►
From YouTube: CDEvents Working Group (EMEA/APAC) - March 27, 2023
Description
For more Continuous Delivery Foundation content, check out our blog: https://cd.foundation/blog/
B
B
B
B
C
It's
spring,
it's
sunny.
Incredibly,
it's
getting.
D
C
A
A
C
B
C
A
A
C
I
hope
so
I
mean
even
being
me
that
it's
5
a.m
for
him
it's
too
early,
so
he
won't
change
today.
Of
course,.
C
A
C
C
Oh,
is
that
oh
no
I
think
I
was
updating.
The
I
was
trying
to
make
an
agenda
for
today
and
I
was
updating
the
the
docker.
No,
the
the
notes
from
last
week.
B
C
All
right!
Yes,
yes,
so
indeed
there
release
notes.
C
Here-
and
this
is
the
link
to
the
documentation-
I
can
open
it
quickly.
So
this
is
the
release,
notes.
B
B
C
C
And
I
think
it's
kind
of
got
nicely.
I
basically
started
doing
the
updates
and
I
then
ended
up
saying
you
know.
I
didn't
want
to
do
these
updates
manually
all
the
time
and
they
have
two
error
prone.
Okay,
so
I
started
automating
the
generation
of
the
or
good
punch,
the
it's
a
event,
specific
part
of
the
code
of
the
SDK
from
the
schemas
good.
B
C
C
So
the
idea
of
the
process
is
that
it
will
be
like
there
is
a
sub
modules
in
the
SDK
that
points
to
the
the
spec
repo.
So
when
you
want
to
when
you
want
to
update
to
a
new
release,
basically
you
move
the
submodule
to
the
new
tag.
C
Yeah,
you
run
the
generation
script,
you
run
the
test
and
there
might
be
a
few
things
failing
that
needs
to
be
tuned,
but
otherwise
everything
should
be
there
like
in
the
is
it
if
the
examples
introduce
the
new
string,
new
test
value
that
you
need
to
put
in
the
test
or
something
like
that
right.
But
otherwise
everything
should
be
just
like
that,
and
I
I
rely
on
the
CI
job
that
will
run
the
generation
script
and
check
that
the
main
branches
and
sync
with
that
that
basically.
A
Generate
all
existing
events
types
then
and
validate
them
towards
the
CMS
or
as
well.
A
Good,
so
one
thing:
I
guess
that
you
will
like
when
you
generate
this
SDK
from
the
Json
schemas,
is
that
you
it
will
not
be
another
way
documented
the
so
you're,
not
a
double
documentation
of
the
SDK
itself
right.
It
will
be
just
the
structures
there
so
to
say,
and
that's
I
guess:
I!
Guess
it's
a
limitation
of
Json,
because
you
cannot
have
comments
in
Json
really.
C
A
To
say
commenter
for
rifle,
we
did
not
recently
A
Change,
maybe
I
discussed
that
before
we
moved
actually
from
from
Json
being
the
source
format
to
the
to
the
yaml
format.
Instead
and
Home
Room
demo
format
from
which
we
don't
generate
the
Json
schemas
and
also
the
documentation,
the
market
documentation.
We
have
yeah
together
with
the
documentation
with
the
comments
and
everything,
and
then
the
idea
is
that
we
should
also
be
able
to
generate
the
SDK
code
from
there.
A
D
D
A
C
Yeah
yeah
that
makes
sense
that
that
would
be
a
natural
Next,
Step
and
I
think
the
yeah,
so
the
the
the
generation,
the
code
generation
Works
in
a
way
that
basically,
it
parses
the
yaml
for
the
the
Json
files
can
it
builds
a
small
object
with
all
the
data
that
is
required.
Like
version
is
type
and
just
kind
of
bank,
and
then
there
are
some
templates
and
it
uses
the
code.
Templating
supports
to
basically
go
and
and
generate
those
parts
from
this
data
object
right.
C
A
B
A
C
Yeah,
the
other
thing
I
need
to
check
with
the
the
other
SDK
folks
was
thinking.
