Add a meeting Rate this page

A

Hi there, hello.

A

Hello.

B

You want to make your color, or I can do that if you.

B

I want describe you, um or vice versa,.

C

I'm sorry, I think I didn't hear, hear your sentence dropped in and out, um 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

Oh waiting for all this to join.

C

Thank you.

C

Percy, do we have any outstanding action items? I don't. I can't tell from the meeting notes. It seems like they're all taken care of.

B

Yeah, I I looked action item says I couldn't find any. uh I suppose uh 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.

C

I'm sorry did you say, follow up with spdx, yes from their presentation.

B

Yeah yeah, because, like again, I think stu uh 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, um 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 um bring the cicd um 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

Yeah, maybe while since we start talking about this, it's okay, we most analyzing at a as the next topic, because I think we should continue talking about this.

B

Rather than just spoken action item, so uh one thing I want to check like I, I've been uh crossing through the presentation uh 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 um pick a an area uh to focus on and then cross-link it over to the spdx.

D

You know reference spdx, um 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.

B

Oh I volunteer for that. Anyone wants to join me.

D

uh I will join you and I'm wondering how we should do it if we should do it through a um 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, um 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 uh 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.

B

Okay, then, we should follow their example.

B

I don't see our repo has discussions enabled, but we can enable that and then start a discussion for pictures and then.

D

Take it from there, then that sounds like a plan and I would and just start I would throw out just uh you know just to have you started start the topic. You know pick something from spdx that we should review and then um 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

Because their their their model can be pretty complex.

B

And I think excited so I'll select areas.

D

Yeah, this is all the relationship.

D

So if you go up to go back to that, car uh go to um number three like package information or file information on the left there see. What's in that group, there.

E

Files.

D

Analyzed.

D

Yeah, that's that try file information, the next one down number four.

D

This may be a a good one. To start with, lottie is the file information.

D

Because it talks about artifacts and things like.

B

That.

B

This page on that action item please so.

B

Sure.

B

Okay, yeah yeah because, like when I look at our standardized metadata, like it's kind of, we are reinventing the wheel here by trying to put some definitions and so on attributes.

D

And I think that's going to be one one key point: that we need to make sure that we, when we are looking through this, that we highlight somehow we annotate that this particular for lack of a better word object is missing in spdx and it makes sense for spdx to adopt the object that we find that's missing from a ci cd perspective.

D

And when we do that, we can then.

D

Go to their meeting and say this is what were what seems to be missing in your your definition? Here's why so they can look at uh including it.

C

So the goal is greater conformity between the sbdx spec and the metadata categories that we're developing.

D

That's my viewpoint on it. um You know. Instead of you know, I hate redoing, something that somebody's already put. You know 10 years worth of work yeah, you know if we could, if we can leverage it, you know, I think, the better off that will be and in in the long run the the spdx.

D

You know, spdx originally started uh 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 uh 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 uh attributes that have built upon that that overlap with into the cicd world.

C

Nice should we look at standardized metadata on that.

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 uh 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

um If that exists or not yeah, I'm not sure yeah, it would probably be in that file. Section yeah.

C

It to take a look: okay.

D

Yeah there's file.

C

Checks.

B

um Yeah, I I have a question to you. Steve like I haven't, read the file yet, but uh 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, um 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 um at this level, maybe up at package.

D

If they the package checksum, but I don't think that's going to be the commit.

D

So I think this is like the checksum of the let's say you have a node.js package that is going to be the checksum of of that package. uh That's going to be utilized.

D

So it looks like um 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 um you know when you're way downstream, that you know what was the commit for this. uh This change in the.

F

Package, I guess the closest thing is in 312 source information, but that doesn't really specify a commit. But.

D

Exactly.

F

So uh 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 um 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 um 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 uh in a ci cd world.

D

You know this is a. I just made a change to the my python code. Now go ahead and package it up and push it to pi pi. That would be driven by a commit which would fit into this 312 area.

