is kind of one of the big pieces that typescript seems to pull ahead on and the difference is in JavaScript you'll probably get a pretty good refactoring, but it's possible that there will be mistakes, and you should check that and take a look at where it's the IDE is suggesting. Changes should be made because they will not always be correct. Right under the time is based on string, searches right, whereas.

G

U

Typescript you get a guarantee that it will be correct because it knows exactly well.

O

So let me let me dump into that that that's, if you're, using the that that's if you're using typescript for actually typing right. So if you're writing just playing log JavaScript without the types right you know, file, that's done jas versus dot. To pass like doesn't have the extra information. Is that correct right? It's still gonna be doing the same. It's gonna be doing the same analysis. It doesn't have the extra type annotations.

A

That's how I understand it.

N

Which is kind of why, like I'm, reluctant to go with trance PR? Because it seems to.

N

Achieve the same thing, but that at least initially like I, don't see that there's any any improvement in change or any benefit to changing to TS files. Unless you plan to use the typescript superset of you know the language, and you know I thought that we had talked about not doing so.

O

So let me let me in let me ask you Lance a timeline question right, because part of your part of your saying is it takes time to learn in typescript of all of that right or I.

O

Don't know how to ask this in a more neutral way. So forgive me it is is. Is your your the the group of developers that you're representing right it is the is the is the long-term concern when you state it that way, right so think, think a year from now right are you or are you?

O

Are you open to evolving the the SDK codebase over some longer period of time to start adding more of these extra features, assuming that they're good and you stole all of that right right or is it more of a we? We want to keep it pure JavaScript forever, or you know indefinitely some.

N

So I guess I would say: I mean I've, said in the NPR that that I see this as a possible step towards a transition to full typescript yeah, but they keep saying because I'm open to it but I. You know I'm I can't say right now: yes, absolutely I'm gonna, once I get all this. You know the the type interfaces and stuff figured out the super center. The language and I learned that and I'm comfortable with it. Then great I. You know I'll move in that direction.

N

O

I guess I'm trying to tease into you know we want to call it a philosophical foundation right, there's some there's some people who are like whatever the language you I'm a seeker very much right and and you know, then they go to work for someplace, very specific, ready and they're. Okay with that, but they're not going to do you know, runtime insanity.

O

So there's versus a you know: it's just a matter of time see the benefit we can see. The typescript community is kind of you know, eating.

O

An hour we don't have the time, we're not experts. I guess is what I'm trying to tease tease apart well.

N

I'll speak for myself personally, the and it kind of goes to the common of me made very early on in this call is that I feel like I've, been extremely productive over the last three weeks and I I. Think if we start introducing things like interfaces and stuff like that, that's gonna slow me down pretty dramatically.

N

If we start to introduce introducing that stuff immediately.

N

Okay, I'm, not a you know like I, have JavaScript is not the language. Whoever worked in I've switched programming languages, a lot you know, I've done, Java, plus I've done Perl and I mean I'm, not afraid of new languages. I, don't particularly like typescript I. Don't like the way it looks. I like JavaScript for the you know dynamic nature of it. The loose typing could I get it. Other people like strong typing and that's great I.

N

You know just because I don't like it doesn't mean it can't be a part of the project.

O

N

O

So then, let me let me put in another hypothetical right, so so let let's, let's, let's hypothetically, let's start with okay, so you have this this PR with the Jas doc and using TSE or whatever, and we we go with that right and then three months from now or whatever some not-too-distant future. Somebody comes in a PR that had some of these early things where they've done all the work.

N

Some of these only thing: what do you mean whatever.

O

Whatever you know some some, you know where it doesn't completely wholesale change the the JavaScript, but it's at call it additives right where it's adding some capabilities and they've gone in and cleaned up in and they've they're there already and they've done all the work. They've got a test, so it's all, it's all verified and tested right, and it's three months from that.

O

Well, what do you what's your? What's.

