►
From YouTube: Aries JavaScript Meeting
Description
Aries JavaScript Meeting
A
C
A
So
you
can
read
it
if
you
want
it
is
anybody
new
here
today
I
want
to
introduce
themselves
or
any
or
anybody
who
is
not
new
but
want
to
introduce
themselves
or
if
they
want
to
introduce
anyone
else,
I,
don't
know
we
are
not
so
many
and
I
know
all
the
names
but
okay,
but
anyway
anyway,
if
you
want
no
problem
so
yeah
we
can
just
start.
I
will
just
trying
to
find
my
zoom
window.
So
I
can
I
can
say:
I
can
post
the
meeting
or
SnapChat.
A
A
I
guess
we
had
this
older
than
us
moving,
but
maybe
we
can
leave
it
for
just
enough
yeah.
A
Oh
okay,
and
for
the
buy
for
the
any
any
other
meeting,
then
nothing
okay,
okay,
so
maybe
we
can.
We
can
just
start
I,
don't
know
if
anybody
wants
to
add
something
else
to
the
agenda.
This
is
like
maybe
a
copy
paste.
From
last
week,
I
I
just
moved
some
stuff
like
starting
with
the
separating
storage
layer.
If
we
want
to
discuss
about
that,
then
some
of
this
on
the
VidCon
V2
work
and
probably
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
zero
file
release
and
the
zero
for
two
that
I
have
seen
today.
A
A
B
There's
anything
yeah
I
Down
Below
in
the
meeting
notes.
I
put
the
meeting
notes
that
came
out
yesterday
during
the
Iris
working
group
and
I
think
there's
also
a
link
below
them.
That's
all
oh
yeah
there.
If
you
can
post
that
in
the
chat,
maybe
the
link.
A
B
So
for
those
I
who
don't
know
last
Monday
we
have
done
a
We've
or
I've,
opened
the
discussion
in
the
early
Scrambler
JavaScript
repository
about
moving
to
well.
It
contains
a
proposal
to
move
the
framework
to
owe
it
explains.
Why
yeah,
why
we
think
this
is.
B
This
is
necessary
mainly
in
due
to
a
sort
of
a
branding
issue
that
we're
experiencing
more
and
more
and
while
we're
acting
for
for
feedback
or
for
opinions
over
for
objections
and
when
he
is
really
against
against
it
and
well
yeah
I
said
yesterday.
I
also
discussed
this
during
the
Aries
working
group
and
I
figured
that
this
would
also
take
place
to
discuss
it
since,
amongst
stakeholders
are
here,
I,
guess
of
the
framework
yeah.
B
Next
to
that
there
isn't
really
much
to
what
I
have
to
say
about
it.
I
just
wanted
to
openly
ask
for
opinions
answer
any
questions.
People
might
have
yeah
just
open
the
discussion
here.
B
So
are
there
any
questions
about?
Let
me
start
with
that.
B
Yeah,
that's
correct
and
extensions
makes
sense.
Yes,
yeah
I,
guess
I,
don't
know,
I,
don't
know
exactly
what
the
motivation
behind
this,
but
but
I
guess,
yeah
after
or
iPhone
is
completely
dependent
on
on
afj,
so
I
I
think
that's
the
main
reason.
D
So
I
I,
don't
think
that's
I,
don't
think.
That's
why
honestly
I
was
at
the
call
as
well
and
my
read
on
it
is
that
BC
gov,
while
extraordinarily
interested
in
in
continuing
with
didcom
and
Aries,
feel
the
hurt
of
The
Branding
as
well
in
terms
of
talking
to
other
governments
and
so
being
able
to
say
to
their
European
and
other
provincial
and
counterparts
and
the
like
that,
hey
the
same
stuff,
we're
using
is
available
to
you
through
owf
and
the
like
might
help.
D
You
know,
soothe
some
or
or
smooth
the
way
in
certain
regards
so
I
think
it's
probably
more
a
thought
about
marketing
than
it
is
about
anything
technical,
whether
they
actually
do
it
and
and
I
know
that
also
it
appear.
It
seemed
to
me
that
while
Sam
Curran
was,
you
know
outwardly
supportive
of
this,
because
this
is
what
the
community
wants
to
do.
D
B
All
right,
that's
not
how
I
how
I
got
it,
but,
but
this
seems
very
implausible
indeed.
It
was
also
clearly
mentioned
that
this
is
probably
not
the
time
for
occupied
to
move
but
also
kind
of
in
those
words,
so
nothing
not
the
time
right
now,
but
also
not
excluded
from
moving
in
the
future.
D
C
You
know
this
is
Tim
here,
I
think
the
the
Occupy
piece
is
more
hesitant
because
it
is
question
of
fit
as
well
right.
I
mean
well
foundation,
focuses
in
the
wallet
to
component
as
well,
obviously,
but
as
an
agent,
but
the
interest
was
in
NASCAR
and
those
kind
of
components
that
may
be
more
of
a
natural,
a
natural
fit
to
the
wallet
is
as
a
first
thought
as
that.
That
was
my
read
from
that,
and
also
other
discussions.
I've
had
on
the
side
as
well.
B
Well,
it
sounds
like
there
isn't
a
lot
of
objection
here
or
or
another
questions
on
this,
but
I
don't
know,
I
think
it's
also
interesting
to
start
thinking
about
how
this
move
will
happen.
If
we
do
and
start
from
your
plan
in
that
regard,
it
was
also
yeah.
B
It
was
discussed
yesterday
like
how
would
picture
move
like
technically
look
and
Stephen
I
think
rosalindo,
and
he
also
commented
I
think
yesterday
evening
on
the
on
the
discussion
that
I
thought
would
be
not
a
good
idea,
because
yeah,
the
likelihood
of
the
hyperluster
repository
being
abandoned
is
quite
quite
big,
so
most
were
I
believe
in
favor
of
moving
the
entire
repository
like
transference
to
the
lwf
organization,
which
to
me
makes
sense,
I,
don't
know
if
anyone
knows
other.
