►
From YouTube: 2023-08-22 WG Platforms - Maturity Model Project
Description
TAG web site: https://tag-app-delivery.cncf.io/
TAG Slack channel: https://cloud-native.slack.com/archives/CL3SL0CP5
TAG git repo: https://github.com/cncf/tag-app-delivery
TAG meeting notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OykvqvhSG4AxEdmDMXilrupsX2n1qCSJUWwTc3I7AOs/edit
A
B
A
A
A
B
B
B
We've
got
a
few
things
we
can
go
through
and
and
please
feel
free
to
to
add
items
to
the
list
that
you
want
to
cover.
This
is
a
a
figure
out
as
we
go
list.
So
what
we'll
do
is
give
people
a
minute
or
two
to
still
kind
of,
join
and
add
items
to
the
agenda,
and
then
what
we'll
do
is
the
first
thing
we
try
and
do.
B
Every
meeting
is
is
encourage
new
people
to
introduce
themselves
so
Vishal
I
know
I've
seen
you
you
around
in
the
docks
would
be
great
to
hear
a
bit
from
you,
so
we
aim
for
sort
of
a
one
to
two
minute.
Intro
so
know
that
that
we
know
that
that
doesn't
fully
fully
allow
everyone
to
share
everything
about
themselves,
but
it
gives
a
bit
of
a
taste
of
what
people
are
working
on,
what
why
they
are
joining
the
group
and
the
calls
what
they
hope
to
get
from
it.
B
That
kind
of
thing,
and
then
what
we
found
is
that
some
people
have
stories
they'd
like
to
tell
that
are
a
bit
longer
and
and
more
in
depth,
and
we
really
want
to
encourage
that,
and
we
would
we'll
either
have
time
today
or
we
can
schedule
in
for
the
next
meeting.
If
people
want
to
tell
kind
of
their
platform
engineering
story
or
their
other
experiences
in
a
bit
more
depth.
So.
B
E
Sure,
hello,
everyone
Vishal
here
I
am
founder
and
CTO
at
a
company
called
info,
Cloud,
Technologies
and
brief
history.
I
started
as
a
mechanical
engineer
according
to
programming,
did
that
for
a
few
years
and
then
got
into
Google
app
engine
short
fundry,
early
2010s
and
then
Chef
prepared
and
one
thing
later
in
Docker
and
then
kubernetes
and
here
I
am
basically
I
think
we
have
been
speaking
to
a
few
customers.
Lately,
Enterprise
customers
getting
their
platform
engineering.
E
You
know
in
order
and
that's
when
I
discovered
the
platform
engine
white
paper
and
I
was
like
Hey.
Something
is
happening
so,
let's
join
and
you
know,
contribute
where
we
can.
I
am
based
out
of
India,
but
most
of
our
customers
are
based
in
us
and
then
a
few
Indian
Banks
is
also
something
we
are
working
with,
and
our
entire
focus
is
all
infrastructure
Technologies
from
bare
metal
to
kubernetes,
whatever
it
takes.
But
infrastructure
is
what
we
focus
on
yeah.
That's
a
very
brief
intro
about
me
and
the
company
so
to
speak.
B
C
Not
yet
also
the
first
time
all
right,
I
I
am
Dominic
I'm,
a
product
manager
working
for
giant
swarm
and
puya
works
there
as
well.
So
he
explain
me
about
what
you're
doing
here
and
so
I
directly
sparked
my
interests
at
Ned,
as
we
in
giant
Swan
are
doing
platform
engineering
and
support
our
customers
with
creating
their
own
platform.
B
B
The
one
downside
to
this
process
is
that,
obviously
you
all
don't
quite
get
to
get
the
intro
to
all
of
us,
but
that
will
come
out
naturally,
hopefully,
over
time
and
and
I
know,
I've
had
some
short
chats
with
with
new
joiners,
just
introing
myself
and
what
we're
up
to
so.
If
that's
something
you
all
want
to
do,
encourage
to
to
reach
out
and
do
those
kinds
of
chats.
B
So
we've
got
a
lot
to
do
as
a
super
high
level
reminder
we,
we
are
trying
to
be
intentional
about
shaping
our
work
for
the
level
of
kind
of
visibility
or
impact
of
it,
and
so
we're
okay
with
the
fact
that
any
one
thing
that
we
publish
is
not
going
to
be
perfect
for
everyone.
But
we
want
things
to
speak
to
each
other,
so
the
white
paper
being
sort
of
at
the
top
level
of
hierarchy,
height,
depth
whatever
and
then
kind
of
the
maturity
model,
giving
a
little
bit
more
concrete
detail.
B
And
then
what
we're
expecting
is
that
there'll
be
much
more
detailed,
Publications
that
come
off
the
back
of
that.
So,
for
example,
I
know
we
have
a
platform
platform
as
a
product
paper.
That
is
that
people
are
passionate
about
getting
out
into
the
public
and
I.
Think
they'll
be
I've,
heard
about
things
around
metrics
and
measuring
platforms
that
people
are
passionate
about,
and
so
I
think
that
we'll
we'll
get
some
of
those
more
detailed
things
out
in
due
time.
