►
From YouTube: CNCF Serverless Working Group 2019-12-5
Description
Join us for Kubernetes Forums Bengaluru and Delhi - learn more at kubecon.io
Don't miss KubeCon + CloudNativeCon 2020 events in Amsterdam March 30 - April 2, Shanghai July 28-30 and Boston November 17-20! Learn more at kubecon.io. The conference features presentations from developers and end users of Kubernetes, Prometheus, Envoy, and all of the other CNCF-hosted projects
CNCF Serverless Working Group 2019-12-5
A
B
D
E
B
F
B
Do
me
a
favor
I
pasted,
a
minute
I'll
link
to
the
minutes.
If
you
can
just
put
your
company
name
next
to
your
name
and
the
agenda.
Just
so,
I
can
give
your
company
credit
for
joining
I'd
appreciate
that
alright,
thank
you
and.
D
G
B
You
know
if
I
don't
remember
somebody
please
remind
me:
I
was
gonna,
ask
if
people
actually
want
to
have
a
phone
call
in
the
nineteenth,
because
I
don't
know
about
you
guys,
but
at
least
within
IBM
a
lot
of
people
start
taking
vacation
or
right
around
the
fifteenth
or
so
so
I,
don't
know
how
many
people
are
actually
gonna.
Take
a
phone
call
on.
B
B
And
then
we'll
are
you
there,
man
well
Stein.
Yes,
said:
oh
I'm,
yeah,
hey!
Is
this
your
first
time
on
the
call?
Yes,
it
is
okay,
great.
Do
you
a
favor,
I'm
gonna
paste,
a
link
to
the
agenda
talk
into
the
chat,
if
you
could
just
add
your
company
name
next
to
your
name.
Just
with
that
way,
you
guys
can
get
credit
for
joining
I'd
appreciate,
Thanks!
B
D
B
Okay,
thank
you
all
right
class.
Are
you
there
yet?
Oh,
maybe
okay
anyway,
got
some
up
later
right.
Sixteen
that's
going
to
get
started.
Okay,
community
financial!
For
those
who
are
new
to
the
call
to
me.
This
is
a
time
for
anybody
who's,
normally,
not
on
the
call
to
bring
up
a
topic
that
they
might
want
to
bring
up
for
discussion
for
the
community
to
to
ponder.
Is
there
anything
if
you
want
to
bring
up.
B
F
B
B
B
So
if
you're
interested
in
that
part,
the
discussion
to
stick
on
the
call
after
this
one
will
started
basically
immediately
after
this
one
ends,
even
if
it
ends
early,
let's
see
I
don't
see
Cathy
on
the
call
or
anybody
else
from
that
work
group
to
mention
anything
so
I,
don't
things
anything
to
talk
about
where
that's,
if
to
the
workflow
other
than
still
the
work
is
still
going
on
over
there
server
interested
in
that
please
join.
They
are
ramping
up.
B
What
I
want
to
do
now
is
give
an
opportunity
for
people
talk
a
little
bit
about
what
happened
to
kook
on
I.
Do
have
a
whole
section
down
here
talking
about
what
we're
going
to
work
on
next,
so
save
those
discussions
for
later.
But
does
anybody
want
to
bring
up
anything
relative
to
the
practitioner
summit
or
the
cloud
event
session,
but
they
think
might
be
of
interest
to
the
group
in
general.
B
Nothing:
okay,
tell
you
what
I,
just
let
you
guys
know
at
Keuka
itself.
I
was
hit
up
for
quite
a
few
press
interviews
around
cloud
events
well
mainly
about
cloud
events,
obviously
because
we
reached
1.0,
but
a
lot
of
them
also
did
then
ask
about
you
know
what
could
happen
next
with
a
service
working
group
and
they
all
seemed
really
generally
interested
in
and
excited
by
a
cloud
event.
So
that
was
all
good
and
they're,
also
very
much
interested
in
what
we're
going
to
work
on
next.
B
So
they
do
seem
to
really
like
what
we're
doing
here
and
they're
very
eager
to
see
what
we
work
on
next
and
to
see
if
we
can
keep
the
the
good
feelings
going
with
all
this
I
thought
that
was
all
kind
of
nice.
