►
From YouTube: CDF SIG Best Practices - Jan 10, 2022
Description
For more Continuous Delivery Foundation content, check out our blog: https://cd.foundation/blog/
C
All
right,
yeah
nicola
and
I
have
an
update
on
the
site
and
mauricio.
So
I
just
saw
your
message
in
slack:
did
you
want
to
give
a
quick
hint,
and
maybe
we
can
guess.
B
That,
yes,
yes,
so
I
joined
the
meeting
because
kara
told
me
to
join
and
to
basically
address
this
group
for
the
example
that
I
that
I've
been
working
on
so
just
for
terry
and
for
nicola
I've
been
working
on
a
book.
B
I've
been
addressed
several
times
before
that
the
example
shouldn't
live
in
my
own
personal
github
organization
it
and
it
would
be
way
better
if
we
can
have
that
under
a
foundation,
and
I
think
that
the
continuous
library
foundation
should
be
kind
of
like
the
place
for
those
examples
to
live.
So
I've
been
kind
of
like
approaching
different
people,
tracy
included
like
cara
and
oleg
as
well.
B
They
are
all
kind
of
like
in
favor
of
the
idea,
but
I
think
that
we
need
to
start
working
on
the
specifics
at
some
point
and
kara
just
need
to
join
this
group,
and
basically
just
mention
this
to
you
folks,
to
see
if
you
can
guide
me
like
what
are
what
the
next
steps
that
I
should
be
taking
on.
If
I
need
to
convince
some
more
people
or-
or
you
know,
any
kind
like
suggestions
to
move
things
forward.
Basically,.
B
Yeah,
so
basically,
the
examples
are
like
step
by
step
tutorials
on
how
to,
for
example,
deploy
the
application
how
to
build.
You
know
the
services
with
tecton,
how
to
you
know,
use
sky
native
for
other
things,
how
to
use
captain,
for
example,
on
how
to,
for
example,
also
like
use
cd
events
as
well.
So
let
me
share
the
link.
B
I
will
put
the
link
here
in
probably
in
the
in
the
slack
channel
and
again,
the
repo
is
kind
of
like
in
constant
modification
because
of
the
book
and
because
of
the
examples
that
keep
mutating.
But
if
I
were
to
donate
this
to
the
foundation,
I
would
definitely
refactor
the
examples
to
have
all
the
same
format.
D
C
Yeah
maurizio
was
sharing
details
of
a
repo
that
complements
his
book
and
he'd
like
to
live
on.
The
cdf
awesome
did
we
is
there.
D
Okay,
oh
and
if
someone
did
someone
grab
the
notes?
No,
I
have
not
all
right.
Oh,
let
me
go
grab
it.
E
E
But
if
I
remember
correctly,
we
also
said
we
wanted
to
remain
relatively
technology
agnostic,
and
so
I'm
sure
we
can
manage
to
incorporate
this
in.
In
the
spirit
of
that.
D
The
anything
where
we
got
specific,
we
were
going
to
treat
it
as
a
case
study
or
or
similar,
if
I
recall
correctly
so
because
at
some
point
it
is
important
to
talk
specifics.
What
is
today.
B
Yeah
yeah,
the
the
main.
The
main
goal
for
these
examples
is
to
enable
people
to
run
like
an
application
that
it's
easy
to
understand.
But
it's
like
complexity
level.
It's
like
medium,
where
you
can
see
multiple
services
working
and
then
different,
open
source
projects
like
being
leveraged
for
running
or
doing
something
with
the
application
and
again
like
the
approach,
also
is
to
have
like
step-by-step
tutorials
on
how
to
install
things,
how
to
run
things,
how
to
test
different
aspects
of
the
tools
that
I'm
showcasing
there
and
again,
because
I'm
working
on
the
book.
B
C
Yeah
and
I
think
very,
very
interesting
so
as
gonna
say
yeah,
I
agree.
The
key
is
just
connecting
this
in
with
the
best
practices
document
and
making
sure
it
it
can
be
part
of
that
story
and
and
then
suddenly
it
all
comes
together
and
it
makes
sense
and
then
you've
got
the
book
as
well,
which
complements
it
nicely.
F
Yeah
so
yeah,
so
in
terms
of
of
the
breakdown
of
the
site
in
the
sort
of
straw,
man
skeleton
that
we
have,
there
was
going
to
be
a
community
section
and
the
idea
there
is
that.
