►
From YouTube: CDF - SIG Interoperability Meeting 2021-05-06
Description
For more Continuous Delivery Foundation content, check out our blog: https://cd.foundation/blog/
A
B
I
want
describe
you,
or
vice
versa,.
C
I'm
sorry,
I
think
I
didn't
hear,
hear
your
sentence
dropped
in
and
out,
if
you
all
want
to
add
your
names
to
the
participants
on
the
hackmd
meeting
notes,
that
would
be
great.
The
link
is
in
the
calendar,
invite
and
also
I
can
drop
it
in
our
chat.
C
B
Yeah,
I
I
looked
action
item
says
I
couldn't
find
any.
I
suppose
one
of
the
obvious
things
we
discussed
during
the
previous
meeting
was
how
to
tolerate
with
spd-x,
which
we
haven't
been
acting
item,
but
we
can
talk
about
it
when
the
topic
comes.
I
suppose.
B
Yeah
yeah,
because,
like
again,
I
think
stu
suggested
that
we,
instead
of
us,
trying
to
start
things
from
scratch.
We
should
perhaps
look
at
what
svdx
has
find
the
gaps
and
overlaps
and
focus
on
those
things
rather
than
us
writing
things
out
of
us.
D
Right
and
if
we,
if
we
want
they're
starting
spdx,
is
starting
their
version
three,
I
think
or
they're
pretty
far
along,
but
they're
more
than
willing
to
have
us
bring
the
cicd
needs
to
their
group,
and
when
we
do
that,
they'll
go
ahead
and
if
it
makes
sense,
they'll
adjust
their
model,
bring
it
in
and
then
they
will
update
it
through
the
iso.
So
I
think
it's
a
good
way
for
us
to
get
a
stronger
standard
as
part
of
that.
B
Rather
than
just
spoken
action
item,
so
one
thing
I
want
to
check
like
I,
I've
been
crossing
through
the
presentation
paid
shared
during
previous
meeting.
It's
like
it
was
pretty
interesting
during
the
meeting
as
well,
but
I
become
even
more
interested
to
what
they
are
doing.
So
I
am
wondering
like
if
anyone
wants
to
you
know
help
out
with
this.
So
we
can
extract
some
information
from
their
specification
and
then
put
on
our
document
so
make
others
lives
easier
when
they
browse
to
document
by
highlighting
the
relevant.
D
Pieces
yeah.
I
think
we
should
pick
a
an
area
to
focus
on
and
then
cross-link
it
over
to
the
spdx.
D
You
know
reference
spdx,
maybe
you
know
start
like
a
an
artifact
or
you
know
just
something
really
basic
and
start
there
and
then
just
keep
on
building
on
it.
Exactly.
D
I
will
join
you
and
I'm
wondering
how
we
should
do
it
if
we
should
do
it
through
a
a
github
issue
or
a
discussion,
and
then
once
we
get
far
enough
long,
then
do
a
pr
or
do
the
pr
first
and
then
you
know
keep
on
adding
on
to
it.
That
way.
B
Well,
we
never
tried
github
discussions,
but
I
think
events
group
are
using
them
heavily.
Maybe
we
can
give
github
discussions
by
because,
like
if,
like
look
like
based
on
discussions,
we
can
turn
the
you
know.
Whatever
comes
out
of
that
discussion
on
the
github
discussion
or
issue,
you
can
turn
that
into
a
pull
request.
Perhaps.
D
Yeah,
I
think
that's
how
the
events
are
doing
it.
They
they'll
they'll,
have
a
discussion
going
and
then
the
discussion
may
be
around
a
pr,
you
know,
and
then
they
would
have
the
discussion
on
the
threads,
because
it's
a
little
bit
easier
to
follow
on
the
discussion
side
and
then
once
they're
happy
like
at
a
meeting
like
this
they'll
go
ahead
and
kind
of
merge.
Things
say
this
is
we're
kind
of
done
with
this.
D
This
discussion,
let's
go
ahead
and
somebody
would
go
ahead
and
update
the
pr
with
the
details,
kind
of
comb
through
the
discussion
board
and
and
and
update
the
pr
with
the
the
with
what
was
decided
upon
that's
kind
of
how
they're
doing
it.