We
could
take
this
go
tool.
It's
actually
at
the
end,
is
like
I,
go
binary
that
will
parasit
Json
schemas
and
run
some
templates
and
the
format
of
the
language
of
that
those
templates
is
really
language
agnostic,
so
you
could
generate.
If
you
had
template
for
other
languages,
you
could,
in
theory,
use
this
same
tool
to
generate
Java
files
or
python
files.
Things
like
that,
so
maybe
that's
a
possibility.
C
We
could
use
these
to
you
know
and
take
this
tool,
maybe
even
out
of
this,
it
was
Decay
put
it
in
a
shared
repo
and
then
use
it
to
generate
all
the
various
sdks.
C
D
C
An
idea
but
sounds.
B
C
D
C
Yeah
apart
from
that,
then
once
that
is
done,
that
would
be
the
the
release
then
of
the
SDK
itself
and
move
that
0.3
draft
moved
Main
in
on
this
back
to
0.3
draft
and
also
then
we
add
the
University.
The
announcement
work
I
mean
I,
put
it
into
slack
for
now,
but
there's
probably
a
bit
more.
C
A
C
Ask
spare
time
to
be
honest:
I'd
I'd!
Rather
you
you
invested
it
in
the
and
in
these
pack,
topics
yeah.
C
Right,
yeah
I
think
that's
all
for
the
release
beat
zero.
Two
I
mean
their
follow-ups,
follow-up
things,
of
course
like
aligning
the
other
sdks
and
updating
the
proof
of
Concepts
to
use
the
new
versions
and
yeah
I.
Don't
know
how
much
time
I
can
spend
on
those
now,
because
I
had
to
spend
quite
a
lot
of
time
on
the
SDK.
Now
this
time
and
I
have
other
things
that
need
to
move
forward
but
yeah.
C
So
for
the
python
SDK
Evan
wrote
me
a
message
that
is
not
able
to
attend,
but
also
some
updates
is
that
there
is
a
new
colleague
from
Fidelity
that
is
a
new
teammate
from
of
Evans
that
is
going
to
to
start
working
on
the
python
SDK.
C
So
the
first
thing
she's
picking
up,
is
there's
one
issue
about
python
Tech,
which
is
to
you
know,
Parts
incoming
events,
basically
in
the
python
SDK.
So
she
will
be
working
on
that.
Okay
and
Evan
is
continue,
continue,
working
and
will
continue
working
on
the
release,
automation
for
both
the
Python
and
the
Java
SDK.
That's
dimensioned.
C
Yeah,
that's
all
of
the
data
affair.
S.
A
The
POC,
though,
if
you
go
back
to
the
release
for
02
program
or
project
I
heard
that
jalander
might
have
started
also
to
look
into
the
to
updating
the
City
events
to
zeros
one,
the
POC,
but
you
are
assigned
to
it
here.
So
I'm
not
sure
if
he
has
started
actually
or
if
he
just
intended
to
start
I
just
heard
that
he
intended
to
start
something
there,
but
maybe
I
don't
know.
A
Maybe
you
should
reach
out
to
him
to
see,
or
you
can
do
this,
but
yeah
that's
good.
If
he
would
like
to
do
it
or
if
you
should
do
it.
A
B
C
Yeah
exactly
I
guess
it
depends,
since
there
are
many
components
involved,
some
of
the
components
use
different
sdks.
If
we
don't
have.
B
C
Version
of
the
SDK,
but
that
could
be
also
an
interesting
test
to
have
maybe
one
component
to
narrating
0.2,
0.12
events
and
the
other
one
parsing
them
using
a
0.1
SDK.
That,
in
theory,
should
work.
B
C
So
in
terms
of
the
testing
events,
I
haven't
heard
from
Oli
all.
A
He
reached
out
to
me
it
was
like
a
few
weeks
ago,
but
and
then
I
haven't
heard
anything
I
I
think
he
said
he
had
looked
into
most
of
the
comments
and
he
wanted
me
a
little
modest
to
look
into
it
again
to
the
review,
but
I
know
that
he
has
some
uplifting
to
do
as
well
right,
so
I'm
not
sure
I
haven't
been
able
to
spend
the
time
on
reviewing
it
either.