But
again
one
last
chance.
Anybody
else
want
to
bring
up
anything
relative
to
cook
on
they
might
not
give
interest
all
right
cool
in
that
case
moving
forward.
B
What
I
wanted
to
do
in
the
future
calls
is
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
ignore
some
of
the
stuff
that's
going
on
in
cloud
events
as
we
work
on
something
new
is
I
want
to
do
a
little
bit
of
things
like
issue
triage
or
PR
trios,
if
needed,
but
I'm
not
going.
Obviously,
gonna
spend
the
entire
timeline.
That's
what
I
did
I
just
picked
out
three
of
the
newer
issues
and
just
to
make
sure
we
this
has
some
owners
are
going
to
take
a
look
at
it.
Clemens
I
thought.
B
B
B
B
B
Thank
you,
and
did
you
raise
your
hand
for
a
different
question,
or
was
that
it?
You
know
I
just
forgot
to
lower
it:
okay,
cool
okay.
Luckily
we
have
no
PRS
review,
so
that's
all
good.
So
now
I
could
jump
into
the
fun
stuff.
What
to
work
on
next.
Let's
see
I
want
to
show
something
here.
So
a
couple
things.
First
of
all
in
terms
of
the
face-to-face
meeting
and
the
server
this
working
group
session,
I've
had
a
coupon,
we
did
take
notes
and
the
link
to
it
is
in
the
meeting
minutes.
B
It's
this
link
right
here.
We
did
take
notes
in
terms
of
people.
Were
there
brainstorming
sessions
to
me,
the
most
important
thing
was
once
we
parody
was
done
with
they're
sort
of
brainstorming
ideas
of
what
we
could
possibly
work
on.
We
then
asked
the
group
ok.
After
all
these
ideas,
let's
narrow
it
down
to
what
we
actually
think
is
doable
and
possible
to
work
on,
and
people
could
actually
get
behind,
and
it
came
basically
came
down
to
this
list
right
here,
which
is
did
it
do?
Where?
Is
it
I?
Don't
have
there
anyway?
B
Okay,
which
is
basically
this
list
right
here
now,
and
this
is
in
the
meeting
minutes
as
well.
The
other
thing
is,
though,
at
the
birds
of
a
feather
working
group
session.
We
had
here's
basically
summary
of
the
notes
that
I
took
there.
What
was
interesting
to
me
was
a
couple
of
things.
First,
there
seemed
to
be
a
split
in
the
room
about
how
important
portability
and
lock-in
was.
B
We
had
some
people
who
thought
it
was
very,
very
important,
and
we
had
some
people
who
thought
it
wasn't
important
at
all,
and
people
just
managed
to
work
around
it.
So
I
thought
that
was
kind
of
interesting,
because
in
the
past
most
people
seem
to
think
that
Interop
was
actually
really
be
concerned.
So
it
kind
of
took
me
aback
a
little
to
hear
that
for
some
people,
it's
not
an
issue
whatsoever,
so
that
was
kind
of
interesting.
B
But
the
other
interesting
thing
is
that,
in
terms
of
what
to
work
on
next,
there
definitely
seem
to
be
a
lot
of
people,
leaning
towards
the
discovery
and
catalog
side
of
things
which
was
interesting
and
in
terms
of
adoption
of
surplus
and
functions
itself.
The
general
consensus
I
got
from
the
room
was
for
newer
things.
People
don't
necessarily
seem
to
be
having
a
CERN
was
going
towards
service,
the
bigger
concerned
to
be
seeing
more
around
things
like
you
know.
How
do
they
get
there
from
where
they
are?
B
Today
is
our
example:
how
would
they
break
up
the
monolith,
not
just
in
containers,
but
then
all
the
way
down
to
functions
or
they're
a
little
bit
nervous
about
technology,
so
they
may
start
with
tooling
type
of
stuff
or
utilities
and
not
necessarily
jump
full
head.
You
know
head
on
into
using
it
for
product
level
code.