D
Take
it
from
there,
then
that
sounds
like
a
plan
and
I
would
and
just
start
I
would
throw
out
just
you
know
just
to
have
you
started
start
the
topic.
You
know
pick
something
from
spdx
that
we
should
review
and
then
start
the
discussion
around
it.
So
I'm
indifferent
on
what
you
pick
you
know,
whatever
whatever
seems
the
easiest
would
be
my
suggestion.
D
So
if
you
go
up
to
go
back
to
that,
car
go
to
number
three
like
package
information
or
file
information
on
the
left
there
see.
What's
in
that
group,
there.
E
B
B
D
D
D
You
know,
spdx
originally
started
around
just
figuring
out
a
standard
for
the
licenses
that
were
included
in
software
and
that's
what
they
originally
were
focused
on
was
just
trying
to
find
the
licenses
and
from
there
it
involved
into
copyrights,
and
then
it
just
kept
on
going
and
building
upon
that
that
level
of
detail
so
you'll
see
a
lot
in
the
the
spec
that
has
to
do
with
licenses
and
copyrights,
but
there's
also
a
lot
of
attributes
that
have
built
upon
that
that
overlap
with
into
the
cicd
world.
D
Note
yeah
so
like
because
I
put
together
some
of
the
like
the
the
metadata
around
what
is
a
git
command?
What
is
a
an
artifact,
and
I
think
we
may
need
to
kind
of
adopt
these
we'll
have
to
see
if
some
of
this
like
a
what
they
considered
a
commit
over
on
the
spdx
side.
D
If
that
exists
or
not
yeah,
I'm
not
sure
yeah,
it
would
probably
be
in
that
file.
Section
yeah.
C
B
Yeah,
I
I
have
a
question
to
you.
Steve
like
I
haven't,
read
the
file
yet,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
they
have
this
type
of,
like,
I
don't
know,
classifications
of
different
types
of
artifacts
or
they
consider
all
of
them
as
file
art
file
on
the
file
or.
D
Well,
that's
where
we
had
to
do
that
the
investigation
and
see
I
have
not
read
the
file,
all
the
specs
on
the
spdx
side
around
artifacts,
and
it
does
not
look
like
they
are
at
this
level
at
the
file
level.
That
they're,
including
a
commit
at
this
level,
maybe
up
at
package.
D
D
So
it
looks
like
just
from
a
a
quick
look
here
like
the
git
commit
or
a
commit
is
not
referenced
back
in
the
spd-x.
That
would
be
something
that
we'd
probably
want
them
to
add
an
attribute
for,
because
it
would
make
sense
from
you
know
when
you're
way
downstream,
that
you
know
what
was
the
commit
for
this.
This
change
in
the.
F
D
F
So
now
we
can
probably
add
on
some
things
here.
D
Yeah,
especially
when
we're
we're
coming
at
it
from
a
different
viewpoint,
like
I
said
their
their
viewpoint
originally
was
around
licensing,
so
we
think
more
about
runtime
environments,
so
yeah.
I
think
this
would
be
this
section
here.
D
312
would
were
and
it
may
even
be
at
the
other
one
at
the
file
level,
it's
hard
to
tell
where
it
would
fit
better,
probably
at
the
package
level,
because
this
would
be
a
result
of
the
if
you're
going
to
create,
let's
say
you're,
going
to
create
a
a
python
module
and
you're
going
to
push
it
to
pi
pi
that
you
actually
would
do
you
go
through
a
build
step
of
creating
the
basically
the
setup
file
and,
at
that
point,
you're
going
to
be
uploading
it
to
pi
pi
through
twine
that
that
would
be
where
you'd
be
triggered
by
a
commit
in
a
ci
cd
world.
D
D
D
But
the
one
thing
you
do
have
to
remember
is
when
they
are
talking
about
packages
when
we
get
to
into
the
container
world
there.
You'll
have
multiple
packages
installed
in
a
container.
So
you
know
when
you
do
do
a
hello
world
for
node.js,
you
get
1500
packages
that
get
installed
by
default
and
each
one
of
these
would
be
conforming
to
have
a
312
section
for
each
one
of
those.
F
When
kate
talked
about
when
it
presented
espdx,
she
talked
about
other
frameworks,
and
so
when
they
were
taking
up
to
be
conformed
against,
was
she
mentioning
in
total
or
was
that
somewhere
else?