Really,
since,
since
the
updated
his
pull
request.
B
C
B
A
B
A
C
A
Doesn't
really
matter
too
much,
it
doesn't
really
matter,
but
I
think
some
properties
might
have
been
renamed
and
maybe
changed
locations
or
something
as
well,
but
that
would
be
a
good
test.
I
guess.
When
you
talked
about
the
the
pocket,
there
should
be
different
versions
in
different
parts
of
the
book.
It's
interesting
then,
to
see
if
the
testing
event
is,
but
we
don't
use
testing
events
in
the
pop
of
course
today,
but.
C
C
A
B
C
Okay,
so
in
terms
of
tools,
tools,
Integrations,
the
only
update
that
I
have
is
that
the
DRC
is
merged.
Now,.
C
Which
is
great
so
it
means
that
work
has
been
approved
by
the
project,
team
and
I.
Think
jalander
is
planning
to
start
implementing
it
I
think
so,
yeah
so
yeah.
That's
that's
really
good
and
yeah
for
Jenkins
I.
Don't
have
any
update
since
last
time.
I
know
that
Fidelity
is
working
on
that
internally
for
now
and.
B
A
C
I,
guess
that's
yes,
yes,
indeed,
I
I
share
the
same
concern.
I
mean
from
what
Jamie
told
me.
C
One
part
of
the
reason,
at
least
for
that
is
that
they
were
still
finishing
like
going
through
the
internal
company
processes
to
be
able
to
actually
want
you
to
do
this
in
open
source
and
that
it
looked
very
good,
but
still
I,
guess
the
last
mile
was
being
processed
and
they
didn't
want
to
wait
doing
work.
C
That's
so,
and
my
understanding
is
that
as
soon
as
that
hurdle
is
removed,
then
it
should
be
possible
to
to
get
this
in
the
open
and
I
mean
it
can
be
done
in
a
way
that
does
not
hinder
speed,
velocity
and
then
just
having
it
public
repository
somewhere.
C
But
people
can
at
least
comment
and
so
forth
at
least
see
the
code.
They
can
still
decide
to
be
there
owners
of
that
code.
While
they
work
in
it,
you
know,
and
they.
C
But
yeah
I'll
keep
I,
keep
the
team
posted
on
on
progress
on
that
yeah.
D
A
C
Yeah,
the
the
only
other
bit
of
update
that
I
I
have
from
let's
say
on
the
connecting
events
site.
Last
time
we
discussed
starting
to
put
together
a
PR
yeah.
C
I
I-
and
the
only
thing
he
mentioned
to
me,
is
that
it
got
the
okay
from
legal
to
to
go
at
because
I
don't
know
if
it
started
anything
yet,
but
at
least
he
said
he
got
the
approval
so
that
he
plans
to
do
it.
Okay,.
A
B
C
Get
no
sorry,
I
didn't
manage
to
put
it
in
the
agenda,
but
maybe
we
could
review
did.
C
D
A
B
A
C
But
yeah
I
think
I'm
happy
to
have
different
views,
I
mean
if
you
want.
If
you
have
time,
if
you
want
to
invest
and
try
and
building
those
that
kind
of
craft,
pretty
sure
it
would
be
nice
to
to
see
yeah.
C
B
B
C
C
A
So
I
think
we
can
actually
move
that
away
from
0.3.
We
shouldn't
be
hindered
by
that
I
think.
B
B
A
A
A
So
I,
don't
know.
Maybe
before
we
put
a
lot
of
effort
on
I,
mean
rephrasing
things
and
renaming
things
in
our
protocol,
maybe
we
should
wait
for
any
push
from
what
should
I
say
the
TOC,
maybe
or
or
from
Central
perspective
on
on
cdfs,
that
we
should
really
align
on
this.