B
So
look
talking
about
what's
in
whip,
so
the
first
thing
I
want
to
call
out
is
that
we
very
excitingly
had
a
contribution
to
bring
internationalization
to
the
tag
website.
So
this
is
that
we
have
a
website
for
the
entire
technical
group,
the
tag
which
is
app
delivery.
This
is
just
one
working
group
within
that
tag.
There's
also
operators
and
git
Ops
and
a
few
others.
So
we
are
yes,
we
have
internationalization
I've
done.
A
quick
review.
B
I
noticed
a
an
issue
with
some
of
the
translations,
but
that's
been
fixed
so
from
my
kind
of
quick
review.
This
feels
like
we
are
that
this
is
a
step
forward
and
a
positive
one,
and
we
should
look
to
merge
it,
so
maybe
actually
Robert
as
I
think
you
I
think
you
have
rights
on
them
on
the
repo.
So
maybe
something
that
you
could
look
at
when
you
get
a
moment
and
see.
D
B
B
A
F
F
Yeah
I
I
think
it
is
a
good
kind
of
roll
into
I
know
that
we've
been
kind
of
having
dialogue
with
us
a
few
times
about
the
Prototype
platforms
and
for
context,
people
that
don't
know
what
that's
about.
Basically,
there's
an
idea.
That's
out
there
that
it
may
be
useful
for
us
not
to
just
have
like
to
kind
of
stop
at
maturity,
model
or
white
paper,
but
to
have
practical
examples
of
what
it
can
look
like
to
be
in
a
at
a
certain
type
of
role
within
a
organization.
F
F
A
B
Absolutely
I
think
this
is
an
example
of
where,
as
we
say,
we're
going
to
do
things
at
different
levels
of
abstraction,
and
this
is
a
very
kind
of
implementation,
specific
thing
that
we
want
to
refer
back
to
the
higher
level
Concepts
in,
like
the
white
paper,
and
things
like
that.
But
are
this:
is
the
right
place
to
be
talking
about
cncf
tools
and
other
tools
and
implementation
choices,
so
yeah
absolutely.
F
That's
sad,
I
think
where
well,
there
are
conversations
we've
had
up
to
this
point.
I
think
what
the
end
of
this
dialogue
is
kind
of
connotating
is,
instead
of
trying
to
like
very
do
a
bunch
of
work
like
curating
the
content
that
would
go
kind
of
just
throwing
it
out
there
and
then
slowly
sort
of
building
in
a
bit
more
processes
and
refining
it.
B
These
drop
downs
so
right
now,
all
that
there
all
that
has
happened
is
the
previous
content
that
was
previously
on
the
website,
which
was
pretty
much
just
Charters
and
white
papers
have
been
slotted
into
the
correct
locations,
but
that
has
Unleashed
now
each
of
the
working
groups
to
have
ownership
and
autonomy.
So
we
have
the
ability
now
to
restructure
what
comes
in
underneath
platforms,
working
group,
Title,
Here
and
there's
one
of
the
first
things
people
are
interested
in
doing
is
introducing
something
around
prototypes
under
there,
so
yeah.
B
B
F
Maybe
I
can
reach
out
to
Leanne
over
the
slack
Channel
and
kind
of
say
like
hey
like.
Would
you
be
open
to
just
having
like
a
separate
like
dialogue
concerning
the
subject
and
whoever
wants
to
join
that's
interested
in
the
subject
can
join
and
we
can
kind
of
talk
through
different
options
and
then
kind
of
go
from
there
for
like
what,
whatever,
whatever
actions
result
from
that
meeting.
G
G
Want
to
include
me,
that's
an
area
I'd
like
to
contribute
as
well.
We
chatted
with
Leanne
a
little
bit
about
that,
but
just
didn't
get.
We
were
all
busy
at
the
time
and
didn't
really
get
momentum
on
it.
It's
a
good
chance
to
Bubble
it
back
up,
but
I'm,
also
happy
to
I
know
she
prefers
meeting
asynchronously
on
some
stuff,
but
I'm
happy
to
get
into
a
call.
I
work
better.
That
way
like
getting
into
a
call.
If,
if
you
do
as
well,
but.
F
Yeah
I
do
too
and
I
think,
especially
just
for
the
start,
just
so
that
we're
all
on
the
same
page
about
this
is
just
where
we're
going
and
then
from
there.
We
can
just
go
async
I'll
reach
out
and
see,
if
she's
comfortable
with
that.
But
if
not
then
yeah,
we
can
probably
try
to
work
it
out.
Asynchronously,
there's!
Maybe
a
lot
of
messages
on
the
thread.
Yeah.
B
I
will
say
that
you
can
create
channels
in
the
cncf
slack
and
if
we
want
to
create
a
channel
that
is
named
in
such
a
way
that
is
discoverable
and
maybe
clearly
accessible
from
the
working
groups
channel.
So
something
like
working
group
platform
prototypes
or
something
like
that,
so
it's
like
people
can
can
realistically
find
it,
then
maybe
that's
a
short-lived
channel.