We
mentioned
that
one.
D
Because
there's
a
whole
section
about
relationships
in
section
seven,
I
think.
D
Yeah,
so
this
is
building
out
their
data
model
and
I
think
their
data
model
will
pretty
much
takes
care
of
all
the
the
relationships.
I
mean
it's
pretty
well,
you
know,
lays
out
a
many-to-many
relationship.
You
know
all
the
different
permutations,
it
seems
pretty
good
at
this
level.
D
D
It
seems
to
be
a
little
more
low
level
like
one
like
right
here
when
they're
talking
about
a
make
file,
that's
going
to
be
more
at
the
at
the
low
level,
compile.
C
C
Yeah,
I
would
say
that
this
is,
I
mean,
probably
from
its
history,
what
it
was
engaged
with.
It's
really
this
this
process
of
releasing
a
new
version
of
a
library
or
something
it's
very
different
than
or
different
enough.
I
guess
significantly
different
from
from
ci
cd
for
a
code
base.
You
know,
so
this
is
what
our
focus
is:
bridging
that
gap
in
terminal
yeah.
D
Look
at
what's
the
external
repository,
it's
section,
six
appendix
six.
E
D
D
You
know
see
see
where
we
can
find
what's
in
common
and
and
I
thought
that
it
might
be
easier
to
just
pick
something
on
the
spdx
side
and
instead
of
taking
it
from
the
ci
cd
side,
just
pick
like
the
file
or
a
package
and
start
there
and
see
how
we
can
overlay
it
into
the
the
pipeline
and
see
what
common
terminology
there
is
from
from
that
world
may
be
easier.
D
B
Okay,
I
I
I
create,
I
enabled
the
discussions
thing
on
our
repo
so
and
we
can
start
a
discussion
on
file
information,
as
you
suggested
steve
and
then
put
links
from
the
specter,
and
then
you
know
see
where
we
end
up,
because
this
is
like
yeah,
it's
pretty
relevant
to
what
we
are
doing
as
well
as
like
what
events
group
is
doing,
even
if
this
doesn't
end
up
being
anything.
It
is
good
for
you
know
knowing
what
the
other
communities
are
discussing,
but
I
believe
like
based
on
what
I
heard
from
kate.
D
Yeah
and
even
if
we
start
simple,
like
you
know,
just
defining
a
you
know,
asking
them
to
add
one
attribute
like
a
git
commit
to
their
spec
and
see
what
the
process
is
for
them
to
adopt
it.
You
know
we'll
see
how
much
work
it
is
to
just
get
something
simple
like
that,
added
to
their
spec,
maybe
worth
the
exercise.
B
C
C
Anything
else
we
need
to
discuss
on
standardized
metadata.
What's
our
additional
discussion
for
that
that
needed
anything
we
needed
to
review
or
discuss
together.
B
I
think
I
sent
a
message
to
our
slack
channel
three
weeks
ago,
when
I
first
heard
about
this.
I
hope
you
can
see
page
now,
page
and
and
then
I
noticed
they
had
a
webinar
last
wednesday.
B
I
think-
and
I
joined
that
webinar
and
terry
was
there
as
well
and
we
we
both
listened
to
a
webinar,
and
we
asked
a
few
questions
like
I
asked
like
how
much
they
talked
about
how
much
they
are
engaged
with
open
source
communities
and
they
kind
of
skip
that
question
and
then
terry,
I
think,
had
some
comments
about
tools,
technologies,
adopting
the
standard
and
so
on,
and
there
were
some
other
questions
such
as
like
why
standard
display
world,
which
will
kind
of
you
know,
become
an
initiative
when
it
comes
to
adoption.
B
B
Yeah
this
is
the
table
of
contents,
it
talks
about
processes,
activities,
tasks,
outcomes
and
so
on.
So
it
wasn't
a
waste
of
time
for
me,
but
maybe
you
know
for
some
people
who
know
these
things
better
than
me
quickly
brought
this
through,
but
that
is
my
reflection
webinar.
I
understand
all
your
stuff
and
terry.
You
want
to
forget
your
own
reflections
on
this.
G
So
yeah
we
had
a
discussion
about
this
over
in
the
best
practices
sig
as
well.