So
what
is
your
thinking
around
that?
Do
they
think
that
tools
in
the
CDF
are
expected
to
align
on
this
now
or
do
you
consider
that
still
being
work
in
progress
to
define
those
terms
and.
C
B
C
Really,
yes,
City
events
could
try
and
align
with
like
standard
terminology,
pretty
sure
but
yeah.
C
A
What
document
is
that
now
that
the
table,
where
we
specify
all
the
tools
and
their
names
for
pipelines
and
tasks
and
stages,
and
whatever
there
should
be
like
a
common
row
at
the
bottom,
or
something
saying
that
this
is
the
least
common
denominator,
or
something
like
that
that
so
these
are
the
terms
we
should
go
for,
but
there
is
no
such
yet
so
maybe
before
we
start
changing
in
City
events,
we
should
maybe
propose
such
an
update
to
the
to
that
table.
A
C
B
A
C
Very
Broad,
but
yeah
I've
I
would
like
to
start
doing
something
around
this
0.3
maybe
like
having
the
sign
predicate
for
the
artifact
event
and
work
with
plan
for
0.2.
C
So
I
would
leave
that
this
one,
and
maybe,
if
I,
create
more
specific
items,
then
I
can
put
them
in
0.3
and
if
this
out,
but
for
now,
I
think
it's
it's
fine
to
everything.
C
C
Naming
in
the
pr
from
ole
right
now
and
and
that
was
because
there's
no
standard
again
for
that.
B
B
A
C
A
B
A
A
C
C
A
Yeah
I
think
this
could
be
considered.
Should
we
ask
Darian
that,
if
he's
pleased
with
us
that
there
is.
B
D
B
B
B
C
A
A
A
C
I
think
it
makes
sense,
and
just
trying
to
imagine
I
guess
how
it
would
work
in
in
practice,
so
I
would
not
want
I
guess.
Every
time
we
parse
a
message,
the
SDK
to
go
and
download
that
schema
from
somewhere.
No.
A
For
sure
and
the
SDK,
but
I
need
to
have
some
additional
optional
feature
for
dealing
with
specific
schemas,
and
even
when
you
call
the
SDK,
when
you
use
the
SDK,
you
need
to
forward
that
schema
reference
somehow
to
the
SDK,
and
if
that
exists,
then
the
SDK
could
maybe
just
should
the
SDK
validate
them.
Maybe
it
should,
if
that
is
provided,
but
still
if
it's
just
an
optional
part
of
the
protocol,
there's
no
need
that
the
scheme
must
at
least
initially
have
support
for
it.
A
C
In
some
way,
yeah
what
I
do
for
the
go?
Sdk
now
I
I
use
the
go,
embedding
capabilities
so
that
it's
actually
pulling
the
schemas
in
as
a
variable
as
a
constant
I
guess
in
the
five
definitions
yeah,
so
that
it's
basically
then
becomes
part
of
the
the
goal
module.
So
when
you
redistribute
the
download
the
SDK
you
you,
you
have
the
the
schemas
embedded
in
there,
so
that.
B
C
Can
validate
them
without
having
to
download
them
from
anywhere,
but
it
will
only
validate
against
the
schemas
that,
for
the
respect
version
corresponding
to
the
SDK
version,.
C
You
cannot
send
it
and
you
can
receive
it
you
so
in
the
latest
version
of
the
go
SDK
I
introduced
support
from
what
we
discussed
to
being
able
to
parse
older
messages
or
newer
messages.
As
long
as
they
are
kind
of
compatible.
Okay
I
mean
New
River
for
newer
messages
on
a
minor
version.
C
They
will
be
compatible,
but
they
might
lose
data
right
because
you
can
have
addictive
changes
yeah,
but
it
will
try
to
validate.
If
you
ask
to
validate.
If
you
call
the
validate
method
on
the
SDK,
it
will
use
the
embedded
schema
right
so
that
that
means
that
validation
will
fail,
because
the
spec
version
will
be
different
very
soon.
I.
