►
From YouTube: CNCF Serverless Working Group 2021-04-29
Description
CNCF Serverless Working Group 2021-04-29
B
C
D
E
F
D
G
F
D
C
H
F
F
I
J
F
C
J
F
F
G
J
C
C
C
C
Okay,
yeah
it'd
be
great.
If
you
could
have
done
anybody
can
join.
I
just
found
out
that
I
won't
be
able
to
join
because
it
overlaps
with
a
couple
of
the
sessions
that
I'm
doing
but
I'll
try
to
join
later
after
my
sessions
are
over,
but
we
need
other
people
there
for
who
who
could
definitely
be
there.
I.
H
C
Offline
and
I'll
I'll,
let
them
know
that
you
add
your
name
to
the
list
I'll,
let
them
know
about
you,
remy
all
right.
Let's
see
10
percent
on
the
call-
and
I
haven't
heard
from
him,
so
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
updates
there
so
before
we
jump
into
the
pr's
and
stuff
any
other
topic
to
add
to
the
agenda.
C
All
right
so
clemens,
maybe
we
should
wait
for
john
to
show
up
because
he
specifically
wanted
this
brought
up
to
the
top
of
the
list,
even
though
you
have
an
outstanding
ai.
So
tell
you
what
why
don't
we
go
ahead
and
do
that
because
he
may
have
some
questions
on
there.
So,
let's
get
that
one
right
now,
so
this
one
is
another
john
one,
but
I
think
we
can
talk
about
it
without
him
here.
C
So
he
opened
up
this
pr
to
modify
the
primer
to
talk
about
versioning
of
attributes
and
stuff
like
that
and
we
merged
it
into
master,
so
the
change
is
is
approved
in
general.
The
question
for
the
group
here
is
whether
this
is
worthy
enough
to
go
into
a
101
as
a
hotfix
or
whether
we
want
to
save
it
for
102..
C
Okay,
I
I
personally,
I
don't
have
an
opinion
either
way,
I'm
okay
with
it
going
in.
I
like
clarity,
and
since
it's
not
touching
the
spec,
I'm
okay
with
it,
but
I'm
fine
with
it
for
for
should
be
expandable,
okay
and
lance.
Thank
you
for
jumping
in
there.
Okay.
So
any
objection
to
treating
this
as
a
typo
type
fix
and
merging
into
101
of
the
hot
fix.
D
F
C
C
B
L
C
M
L
Which,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
if
I
can
add
something
at
the
end
of
the
day,
that's
I'm
not
sure.
If
you
know
the
open
api
security
requirement
object,
which
has
an
ndr
semantic
and
it
works
exactly
like
that
more
than
having
the
all
and
any
which
for
them
is
and
and
or
they
just
differentiate
between
object
and
array.
L
L
B
L
C
B
Like
for
me
for
me,
there's
a
consistency.
Question
well
for
the
simplest
case
is
that
you
have
and
that
that
was.
That
was
the
goal
of
it.
The
simplest
case
is
you,
don't
have
a
you,
don't
have
multiple
conditions,
but
just
one
and
then
you
just
put
the
filter,
then
you're
done.
So
if
you
have
a
filter
and
a
sql
filter,
you
say:
filter,
sql
expression.
Thank
you
very
much
or
you
have
a
filter.
B
L
C
L
No,
I
I
was
saying
that
it's
not
for
the.
What
you
think
you
misunderstood
is
that
I'm
not
talking
about
only
the
top
level
filter,
I'm
talking
about
the
filter,
object
itself
and
by
the
spec.
The
filter
object
is
a
map
of
dialect
where
there
can
be
only
one
key
value.
Okay,
and
what
I'm
changing
is
that
I'm
saying
no
in
this
map,
you
can
have
several
dialects
and
we
will
do
the
end
of
the
evaluation
of
this.
How
does
all
work
or
works
the
same
as
before.
L
I'm
not
getting
rid
of
the
end,
I'm
just
saying
I'm
just
saying:
if
you
need
to
define
something
simple
like
you
want
to
have
just
two
filters
and
you
want
to
match
both.