G
G
So
I
will
get
a
bit
more
involved
and
and
try
and
understand
what
they're
trying
to
do
with
this
and
where
they're
going
with
it,
I
haven't
had
a
chance
to
to
read
the
specification
yet,
but
it
it
feels
like
it's
trying
to
redefine
devops,
to
align
with
what
people
are
doing
in
sort
of
corporate
structures
where,
where
they
struggle
to
actually
have
the
agility
to
do,
devops
so
I'll,
be
interested
to
to
understand
whether
that's
coming
across
in
the
standard
itself
or
whether
the
standard
is
adhering
to
you
know
what
we
actually
need
from
devops.
B
When
I
was
reading
click,
I
I've
seen
some
sentences
about
mainframes
and
so
on
and
waterfall
devops
type
of
stuff
is
very
understandable,
but
at
the
same
time
I've
seen
some
of
the
things
we
have
quickly
been
discussing
within
this
group
and
other
groups.
So
it's
like
mix
of
I
felt
like
it's
mix
of
both
worlds
like
neither
this,
nor
that
type
of
you
know
feeling
I
get,
but
maybe.
D
Yeah,
it's
funny
that
they're
talking
about
mainframe,
because
there's
a
mainframe
source
control
tool
called
endeavor
and
it's
spelled
without
the?
U
and
the
reason
why
it's
spelled.
The
way
it
is
is
because
it
means
an
environment
for
development
and
operations.
D
A
It
yeah
for
the
most
part
to
me.
It's
always
seemed
that
the
term
devops
has
been
an
attempt
to
to
trendify
a
return
to
how
we
used
to
do
systems
administration
back
before
colleges
started
churning
out
a
bunch
of
people
who
did
not
really
combine
the
disciplines
of
systems,
operations
and
software
development
right
right.
D
B
B
B
Okay,
so
while
I
have
the
screen
sharing,
I
can
show
the
policy
driven
cicd
updates.
B
So,
as
you
know,
this
was
another
topic
we
started
talking
about
beginning
of
this
year
and
so
on,
and
there
have
been
updates
since
we
last
looked
at
this
document-
and
I
just
want
to
highlight
that
during
this
meeting,
so
one
of
the
updates
was
from
ravi
from
harness
and
he
talks
about
how
they
approach
to
policy,
and
the
other
thing
was
from
cameron.
B
Actually,
he
included
information
about
more
information
about
armory
flavor
of
spinnaker
on
their
support
of
open
police
agent,
and
I,
what
I
want
to
highlight
now
is:
there
is
some
kind
of
convergence
around
open
policy
agent,
which
is
like
kind
of
good
to
see.
At
the
same
time,
I
also
start
seeing
lots
of
the
winners
from
various
companies,
such
as
like
opsimics
armory,
and
harness
talking
about
their
approach
to
policy.
B
F
B
People
start
talking
about
the
topic
more
and
finally
helping
us
to
see
the
trend
like
open
police
agent,
which
makes
me
think
we
should
perhaps
by
reaching
out
open
policy
agents
for
me
to
see
what
they
are
seeing
from
their
side
because,
like
I
don't
see
it
in
like
many
things
happening
in
junk's
committee.
But
I
think
karaoke
is
here
saying
that
there
is
interest
within
jenkins
committed
to
supporting
police
agent,
but
we
get
some
kind
of
alignments
in
police
area
from
communities
that
would
have
a
lot
to
end
users.
B
C
B
C
Reach
out
through
links
and
links,
people
to
just
people
who
know
people
at
syrah,
I
could
try
and
reach
out.
This
is
sure
yeah.
B
If
you
could
do
that
because
like
if
we
can
bring
someone
from
open
police
agent
opa
community
here,
they
can
have
a
chance
to
talk
to.
You
know
the
cicd
momentum
members
here
and
see
if
they
have
any
digital
keys
when
they
are
working
with
open
police
agent
and
what
they
are
aiming
for,
and
here
lens
of
opa
community.
For
this
kind
of
you
know
brilliant
gap
and
as
an
end
user.
I
can
also
see
now.
How
can
I
bring
these
discussions
to
you
know
my
organization
or
others.
B
C
B
H
B
Cancel-
and
this
is
also
related
to
broader-
you
know-
cdf
strategic
course
like
one
of
the
goals
in
the
cdf
warning
board
strategic
course
is
to
increase
participation
from
end
users,
and
now,
if
we
could
know
so
that
we
are
working
on
android
concerns
it
will.