That
makes
sense,
but
the
other
thing
I
was
just
going
to
say
is
for
some
of
our
newer
joiners
that
are
on
the
product
side.
B
This
is
I
would
say
that
the
majority
of
the
people
that
have
been
involved
with
this
initiative
to
date
are
people
who
are
on
the
engineering
side.
Looking
to
kind
of
engineer,
Solutions,
and
one
of
the
reasons
why
it's
been
maybe
slow
to
have
uptake
is
there's
been
questions
around.
How
much
should
we
clarify
the
higher
level
questions
and
the
higher
level
like
intentions
of
a
prototype
versus
just
being
like
here
is
some
tech
and
I
think
there's
a
goal
to
not
slow
down
the
tech,
while
still
encouraging
discussion
around
that
higher
level
like?
B
C
B
Does
there
need
to
be
how
much
description
of
the
trade-offs
that
it
that
it
surfaces
or
that
it
makes
needs
to
be
like
those
are?
Those
are
the
conversations
that
I
think
were
being
raised
and
were
we
were
trying
to
figure
out
how
much
to
do
those
up
front
versus
how
much
do
those
as
we
start
seeing
prototypes
come
in,
and
then
we
can
start
to
standardize
across
them.
So
yeah
very
good
point:
Dominic
yeah
this
yeah
any
any
other
questions
or
comments
or
calls
to
action
around
the
website
stuff.
B
Cool
all
right,
then
I'm
gonna
pop
back
up
and
have
a
look
at
maturity
model
quickly.
So
this
has
been
a
big
piece
of
work.
We
picked
up
basically
coming
out
of
Amsterdam
where
we
released
the
white
paper.
This
is
the
idea
that
the
white
paper
got
legs
quite
quickly
to
be
honest,
excitingly
quickly,
and
a
lot
of
people
were
like
cool
now.
B
What
and
the
maturity
model
is
an
attempt
to
help
people
ground
themselves
on
the
the
intentions
behind
the
white
paper
so
where
we
stand
on,
that
is
that
we
have
done
some
really
good
Deep
dive
work
on
the
on
the
model
itself,
I'll
call
it
the
table,
the
like
kind
of
screenshotable
conference
talkable
table
and
we're
now
working
through
the
where
to
go
from
there.
So
let
me
see
if
I
have
a
I,
don't
have
any
links
to
it.
Oops.
Let
me
sorry.
B
B
B
So
each
of
the
rows
on
the
table,
investment,
adoption,
interface
operations
and
measurement,
and
they
have
edit
rights
to
the
permissions
to
the
document
of
their
aspect
and
are
starting
to
add
details
to
it
in
whatever
fashion
they
they
see
fit
to
work
through
that.
We
of
course
need
this
to
be
a
coherent,
singular
document.
So
we
have
some
high
level
kind
of
intentions
for
how
we
want
to
do
the
details,
but
these
should
be.
These
will
evolve
as
you
learn
right.
B
These
are
sort
of
just
trying
to
help
people
get
on
the
same
page.
So
giving
a
sense
of
these
are
not
we're,
not
writing,
multi-page
documents
and
details.
These
are
kind
of
looking
for
a
few
sentences
to
a
small
paragraph,
but
we
want
a
few
sentences
to
a
small
paragraph
for
each
level
within
it,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
each
level
is
considered
a
point
in
time
that
is,
provides
both
challenges
and
and
positives,
and
and
that
there
are
growth
within
it.
B
You
don't
have
to
get
to
level
four
before
you
get
something
positive,
yeah
and
and
talking
about
the
abstraction
level.
We
don't
want
this
to
be.
If
you
use
tool
X,
you
are
level
three
and
if
you
use
tool
y,
you
have
progressed
to
level
four,
it's
not
about
the
tools.
You
use
it's
about
the
outcomes
you
get
and
yeah,
and
so,
if
we
open
up
like
one
of
the
examples,
this
is
I
think
sorry.
I
think
this
is
one
you're
working
through.
B
This
is
as
sort
of
the
lead
on
it.
This
is
sort
of
you
know,
work
in
progress
right
now,
so
a
little
bit
of
kind
of
brainstorming
and
and
information
gathering,
and
then
it's
going
to
get
refined
into
paragraphs
and
our
goal
right
now
is
to
get
these
into
get
at
least
some
amount
of
information
in
them
for
discussion
into
all
of
them.
B
For
discussion
by
next
Tuesday,
when
we
have
a
an
opportunity
for
a
synchronous
chat
on
the
detailed
sections
so
that
we
can
kind
of
get
a
quick
sync
sync
between
people
and
then
the
goal
is
to
get
these
into
a
relatively
stable
position
by
September
10th,
which
is
when
we
are
aiming
to
open
up
for
sort
of
formal
review
of
the
the
entire
document
via
GitHub.
To
allow
us
time
to
be
able
to
review
refine
and
publish
before
Chicago,
so
call
to
actions
are.
B
So
if
there's
one
you're
particularly
passionate
about,
let
me
know
and
then
the
other
thing
that
is
a
call
to
action-
is
that
this
intro
section
is
also
sort
of
in
the
refinement
phase
going
into
that
September
10th
Target
stabilization
period.