Quite
yet,
so
it's
a
slow
progression
kind
of
thing
which,
which
makes
sense
from
all
perspectives
in
terms
of
you,
know
slow
learning
curve,
so
that
was
that
was
kind
of
nice
to
hear.
B
But
the
biggest
thing
I
think
for
us
is
to
actually
talk
about
what
to
work
on
next
and,
as
I
said,
I
think
discovering
catalog
was
probably
the
top
thing
that
kept
coming
up
and
a
very
close
second
was
function.
Signatures
so
I
think
those
are
so
the
two
top
things,
but
let
me
pause
there
and
see
if
other
people
who
are
at
coop
con
I
had
a
different
take
than
in
my
view
of
it.
B
D
C
A
Catalog
for
producers
and
consumers,
so,
basically
I
think
open
API,
but
open
API
is
tied
to
usually
HTTP,
so
it
dictates
a
certain
protocol.
You
need
to
speak
to
the
that
producer
that
consumer,
but
what
we've
done
with
cloud
events
is
kind
of
reduce
the
that
dependency
on
the
protocol
you
choose.
So
I
would
like
to
explore
a
some
sort
of
concept.
A
C
Got
it?
Thank
you,
yeah,
see,
I,
think
we
had
so
we
had
custard
a
few
things
in
the
discussion
and
three
things
we
costed
together
or
the
idea
of
of
this
catalogue,
and
it
is,
you
know,
ask
a
and
ask
a
publisher
or
its
its
delegates
inform
a
middleware
what
events
are
available
and
then
a
schema
registry,
which
you
know
tells
you
what
the
payloads
are
in
those
events,
I
think
those
things
work
very
well
together
and
then
the
subscription
API
to
now
you
have
discover
and
how
you
gonna
get
at
those.
A
C
And
I
think,
even
if
you
didn't
want
to
be
intelligent
inside
of
the
inside
of
the
middleware
for
scheme
abounding
coatings,
like
I
mean
we
we
keep
those
out
now,
but
I
think
proto
is
going
to
be
back
for
schema
bones
encoding
swear
you
can't
even
decode
the
body
without
having
a
schema
hands.
I
think
a
schema
registry
will
be
important,
even
if
the
middle,
where
it
doesn't
reason
about
the
payloads
yeah.
B
Is
that
I
know
in
the
past
we've
talked
about
subscription.
Api
is
something
possibly
to
work
on
next
and
I
think
is,
as
Scott
has
pointed
out,
a
couple
of
times
that
that's
all
well
and
good,
but
without
the
discovery
side
of
it,
it's
going
to
be
hard
to
automate
it
all
right,
tooling
around
that
stuff,
so
I
think
what's
really
cool
about
this
is
Clement
said.
If
you
can
link
you
know
the
discovery
of
what
events
are
being
generated,
what
their
schema
is
that
goes
very
nicely
with
the
subscription
API
definition
as
well.
B
You
know
they
all
kind
of
fit
together
into
this
sort
of
attack
in
the
same
general
problem.
You
know
how
do
you
get
have
you
started
asking
for
the
events
at
what
types
so
you
can
receive
and
it
all
just
seems
to
fit
nicely.
Of
course
it's
also
a
nice
next
step
for
the
evolution
of
cloud
events
in
terms
of
using
the
cloud
of
a
metadata.
They
were
defined
in
the
next
step
of
your
tooling
exploration
kind
of
stuff,
so
I
thought
it
was
kind
of
a
nice.
I
Sorry
I
would
like
to
invite
people
that
are
involved
in
that
topic
to
maybe
have
a
sidebar
discussion.
The
reason
I
bring
that
up
is.
We
have
actually
got
a
beta
product
that
is,
the
catalog
automatically
generates
the
events.
We've
actually
pushed
that
into
a
sync
API,
which
is
a
parallel
thing
to
open
API,
except
for
non
HTTP,
and
we
have
code
generators
that
have
actually
demonstrated
internally
just
this
week
to
our
executive
branch
to
generate
spring
cloud
streams.