It
hopefully
includes
us
participation
from
end
user.
C
C
Fuzzy,
the
end
user
console
is
open
to
all
ci
cd
end
users.
What
what
group
are
we
aiming
for?
Is
there
any
restrictions
on
that.
B
Well,
cdf,
end
user
console
is
open
to
leadership
teams
from
cdf
and
user
members
and
guest
organizations
for
if,
like
people
are
member
people
are
from
a
member
and
user
company.
They
can
join
to
this
sponsor.
But
if
they're
not
from
a
member
company,
they
can
request
an
invitation
by
reaching
out
to
tracy
and
join
the
meetings.
C
E
I'd
love
to
be
able
to
join
those
meet
the
end
user
council
meetings,
but
they
are
smack
dab
in
the
middle
of
our
daily
stand-ups
that
I
have
with
two
different
teams
every
day
and
I've
reached
out
to
to
tracy
to
to
find
out.
Can
we
you
know,
I
don't
know,
can
we
change
that
somehow
to
some
other
time
and
just
haven't
gotten
back,
I
tell
you
the
only
reason
I'm
able
to
attend
this
meeting
is
because
it
happens
at
8.
00
am
my
time
and
at
9
00
am.
B
Time,
but
we
can,
I
told
you
or
you
said
you
already
reached
out
to
trace.
I
don't
if
you
want
reminder
or
because
this
I
was
joining
these
meetings
and
it
hasn't
happened
since
I
think
about
two
months
ago
last
meeting
and
mark
john
mark
walker.
I
think
he
also
changed
his
job,
which
may
have
you
know
kind
of
slowed
down
the
post
progress
with
the
end
user
constantly,
which
may
be
a
good
time
how
to
take
a
look
at
the
calendar
and
change
the
meeting.
B
E
To
see
if
that's
possible.
E
Frankly,
I
value
the
work
that
we
do
here,
a
lot
more
only
because
we
are,
we
are
not
just
bringing
in
the
the
different
open
source
projects,
but
also
the
end
users
are
also
here
as
well,
so
the
the
need
I
would
have
for
an
end-user
council
frankly,
is
not
as
much
as
it
is
what
we
do
here.
E
I
I
hear
from
both
commercial
and
open
source
maintainers
in
this
forum,
as
well
as
the
end
users
in
this
forum,
and
I
don't,
I
really
don't
see
much
of
a
need
for
a
separate
end
user
council.
But
that's
just
me.
B
Maybe
I
can
add
something
on
top
based
on
another
community.
I
was
part
of
I.
I
was
heavily
engaged
in
one
of
the
linux
foundation.
B
Networking
projects,
in
with
the
name
of
the
platform
for
network
function
socialization
and
in
that
community
and
broader
foundation,
networking
community
there
is
this
end
user
console
as
well,
and
the
way
that
console
works
is
they
simply
put
requirements
on
communities
and
vendors
to
you
know
have
some
kind
of
standardized
approach
to
the
solutions:
either
communities
are
building
or
the
vendors
are
offering
and
maybe
end
user
console
and
cd
contacts.
The
foundation
context
could
take
a
similar.
B
You
know
approach
to
this
and
instead
of
now
only
talking
about
what
problems
are,
they
can
also
talk
about
what
they
expect
from
communities
and
vendors
kind
of
providing
some
kind
of
direction
and
again
from
linux
foundation.
Networking
they.
There
are
programs
called,
like
conformance
programs,
and
I
think
jeremy
openstack
has
also
some
kind
of
conformance
program
which
heavily
takes
input
from
end
user
organizations
for
whatever
products
or
solutions
available
out
there.
A
A
So
if,
if
a
public
cloud
provider
or
a
distributor
of
the
software
wants
to
be
able
to
say
that
this
is
openstack
powered
or
whatever,
then
they
they
have
to
perform
tests
against
the
deployment
and
submit
test
results
to
the
open
infrastructure
foundation
for
for
vetting.
And
then
that
gets
added
to
a
database
of
test
results
that
the
foundation
uses
to
to
check
against
for
people
trying
to
make
use
of
the
trademarks
and
official
capacity
for
commercial
purposes.