So
all
of
this
is
very
work
in
progress.
It's
going
to
become
harder
to
make
big
changes
when
we
get
into
GitHub.
So
the
idea
is
is
that
this
is
the
time
when
we
should
be
hearing
the
feedback.
B
B
B
So
if
we
have,
if
we
open
it
for
review
in
GitHub,
that
would
mean
that
we'd
be
calling
attention
to
it
by
people
within
the
cncf
in
different
groups,
and
things
like
that.
To
give
us
review
that
would
give
us
about
a
month
of
that
final
review
and
then
that
would
give
us
about
two
weeks
to
sort
of
get
the
PDF
created,
create
the
marketing
for
it
Etc
coming
into
Chicago.
So
that's
our
our
general
timeline.
B
A
F
A
B
Yeah
any
other,
so
we've
got
basically,
we've
got
another
half
an
hour
of
the
call,
and
so
we
can
dive
into
some
details
on
some
stuff,
but
I
just
want
to
First
make
sure
that
there's
no
other
kind
of
action
items
agenda
items
things.
People
want
to
talk
about
at
like
higher
level
before
we
we
dive
into
any
details
behind
something.
So
does
anyone
want
to
talk
about
anything
else?
From
like
a
working
group,
kind
of
height
conversation.
H
B
B
B
But
yeah,
but
but
in
slack
or
just
give
a
shout
and
slack
if
you
have
questions
but
more
importantly,
I
reinfo
I
would
be
happy
to
reinforce
the
point
of
like
don't
stress
and
like
the
only
reason
to
worry
about
that
is.
If
you
are
like
I
would
love
to
pair
with
someone
on
this.
Then,
of
course
getting
to
know.
Who's
who's
involved
will
be
beneficial,
but
everyone
should
feel
empowered
and
encouraged
to
jump
in
with
comments
questions
whatever
for
any
of
these
These
are.
B
They
are
all
owned
by
the
entire
working
group.
It's
just
that
for
ease
of
like
change
management
having
a
few
people
who
are
like
making
sure
we
get
progress
on
it,
making
sure
that
everyone's
getting
their
voices
heard
it's
just
a
bit
easier,
I
think
to
to
have
certain
people
with
edit
rights,
but
yeah.
Please,
please
suggest.
Please
comment,
no
limitations.
There
perfect
thank.
H
B
B
Cool
all
right.
Well,
then,
what
I
would
suggest
is
opening
the
floor
for
people
who
are
who
are
in
the
in
the
depths
and
then
the
weeds
a
bit
on
the
maturity
model
or
on
any
other
piece
of
work
if
they
want
to
do
an
impromptu
bit
of
a
session
now
or
answer
any
questions.
This
would
be
a
great
time
to
to
do
that
so
I
I
think
I
saw
something
around
guidelines
in
the
chat
as
a
question
like
those.
This
would
be
a
good
time
to
do
that.
Yeah.
B
G
B
Unfortunately,
I
won't
be
able
to
make
it
today
if
it's
after
this
I
have
to
I'll,
send
you
a
report,
yeah,
sorry
and
so
for
context
for
everyone
else.
Cartographers
is
a
is
the
group
that
produces
the
cloud
native
maturity
model,
which
is
a
much
higher
level
maturity
model
than
what
we're
doing,
but
we're
trying
just
like
we're
trying
to
create
things
at
differing
levels
of
abstraction
within
our
working
group.
They
want
to
encourage
that
within
all
of
the
CNC.
B
Yes,
so
they
have
quite
a
high
level
maturity
model
around
Cloud
native
adoption,
and
they
see
platforms
as
something
that
will
slot
into
certain
aspects
of
that
maturity
and
at
certain
levels
of
that
maturity,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
our
language
is
such
that
it
that
it
works
together
and
that
we
have
the
right
hook,
points
where,
inside
their
maturity
model,
they'll
link
out
to
to
our
white
paper
into
our
maturity
model,
and
things
like
that.
So
that's
why
we're
collaborating
with
them.
B
So,
if
that's
something,
if
you're
interested
in
that
sort
of
higher
level
maturity
models,
grab
Colin
for
a
slack
chat
or
whatever
he's
he's
a
good
person
to
talk
to
about
that
all
right.
Well,
then,
if
no
one
else
has
anything
I
think
one
thing
that
may
be
worth
talking
about
is:
we
have
two
suggested
edits
to
the
the
table,
so
they
say
this
is
stabilized,
but
it's
not
finalized.
B
So
in
the
sense
that
we
expect
that,
as
people
are
detailing
out
their
sections,
they
may
see
inconsistencies
or
misalignment
of
levels
and
and
call
that
to
attention
they're
going
to
become
more
of
the
experts
in
each
of
these
aspects.
Basically,
as
they
go
so
sorry,
do
you
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
investment
one.
A
A
F
F
B
D
F
D
Yeah
and
that's
kind
of
the
main
thing
for
me:
it's
it's
not
something
when
I
read
it,
I
kind
of
I
just
don't
understand
what
it
is
based
on
the
words
itself
so
like.
If,
if
it
you
know,
the
other
words
you
know
that
are
used
in
the
table
in
general
is
very
self-explanatory.