F
That's
where
anything
that
wasn't,
we
would
have
a
learning
section
where
we
would
have
the
best
practices
in
general
in
a
very
vendor
agnostic,
explained
in
a
vendor-agnostic
way,
and
then
the
community
section
would
be
a
place
then,
where
we
could
would
host
anything
that
were
specific
implementations
or
case
studies
or
examples
that
implement
these
best
practices.
So
this
might
be
the
section
where
we
would
put
that
information.
F
B
F
Yeah
that
that
was
that
was
the
direction
we
were
going
with
this
site.
So
you
know
under
the
best
practices
there
would
be
things
about.
You
know
using
version,
control,
delivery
and
automated
testing
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff
in
a
very
general
way,
and
then
you
know
we,
your
stuff
could
then
be
hosted
in
the
community
section,
and
you
know
if
google
has
its
best
practices
or
wants
to
talk
about
dora,
then
that
could
go
in
there
as
well
and
then
other
other
foundation.
Members
could
also
add
their
content.
C
B
Yeah,
so
there
is
kind
of
like
a
like
an
index
there
in
the
repository.
I
think
that
that
kind
of
gives
you
an
idea
of
the
tools
that
I'm
covering
there
is
more
stuff
being
added
right.
So
I
think
that
there's
like
an
open
source
projects
list
there,
which
is
basically
explaining
different
projects
and
how
I'm
using
them,
that's
very
like
a
very
technical
approach
of
describing
topics.
I'm
pretty
sure
that
we
can.
I
can
rephrase
some
of
the
tutorials
to
follow
kind
of
the
best
practices
topics.
B
C
So
maybe
we
can
talk
about
that
because
that's
what
we're
evolving
so
we
do
have
a
word
document
but
to
be
honest,
we're
trying
to
get
away
from
that
document
and
move
things
into
github
and
specifically
into
the
content
behind
the
site
which
nicola
has
been
helping
us
organize
the
information
architecture
around.
C
So
by
way
of
an
update
on
that,
I've
worked
with
nicola
over
the
break
and
we
do
have
it
now
running
in
cdf
netlify,
which
means
nicola.
In
theory.
We
can
open
it
up
for
folks
in
this
group
to
be
able
to
contribute.
F
So
yeah,
the
idea
should
be
that
things
that
get
committed
into
the
best
practices
get
a
repo
would
then
get
automatically
built
and
deployed
to
this
this
preview
site
in
terms
of
being
able
to
see
the
preview.
F
My
understanding
is
that
only
members
of
the
netifly
account
would
be
able
to
see
previews
before
any
changes
are
actually
merged.
But
you
know
in
terms
of
someone
who's,
making
a
contribution
trying
to
preview
their
stuff.
They
could
also
do
what
they
could
also
do.
A
local
preview
like
just
set
up
a
docker
container
and
run
it
and
look
at
that
locally
if
they
want
to
see
what
the
website
changes
would
look
like
before
merging
things.
C
The
the
preview
idea
is
that
a
limitation
of
doxy,
or
is
that
just
no.
F
It's
it's
a
netlify
deployment
like
in
terms
of
netlify.
I
think
my
understanding
from
the
nutify
documentation
is
that
people
who
are
in
the
networking
account
can
see
a
preview
of
pr's
before
they're
merged
in,
but
I
think
I
don't
think
anybody
can
do
them.
You
said
that
something
similar
was
set
up
for
the
landscape
right.
C
Yeah,
so
we
do
have
the
landscape
and
that
I
believe
it's
hosted
on
netlify,
but
it
just
spits
out
previews
for
anybody's
pr
once
once
it
kind
of
goes
through
the
ci
build
stage,
but
I
I've
never
looked
under
the
hood
to
see
how
that's
set
up,
but
I
think
yeah
in
the
short
term
we
can.
I
can
certainly
add
members
of
this
group
to
the
the
netflix
that
specific
site,
so
they
can
have
access,
but
I
think
long
term
I
can
figure
out.
How
does
the
landscape
do
it?
C
C
Okay,
so
yes,
folks,
who
is
happy
to
be
added
onto
the
netlify
site
and
maybe
wants
to
get
involved
with
that
first
batch
of
starting
to
move
things
from
the
google
doc
over
to
the
site.