B
A
Yeah,
that's
administrative
and
interface
certification
program
for
people
who
want
to
basically
be
able
to
to
take
tests
to
prove
that
they're
proficient
in
using
the
software.
A
So
probably
the
the
closest
thing
I
can
think
of
to
that
in
recent
history
is
the
core
infrastructure
initiative.
They
did
a
lot
of
work,
particularly
around.
A
If
I
understand
what
you're
suggesting
projects
that
develop
are
companies
that
develop
ci
systems
could
cincd
systems
could
basically
provide
some
sort
of
details
that
indicate
that
their
the
software
they
produce
or
the
systems
that
they
deploy
or
whatever
are
conformant
with
the
cd
foundation,
interoperability
guidelines
and
and
then
be
able
to
to
display
a
badge
to
to
that
effect
on
their
web
pages
or
whatever.
B
Yeah,
that
was
my
thing
because
again,
if
I
go
to
linux
foundation,
networking
that's
exactly
what
that
linux
foundation.
Networking
conformance
program
provides
like
if
you
pass
this
set
of
test
cases,
you
are,
you
know,
allowed
to
use
links,
foundation,
networking
conformance
program
logo
as
part
of
your
marketing
or
as
part
of
your
community
thingy
like
how
you
describe
for
infrastructure
initiative,
or
maybe
that
would
be
something
to
get.
You
know,
interest
from
end
users
to
demo.
A
Yeah-
and
I
I
think
the
core
infrastructure
initiative
reworked
itself
in
the
last
year,
or
so
as
the
open
source
security
foundation
still
under
the
linux
foundation,
but
I
think
they're
still
maintaining
something
similar
to
the
to
the
cii
conformance
programs,
so
they're,
probably
still
a
pretty
effective
example
to
to
model
something.
After
for
for
the
cdf,
I
would
think.
B
E
Not
sold
on
that
the
the
the
types
of
decision-making
that
go
into
the
the
factors,
I
should
say
that
go
into
the
decision-making
when
we're
picking
things
frankly
is
is
not
doesn't
really
include.
You
know,
is
this
ratified
by
a
certain
group?
E
What
really
comes
into
play
is:
does
it
meet?
Does
it
meet
our
use?
Will
it
solve
our
use,
our
problem
who's?
Maintaining
it
do
we
have
to
maintain
it?
Is
it
open
source?
Is
it
commercial?
We
have
to
pay
for
it
and
things
of
that
sort.
E
The
the
fact
whether
whether
or
not
it's
been
ratified
by
any
open
source
community
only
adds
to
it,
but
the
meaning.
It's
it's.
It's
a
lower
down
the
priority
way
lower
than
the
priority
than
than
the
other
factors.
E
So
it
has
some
effect,
but
not
frankly,
if,
if,
if
something's,
you
know
massively
ratified
by
by
any
community,
but
it
doesn't
meet
your
requirements,
it
won't
solve
your
problem
and,
frankly,
you
have
to
end
up
maintaining
it
or
whatever
the
case
is
it's
the
badge
that
kind
of
a
badge
won't
help
pick
it,
but
it
you
know
it
might
help.
B
Again
another,
like
example,
from
against
coming
from
taco
industries.
You
know
benefits
are
not
challenges.
The
thing
is
like
what
we
are
seeing
is
like
when
it
comes
to
all
this
5g,
open
radio
networks
and
so
on.
What
we
are
seeing
is
like
many,
you
know:
communication
service
providers
are
asking
for
compliance
to
certain
open
source
community
specifications
such
as
global
network
automation,
platform
and
so
on,
and
lately
or
an
open
run
type
of
stuff,
and
maybe
this
is
difference
between
the
domains
like
telecom
infrastructure
versus
ci,
cd
infrastructure,
maybe
yeah.
E
E
I
I
in
a
in
a
past
life,
I
actually
worked
for
a
company
that
that
created
you
know,
videos,
videos,
video
surveillance,
software,
you
know
network,
nvrs
and
and
cameras,
and
all
that
the
the
on
the
onv,
if
which
I
can't
on.
If
it's,
I
can't
remember
what
the
acronym
stands
for,
but
it
is
a
is
an
open
standard
for
network
security,
cameras
and
network
video.
E
If
you
know
they
created
this
thing
and
the
entire
industry
just
ran
towards
it.