I
B
I
B
That's
cool
all
right,
any
other
questions
or
comments
just
around
the
idea
of
catalog
discovery
subscription,
API
type
stuff.
Look
at
it.
Basically,
these
two
things
here.
K
B
H
K
Yeah,
if
I
can
make
one
comment
on
the
subscription
API,
so
what
I?
So
I
basically
write
a
software
service
a
time
and
we
would
push
our
events
into
a
middleware
and,
if
they're
hosted
like,
for
example,
every
event
quit
then
our
d
end
consumer
would
subscribe,
should
subscribe
at
the
event
quit
api
and
then
our
api
would
push
the
events
even
quit,
and
I
meant
great
boot
boot
and
further,
but
there's
a
problem
in
that.
K
If
we
push
all
of
our
events
to
vanquished
can
be
a
lot
of
them
and
the
end
consumer,
maybe
only
once
the
few
of
them.
So
what
we
end
up
with,
maybe
as
pushing
hundreds
or
thousands
of
events
and
the
end
consumer
only
one
or
two
of
them.
So
that's
like
a
huge
waste
of
money,
so
we
could
get
like
a
standardized
subscription
API
so
that
it
can
be
forwarded
along
multiple
hops.
Then
the
first
event
producer
can
already
know
what
events
to
send
on
so
I
would
be
very
interested
in
this
one
cool.
H
B
Good
to
hear
that
yeah,
so
I'm
hearing
lots
of
people
jumping
on
board
with
the
idea
of
of
catalog
discovery,
submission
API.
That
kind
of
stuff,
however
I,
don't
want
to
assume
make
too
much
of
an
answer
here.
But
so
let
me,
but
let's
take
a
step
back
for
a
second
and
see.
Are
there
other
ideas
that
people
have
either
arm
lists
from?
You
know
the
minutes
that
I'm
highlighting
here
or
just
other
deities
in
general,
that
people
think
no
we're
missing
the
boat.
J
J
L
B
And
that
one
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
what
you'd
like
me
to
do,
would
you
like
us
to
do
with
that?
Is
that
something
that
you
would
like
to
ponder
a
little
bit
more
to
see
what
that
actually
means?
Or
do
you
want
this
to?
Actually,
you
know
put
that
on
par
with
the
other
one
and
say
you
know
we
need
to
choose
between
the
two
it
because
this
one's
just
as
important
I,
don't.
J
B
Kind
of
I
kind
of
inverted
the
discussion
here.
So
let
me
ask
anybody
else
on
the
call.
For
example,
Clemens
I
think
you
may
have
brought
up
security
at
one
point
as
well,
but
you
didn't
seem
to
think
it
was.
He
was
at
the
same
level
of
that
we
should
work
on
next.
It
was
just
something
that
sort
of
was
in
a
hopper
or
something
to
consider.
So
what
are
the
people
think
on
the
call
about
the
Indian
security
idea?
C
We
can
probably
tackle
next
now
there
is
a
I
think
the
the
pieces
that
are
up
to
us
to
peak
or
to
standardize,
even
if
we
think
about
creating
an
ecosystem
which
is
backed
by
improper
or
software,
then
it's
not
so
much
about
the
end-to-end
encryption
per
se.
That's
a
that's
an
aspect
of
it,
but
there
we
have
to
go
and
pick
pick
something
that
we
all
can
understand
like
s/mime
or
something
like
this.
But
then
the
question
is
from
an
internal
perspective.
Is
how
to
restore
are
the
the
cryptid
material?
C
How
do
we
share
it?
So
if
you
go
and
publish
start
publishing
events
and
you
use
asymmetric
encryption,
and
how
do
you
share
your
public
key
and
if
you,
and
because
it's
asymmetric
and
because
it's
pops
up
your
your
keys,
really
great
quicker
than
they
usually
would
because
you
can't
negotiate
session
keys,
which
means
you
don't
need
to
be
able
to
roll
them,
which
gets
you
to
the
point
that
you
have
to
have
a
schedule
of
keys.
So
there's
I
think
there's
lots
of
stuff
that
is
required
for
and
uniquely
required
for
ready
flows.