N

Your take on that, let me make sure I understand the scenario, so we've we've merged my compromised, PR yep and we're not actually doing translation step, we're just doing type definition generation today, yes, three months from now, somebody comes in with PR that a transcript interface and also modifies the build pipeline, hmm so that you know it's working that way. Rom.

O

And they've done all the work right and they've tested it, and you know all that kind of stuff right. So they're they're not they're, not burdening you right with any of that extra work to make that to make that PR yeah.

N

I mean it's hard to say in a hypothetical if it's somebody coming in from the outside who's, not a maintainer and won't necessarily stick around to maintain it. Then that might be a little question. Yeah, okay,.

O

Well so then, let me let me embellish the hypothetical and say that it's grant or grant keen right that they're using it for a product outside you have at least is most anybody else right that they're gonna they're gonna support that for for a reasonable amount of time mm-hmm and they you know what they're doing right. They, like their people, have a clue. They're there they're committed- and you know, they're willing to we're going to back.

N

Yeah I mean, and if they could help me understand what benefit it brings either to the end user or the SDK developer. Without imposing burden, then I yeah I mean I'm a reasonable person. I know it may not seem that way, based on some of the online discussions, but I hope that my actions in trying to compromise here sort of illustrate that I'm not like unwilling to bend yeah.

O

I'm just trying to help right, cuz there's you know, there's there's you know, there's obviously some some tension right so I'm. You know trying to use the hypothetical to try and give some give some flavor to that. You know a decision today.

U

Right for the sake of establishing philosophical basis, I think it might be also important to ask the related question, which I think Lance has already commented on. If this Rico was written in Thai just say this hypothetical grant to rose disputable PR, it was a very one. Well done all the support long-term committed and that was merged if they Lance two came along I.

U

Think then sneaked only in JavaScript and was looking at the repo and thinking about making a contribution with that with Lance to be willing to absorb some of the new environment and constructs in order to make that contribution. Yes,.

N

M

For me would I be willing.

N

U

Is that the question well I think given my willingness to flex on all these things, I don't think I can make a good assertion because I'd be fine, but certainly given the the stance that you've certainly started with and as it's evolved, I think you could probably speak to the the more general case with more authority than certainly I can I.

N

Know that if I had come to this, you know a month ago- and it was all in typescript- I mean I only did come to this like a month ago. So it were all in typescript. I would I would probably not have contributed. I, don't know, it really depends. I mean it's like. We two are using this in a potential product online we being Red Hat, and so it may be that I that I would have had to just because we need to use it, but I would have been reluctant.

N

I mean I'm, not a typescript developer. When I look at early in the thread about the typescript types thread, number nine. On the issues grant you link to the you know a Google interface for pod events, and you know that's just like I looked at that and I was like hey, that's not JavaScript, that's not what I'm comfortable with yeah, so that.

G

N

General case yeah, obviously in the last three weeks, I've been all and yeah.

S

I mean and but yeah okay, you didn't have to well and the interface is because we don't have a an SDK that that has any usability with cloud functions.

S

But if we like, if you personally, like never had to work with any extra features like would you be willing to I mean I I'm, not you're, making all the compromises? But would you be willing to be supportive of that?

S

That file, for example, or that feature within the repo.

N

Well, I mean yeah I suppose, but I'd like the truth is like. If I'm working on a repo I would want to be able to like actually understand everything and work on it and.

G

N

That's why to some degree I'm just saying: can we take it slow right I, like my fear, when I look at your er, my figure is: oh, my god, everything's gonna be changed. Duck yes and then I'm not gonna have any ability to contribute this, and because we don't already have rules in place to say it has to be pure JavaScript. Well, then, you know I can't control whether or not somebody is writing typescript, because the linter doesn't pick that up and let's scale, let's.

S

Go over the beers like one by one, so like I, mean what like, if, if the PR included the linker that enforced just pure es6, no typescript like what would that be well.

N

And that's that gets me back to my question of like okay. So why? Because if.