When
you
read
it,
but
I
agree
that,
like
voluntary
or
temporary,
probably
aren't
the
the
best
things
to
to
use
somebody.
You
need
to
find
something
better.
F
B
With
tactical
I
do
think
technical
cost
center
is
has
tactical
aspects
to
it.
It's
not
I
do
think.
I
can
definitely
see
the
word
tactical
being
used
at
this
level,
so
I'm
not
saying
that
it's
like
a
blanket.
Oh
that's
already
covered
by
level
two
but
I
do
think
like
I,
wonder
if
there's
something
else,
that's
yeah
I
think
Community
think
on
it.
One
of
the
things
I
just
was
thinking
about
is
you
just
did
a
great
explanation
of
like
the
what
triggered
the
change
and
I
tried
to
capture
that
in
a
comment
here?
B
But
if
you
want
to
add
anything
more
to
this
like
chain
of
comments
of
like
what
the
characteristics
of
the
word
you're
trying
to
think
of
would
be.
It
might
like
encourage
creativity
in
someone
else.
Like
oh
I
wanted.
You
know
to
emote
the
idea
of
volunteering
temporary,
but
have
these
characteristics
have
it
be
more
yeah
aligned
to
the
the
structure
of
the
other
three
or
whatever
you
said
it
well,
basically,
and
if
you
want
to
throw
something
into
that,
that
might
help
people
think
through
other
options.
You
know
that
can.
C
F
Yeah,
it
kind
of
hits
the
other.
It
fits
a
little
better
with
the
other
ones,
because
I
think
technical
cost
center
that
at
least
that
kind
of
kind
of
takes
like
not
necessarily
that
there's
like
a
specific
end
date
that,
but
still
that
this
is
an
expense.
This
isn't
something
that
we're
seeing
as
like
an
asset.
This
is
like
a
liability
that
we're
dragging
along
with
us
this
platform,
so
I
kind
of
like
the
idea
of
having
something
like
a
project.
F
I
think
the
issue
with
project
is
that
doesn't
I.
Think
we'd
have
to
really
like
explain
it
within
description,
which
is
what
these
descriptions
for,
but
I'm,
not
sure.
If
it'd
be
really
easy
for
someone
to
intuitively
know,
oh
I
see
why
that's
level
one,
that's
very
obvious.
That
project
is
not
great.
The
projects
seemed
like
good.
You
know,
like
oh
I
apologize.
We
all
have
projects
so
yeah.
It's
kind
of
a
tricky.
C
One,
maybe
that's
the
the
you
know
the
problem.
With
product
managers,
we
explain
products
and
projects
all
the
day.
For
me,
it's
very
clear
foreign
I
was
just
coming
from
the
idea
of
you
know
it's
it's
something
that
I
just
like
in
that
in
the
provisional
state
in
the
first
state
of
it.
I
just
want
to
pay
for
it
once
in
the
best
case,
so
one-time
bill
or
something.
But
that
sounds
weird
so
project.
E
I
Yeah
I
think
the
top
the
cost
center
already
is
some
form
of
institutionalization
right
and
in
the
provisional
place
we
we
have
no
institution
yet
at
the
company
right,
it's
more
like
it
might
pop
up
somewhere,
it
might
be
I,
don't
know
the
digital
experience
layer
where
they're
like
oh
yeah.
We
need
this
or
we
just
do
it
right
and
we
invest
in
it
and
at
some
point
you're
like
yeah.
Maybe
this
needs
to
be
more
centralized
operationalized
and
then.
B
I
think
that
that's,
in
my
opinion,
that's
grasped.
The
difference
between
the
two
levels
really
well
like
in
the
sense
that,
like
tech,
technical
cost
center
is
often
quite
tactical
still,
but
it
is
more
centralized.
It
is
more
long-lived.
It
is
more
tracked
and
that's
why
it's
operationalized
versus
level.
One
is
more
like
who's
got
the
energy
today,
who's
got
the
passion
today,
who's
who's,
feeling
the
most
pain
today
and
is
therefore
going
to
to
take
some
sort
of
action
to
reduce
their
personal
pain
or
their
Improvement.
B
Would
definitely
agree
that
voluntary
or
temporary
is
something
that
could
absolutely
be
captured
in
the
details,
rather
than
be
at
the
table
level,
so
I'm,
not
yeah,
so
I
think
it's
like
this
is
what
I
mean
by
the
people
who
are
digging
into
the
details.
Like
sorry,
was
there
when
we,
when
we
settled
on
this
as
the
table,
and
yet
when
he
was
sitting
there
looking
at
the
detailed
section
was
like?
Oh
actually,
this
doesn't
now
that
I'm
really
zoomed
in
just
on
this
aspect.
It
doesn't
quite
work
and
I.
B
Think
it's
a
great
shout,
and
so
now
it's
trying
to
think
through
what
that
that
better
top
level
word
might
be
yeah.
So
so
what
I
was
putting
in
is
like
I
was
gonna,
maybe
edit
his
like
tactical
projects
or
like
it's
almost
like
passion
projects
is
like
sort
of
the
what
it
is
right
at
this
level
like
or
something
dis
like
disconnected
projects
like
there's
something
like
that.