C
That
calls
for
having
you
know
a
common
interface
to
a
key,
vault
and
I.
Think
that's
something
that
we
should
go.
Take
a
look
at
more
than
then
really,
you
know
figuring
out
what
a
new
crypto
model,
because
ultimately
I
think
s/mime
or
something
like
this
is
ready
to
go
but
I
think
having
having
you
know
a
unified
view
of
a
key
vault.
That
would
be
more
interesting.
I
think
that's
something
that
we
should
eventually
tackle,
but
from
a
priority
perspective,
I
think
of
the
subscription
and
discovery
and
schema
registry
as
higher
pry.
M
Yeah
I
actually
have
to
say
that
I
effect,
idli
agree
with
everything
that
Clemens
has
just
said.
I
was
also
surprised
along
with
Jim
or,
like
he
didn't
state.
This
I
was
surprised
that
end
in
security
concerns
signatures
encryption.
That
kind
of
stuff
hadn't
been
on
the
list
is
something
to
discuss
so
I
want
a
second
that
as
something
valuable
to
keep
up
there.
I
do
think
that
the
I
I
think
there's
a
delivery
API
that
perhaps
is
separate
from
a
discovery
or
subscription
API.
B
M
M
I
was
I,
was
envisioning
the
discovery
and
subscription
as
as
kind
of
developer
experience,
or
you
know,
although
there
were
the
other
things
and
then
the
the
delivery
API
is
gonna,
be
far
more
productionize
dand
far
more
performant,
it's
gonna
have
a
different
kind
of
an
environment
and
set
of
concerns.
That's
going
to
need
to
fit
into
in
order
to
be
fit
for
purpose,
so
I
did
there
seemed
to
maybe
not
be
enough
separation
and
how
that
was
being
discussed,
and
so
that's
why?
Every
though
okay.
G
A
No
D
I
think
I
want
to
add
to
what
Eric
was
saying.
We
did
talk
a
little
bit
about
function,
signature
like
function
signatures
and
making
that
more
common,
but
I,
don't
think
that's
what
you're
saying
one
thing
we
didn't
really
talk
about-
or
maybe
we
talked
about
super
briefly-
was
protocol
negotiation
where
you
could
upgrade
some
like
if
you
wanted
to
talk
over
kafka
queue
directly,
and
maybe
that
is
that
we
were
talking
about,
was
being
able
to
negotiate
to
talk
about
how
to
get
things
delivered
in
the
subscription
API.
M
Yeah
I
think
that's
a
really
that's
a
good
sophistication
of
what
I
was
saying
yeah.
So
you
know
what
are
the
rules
and
expectations
kind
of?
What
are
the
guarantees
that
each
side
should
make
to
the
other?
If
it's
a
you
know,
Kafka
queue.
Was
there
a
set
of
delivery
requirements?
You
know,
do
I
just
say:
hey:
did
you
did
I
successfully
open
and
transmit
that
data
or
hey?
Are
you
gonna
act
that
it
was
actually
written
to
the
disk?
Some
of
these
nuances
really
matter
for
how
you
design
system.
B
M
Yeah
I
kind
of
I
was
that's
what
I
was
saying
if
you
squinted
subscription
to
the
API.
It
includes
a
delivery
API
but
I
think
they're
fairly
different
requirements
for
the
delivery
of
data
through
a
specific
protocol
and
and
using
maybe
even
within
a
protocol
specific
rules
about
what
that
means.
It
might
be
nice
to
have
amount
of
standardization
across
protocols,
but
that
gets
us
into
some
pretty
difficult
waters.
Yeah.
B
Okay,
okay,
go!
Thank
you!
Okay,
so
John's
got
your
hands,
are
still
up.
I
assume
those
are
old,
right,
okay,
cool
anybody
else
want
to
jump
in
here
and
comment
on
this
and
just
want
to
point
out.
There
were
other
things
that
were
mentioned.
Obviously,
focus
signatures
popped
up
there
to
refresh
the
white
paper
and
that's
of
Education
stuff
as
well,
but
as
anybody
else
want
to
mention
something
that
they
think
that
they're
just
flat-out
missing,
it
should
be
added
to
the
list.