B
A
Something
we
should
have
a
zero
three,
or
should
we
focus
on
the
supply
chain
and
the
connecting
events.
This
is
quite
a
small
thing,
of
course,
the
ad
so
but
anyway,
we
since
we
now
generate
things
in
the
sdks
based
on
the
schemas.
We
need
to
have
some
kind
of
handling
of
this
property.
Also,
though,
but
I
guess,
the
sdkp
has
considered
just
a
free
text
string.
You
don't
need
to
have
any
special
ending
for
now.
A
C
C
A
Same
time,
if
I
don't
think
that
anyone
else
would
prioritize
it
either
and
if
I
should
focus
my
time
on
something
here,
I
should
probably
focus
on
the
connecting
events
or
the
supply
chain.
A
The
part
as
well
I
mean
we
just
spent
one
month
away,
so
I
wouldn't
expect
that
I
will
be
able
to
do
this
or
prioritize
it
now.
I
would
rather
prioritize
the
connecting
events,
discussions
and
those
parts,
and
we
have
one
week
lose
lost
for
you
gone
more
or
less
as
well,
so
it's
small
as
just
three
three
weeks
away
or
something
so
no
I
think
we
can
actually
move
this
away
from
zero
through
zero.
Three.
B
C
B
C
3.
so
I
think
that
that
looks
fine,
I
wouldn't
go
and
look
for
anything
else.
Do
it
here
yeah
this
document
generally
required
features,
it's
something
that
I
would
like
to
try
and
do
for
this.
C
Release
and
the
only
last
item
we
have
is
the
key
to
CD
event,
translation
proof
of
concept,
I
mean
and
probably
also
the
proof
of
Concepts
that
we
will
move
over
from
0.2.
Sorry
but
I
guess
those
are
kind
of
ongoing
and
I
mean
I
can
check
with
debuff
and
Brad.
If
there
was
any
progress
on
that
I
haven't
heard
anything
yeah.
C
A
C
A
Maybe
we
should
ask
them
if
there's
anything
ongoing
and
if
it
isn't,
then
we
should
probably
move
it
away
from
zero
three,
unfortunately
or
ask
if
they
could
do
something
before
the
city
gone
on.
This
I
think
Brad
is
coming
right
to
Vancouver
I.
Think
I
thought
he
would
present
something
I'm,
not
sure
what
it
was
about.
So
if
it
was
Persia
or
something
maybe.
B
A
C
Yeah
I
do
have
a
talk
on
CD
events
on
in
Vancouver,
yeah
yeah
good,
which
is
well
I,
think
it's
like
doing
interoperability
through
CD
events,
okay,
so
General
introduction
to
City
events
and
what
features
we
have
in
the
protocol,
what
updates
and
so
forth
and
then
the
second
part
won't
focus
on
like
integrating
CD
events
into
tools,
so
I
guess
I
will
collect
some
I
wanted
to
collect
some
stories:
The
Experience
they
had
on
Jenkins
side
and
Spinnaker's
side
and
could
maybe
hopefully
techton
if
I
managed
to
to
get
some
progress
there.
C
Well,
I
I
have
done
something
done
on
deckton
anyway,
so
I
will
include
that
for
sure,
and
hopefully,
I
would
be
interested
to
to
get
something
from
ole,
maybe
as
well
about
what
they
plan
to
do
for
test
Cube.
So
I
will
try
to
to
kind
of
gather
those
kind
of
stories
and
present
those
but
yeah.
C
A
C
15
minutes
talks
and
like
the
idea
is
to
have
like
updates
from
the
projects
yeah
so
yeah.
If,
if
anyone
else
from
City
events
is
going
to
to
want
to
be
in
Vancouver,
maybe
you
might
be
interested
in
in
doing
that
update.
C
A
Events,
Community
will
come
there,
but
we
can
maybe
reach
out
once
like
to
the
community
before
we
go
there
and
see
if
anyone
else
is
joining
yeah
second
idea
yeah,
it
would
be
nice
too.