B
B
C
I
think
maybe
just
bringing
it
to
this
group
as
a
discussion,
because
we're
still
very
early
stages,
so
yeah
you,
I
I
think
a
pr
would
be
fine,
but
I
think
it's
probably
so
early
and
there's
so
little
there
that
it
might
be
more
effective
to
to
just
have
the
discussion
here
and
then
we
can
kind
of
throw
around
how
that
fits
into
the
overall
architecture.
Nikola
can
advise
us
as
well
how,
because
there
is
a
like
a
document
where
she's
mapped
out
the
thinking
and
how
it
all
ties
together.
C
B
Yeah,
it
makes
sense,
so
maybe
what
I
can
do
is
I
in
order
to
start
the
discussion.
Maybe
I
can
just
pick
one
of
the
subjects
that
I
have
in
one
of
the
tutorials.
I
think.
E
B
D
Oh,
it's
nice
to
be
have
a
working
example.
Yeah.
B
Oh
sorry,
go
ahead.
One
more
thing
that
I
wanted
to
mention
is
that
the
reason
behind,
like
my
approach
at
this
point,
is
that
the
book
is
like
being
written
right
now
like
I'm,
writing
it,
and
it's
not
finished,
and
what
I
would
love
to
do
is
like
before
printing
it
it's.
I
would
love
to
have
the
example
somewhere
else,
so
I
can
point
to
those
examples
in
the
printed
version.
That's
very
ambitious,
but
I
think
that
I
think
that
I
will
have
enough
time
to
to
make
some
something
like
that
happens.
B
If
you
know
if
we
manage
to
move
things
forward,
so
I
will
definitely
come
back
to
the
group
with
the
proposal
like
a
small
proposal,
and
I
think
that
that
would
be
great
if
we
can
just
evaluate
it
and
make
a
decision
at
some
point.
C
Cool,
okay,
that's
and
the
other
thing
is
going
to
mention
as
well
besides
stuff
in
the
google,
doc
and
nicola.
Maybe
let's
get
your
thoughts
on
this
in
other
parts
of
cdf,
specifically
the
interoperability
group
and
the
event
say:
there's
some
work
that
happened
on
like
definitions
and
terms
or
even
like
what
the
interoperability
group
called
the
rosetta
stone,
which
compares
how
different
tools
use
terms
in
different
ways.
C
I
was
wondering
if
we
wanted
to
think
through,
if
which
of
those
would
make
sense
to
be
part
of
this
document
like
I
feel
the
definitions
themselves
could
could
be
moved
under
this
work
and
featured
there,
I'm
not
sure
about
some
of
the
stuff
like
the
rosetta
stone,
but
maybe
we
could
link
out
so
yes
wondering
if
you
had
any
thoughts
on
that
or
whether
you'd
even
seen
some
of
that
work
on
on
ci
cd
definitions
elsewhere.
C
G
D
So
I
think
but
yeah
if
I
turn
the
ring
light
off.
E
Yeah,
it's
it's
a
6k
blackmagic
broadcast
video
camera.
D
E
D
C
Find
one
part
I
was
looking
for,
which
is
larry
and
there's
another
little
repo
as
well.
I'm
trying
to
find
this
stuff
is
all
over
the
place.
C
F
So
that
first
link
is
it's
kind
of
a
mishmash
of
industry,
terminology
and
specific
products,
which
I
consider
kind
of
a
different
thing
like
a
lot
of
these.
Are
our
products
like
circle,
ci
and
jenkins,
so
yeah,
it's
terminology,
but
it's
not
really
see.
There's
ci
cd
products,
not
really
terminology
per
se,
or
I
wouldn't
call
them
terminology.
H
C
And
it
might
be
that
that's
too
low
level
anyway,
for
the
scope
of
this,
I
take
a
look
at
probably.
D
C
And
then
there's
this
glossary,
which
is
what
christie
wilson
had
kicked
off.
It
also
started
in
the
interoperability
group,
but
then
she
tried
to
up
level
it,
and
I
think
that
is
a
much
stronger
case
for
for
being
part
of
the
the
best
practices
work.
D
Oops
here
we
go
hang
on
copy.
D
D
D
I
say
this
in
ignorance,
because
I
don't
do
information
architecture
I
can.
I
could
certainly
imagine
imagine
as
a
consumer
of
this
ways
that
I
think
it
would
be
helpful.
Okay,
so.
D
Enter,
oh,
how
do
I
oper
there
we
go.
Interoperability
is
a
hard
word.