I
Sorry
I
was
still
on
mute,
having
done
quite
a
bit
of
work
with
the
api's
in
the
last
couple
of
weeks
and
the
fact
that,
as
I
mentioned,
we
are
doing
a
lot
of
cogeneration
based
on
the
schemas.
Some
more
expansion
on
the
actual
cloud
event
schema
where
right
now,
it's
quite
elegant
with
all
definitions.
I
I
You
know
so,
there's
quite
a
few
ways
to
do
these
things
and
there
might
be
a
better
way
or
a
worse
way,
but
might
be
recommended
and
possibly,
for
example,
we
found
some
of
the
libraries
for
some
validations
and
things
really
don't
like
everything
using
definitions.
They
expect
a
more
common
definition,
less
schema.
That
might
be
something
that
is
produced
as
well,
so
just
a
little
bit
more
work
around
the
actual
schema,
because
there
is
one
one
example
only
and
there's
multiple
ways
to
do:
JSON
so.
B
I
D
I
All
of
this
is
based,
if
you're
doing
the
structure.
It
is
this.
You
know
the
cloud
event
schema,
which
right
now
there's
one
example
and
really
no
discussion
or
and
again,
even
though
it's
nice,
it
should
be
cleaned
up
where
some
of
the
definitions,
where
they
define
the
event
and
the
event,
is
then
referencing.
Other
definitions,
the
kind
of
some
at
the
top
some
below
you
know
just
clean
it
up
a
little
bit
might
not
be
a
bad
idea
either.
Okay,.
B
So
it's
interesting
because
this
doesn't
this
I
sound
like
I,
say
a
whole
new
work
stream
as
much
as
it's
just
additional
tweaks
to
the
spec,
its
to
the
other
spec
or
the
primer
itself
and
I.
Think
these
from
my
point
of
view,
that's
always
been
a
sort
of
on
the
table,
as
as
people
raise
issues
or
concerns
with
the
spec
right.
I
Not
the
spec
is
fine,
it's
kind
of
like
when
you're
doing
the
SDK
it's
great
to
have
the
libraries,
but
without
examples
it's
not
going
to
be
adapt
adopted
and
people
get
frustrated.
So
again
the
spec
is
not
affected.
It's
purely
the
samples
of
the
JSON
schemas
provided
which,
to
your
point
I
think,
might
be
reference
more
towards
the
primer
than
the
spec
itself.
Okay,.
L
N
B
B
B
B
It
seems
to
me
that
you
might
be
good
for
people
that
go
back
to
the
respective
companies
and
do
some
thinking
about
what
they
think
they'd
like
to
work
on
next
I.
Ultimately,
though,
I
do
think
as
of
right
now,
I'm
hearing
more
people,
leaning
towards
the
subscription
API
type
stuff
more
than
anything
else.
B
Whether
number
two
is
things
like
function,
signatures
or
packaging
contract
or
internet
security
I'm,
not
sure
yet,
but
I'm
not
sure
it
matters.
Both
we
gonna
pick
one,
but
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
come
back
onto
the
next
week's
call
and
basically
take
a
vote
in
essence
and
say:
you
know:
is
it
going
to
be
subscription
API?
Is
it
going
to
be
in
security
or
any
other
ones
that
are
mentioned?
B
B
Silence
anybody
else,
wanna
chime
in
otherwise
I
will
assume.
Silence
is
a
agreement
you,
okay,
so
in
terms
of
thinking
about
what
we'd
actually
gonna
vote
on
just
to
reduce
the
number
of
choices.
I
do
think
subscription,
API
and
discovery
is
on
the
list.
I
think
we're.
Not
people
have
said.
Yes
to
that
one
is
there
anybody
who
thinks
that
functions
signatures
should
be
on
the
list
for
people
to
consider.
Oh
I'll
go
first
with
voicing
opinion
on
this
one
personally,
I
love
the
idea
of
function,
signatures
I,
think
that's
a
wonderful
thing
to
tackle.