That
isn't
quite
right
either,
but
that's
all
like
the
that's
all
emoting
the
right
feeling
now
it's
just
like.
B
Yeah,
that's
and
that's
what
you're
getting
a
lot
of
at
that
level
right,
but
I
guess
you
could
get
Shadow
at
all
levels
if
you're
not
doing
it
or
not,
maybe
at
level
four,
because
the
whole
point
is
level
four
you
shouldn't
incur
like
it
should.
It
should
be
so
responsive
that
you're
not
getting
that
shadow
as
much
but
I.
B
Cool
I'm
gonna,
so
that
is
just
keep
chewing
on
that
is
what
I
would
suggest.
I'm
just
gonna
call
out
one
of
the
other
ones
where
we
have
a
a
suggestion
so
that
we
can
get
that
on
people's
minds
as
well
as
we
go
so
one
of
the
principles-
and
we
talked
about
it,
came
up
in
comments
about
principles
like
one
of
the
principles
was
we
don't?
We
want
the
this
table
to
be
durable.
B
Now,
there's
a
chance
that
the
day
after
this
publishes,
we
learn
something
new,
which
means
that
this
table
would
would
ideally
change.
So
I'm,
not
saying
it's
it's
above
reproach,
but
the
idea
is
we
want
to
use
language
in
this
table
where
the
chances
that
it
needs
to
change
in
the
next
six
to
12
months
is
very
low,
whereas
in
the
detailed
section
the
chances
it
needs
to
change
in
about
a
year,
because
we've
learned
better
about
process
and
technique,
and
things
is
more
likely,
though,
maybe
not
like,
definitely
and
so.
B
I
think
Marsh
was
calling
a
great
question
around
the
durability
of
API
contracts
and
whether
or
not
that
is
sneaking
in
the
idea
of
a
of
a
technique
or
a
tactic
like
that
contracts
is
a
technique
or
a
contract
versus
what
your
the
outcome,
which
is
really
what
we're
trying
to
aim
for
at
this
table
level,
is
a
robust,
API
or
set
of
robust
apis
and
I
thought.
That
was
a
very
good
shout
I,
don't
know
what
do
people
think
about
the
shift
in
that
language
or
something
else
altogether.
I
G
I
G
Curious
on
the
the
use
of
API
versus
the
use
of
contracts,
because
we
we
think
very,
we
all
think
very,
very
technically
about
this
in
a
lot
of
cases-
and
you
know
I
if
I
was
reading
through
this
I
just
I'd
associate
API
with
this
is
entirely
automated.
It's
only
systems
that
are
communicating
with
actual
apis
between
each
other
versus
the
concept
of
like
an
API
as
a
contract.
G
A
F
Know
it's
funny
that
you
say
that
because
I
had
a
conversation
with
Marsh
about
that
exact
subject
a
couple
weeks
ago
and
he
said
the
exact
same
thing:
I'd
be
I,
wish
I
was
here,
I
think
you
would
would
have
agreed
with
what
you
just
said.
So
I
think
it
does
get
a
bit
tricky
of
like
we
don't
want
to
box
ourselves
into,
like
always
computer
to
computer
interactions
or
things
like
that.
F
But
rather
it's
really
it's
the
people
behind
the
computers
that
are
a
part
huge,
the
biggest
component
to
the
interface
that
the
humans
Drive,
the.
Why
behind?
Why
we're
having
whatever
dialogue
or
why
we
are
engaging
whatever
promises
or
deliveries
whatever
it
is,
so
yeah
I
think
it's
something
worth
worth
asking
I
totally
agree.
I
I
wasn't
too
deep
in
the
previous
discussions
here,
but
in
what?
What?
What
kind
of
put
up
a
question
for
me
is
like
for
me
already
at
the
self-service
points
behind
the
self-service,
most
probably
there's
apis
and
I'm,
not
sure
how
to
interpret
then
the
next
step
towards
level
four
being
robust
apis
is,
is
that
more
towards?
I
I
Towards
the
user
itself,
service
is
enough.
What
happens
behind
the
self-service
is
not
really
important
to
what's
the
platform
team
I
am
seeing
customers
or
end
users
actually
working
towards.
Oh,
we
have
self-service,
but
in
the
in
the
background,
we're
doing
it
all
by
manually
pushing
some
terraform.
D
This
is
something
that
also
I'm
struggling
a
little
bit
with,
because
for
me
as
soon
as
you,
your
platform
is
self-service.
That,
for
me,
is
kind
of
the
top
of
the
maturity
model
in
in
my
ad
and
I'm
gonna
struggling
a
little
bit
about
like
abstracting
that,
because
what
it
was
before
there
was,
you
know,
templating
and
golden
path
and
self-service
apis.
D
That
was
kind
of
like
the
two
top
ones
and
I
I,
remember
them
being
reversed,
so
it
was
kind
of
like
self-service
and
then
templating,
which
is
wrong
in
my
head
again,
because
it's
it,
you
know
the
more
self-service
you
are,
the
more
material
and
I
I'm,
also
drawing
a
little
bit
with
the
idea
of
having
something.