D

And I would imagine there would be something that's similar for like a golang, you know when you go to to publish a module for golang that you go through a similar process, the same with.

D

Node.Js.

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 um there. You'll have multiple packages um installed in a container. So you know when you do do a hello world for node.js, you get 1500 packages uh that get installed by default and each one of these would be conforming to have a 312 section for each one of those.

G

Packages.

D

So when we talk about artifacts at a container level, we would be actually referring to a list of spdx.

D

Packages.

F

When kate talked about when it presented espdx, she talked about other uh frameworks, and so when they were taking up to be conformed against, uh was she mentioning in total or was that somewhere else? We mentioned that one.

D

I think that's further down in their spec.

D

Trying to remember where that.

D

I don't recall where I remember her talking about that in her presentation, but I can't remember where it was referenced in the in the spec.

D

Because there's a whole section about relationships um in section seven, I think.

D

Yeah, so this is building out their data model um and I think their data model will pretty much takes care of all the the relationships. I mean it's pretty well, uh you know, lays out a many-to-many relationship. You know all the different permutations, it seems pretty good at this level.

D

So I think all we need to do is add in the missing pieces that we're looking for for from a.

D

A ci cd world like the build tools there.

D

The test tool that information is is stuff that can come or will come from the cicd pipeline.

D

The thing that's missing like in this relationship, I just see off the top. My head is like the a reference to the build tool itself. You know whether it's jenkins or if it was team city or you know, cloud build.

D

It seems to be a little more low level like um 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

Aspect.

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 um what's the external repository, it's uh section, six appendix six.

D

uh Appendix six yeah, if that is persistent,.

E

Id.

D

Oh okay, I know what they're referring to.

D

They're trying to reference the repository where the artifact was pushed to after it was built.

D

Okay,.

D

So I would say that we just pick a spot to start with and just kind of.

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 um 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.

B

Looking from that side to see how it translates to our kind of thing, you know.

D

Exactly.

B

Okay, I I I create, uh 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.

B

They are pretty open to you know, contributions from you know others who are more focused on specific things, such as the icd stuff.

B

We have an opportunity there and, as you said like, they are working on third version of the spec, which seems to be a perfect timing for us to go and somehow take part in that discussion.

D

Yeah and even if we start simple, like um 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. um You know we'll see how much work it is to just get something simple like that, added to their spec, um maybe worth the exercise.

B

Yeah.

C

Good, so you both know your next steps and that's very good great. So I guess we'll review our next meeting and see how it's going. Does that sound good.

D

Yep, okay,.

C

um 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 still talked about these parts during one of the previous meetings, so.

C

Okay, I triple e standard for devops standard event.

B

May I share.

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 uh page now, page and uh 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 uh talked about uh how much they uh are engaged with open source communities and they kind of skip that question and then terry, I think, had some comments about uh 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

But there wasn't satisfying answers to those questions and I downloaded the standard. So I I don't know if I am doing something illegal here, but I just want to show the table of contents yeah. I read the standard, it was kind of a refresher for me, as you see here,.

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 uh reflection webinar. I understand all your stuff and terry. uh You want to forget your own reflections on this.

G

So yeah we had a discussion about this over in the uh best practices sig as well.

G

My concerns were from the presentation that they gave.

G

They started the presentation by.

G

Really asking the question: what is devops and why do we do it, and nobody on the working group seemed to actually be able to answer that question, and there were a lot of things discussed that that were quite concerning from from my perspective.

G

um In you know, there were there were phrases thrown around like waterfall, devops and devops for mainframes, uh so it it felt quite a long way away from you know the reality of you know what we do devops for.

G

um So I have reached out to the um to the team and have been asked to join the next working group.

G

um So I will uh 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, um I haven't had a chance to to read the specification yet, um but it it feels like um 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 um 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 uh 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

So it's actually the first devops tool that was built back in the early 80s, where you can check in compile and ship your code out automatically. So the mainframe has been doing devops since the 80s. Just the distributed side thinks that they're geniuses and coming up with.