N

Let me just finish: let me just finish: if we're transpiling JavaScript to JavaScript, you know that doesn't seem to make any sense, and the first step of that is taking that JavaScript in generating type definitions, whether it's just stopping there or continuing on it's just like no I get right.

O

So that so that's where I'm bringing up the hypotheticals right, because so so that we stop micro-word myopically, focusing on just a point in time. Look at this over an evolution of time right so so so put aside the is: is it actually different in this point of timing decision right if chunk out the community which various people have brought up, you know at least support for adding typescript over time right into the repo right. Then then, if, if that's directionally, where it's gonna go right,.

H

O

Then it doesn't really matter in this point of time. Right like great, we ended. Yes, it's maybe it's it's. You know it's an extra step or whatever, but it is a separate piece, but personally I don't really care about it. It's it's more of you know like again my in my example. Okay, three months from now, there's some cool feature that again, for example, grants team comes up with and takes advantage of some typescript piece that they just slide right in.

O

They do all the work, and you know they don't go crazy right because they're sensitive to hey, there's other maintainer Zahn, the group or whatever right they. Don't they don't do the born again C++ psycho step right, so I mean if we look at this as an evolutionary process over over a longer period of time, I think the the distinction of taking the step and in doing the linter and I think it was maybe Remy or Eric who's made a comment earlier.

O

Oh was Remy, we're talking about French right, it doesn't his comment about cleanliness or it looks like a a standard approach and the tools. If I just come in and look at the repo as a newbie or whatever it looks more, it looks more like what I would expect or that kind of stuff. Maybe that's an issue for some people, maybe not I, don't you know, I, don't know and I know I'm, not a good example for that, but I but I.

O

Think if you know, if we can kind of shift our view to be more evolutionary, then then maybe that helps contextualize things a little better.

N

Does that make any said yeah it does. um Did you it was there a question, though no.

O

I mean it's more on. If that's the case right, then it's another one of these right I go I, keep going back to you to me. It really looks like you know: 48:52 right, I, don't I, don't see, I, don't see, you know, maybe there's some edge cases in this. You know particular tooling, or this particular thing one way or the other.

O

But if, if, if I'm understanding grant and what he said a few times, it is, you know, they'd be willing to start with the the the you know, the lint rules, and maybe the lint rules, don't pick up everything and something sneaks in and you know, that'll get caught in in a PR or you know review.

O

If that's the case and we and we know that directionally, you know the at least most of the people we've heard of talking at least support.

O

Some kind of eventual evolution see more typescript features. Then then that 48:52 decision right now at this point of time doesn't doesn't seem. You know it doesn't seem like a fight worth having.

N

Okay, I'll take that under consideration. I think I need to stop having the conversation right now, we've been at it for three hours and it's 3 p.m. my time. I haven't had lunch yet I'm, starting to feel a little weak.

N

I think this has actually been a lot more productive than the stuff on github.

O

Yeah so can I propose it like, because obviously people need to sleep on it and think about it. Given Thursday is something that we, you know like help to schedule. Other calls like, for example, that gives people some time to think on things, no hassle stuff or go do some checking and some experiments or whatever they need to do and come back on.

N

That's a good suggestion.

S

Yeah, that would work with Monday, okay.

U

Just to be a little awkward, thank you. Everyone for the tone of voice and conversation today, I really appreciate that everyone's been really simple. These things are hard to deal with in space of conflicts.

N

O

Sticking around and help mediate absolutely my pleasure. So why don't unless, unless everybody has a known time right now, why don't why don't we figure out a schedule on slack?

O

You know over the over tenet later today or whatever, and you know we'll just use the same zum-zum channel for the discussion on Monday. Does that sound reasonable sounds.

N

S

Good do I send the message done. Everyone it's like.

O

Well, fine, making me responsible, yes, I'll! Do that I'll! Do that.

S

After I very appreciate it, thanks for the discussion, I really appreciate everyone sticking around.

U

Yeah great days and lunches.

U