Just
shh
first
thing
in
the
morning.
C
So
one
of
the
other
things
just
on
the
on
the
list
for
the
best
practices
doc
like
we
want
to
get
to
a
point
where
we've
got
a
a
domain
for
it,
and
one
of
the
suggestions
that
I
thought
that
was
pretty
good
that
had
come
out
of
the
strategy
committee
was
about
coming
up
with
a
strong
brand
for
it
and
a
name-
and
I
know
jane
grohl
of
the
devops
institute
had
was
the
leading
thinker
around
saying
you
know,
get
get
a
strong
brand.
C
Have
it
be
something
easy
for
people
to
to
grasp?
So
they
can,
you
know,
speak
to
it,
share
it
and
what
and
and
the
main
blocker
for
us
is
just
around
domains.
I
mean
we
can
pick
something
reasonable
and
we
can
change
later
if
we
decide
to
brand
it,
but
the
folks
here
have
any
thoughts.
So
how
should
we
go
about
doing
that?
Anybody
who
specifically
want
to
be
involved
if
we
get
a
little
brainstorm
session
going
around,
you
know
brand
and
look
and
feel
or
any
other.
D
I
think
I
think
my
brain
shut
down
at
the
beginning
of
this.
This
is
the
just
to
make
sure
I'm
understanding
what
you're
asking
about
this
is
for
the
final
published
site
or
yes,
okay.
So
when
we
move
from
the
staging
netflix
preview,
netlify
yeah,
what
is
it
called?
Okay,
yeah,
I'm
happy
to
sit
in
on
it.
I
don't.
C
Okay,
yeah
I'll
go
to
the
strategy
committee
and
as
as
we're
evolving,
it
gets
get
some
thoughts
and
I
think,
there's
a
few
examples
out
there
from
other
folks
who
have
done
this
or
you
know
even
going
calling
things
de
facto
terms
like
the
blue
book
or
the
this
book.
So
it
becomes
known
as
a
thing
for
best
practices
so
or
even
as
much
as
you
know,
people
discouraging
the
the
words
best
practices
so
using
some
other
kind
of
terminology
that
encompasses
the
sentiment.
But
it's
a
bit
more,
maybe
catchy.
D
C
Yeah
equally,
if
you
can
think
of
any
kind
of
well-branded
equivalent
types
of
documentation,
most
of
the
ones
I
know
tend
to
be
associated
with
the
parent
company,
which
themselves
have
a
a
good
brand.
If
it's
you
know
stripe,
documentation
or
hashicore,
or
something
like
that
right.
E
Yeah-
and
I
think
we
need
to
be
mindful
not
to
not
to
end
up
with
a
catchy
buzz
phrase
that
that
then
becomes
fashionable
for
18
months
and
everybody
goes
off
and
implements
their
own
version
of
whatever
the
buzz
phrase
is
and
doesn't
work,
and
then
they
all
say
it's
terrible
and
they'll
never
speak
of
it
again.
So.
E
But
I
think
if
you,
if
you
keep
the
organization
name
in
the
in
the
branding
for
the
guide,
that
helps
to
keep
it
tied
back
to
the
original
source
information
rather
than
just
letting
it
escape
into
the
wild
and
to
have
a
life
of
its
own
yep.
F
C
Yes,
yeah,
that's
a
few
folks.
I
think
in
that
strategy
called
discussion.
We
can
pull
in
specifically
I'd
love
to
get
jane
grohl,
and
it
might
just
be
we
we
invite
a
a
bunch
of
folks
to
a
specific
one
of
these
meetings
and
just
say:
okay,
the
specific
topic
is
thrashing
out
a
name,
a
domain
and
a
a
brand
around
it,
but
I'll
ask
around
as
well
if
any
of
our
members
or
community
folks
have
links
to
folks
in
the
in
the
branding
world,
who'd
like
to
come
along
and
and
offer
some
consulting.
C
D
There
would
be
drinks
and
post-its
and
much
much
laughing
yeah
and
one
of
these
days
we're
gonna
get
out
of
this
goddamn
pandemic.
F
I
don't
think
so,
as
I
said,
if,
if
there's
something
that's
being
implemented
differently
for
the
landscape,
that
we
can
apply
to
make
things
easier
for
for
the
best
practices
site,
then
that's
cool,
but
otherwise,
just
let
me
know
if
there's
anything
else
you
need
from
me.