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

Exactly.

B

Yeah, this is what I want to know highlight on the distance.

B

Okay, but yeah.

B

Perspectives of this group, as well, which may be for us to you, know somehow breach the gap between the community perspectives and I still perspectives, and they tell you reached out to them. I I think of doing the same as well see what the response will be.

B

Okay, that was all about this topic. I.

B

Suppose.

B

Okay, so while I have the uh 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 uh from harness and he talks about how they approach to policy, and the other thing was from uh 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

It's kind of that made me feel we may have contributed those you know webinars to start happening after each other because, like those like their contributors contains their foundation and our group as well. So we kind.

F

Of get.

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 uh 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

That's what I'm welcome to I've been struggling on to that point. But that's what I'm trying to summarize.

B

So any of you have any contacts in open policy agent community, my friends.

D

Not on my.

C

Side I.

B

Could.

C

Reach out through links and links, people uh 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

I I am a policy as well, as you may remember, tracy was talking about end user phone still. Plan and governance is an area for end user council to look at before, but we could somehow contribute to that work as well. That would benefit everyone, not just communities, but also users.

C

Do you want to put a link in the in the notes and then we can all take a look? Maybe you have.

B

The end user plan.

C

Yeah.

B

Okay,.

C

um I guess governance and policy compliance.

B

Okay, yeah yeah.

B

The link is in the minutes actually.

C

Oh perfect good. Thank you.

C

Yeah from for for the work that you're doing in the end user, community.

B

Yeah yeah.

H

Sweet.

C

And user.

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.

B

Organizations help bring these different things together.

B

That was all I want to highlight, so please, if you can take, if any of you can take a look at the background, I see questions comments.

B

You can I like those things to communities, because this is also, I think, it's a good difference, talking about different community aspects and we should perhaps bring some more input from end users like fidelity and others into this document to see what they are dealing with, and while I am here, can I action you about opa contact.

C

Yes, go.

B

Ahead: okay, that's! What's going on yeah.

C

Fuzzy, the end user console is open to all ci cd end users. What what um group are we aiming for? Is there any restrictions on that.

B

Yeah, when I was reading the end user fonts chart or this page states.

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

Okay and presumably, presumably part of our wider set of networks and and communities and end users of our own products. We might want to invite them to engage with the end user council and help facilitate their joining.

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 uh I've uh reached out to uh uh to tracy to to find out. Can we you know, I don't know, can we change that somehow to some other time and uh 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.

E

I have stand-ups all the way till 11 o'clock with two different teams, so yeah can't be two place same.

B

Time, but we can, uh 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

Daytime.

B

Yeah, I mean just let me know if you want help pushing the change of time again.

H

I can reach out again to tracy.

E

To see uh 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 uh the different open source projects, but also the end users are also here as well, so um 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 uh 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 uh 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, uh in uh with the name of the platform for network function socialization and in that community and uh 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

uh 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 uh takes input from end user organizations for whatever products or solutions available out there.

B

You know benchmark themselves against what comes from end user organizations in the form of s cases and so on.

B

Maybe I don't mean this approach makes sense or not. That is what was.

B

Was that a question yeah? I was talking about openstack, conformance or.

A

uh So it's a their interoperability guidelines that that are required for deployments to be able to make use of the project trademarks in any official sense.

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

And the relation between that program- and I think, does does open infra foundation- have some kind of end user console as well. I suppose it does.

A

uh Oh um certification program, the openstack uh certified administrator.

B

Okay, it has participation from end users as well, then.

A

Yeah, that's um 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.

B

Like if I must speculate here like, let's just speculate and cd foundation comes up with some kind of badge saying that this like project or product, is conformant with cd foundation, guidelines or whatever incorporability can be, then that kind of approach could perhaps make end users more engaged in the discussions.