Then
you
can
do
this,
then
if
you
want
to
go
complex
and
do
a
complex
any
any
and
all
filter
composition,
you
use
all
and
any
as
before,
but
if
you
just
switch
back
to
the
definition.
B
L
L
So
every
so
I
I
I'm
actually.
My
your
example
is
more
distant
from
jesus
schema
than
my
example,
because
if
you
look
at
the
spec
of
jesus
schema
again,
it's
every
keyword
is
a
predicate
and
the
schema
object
is
the
end
of
those
predicates
so
that
that's
at
least
I
mean
that's,
that's
where
I'm
coming
from,
and
that's
why,
when
I
saw
the
spec
I
said
yeah,
it's
too
much
verbose
for
that
for
doing
that.
All.
L
C
C
N
It's
the
first
time
I've
looked
at
the
filter
stuff
personally,
but
it
feels
to
me
like
and
will
be
vastly.
I
suspect
it
will
be
vastly
more
widely
used,
and
I
like
the
idea
of
being
able
to
do
it
explicitly
where
that
does
make
things
more
readable
and
implicitly,
in
the
common
case.
So
I
haven't
looked
at
the
pr
to
see
how
it's
achieved,
but,
judging
by
the
discussion,
if
I've
understood
it
correctly,
I'd
be
in
favor.
Okay,
with
a
very.
C
O
C
C
O
C
O
C
C
K
J
C
C
C
L
B
Yeah
there
are
the
off,
and
one
off
difference
is
having
massive
effects
on
on
the
code
generators
and
what
they
what
they
put
out.
So
that's
something
that
I'm
I'm,
I'm
I'm
certainly
going
to
go
check
out
this
pr
and
check
it
against
the
the
quarter
extra
stuff
that
I
have
because
for
the
discovery
I've
been
building,
I
I
not
only
did
I
built
the
discovery
piece,
but
also
the
subscriptions
piece
that
is
funding
our
service,
and
so
this
will.
B
This
change
will
will
cause
quite
a
bit
of
churn
in
my
in
my
code
code
generated
stuff.
So
I'm
I'm
curious
how
that
comes
out,
because
the
truth
then
ends
up
in
the
code,
and
I
think
so
so
I
understand
where
that
goes,
but
the
I
think
the
construct
needs
to
make
it
makes
it
look
a
little
bit
different.
L
B
We
need
to.
We
need
to
make
quite
a
few
changes
for
that
for
that
change,
and
so
there
will
be
quite
a
bit
of
churn,
so
I'm
having
the
the
the
implicit
the
implicit
option
will,
because
the
implicit
option
causes
the
filter
object,
not
to
be
not
to
have
a
list,
so
this
here
is
appear.
So
so
this
comes
right.
Here
is
purely
a
tree
right
and.
B
C
Q
B
C
B
What
is
the
old
filter
today,
because
the
oil
filter
is
a
list
of
is
an
array
of
items,
so
that
is
probably
the
exact
object
that
we
want
to
go
and
fit
there
and
then
go,
and
so
that
becomes
effectively
the
filter.
The
the
this
container
that
sits
at
that
at
that
level
into
which
we
then
fit
the
filters
I'll
I'll.
I'm
also
going
to
take
a
look
at
that.
Okay,.
B
D
B
R
B
The
the
code
generators
are
very
ticklish
when
it
comes
to
certain
constructs
and
for
some
languages
like
go,
it's
the
polymorphism
throws
them
off
and
there's
so
we'll
just
have
to
go
and
try
out
how
those
things
look
in
in
various
in
various
languages
and
whether
we
like
the
result
and
make
it
somewhat
dependent
on
the
tooling.
I
don't
like
that,
but
that's
just
what
the
state
of
affairs
is
with
with
json
schema.
B
C
N
That
clemens
was
the
the
we
were
waiting
for
clemens
to
discuss
this.
Basically,
I
would
like
this
resolved
in
terms
of
are
we
getting
rid
of
it
or
not,
so
that
when
I
publish
a
c-sharp
sdk
version
two,
I
don't
include
an
extension,
that's
being
removed,
so
timing
wise.
It
would
be
useful
to
make
a
decision.