That's
very
like
API
contracts,
robust
apis,
like
all
like,
if
self-service,
is
not
like
the
top
level.
D
I
I
The
phrase
might
be
a
bit
too
over
loaded,
but
giving
more
capabilities
like
out
of
the
box
without
having
to
like
plug
them
together
actively
is
for
me
kind
of
the
next
step
like
one
like
first
you're
bespoke,
then
you
get
supported
and
you
might
have
some
kind
of
self-service.
But
at
some
point
you,
you
get
a
very
good
out
of
the
box
experience
without
having
to
actively
pull
in,
like
oh
I
need
a
database
as
a
service.
I
need
I,
don't
know
all
these
things.
I
I
need
a
supply
chain,
a
secure
supply
chain,
but
it's
all
it's
just
there
right,
there's
like
I,
don't
know.
Progressive
robots
are
just
there
in
the
process,
instead
of
me
having
to
kind
of
hold
it
together
out
of
different
services
that
are
maybe
self-service,
but
still
not
interconnected
into
whole
capabilities.
B
B
One
thing
to
Collins
point
is
sometimes
we
think
really
technically
and
I.
Don't
think
in
my
opinion,
self-service
is
not
always
an
API
self-services
I.
Don't
have
to
ask
for
help.
I
don't
have
to
like
right,
and
that
could
just
be
very
good
run
book
that
could
just
be
like
an
Exemplar
template
that
I
can
use
right.
It's
not
specif
versus
where
I
think.
So
this
is
one
angle
of
the
maturity
that
I
think
we're
talking
about.
This
is
the
one
that's
maybe
cat
trying
to
be
captured
here.
More
specifically,
is
the
change
from
I.
B
Don't
need
help
to
I.
Don't
need
to
worry
about
it,
so
I
don't
need
help,
because
I
have
really
good
run
book
on
how
to
create
a
database
in
the
cloud
using
terraform,
self-service
I.
Don't
need
to
worry
about
it.
I've
made
an
API
request
and
someone's
given
me
back
a
connection
string
and
I'm
done
with
my
life.
I.
Don't
need
to
worry
about
how
that
database
gets
updated.
I
don't
need
to
worry
about
where
it's
running
I
don't
need
to
worry
about
it.
Scaling
I!
B
Don't
need
to
worry
about
anything
to
do
with
it,
because
it's
behind
a
contract
that
says
I've
got
myself
an
AP
I've
got
myself
a
database
that
I
can
use
and
I
have
the
things
I
care
about,
which
is
that
it's
a
SQL
database
and
it's
secured
for
PCI,
Data
and
I
can
connect
to
it.
That's
all
I
care
about!
B
Are
they
talk
to
each
other.
My
I
don't
need
to
worry
about
my
Pub
sub
to
my
data
store
to
my
whatever,
because
everything
just
sort
of
knows
like
is
interconnected
and
comes
together
as
a
package
and
has
that
sort
of
golden
path
and
to
your
point,
I
know
that
it's
a
little
bit
over
overloaded,
but
we
can
use
that
here
as
a
shortcut,
even
if
we
don't
want
to
codify
into
the
to
the
table.
I
So
maybe,
as
you
mentioned
it
like,
you,
explain
it
really
well,
I
really
like
that
explanation.
So
maybe
the
the
API
is
like
the
word
API
in
there
is
is
a
bit
too
much,
but
it's
more
about
it
feels
like
it's.
It's
like
the
capability
as
a
service
right,
it's
not
it's
and
get
like
if
I
do
an
API
call
or
like,
however,
I'm
requesting
it
I'm,
getting
it
as
a
service
I
don't
need
to
worry
about
it
right,
and
so
it's
it's
one
step
more
than
just
self-service.
I
G
You
know
a
depth
of
integration
required
to
make
this
robust
and
something
like
that,
but
that's
kind
of
how
I
read
it
a
little
bit
too.
It's
not
like
all
of
your
capabilities
are
self-service
and
then
that's
level
three,
and
it
goes
beyond
that.
I
was
reading
that
as
I've
got
self-service
solutions
that
work
and
then
level
four
is
kind
of
like
brought
everything
together.
The.
C
So
I
think
the
the
word
already
dropped
with,
like
the
integration
part
I,
think
that
is
the
significant
significant
one.
So
maybe
it's
a
highly
integrated
self-service
in
its
last
stage,
because
it's
at
the
end,
it's
still
self-service
I.
Think
that's
it.
That's
a
really
important
thing,
but
it's
also
like
it's
even
one
step
more.
It's
one
thing
less
to
worry
about.
C
D
Agree
with
that,
because
what
you
be
described,
you
know
it,
it
can
be
self-service
if
you
have
templated
Solutions
and
kind
of
everything
at
the
get-go.
But
what
I
don't
feel
that
that
is
kind
of
self-service,
I
feel
that's
still
just
templating
and
and
kind
of
you
still
would
have
to
be
a
technical
person
being
involved
doing
stuff,
but
you
can't
just
go
in
order,
a
new
environment.