Why?
Because
it
it
meant
that
if
they
implemented
against
this
spec,
they
could
interoperate
with
thousands
of
different
with
whoever
else
that
also
implemented
to
the
spec.
So
it
had
huge
value
for
that
to
to
have
that
badge
and
say
my
camera
is
on
the
if
capable,
and
so
if
your
network
video
recorder
can
scan,
find
and
operate
with
on.
E
If
cameras
it
doesn't
matter
what
I
do
as
long
as
it's
able
to
do
that
you're
good
to
go,
and
then
you
can
interoperate
with
all
these
things.
So
if
we
come
up
with
something
like
that,
then
yes,
the
you
know
having
a
badge
of
cdf
interoperability
badge
would
be
a
huge
value,
but
first
we
have
to
find
the
use
case
for
that.
H
B
Because,
like
again,
I
think
what
you
talked
about
like
this
camera
network
stuff,
it
is
what's
been
happening
in
falcon
industry
for
like
decades,
you
know
it's
all
about
interpreters
with
all
these
different
vendors
and
products
coming
from
each
of
these
vendors
and
making
sure
those
you
know
products,
those
systems
can
incorporate
with
each
other.
Otherwise,
like
it's
a
lot
of
mess,
because
simply
you
know,
you
can't
bring
different
things
from
different
vendors
because
of
lack
of
interval
and
that
actually
enables
no
operators
to
pick
and
choose
and
vendors
to
be.
E
I
can't
there
is
no
way
that
you
know
laptop
manufacturers
and
phone
manufacturers.
You
got
to
stick
to
to
you
know
you.
You
want
to
be
able
to
hook
up
to
an
access
point
802.11..
You
know
it's
that
is
now
the
law
of
the
land.
It
wouldn't
have
happened
without
it.
B
Yeah-
and
maybe
this
could
be
something
you
know
to
think
about-
like
I'm
not
saying
like,
because
we
don't
have
any
standards
or
any
any
specification
or
anything
yet,
but
maybe
this
would
be
something
to
get
again.
My
like
reason
why
I
started
talking
about
this
topic
originally
is
like
how
to
get
more
engagement
from
end
user.
B
You
know
organizations
because,
like
some
of
those
end
user
organizations,
they
take
part
in
end
user
console,
but
they
are
not
really
active
in
these
type
of
groups,
like
your
events,
groups,
to
increase
the
participation
and
get
some
more
conversation
going
on.
As
you
said,
I
mean
like
this
type
of
meetings
and
groups
of
support
to
maintainers
vendors
and
whatever
you
know
to
push
things
forward
and
everybody
wins
in
the
end.
So
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
coming
from.
E
Setting
down
a
set
of
standards,
not
just
one
set
of
standards
that
has
to
do
with
making
cicd
easier
to
do
better,
more
more
quality.
I
can
totally
see
us,
for
example,
if
we
declare
that
opa
is
it
when
it
comes
to
policy
driven
cicd,
that's
it.
That
is
the
thing
we're
rallying
around
and
by
by
adhering
to
opa,
meaning
you
have
a
system
that
uses
opa
for
its
policy
driven
stuff.
E
You
are
now
part
of
the
interoperability
umbrella.
If
you
will
maybe,
therefore
you
get
to
show
a
badge
that
you
are
part
of
this
community
and
you're,
adhering
to
standards
that
we've
ratified
things
of
that
sort
might
have
some
value
it
might
show
to
people
like.
If
I
see
it
as
a
cdf
interoperability
badge.
I
might.
I
may
immediately
assume
that
oh
okay,
you
must
be
using
opa,
because
they've
ratified
that
things
of
that
sort
might
have
some
value.
E
E
B
Thanks
a
lot
jeremy,
I
mean
for
this
like
impossible
like
this
is
like
like
at
least
in
my
organization.
We
are
struggling
with
like
because
we
use
more
than
one
ci
cd
wall
technology
as
part
of
our
ci
cd
pipelines
and
materials
here,
and
he
is
well
aware
of
that,
and
that's
why
we
came
up
our
way
way
of
addressing
these
things.
What,
if
something
that
comes
out
from
community
efforts
that
could
help
everyone?
H
C
B
F
Quick
question:
yeah:
what
happened
to
the
white
paper.