N
C
N
B
B
C
Yeah
so
yeah,
you
don't
want
to
wait
for
next
week's
call.
Obviously,
if
you
can
put
some
text
out
there
and
if
offline
over
the
next
couple
days,
slinky
looks
at
and
says
oh
yeah
sure
that
satisfies
my
concern.
Then
I
think
that
gives
john
a
little
more
faith
that
it's
actually
going
to
stick
or
stick
around.
E
C
C
Okay,
and
just
from
my
point
of
view,
because
I
know
I
was
one
of
the
ones
who
was
really
worried
about
this,
I
tried
to
think
of
a
concrete
example
where
the
order
would
matter,
and
I
couldn't
think
of
one
that
still
feels
like
there
should
be
one,
but
I
just
couldn't
think
of
it.
So,
barring
that,
from
my
point
of
view,
I
I
don't
have
a
blocking
concern,
but
clemens
you
may
have
had
one
because
you,
I
think
you
spoke
up
last
week
as
well.
B
C
C
C
N
C
Right
and
in
the
past
I
think
we
talked,
I
think,
the
last
time
we
talked
about
this
was
before
you
really
joined
the
group.
I
think
in
the
past,
whenever
we've
talked
about
the
possibility
of
creating
separate
repos
for
things
like
subscription
discovery,
the
general
consensus
at
that
time
was:
it's
probably
not
big
enough
to
warrant
a
separate
repo,
but
maybe
things
have
changed
and
people's
opinions
have
changed.
C
H
This
discovery
and
subscriptions
are
kind
of
tied
a
bit
together
even
like,
so
I
don't
think
that
going
into
several
repo
will
increase
the
visibility
it's
gonna
be
too
much
spread.
I
prefer
your
folder
or
structure
I
don't,
but
the
versioning.
I
do
agree
that
we
could
kind
of
change
the
versioning,
but
I
I'm
not
a
big
fan
of
having
like
10
reports,
to
look
after
to
just
understand
the
whole
project.
N
But
that's
just
my
opinion
and
that's
fine,
but
if
do
we
think
that
it's
reasonable
to
try
to
break
apart
the
versioning
of
the
main
cloud
event
spec
from
subscriptions
and
discovery
specs
I've.
I've
worked
in
repos
that
have
the
version
by
branch
name,
because
there
is
one
one
version
that
covers
everything
in
that
repo
and
I've
worked
in
repos
where
tags
are
used
instead,
because
it
covers
multiple
different
aspects.
N
And
this
is
spitballing
with
only
limited
knowledge
and
not
having
sort
of
prepared
all
of
this,
but
I
would
imagine
we
could
do
the
releases
instead
of
just
being
1.0.0
would
be
subscriptions
dash,
1.1.0
or
whatever,
and
that
would
effectively
give
the
context
of
the
the
tag
slash
release,
which
I
generally
expect
to
be
a
tag
that
points
at
a
commit
that
changes
the
version
number
within
the
document.
If
you
see
what
I
mean
so.
N
Yes
and
I've
personally
found
that
most
of
the
time
you
don't
really
need
branches,
you
just
need
tags
and
then,
if
you
need
to
effectively
patch
things,
then
you
can
patch
via
create
a
branch
at
the
given
tag.
I
guess
you
do
need
to
have
a
policy
of
how
you
do
that,
so
you
could
have
a
branch
of
spec
dash,
1.0.0
and
subscriptions
dash
1.0.x.
N
N
If
we
ever
have
such
a
thing,
then
hopefully
people
would
be
aware
that
the
thing
that's
being
versioned
here,
that's
being
tagged,
is
the
stuff
under
cloud
events
and
not
the
subscription
stuff.
The
subscriptions
bit
could
be
part
way
through
a
different
kind
of
change,
and
you
wouldn't
particularly
look
at
it.
So
it's
it's
a
pin,
that's
only
relevant
for
some
subset
of
the
files.
C
Yeah
but
then
I
think
I
think
you
get
into
what
I
think
eric
is
mentioning
there
in
the
chat,
which
is.
Do
you
get
into
some
sort
of
weird
compatibility
thing
right?