You
would
have
to
set
that
up,
but
there
might
be
automation
around
it.
But
you
know
that
point
is
not
really
self-service.
D
It's
just
basically
fully
automated
templating
self-service
for
me
is
literally.
If
you
go
to
the
to
the
Amazon
after
or
or
you
know,
Google
cloud
and
say
you
know,
I
just
I
need
a
virtual
machine.
I
need
a
kubernetes
cluster
and
then
everything's
happening
at
the
platform
level
like
you
know,
either
through
some
sort
of
it
might
be
an
API,
but
it
might
be
a
CLI
tool.
It
might
be
a
portal
that
doesn't
matter,
but
you
can't
just
describe
what
you
need
and
that
happens
on
the
platform.
D
That
is
for
me
kind
of
like
the
the
top
level.
How
to
describe
that?
You
know
in
any
other
way,
I
I,
don't
really
know,
but
I
feel
that
if
you're
putting
apis
in
here,
people
are
technical
are
gonna
assume.
That
means
you
sit
there
and
send
in
something
to
an
API,
and
then
stuff
happens
that
that
is
automatically
what
I
thought
you
know.
What's
the
thing
and
for
me,
that's
not
the
most
mature,
it's
it's
part
of
the
process.
It
might
be
part
of
the
offering,
but
that's
not
really
it
really
mature
self-service
solution.
B
Yeah
I
think
a
lot
of
that
really
resonates
for
me.
I
think.
Definitely
at
this
point
we're
all
agreed.
Api
isn't
quite
the
right
word,
which
is
a
really
good
Shout
by
sort
of
like
that
has
been
driven
by
Marsh,
raising
concerns
and
and
then
in
this
conversation,
so
I
think
we
need
to
step
away
from
apis
in
the
word,
that's
clear
and
has
agreement
I
think
one
thing
I
would
definitely
challenge
back
rubber
on
whether
or
not
self-service
should
be
the
term
for
the
top
level
in
the
sense
that,
like
I,
think
self-service.
B
B
Think
what
you
you
said:
Puja
I,
really
that
resonated
with
me
when
you
said
that
I
think
our
slightly
different
concepts
and
I
think
we
have
an
opportunity
here
to
to
dissect
the
two,
because
when
we
look
at
the
levels
that
we're
talking
about
something
scaled
needs
to
be
something
that
you
don't
need,
hand-holding,
you
don't
need
support.
It
doesn't
specifically
mean
that
you
have
that
sort
of
on-demand
managed
service
behind
it
right.
That
would
be,
in
my
opinion,
that's
a
really
good
differentiator
between
scaled
and
optimized
at
scaled
I.
B
H
D
D
D
In
that
context,
for
me
self-services
full
on
the
most
mature
and
then
you
would
have
some
sort
of
like
template
or
even
golden
paths.
You
know
because
at
that
point
you
would
still
kind
of
get
pointed
in
the
direction
in
in
a
technical
term
and
would
have
to
do
stuff
and
be
involved
or
self-service
is
totally
hands
off.
B
B
It's
like
potentially
there's
like
a
that's
actually
level,
three
and
level
four
is
self-service
and,
and
so
forth
and
I
think
I,
don't
know,
I
we're
now
a
minute
over
so
I'm
just
gonna
like
call
that
out
and
say
like
this
is
these
are
the
conversations
we
want
to
be
having
and
I'm
really
glad
that
we
took
some
time
to
do
this
today.
I
think
it
does
take
some
time
to
chew
on
this
I
think
we
are
I.
B
Think
there's
still
some
things
left
to
discuss
on
what
we
want
to
achieve
like
what
like
do.
We
have
exact
alignment
yet
on
what
we
think
the
levels
should
be
I
think
I
see
a
little
bit
of
of
challenging
there
of,
like
you
know
where
what
we,
what
we
want
it
to
emote
as
I
said,
but
I
think
this
is
all
really
good
conversation,
because
we're
narrowing
in
on
alignment
and
we're
identifying
where
there's
interesting
debates
to
be
had
and
to
come
with
with
Solutions.
B
So
come
back
for
more
next
Tuesday
and-
and
please
comment
in
the
in
the
document,
if
you
have
other
ideas
that
pop
into
your
head
for
well
any
of
the
squares,
but
in
particular
the
two
that
we
were
able
to
to
talk
about
today
seem
to
be
ones
that
we
want
to
to
improve
on
so
yeah,
that's
I.
This
has
been
really
good.
I
really
appreciate
everyone
in
engaging
with
it
and
all
that
is
there
any
other
things.
B
B
Is
the
output
and
there's
a
lot
of
value
to
be
had
there,
but
I
personally
have
found
that
these
discussions
are
the
reason
to
be
a
part
of
the
group
and
to
get
involved
so
yeah
hope
to
see
you
through
in
the
different
we've
got
Thursday
where
we're
gonna,
asari's
gonna
be
leading
us
through
talking
about
investment
and
next
Tuesday.
Where
we'll
be
talking
about
the
the
table
as
a
whole.
Again
that
sort
of
alignment
on
consistency
across
the
detailed
sections
so
hope
to
see
you
there.