B

You know maybe input yeah.

A

So probably the the closest thing I can think of to that uh in recent history is the core infrastructure initiative. um They did a lot of work, particularly around.

A

Project security practices and you know, allowed projects to to be able to to provide information on what they were, what they were doing and then get confirmation that you know they met this particular set of guidelines and they could publish a badge for that or whatever with their project so like.

A

If I understand what you're suggesting um 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 uh conformance programs, so they're, probably still a pretty effective example to to model something. After for for the cdf, I would think.

B

I mean: does this type of approach you know you know benefit? Is it would it be beneficial like if, like as an user? I am also from an unusual organization?

B

Would just being this type of you know, badge from like city foundation or other communities that you to know like is your decision when it comes to selecting different technologies.

E

um Not sold on that uh the the the types of decision-making that go into um the the factors, I should say that go into the decision-making when we're picking things uh 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? uh Does it meet our use? Will it solve our use, our problem uh who's? Maintaining it do we have to maintain it? Is it open source? Is it commercial? We have to pay for it uh 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, uh uh but the meaning. It's uh it's. It's a lower down the priority way lower than the priority than um than the other factors.

E

So it has some effect, uh but not frankly, if, if, if something's, you know massively ratified by uh by any community, but it doesn't meet your uh requirements, it won't solve your problem uh and, frankly, you have to end up maintaining it or whatever the case is it's uh 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: uh 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

Oh yeah, I mean they do that, because what what what they? What ends up happening is that they want to be able to. They want to be able to create create systems that truly interoperate based on implementations of a spec, I'll I'll use I'll use, I'm I'm huge into uh um into video surveillance.

E

I I in a in a past life, I actually worked for a company that uh that created you know, videos, videos, video surveillance, uh uh software, uh you know network, uh nvrs and and cameras, and all that um the the on the onv, uh 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 uh uh network security, cameras and network video.

E

uh 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 uh with whoever else that also uh 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 uh as long as it's able to do that uh 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 um 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.

E

That would be of value for people to want to inter-operate in that way or implement to it.

E

Does that make sense.

B

Yes makes a lot of sense to me.

H

So yeah.

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 uh 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.

B

You know able to get more business because their products incorporate with other denver products.

E

Can you imagine wi-fi without 802 802.11.

E

I can't there is no way that you know uh laptop manufacturers and phone manufacturers. uh You got to stick to to you know you. You want to be able to uh 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

uh 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

Yeah, I can totally, I can totally see the interoperability cdf and our operability sig.

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, uh 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 uh assume that oh okay, you must be using opa, because they've ratified that things of that sort might have some value.

H

Yeah now you put you know, ideas in my head thanks a lot.

E

Yeah and at the same time, oh, I see the I see the interoperability badge. Oh, you must be using spdx for your metadata.

E

You see so we can be the we we can be the the coalescer. If that's a word of of some, you know a few different specs industry-wide specs, that solve real world, that that aim at solving real world problems.

E

Just for some ideas.

B

Yeah I already took notes. I will you watch the meeting according to or remember but yeah.

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?

B

Perhaps you know we instead focus on our business rather than fixing ci cd views, excellent and.

E

With that, I'm sorry, I have to run off.

B

Yeah yeah sorry yeah.

E

All right, then,.

C

Thank you for being here, including the end users, good edition.

H

All.

C

Right.

B

Okay, I'll relax as well but yeah. What you're scaring me if you are still here thanks for joining today, so it was like kind of modern group of people.

F

Quick question: yeah: uh what happened to the white paper.

B

Oh that's good question.

B

This will be a topic for next. I think, thanks for reminding my class yep.

B

Okay thanks a lot again matthias jeremy and talk to you next time in two weeks. Thank.

B

You.

B

You.
youtube image
From YouTube: CDF - SIG Interoperability Meeting 2021-05-06

Description

For more Continuous Delivery Foundation content, check out our blog: https://cd.foundation/blog/