Because
if
someone
jumps
into
the
subscription
version,
one
branch,
they
will
see
the
other
specifications
in
that
branch,
because
you
can't
have
a
branch
without
doing
the
entire
repo
in
the
branch
right
and
so
they're
going
to
look
at
that
version.
Or
they
may
look
at
that
version
of
the
cloud
event
spec.
C
N
Guess
that
I
would
hope
that
the
subscriptions
documentation,
spec
whatever,
would
say
what
version
of
cloud
events
it
depended
on
like
a
library
dependency,
and
so,
if
we're
part
way
through
doing
something
with
the
cloud
event
spec
and
it's
not
really
settled
yet.
That's
okay,
because
the
subscription
spec
says
well,
the
version
you
should
look
at
is
one
zero,
zero
or
one
zero
one
or
whatever.
It
is
it's
possible
that
we
just
don't
really
know
how
all
of
this
will
evolve
enough
to
design
a
decent
versioning
system.
Yet.
C
Yeah,
because
I
understand
what
you're
saying
conceptually
it's
just
in
practice,
I'm
not
sure
how
many
people
will
think
about.
Oh,
I
missed
the
description,
api
and
then
the
discovery
api
spec.
Therefore,
rather
than
just
going
to
look
at
other
files
in
this
directory
or
in
this
tree,
I
need
now
go
look
at
the
readme
to
see
which
version
and
which
branch
to
go
look
at
to
see
that
corresponds
to
this
version
of
discovery.
Spec.
I'm
not
sure
people
want
to
jump
through
that.
Many
hoops.
I
H
C
H
I
automatically
update
the
readme
whenever
I
do
a
review,
so
you
can
still
put
in
the
readme
something
that
linked
to
like
the
latest
published
version,
and
then
you
main,
basically,
your
main
branch
is
like
the
working
branch,
but
you,
the
the
readme,
is
updated
every
time
that
you
do
when
you
release
and
when
you
do
the
new
release.
Basically,
your
ci
is
just
pushing
the
tag
modifying
the
readme
and
like
with
conventional
permits.
You
can
automatically
create
a
versioning
system.
I
have
like
an
open
source
project.
Who
does
that?
H
C
C
C
N
C
So
let
me
ask
this
because
this
is,
I
don't
want
to
rattle
too
much
on
this.
Do
you
do
we
have
to
solve
the
versioning
problem
at
the
same
time
as
deciding
whether
we
want
a
new
directory
structure
in
here,
I'm
inclined
to
say
we
don't
have
to
meaning.
I
think
we
could
do
this
and
then
decide.
Oh,
we
like
john's
version
scheme
in
the
same
repo,
or
we
said
no.
This
is
getting
too
complicated
nope.
N
Yeah,
the
the
only
downside
of
that
is
that
seeing
a
history
of
things
is
harder.
If
it's
moved
around
it
sort
of
feels
like
it
shouldn't
be,
git
should
know.
Oh,
this
was
moved
from
the
top
level
to
under
cloud
events
and
back
again
I
will
treat
it
as
one
file
for
history
perspective,
but
I
don't
think
it
shows
that
way
in
github.
Oh,
it
doesn't.
N
C
I
don't
want
to
rush
this
decision.
Let
me
take
the
ai
to
go
investigate.
I.
I
really
want
to
say
that
the
history
moves
with
the
file,
because
I
don't
think
github,
I'm
sorry.
I
don't
think
git
treats
a
move
as
a
delete
and
a
create.
I
think
it
treats
it
as
a
move
and
then
the
history
goes
with
it,
but
I
don't
know
for
sure-
and
I
will
double
check
that,
because
that
that
may
be
part
of
our
decision.
D
C
Process,
yeah,
yeah.
Okay,
in
the
meantime
think
about
this
think
about
whether
you
everybody
think
about
this
structure,
think
about
whether
you
want
another
substructure
under
cloud
events
and
think
about
whether
we
should
resolve
all
this
at
the
same
time
with
the
versioning
stuff,
let's
make
a
life
even
more
exciting
and
so
john.