Okay,.
C
So
I
think
that's
all
I
have
so
we'll
get
folks
more
permissions.
Then
we
can
start
building
up
most
sites
and
then
maybe
we
can
start
kind
of
reviewing
section
by
section
as
folks
update
it
in
the
subsequent
meetings.
We
can
just
take
a
look
at
how
it
looks
and
see
what
else
is
missing
and
yeah.
Oh
start
to
open
it
up
more
widely
to
other
contributors,
yeah,
I'm
pretty
keen
to
like.
Now
we
have
getting
something
concrete
in
place
using
that
as
a
way
to
get
more
and
more
folks
involved.
G
What's
the
for
the
netlife
stuff,
is
that
did
you
just
set
something
up
or
is
there
a
cdf
account
or
there's
a
cdf
account.
C
And
nicola
was
able
to
transfer
this
over
as
one
of
the
the
sites
that's
operating
under
that.
F
Yeah,
so
the
the
I
I
had
a
netflix
account
that
I
just
set
up
like
a
personal
one,
a
free
account
and
then
set
up
the
preview
site
through
that,
and
then
I
was
able
to
just
transfer
ownership
of
that
over
to
the
cdf
network
account.
So
the
configuration
should
be
exactly
the
same.
C
And
then
yes,
we
can
set
up
permissions,
so
it
could
be
something
like
you
know,
the
folks
who
are
part
of
the
the
github
best
practices,
seg
team,
get
permissions
or
like
different
levels
for
chairs
versus
admin
and
yeah.
I
think
just
getting
all
of
that
set
up
will
be
good.
H
I
will
kind
of
I
guess
I
could
put
a
couple
words
around
the
links
that
I
sent
yeah,
please
tip.
Okay,
so
yeah
they're
gonna
cover
this
and
I'll.
Maybe
turn
my
video
on
too
say:
hi
hi,
hello,
emery,
so
they're
gonna
cover
this
in
some
detail
on
the
interoperability
sig
meeting
on
the
20th
of
january,
but
just
as
an
fyi,
since
you
are
looking
at
terminology,
there's
two
pull
requests
up
on
their
vocabulary:
doc
right
now
that
I
put
together
with
a
lot
of
help
with
the
folks
at
ibm.
H
So
what
we're
trying
to
do
ibm
has
something
called
one
pipeline,
which
is
like
tecton
pipelines
with
a
bunch
of
techton
tests
that
you
know
you'll
run
your
product
source
code
through
and
it
will
get
certified,
as
you
know,
meets
all
of
our
standards
right
and
I
used
to
work
for
ibm
now
I
work
for
red
hat
and
red
hat.
Lo
and
behold
is
trying
to
do.
H
The
exact
same
thing
have
a
whole
bunch
of
time
tests
and
if
you
run
your
software
through
all
those
steps,
then
at
the
end
you
get
something
that
certified
is
good
enough.
You
know
it's
secure
and
meets
our
standards,
so
we're
looking
at
how
we
could
share
that,
and
we
realized
that
one
of
the
first
things
we
need
to
do
is
just
use
the
same
terminology
for
the
same
type
of
step
or
task,
and
so
that's
what
this
is
is
just
growing
out
there
to
the
wild
hey.
H
This
is
what
really
based
on
what
one
pipeline
uses
for
all
their
different
steps
in
the
pipeline,
but
based
on
my
experience,
working
with
other
tools,
I
think
it's
pretty
common.
You
know,
I
think
this
is
shared
terminology
and
then
the
next
level,
down
from
this
will
be
saying:
okay
for
techcon,
you
know
what
does
it
mean
for
a
policy
step
to
be
required
or
optional?
What
are
the
things
that
we
expect
as
inputs
and
outputs
to
each
of
these
steps?
H
What
what
are
the
standard
s-bond
formats
that
we're
going
to
have
as
an
output
for
one
and
input
to
the
n
to
the
next
step?
And
things
like
that?
This
is
just
the
terminology
phase
of
that.
D
Okay,
okay,
sorry
monday,
monday
morning,
okay
help
my
old
brain,
okay,
so
making
sure
I'm
capturing
this
correctly.
So
there's
a
process
that
ibm
and
red
hat
as
an
adjacent
organization
to
ibm
around
this
one
pipeline
model
for
custom
customers
to
be
able
to
have
a
tested
solutions.