B
However,
I
think
that
is
a.
It
is
a
non-trivial
problem
to
solve
because
of
the
differences
between
the
various
platforms
that
are
out
there
today,
which
also
tells
me
it
probably
might
be
very,
very
political
and
so
I
would
love
the
work
on
this
thing
at
some
point
in
the
future,
I
think
it
may
require
a
little
bit
more
discussions
offline
first
to
see
that
about
the
feasibility
of
it.
B
So
I
like
to
sort
of
keep
that
in
the
back
burner,
but
in
terms
of
as
a
top
order
vote,
possibility
I'd
like
to
not
include
that
in
a
list
just
because
I
think
it's
it's
not
as
a
father
that
cat,
where,
in
my
mind
of
small
next
baby
step,
this
one
feels
like
it's
a
bit.
It's
a
biggie
to
think
about,
and
maybe
a
rat
hole
for
us
to
think
about.
Anybody
else
want
to
advocate
function,
signatures
being
on
a
list
of
considerations.
B
Okay,
these
two
things,
I
think
can
be
done
anytime,
would
honestly
have
to
take
a
vote
on
it.
There's
just
need
people
to
volunteer
to
do
that
kind
of
stuff
and
insecurity
I'm
assuming
that
will
be
on
the
list
just
because
Jim
you
mentioned
is,
and
you
thought
it
was
important
enough.
Is
there
anybody
who
disagrees
with
keeping
it
on
the
list
in
terms
of
on
the
vote
for
next
week.
B
H
Think
that
they
are
interrelated
and
I,
don't
think
that
they
can
be
just
having
thought
about
this
a
bit
in
the
context
of
what
we're
working
on.
Actually,
oh
I,
don't
know
that
they
can
be
developed
independently,
so
I
would
advocate,
for
even
if
they
are,
you
know
conceptually
separate
things.
I
think
they
need
to
be
thought
about
together,
including.
B
B
I
should
mention
offline
just
because
of
all
the
discussions
that
have
been
going
on.
I
started
the
process
of
putting
together
just
something
a
little
more
concrete
about
what's
discovery
and
the
subscription
API
with
concepts
would
be,
do
not
interpret
this
document
as
as
a
as
anything
other
than
just
my
ramblings.
Just
try
to
get
something
a
little
more
concrete,
so
I
could
have
a
conversation
with
people
about
what
we
were
thinking
about.
Doing
and
I
said.
You
know
the
link
is
here
in
the
in
the
notes
Eric.
What?
B
If
we
did
this,
what
if
we
start
off
with
delivery,
API
being
considered
a
subset
of
the
subscription
API
discussion
and
as
we
make
progress
on
there,
if
it
turns
out
it's
either
too
big
or
something
caused
us
to
think
you
know,
is
really
need
to
be
pulled
out.
We
can
pull
it
out
later.
Does
that
make
any
sense,
yeah,
okay,
cool?
Thank
you,
I'll
move
it
into
there.
B
N
N
N
B
B
B
You
know
what's
interesting
is
when
I
think
of
a
packet
of
contract.
Well,
I
think
it
actually
kind
of
falls
in
the
same
category
from
some
signatures
as
G's
that
were
really
nice
about.
If
there
was
commonality
it
feels
like
it's
gonna
get
very
political,
very
fast.
Oh
that's
just
my.
My
gut
feel
yep.
N
B
B
Even
lovely,
nothing,
okay,
all
right,
so
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
send
out
a
note
saying
that
we're
going
to
vote
next
week.
These
two
items
for
next
big
work
item
to
work
on
and
people
should
come
very
to
vote
either
next
week
or
if
they
can't
make
the
call,
then
it's
just
votes
through
email
or,
however
means
we're
means
they
want.
Then
I'll
record
their
vote
all
right.
Anything
else,
relative
to
post,
1.0
or
future
work
out
of
discussion.
Any
of
the
topics.
B
B
B
So,
while
we're
waiting
Scott,
do
you
have
anything
to
talk
about
I'm,
a
yes
to
kick
off
and.