If
you
want
to
think
about
what
your
version
of
proposal
would
look
like,
that
might
be
useful
discussion
to
think
about
when
this
comes
back
up
on
the
next
phone
call
that.
N
L
Yeah,
I
just
want
to
say
that,
like
the
discussion,
whether
we
present
to
our
users,
the
the
spec
versions,
in
my
opinion,
is
not
something
we
should
we
should
solve.
In
the
repository
like
like
the
first
time
I
I've
landed
in
the
cloud
event,
spec
repo.
I
was
like
hey.
Why
there's
the
link
to
the
version
and
then
the
link
to
master
it
doesn't
make
sense.
I
I
would
prefer
that
we
solved
the
solution.
We
saw
solve
this
kind
of
problem
at
the
website
level.
L
So
in
the
website
we
have
proper
links
to
the
various
releases
of
of
the
specs
and
for
each
subspec
we
have
the
link
to
the
spec
or
better,
the
spec
renderer,
just
straight
inside
the
website,
which
shouldn't
be
hard
because
it's
marked
down
at
the
end
of
the
day.
So
yeah.
That's
that's
my
last
thought
about
that.
L
No,
I'm
saying
I'm
saying
that
the
the
readme
needs
needs
to
help
me
navigate
through
the
through
the
repo,
not
through
the
sp,
all
the
splat
pressures,
that's
something
that
the
website
should
do
so
it's
the.
When
I
go
to
the
website.
I
select
what's
person
and
then
I
get
the
list
of
the
spec
of
the
of
the
all
subspecs
and
I
click
on
a
subspec,
and
I
see
it
rendered
on
the
website.
C
L
It
can
with
a
tag,
so
I'm
implying
the
fact
that
we
have
tags
okay
but
like,
as
I
said,
as
I
said
in
the
chat
you
need
branches
like,
for
example,
1.2,
1.1,
1.2
branches.
If
you
need
to
do
patch
releases
okay.
So
if
you
need
at
some
point
so
if
at
some
point
you
release
1.2,
but
then
you
need
to
release
1.1.1.
L
C
L
L
So
one
part
of
one
part
of
the,
so
the
initial
sentences
are
exactly
like
any
other
protocol
binding.
We
have
okay
and
it
claims
the
usual
stuff.
So
if
the
content
type
is
present,
the
value
is
prefixed
with
application
called
event,
then
it's
structured,
otherwise
it's
binary
and
but
then
below.
There
is
the
sentence.
If
the
content
type
editor
is
not
present,
then
use
structured
mode
with
json
event,
format
and
yeah.
L
Of
course,
of
course,
the
the
two
sentences
are
in
contrast,
and
I
propose
I
propose
to
two
different
pr's
one
excludes
the
other,
so
one
pr
is
just
that
we
align
with
other
protocol
bindings
and
we
remove
this.
The
the
other
sentence,
which
is
conflicting
or
the
order,
is
what
I
say,
the
more
kafka
approach.
So
in
kafka,
it's
not
usual
to
to
send
the
content
type
adder
and
that's.
I
think
the
reason
why
there
is
this:
why
there
is
this
sentence,
because
it's
yeah
very
often
you
don't.
L
L
B
Is
a
very
interesting
one
because
there
is
a
so
the
kafka
has
the
has
these.
That
has.
There
is
the
schema
registry,
but
it's
one
particular
vendor,
and
that
is
popular
and
what
that
does
is
it
puts
a
puts,
a
a
tag
as
a
pointer
into
the
schema
registry
kind
of
into
a
magic
meeting
header
inside
of
the
payload,
so
instead
of
using
the
metadata
they're,
actually
stashing
the
information
into
the
into
the
header
of
the
payload
and
that
then
references
the
outside
the
outside
metadata.
B
So
if
you,
if
you,
if
you
want
to
write
a
message
that
is
end-to-end
encrypted,
for
instance,
then
you
can
do
this
based
on
the
criterion
of
what
the
content
type
is,
because
you
can
see
it.
But
if
you
have
to
crack
the
message
body,
then
you
already
have
to
go
and
engage
the
serializer
and
you
have
to
go
and
probably
decrypt
it,
so
that
becomes
becomes
more
more
expensive
and
that's
why
that
should
just
be
there.