I
guess
I'm
trying
to
understand
what
that
first
part
was
so
the
pipeline.
H
Actually
starts
out
as
internal
use
right
so
for
my
own
company
here
are
all
the
things
that
all
the
check
boxes
in
order
for
me
to
be
able
to
ship
something
and
say
it's
like
okay,
so
you
know,
I
saw
7001
complaint
or
whatever
fedramp
complaint
yeah.
D
Okay,
all
right
so
customers
using
this
know
that
they
can
have
an
attestation
around
that
compliance
that
ibm
or,
in
this
case
or
red
hat.
H
Yeah
exactly
so,
but
what
this
piece
of
it
is
just
using
the
same
words
for
the
same
concepts
yeah,
but
the
bigger
project
that's
going
on
is
you
know,
open
source
project
right,
we're
trying
to
get
more
things
out
in
tecton
hub
that
can
work
together
with
each
other,
because
the
same
type
of
task
will
use
the
same
inputs
and
outputs.
H
I
guess
yes,
yes,
so
the
I
think
what
we're
thinking
tecton
will
do
is,
for
example,
there
could
be
a
standard
task
in
tecton
that
says,
make
sure
that
my
github
pull
request
had
reviews
on
it
right.
We
should
all
be
able
to
share
a
task
like
that
and
then
my
corporate
policy,
my
internal
version
of
that
would
say
that
that
task
has
to
pass.
H
You
know
my
pipeline
says
that
that
check
has
to
be
true,
so
I
think
you
know
what
I
see
here
is
that
there's
a
series
of
checks
that
all
sorts
of
organizations
go
through
to
certify
themselves.
You
know
you've
checked
your
known.
Vulnerabilities
you've
done
static
scanning
dynamics.
Giving
all
this
stuff
conceptually
is
the
same
series
of
checks,
and
then
everybody's
would
like
to
be
able
to
reuse
tecton
tests
to
the
greatest
extent
that
they
can
to
implement
those.
H
So
I
think
everybody's
gonna
have
their
own
pipelines,
but
hopefully
share
a
lot
of
tasks
right
right
and
if
I
use
the
sneak
and
you
use
white
source
like
if
they
had
the
same
input
and
output
format
for
their
test,
then
I
should
be
able
to
just
swap
those
out
so
yeah.
H
Yeah,
basically
this,
what
I
have
here
is
pulled
almost
directly
from
ibm's
terminology.
Red
hat
is
not
as
far
along
in
the
implementation,
but
you
know
when
they
reviewed
it.
They're
like
yes,
basically
what
we
call
these
things
as
well,
so.
F
So
I
know
that
one
of
the
writers
on
my
team
is
that
is,
is
also
working
on
tecton.
Do
you
know
jerry
ochilla,
no
okay?
It
might
be
interesting
to
connect
with
him
because
he
works
on
the
tecton
documentation
and
might
be
interesting
to
to
talk
with
him
about
terminology
stuff,
and
he
would
be.
He
actually
is
familiar
with
some
of
the
terminology
we
use
around.
F
Checking
policies
to
see
if
you
have
complied
with
whatever
is
is
required
internally
in
your
pipeline
to
be
able
to
deploy
whatever
it
is.
You
want
to
deploy
so
because
google
has
its
own
terminology
around
that
stuff.
So
it
might
be
interesting
to
have
a
conversation
with
him
about
that
and
then
maybe
what
might
work
as
generic
terminology
yeah
can
I.
D
D
C
A
C
Might
not
know
how
to
navigate
the
the
early
stages
of
the
uncertainty,
but
once
it's
more
like
here's
a
section
please
go
see
if
that
you
have
anything
to
connect
that
might
be
good
but
yeah.
Actually,
maybe
okay
now.
D
G
C
D
C
And
yeah,
I
think
the
work
at
the
interoperability
level
is
is
orthogonal
but
yeah
pretty
key.
The
whole
idea
that
we
can
get
first
capture
what
the
terms
are
and
then
push
towards
getting
folks
to
decentralize
on
de
facto
ones
that
most
people
use
it'd
be
great
if
that
keeps
evolving
and
and
mary
I'll
try
to
think
if
there's
any
other
folks
to
pull
into
that
discussion.
So
you
said
that's
on
january,
20th.
H
And
I
would
be
interested
to
see
if,
where
it
might
diverge
to
right,
anywhere,
you're
using
different
terminology.