How
is
it
with
the
interest
by
the
way
in
IBM,
since
you
are
an
IBM
on
the
City
events
and
these
things
is
there
anyone
else
interested
on
you
or?
How
does
that
work
in
idem.
C
Yes,
there
is
interest
I'm
working
on
keeping
it
growing,
so
to
say
so.
There's
definitely
interest
I
mean
in
terms
of
more
on
the
observability.
If
you
will
type
of
use
case,
okay,
because
we
we
do
work
a
lot,
we
we
do
use
tecton
a
lot
internally.
We
have
products
based
on
it
and
yeah,
so
it
there
is
interest
in
having
like
events
with
more
kind
of
specific
schema.
So
we
do
we
we're
starting
to
use
cloud
events
or
actually
we're
using
Cloud
events
today.
C
C
Yes,
yes,
that's
that's
definitely
of
interest.
There.
C
Yeah,
possibly
okay,
but
yeah.
So
one
of
the
problem
with
problems
with
Spectrum
today
is
that
when
you
run
a
pipeline
because
it's
very
non-opinionated
when
you
run
a
pipeline
detect-
and
you
don't
get
that
much
information
about
what's
going
on
within
the
pipeline
yeah
so
having
the
ability
to
generate
events
more
specific
from
techno
pipelines
and
having
a
way
to
hook
those
into
somehow
yeah.
B
C
Somehow
did
that
the
specification
on
techno
side
to
events
produced
with
more
context
would
be
useful,
so
I
mean
pipeline
started
and
stopped
for
sure.
That's
that's
fine,
but
I.
Think
that's
more
interesting
like
being
able
to
produce
events
about
build,
append
or
artifact
being
signed.
All
those
kind
of
things.
D
A
It
sounds
like
more
or
less
everyone
would
have
those
use
cases,
but
it's
good
that
someone
can
start
leveraging
from
from
City
events
and,
of
course,
it's
good
to
Showcase
in
in
these
conferences
that
we
have
some
kind
of
early
support
in
some
tools,
but
it
would
also
be
even
more
interesting
as
to
see
companies
adopting
it
and
starting
to
use
it.
But,
of
course
well,
City
events
is
not
yet
released
in
any
production
format
or
a
version
of
it.
C
Fidelity
definitely
is
interested
in
in
using
it.
Yeah
sounds
like
and
I
mean
other
companies
I
mean,
but
Ben
is
involved
in
in
the
spec
and
I'm
involved
in
this
pack
and
I,
don't
know
is,
is
there
any
is
any
plan
on
on
your
side?
You
think
America
is
inside
to
adult
City
events
in.
A
Any
way
yeah
I
mean,
of
course,
eventually.
If
seed
events
become
successful,
we
will
for
sure
consider
that
as
a
good
option,
I
mean
today
we
have
Eiffel
and
we
use
hyper
quite
extensively
internally.
So
obviously
there
is
a
question
there.
A
Always
why
do
we
invest
in
seed
events
when
we
have
iPhone
and
that's
something
I
need
to
to
answer
from
now
and
then
but
of
course,
we
we
would
like
to
see
City
events
being
brought
more
broadly
accepted
and
more
broadly
used
than
iPhone,
and
when
that
happens,
we
will
for
sure
look
into
migrating
to
City
events,
but
until
that
happens,
I
guess
we
are
quite
pleased
with
the
iPhone
as
it
is
today.
A
So
we
will
continue
using
that,
of
course,
but
we
are
constantly
looking
into
City
events
as
well.
Some
parts
of
our
exam
which
have
not
adopted
Eiffel
might
go
to
City
events,
so
it
depends,
but
still
of
course,
we
cannot
base
any
production
flows,
I
guess
on
City
events
until
until
there
is
a
good
release
of
it,.
A
Course,
but
the
interest
is
for
sure
there
yeah,
okay,
I,
see
time's
up.
Oh,
we
are
fine
yeah
good,
so
we
have
the
Sig
meeting
this
afternoon.
Let's
see
who
joins
them
and
then
talk
to
you
next
time.