L
Well,
well,
don't
get
me
wrong
clemens,
but
I'm
not
I'm
not
saying
well
that
one
approaches
is
right
and,
and
the
other
one
is
wrong.
I'm
just
saying
that
this
is
what
kafka
developers
are
used
to
do.
So
that's
why
I
proposed
this
the
this.
This
approach
with
the
content
type
in,
in
any
case
that
the
spec,
I
think
now
is
wrong
and
has
to
be
fixed
so
one
way
or
the
or
the
other,
but
it
has
to
be
fixed
for
sure.
C
C
L
D
G
A
B
A
C
C
A
C
C
C
C
C
B
C
B
See
the
http
so
http.
As
I
said,
the
app
the
the
if
a
content
type
header
is
not
present.
The
recipient
may
either
assume
a
media
type
of
application.
Octet
stream,
as
you
heard
that
earlier
or
exact,
examine
the
data
to
determine
its
type.
So
it's
not
required,
but
it's
it's
implied
that
it's
a
binary,
then,
okay,.
C
C
C
F
C
Another
try
clarifying
kafka.
I
must
have
done
this
on
behalf
of
of
the
group
or
something
like
that.
I
cannot
imagine.
I
would
make
these
kind
of
changes
on
my
own.
That's
an
easy
excuse,
though
I
well
because
I
I
like
I
said
I
do
not
know
kafka
and
I'm
looking
at
the
changes
here
and
okay.
Okay,
so
it's
been
there
a
very
long
time
anyway,
it's
not
in
the
other
specs.
So
I
guess
we
don't
need
to
well.
C
C
C
G
D
H
Overwritten
subscribe:
if
I
act
as
a
gateway,
I
have
to
be
the
middleman,
so
I'll
probably
I
can
even
have
like
a
shift
of
network,
so
that
means
every
service
that
I
start
to
proxy.
I
need
to
rewrite
their
own
definition
to
remove
the
subscription
and
put
my
own
subscription
in
place.
Basically,
and
that's
why,
for
me
it
was
a
bit
I
was
thinking
of,
even
when
you
call
the
slash
services
to
have
like
a
subscription
group
that
includes
services
and
then
you
like,
that's
basically
the
subscription
system
that
can
be.
H
H
H
You
could
take
the
service
definition
and
just
stay,
oh
by
the
way
you
can
subscribe
through
me
with
that
type
of
subscription,
and
then
you
you
keep
the
original
service
definition
as
it
was
written
by
like
the
true
service
and
it's
just
the
subscription
parameters
that
are
different
from
the
original,
because
I
really
think
like
in
yeah.
I
need
to
write
more.
I
sorry
it's
just
because
I
was
working
on
it
yesterday
night
and.
H
And
try
to
explain,
but
when
you
have
like,
if
it's
an
internal
service
that
is
exposed
to
your
customer
through
a
gateway
at
one
point,
they
won't
be
able
to
reach
your
internal
service,
so
they
won't
be
able
to
use
the
original
subscription
system.
They
have
to
go
through
a
second
subscription
system.
C
H
C
H
So
that's
the
way
you
see
the
subscription
config,
because
for
me
whether
I
had
trouble
when
I
looked
at
yours
he's
like
the
the
way
I
was
thinking
is
probably
reverse
of
what
you
think,
because
for
me,
my
ping
service.
So
I
also
have
a
ping
service
and
basically
the
ping
service
is
emitting
every
five
seconds,
because
that's
just
the
way
the
service
is
configured
so
me
as
like
the
service
provider.
I'm
just
saying
this.
C
H
Because,
like
this
one,
if
I
subscribe,
I
have
a
new
burger
that
I
just
generated,
but
it
will
the
I'm
not
in
charge
of
how
often
the
people
I
cannot
interfere
with
the
service
just
with
a
cloud
event
subscription,
because
for
me
the
service
is,
can
be
a
complete
app.
So
it's
not
like
me
as
a
subscriber
who
can
define
the
configuration
of
it
like
if
I
take
sales
for
something
like
that,
I
would
expect
to
get
some
events
but
not
to
be
able
to
kind
of
config
salesforce
through
the
subscription
config.
H
So,
like
okay,
my
case
I'll,
try
to
explain
it
from
where
I
start
is
I'm
here
and
I'm
like.
Okay
duke
has
like
two
services
and
I'd
like
to
subscribe
to
one.
If
I
just
subscribe
when
I
subscribe,
I
need
to
give
you
the
interval
I
want
and
the
second
parameters
it's
the
string.
I
forgot
what
you
see,
probably
the
content
of
the
event.
H
H
Like
what
parameters
do
you
want
to
ask
that
means
also,
I
can
have
like
as
many
subscription
as
I
want
on
the
same
service,
because
I
can
resubscribe
with
different
parameters
and
and
continue
like
that,
but
I'm
just
kind
of
thinking
out
loud
and
sorry.
Maybe
there's
no
question,
but
that's
the
way.
So
that's
why
the
my
thinking
was
more.
H
It's
already
established
applications,
so
they
already
have
their
own
behaviors
and
what
like
github,
in
my
opinion,
already
have
his
own
behavior
or
if
I
do
my
own
application,
and
they
will
start
emitting
events
without
me
being
able
to
choose,
because
in
a
way
when,
I
sorry,
I'm
not
sure
yeah.
When
I
subscribe
to
european
service,
that
means
the
subscription
configuration
is
basically
telling
european
service
when
it
should
emit
events.
G
H
C
Correct
right
and
there
there
are
definitely
going
to
be
some
services
that
fall
into
either
either
category
right,
there'll
be
some
that
you
don't
get
to
necessarily
choose
anything
right.
It's
just
you're
just
just
connecting
up
to
the
stream
of
events,
but
then
there
will
be
others
where
it
says.
No,
you
can
tell
me
more
information
about
how
you
want
these
events
to
be
generated
or
when
they're
generated
or
something
like
that
yeah.
So.
H
So
that
exp,
so
I
do
that's
why
I
think
our
two
vision
is
a
bit
different
and
that's
why,
for
me,
the
j-wade,
like
dwt
token,
will
be
in
the
subscription
config,
because
that
means
yeah,
I'm
that
customer
I
can
subscribe.
This
is
my
proof,
and
so
it
will
let
you
go
in
or
out
depending
on
the
subscription
config.
So
that's
why
I
was
seeing
it
there.
C
But
oh
okay
so
hold
on
okay
hold
on.
Let
me
make
it
so
I
think
what
you're
saying
is
you
were
viewing
subscription
config
as
configurations
for
subscribing
yeah
and
I'm,
and
I
believe
the
current
spec
is
the
other
way
around
its
description.
Config
isn't
for
for
for
configurations
for
subscribing
per
se
as
much
as
it's
how
to
configure
the
event
producer
itself
when
it
generates
or
sends,
or
at
least
when
it
generates
the
events.
C
I
I
think
what
you're
saying
is.
We
need
someplace
to
be
very
clear
that
says:
hey
if
I
need
additional
parameters
on
the
subscribe
itself.
These
are.
This
is
not
going
to
influence
how
the
events
are
generated
or
how
they're
sent
it's
just.
You
need
additional
information
for
me
to.
Let
me
even
do
the
subscribe.
C
H
Cool,
so
that
means
I
was
able
to
leave
it
correctly,
but
yeah,
because
for
me
I
don't
see
why
the
subscription
will
interfere
with
the
business
logic.
So
I
that's
why?
Even
if
I
understand
the
argument
on
the
ping
service.
To
be
honest,
so
it's
another
view
that
is
possible,
but
I
think
most
of
the
case
should
be
like.
I
already
have
running
services.
I
have
running
application,
I'd
already
stream
lots
of
events.
H
G
C
C
H
G
C
C
B
No,
you
can
hear
me,
I
build
an
azure
function,
that
is
proxy
in
the
azure
resource
manager,
layer
and
it's
also
proxying
event
grid.
So
this
is
a
little
unreal
need
to
look
at.
So
I
think
I
just
pasted
that
in
here,
so
what
it
does
is
it
basically
creates
the
it
creates
a
discovery
document
that
has
effectively
every
service
that
sits
in
an
azure
resource
group.
So
there's
a
storage
service
and
there's
a
function
app
itself,
but
I'm
going
to
put
put
some
more
there
so
there's
effectively.
B
B
So
that's
the
app
service
and
all
the
various
operations
that
it
can
it
can
raise.
So
this
is
all
just
live
and
what
we
raise
in
in
azure.
So
so
I
haven't
done
any
any
translation
work.
This
is
original
and
then
what
I'll
do
so?
These
are
effectively
three
resources
which
live
inside
of
this
inside
of
this
resource
group
in
in
azure,
and
if
you
subscribe,
you
will
be
doing
this
through
these
subscription
links.
B
That
is
super
real,
so
I'll
also
have
the
I'll
have
some
resources
which
will
go
and
do
some
automatic
raising
of
events
that
will
go,
and
you
know
something
will
go
and
throw
something
into
the
plot
store,
and
then
that
will
raise
the
event.
So
this
will
just
be
real
sort
of
resources,
and
with
this
app
I'm
going
to
give
access
effectively
into
those
resources
without
requiring
I'm
making
a
little
hole
into
azure.
B
If
you
will
so
that
you
can
go
and
subscribe
to
those
events
without
requiring
authorization,
cool
that'd
be
neat,
I
like
it,
so
that
is
mostly
done,
but
I
have
to
go
and
patch
up
some
goals
and
make
it
more
approachable
like
you
should
be
able
to
get
the
like
this.
The
subscription,
while
you
also
have
here,
should
be
more
straightforward.
B
There
might
be
some
information
missing,
there's
also
some
like,
as
I'm
filling
out
all
the
data
data
there's
some
stuff
that
looks
fairly
repetitive
and
I'm
not
yet
sure
what
I
like
that
repetitiveness,
like
you
have.
I
have
four
times
the
four
times
the
same
url
and
I
need
to
think
about
what
that's
that's
the
same
thing
or
whether
we
can
probably
go
and
consolidate
the
the
the
metadata
a
little
bit
more.
B
So
there
are
so
in
two
weeks
when
we
meet
again
officially,
then
there
will
be
certainly
more,
and
this
will
be
more
rounded
cool
also
and
for
everybody
to
go
and
take
a
look
at
if
you
guys
want
to
want
to
peek.
I
have
this
in
a
repo,
so
it's
not
that
I'm
doing
this
in
private.
I'm
actually
doing
this
very
much
in
the
open,
so
paste
it
in
the
chat
window.
If
you
want
to
feel
it.
B
B
B
So
it's
it's
effectively
creating
it's
a
websocket
based
delegation
of
listening
to
to
connections
and
then
those
connections
being
are
being
proxy
to
your
own
machine.
So
it
feels
and
looks
like
if
you're
listening
on
your
on
your
local
machine,
but
the
dns
and
the
actual
endpoint
is
provided
in
the
cloud.
B
So
that's
the
event
grid
project
and
there's
a
bunch
of
json
files
which
I
stole
from
the
I
had
to
go
and
steal
those
from
from
from
some
other
place
in
azure,
because
I
don't
have
access
to
these
types.
But
these
are
all
the
event
types
that
are
being
thrown
to
very
event
grid,
so
they
are
just
there
and
there's.
The
subscription
service
is
implemented
there
and
the
discovery
services
implement.
There's
a
subscription
service.
B
B
B
H
H
Yeah
yeah,
it's
super
easy,
like
you
just
need
like,
so
I
have
like
a
serverless
framework
that
I
did
so.
I
can
use
it
on
aws
because
deploy
also
on
azure
with
function,
and
then
you
just
throw
on
like
yeah
like
a
no
sequel
or
you
can
even
use
a
like
a
blobster.
If
you
don't
want
to
do
any
search
and
and
that's
about
it,
then
it's
just
a
few
and
like
plugging,
probably
guitar
authentication,
to
be
able
to
authenticate
who
published
the
registry.
But
that's
that's
about
it.