D
A
A
B
Yeah
I
think
it
usually
does
that
it
redirects
to
new
repository
to
R
I,
believe
redirected
to
new
locations,
but
we
might
be
I
have
to
double
check
that
yeah
and
I
mean
other
things
are
probably
also
out.
We
use
secrets
in
CI
and
stuff,
so
we
definitely
I
think
need
to
plan
ahead
where
we
also
move
to
dogs
yeah.
That
makes
a
lot
of
sense
to
me.
D
Yeah
I
think
one
of
the
the
mechanisms
that's
often
used
would
be
to
take
the
existing
repo
make
it
put
a
a
note
on
the
top
that
has
been
deprecated
with
a
link
to
where
the
new
thing
is
that
replaces
it
and
and
make
it
read
only
after
that,
so
that
you
know
it
kind
of.
A
F
Yeah
but
there
there
would
be
a
difference
between
like
doing
that
and
moving
the
repository
and
because
that's
usually
done,
if
you
like
archive
it
or
but
then
we
would
have
to
Fork
it
or
publish
it
again.
F
So
maybe
I
think
what
we
could
do
is
just
move
it
over
I
think
and
then,
if
it
doesn't
redirect
or
that
stops,
which
we
can
create
a
stop
repository
or
something
that
just
says
like
hey.
This
is
an
empty
repository.
This
is
where
the
code
actually
lives.
B
B
Yeah
and
then,
and
then
I
think
also
there
is
I
mean
before
we.
You
should
even
think
about
the
technical
stuff.
There
is
I
think
also
like
some
political
organizational
stuff
to
figure
out.
First,
like
yeah
I
mean
we,
we
need
to
GitHub
Runners.
Are
they
already
available?
B
A
A
Yeah
yeah
yeah
there
is,
there
is
a
I,
don't
know
an
open
word
foundation,
Discord.
A
B
B
I
think
for
that
that
is
quite
like
if
we
start
discussing
that
it
becomes
quite
good
thinking
of
this
whole
thing
and
so
I'm
not
sure
if
we
should
wait
with
that
with
like
that
conversation
until
until
the
14th
day
well
objection
period
is
over
or
that
we
can
already
start
that
process
shouldn't
couldn't
hurt,
I
think.
A
C
E
B
E
I
think
I
think
we
should
wait
because
I-
and
maybe
you
can
like
that's
just
my
opinion
right
so
so
I
feel
like
because
we
can
still
discuss
it,
prepare
for
that
go
through
it
maybe
twice
and
to
be
sure
what
we
want
to
do,
but
we
we
should
still
like
comply
with
our
suggestion
like
that
we
are
open
for
you
know.
So
we
are
opinions
and
if
there
is
strong
group
of
people
voting
and
yelling
against
that,
then
then
we
should
do
some
something
about
that.
Yeah
I.
B
B
Yeah
I
know
I
mean
I
I,
don't
mean
to
just
do
whatever
you
want.
I
mean
there
is
a
14-day
objection
period
period,
so
I
mean
if,
if
there
are
objections,
obviously
we'll
listen
and
the
question
is
more
that
I
I
don't
know
it
could
be
that
this
is
a
four
weeks
process
for
them
to
to
get
everything.
Yeah
and
I.
B
Don't
know
how
to
get
us,
onboarded
and
and
I
know
that.net
that,
although
there
is
a
publication
that
the.net
framework
hasn't
moved
yet
so
that
they're
I
guess
they're
also
trying
to
figure
it
out.
Still
at
least
that's
what
I
understood
from
Sebastian
so
yeah.
If
we're,
if
we're
not
in
a
hurry,
it's
fine,
we'll
wait,
we'll
start
the
process
then,
and
first
that
was
just
what
I
was
trying
to
figure
out.
We
can
also
start
the
conversation
now
and
then,
if
somebody
objects
pull
back,
but.
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
F
Yeah
not
not
a
lot
since
last
time,
like
I,
still
think
for
longer
term.
If
we,
we
also
have
to
go
off
like
separating
the
framework
into
separate
libraries
where
a
lot
of
the
core
standards
are
implemented
in
in
different
repositories.
Let's
separate
libraries,
maybe
then
separating
storage
layer
doesn't
make
sense,
because
if
you
don't
want
a
storage
layer,
you
can
just
use
the
the
lower
level
libraries
directly.
F
So
I
think
it
also
depends
a
bit
on
like
what's
our
approach
there,
but
I
still
think
we
need
to
have
separation
between
protocol
and
spec,
implementations
and
storage,
and
those
are
now
currently
very
intertwined.
So
the
the
credential
service
implements
the
credential
protocol
logic,
but
it
also
handles
the
storage
and
the
persistence
which
makes
it
very
inflexible
if
you
need
a
little
bit
more
control
over
what
happens.
A
F
Yeah
I
think
I
like
extracting
and
separating
the
difficult
from
core
and
having
that
completely
separate,
also
separate
from
the
the
storage
will
already
help
a
lot
with
this.
So
you
can
have
like
protocol
implementations
and
did
come
without
necessarily
all
the
the
state
in
the
store
that
afj
provides.
A
Yeah
I
was
thinking
of
maybe
having
some
for
the
account
for
having
a
separate
package
which
is
which
has
they
did
come
based,
logic,
let's
say,
and
then
we
have
different
packages
for
each
product
like
something
like
well
I,
don't
know
how
it
would
be
called,
but
so
something
like
did
it
come
base
or
something
like
that
and
did
come
okay
credentials
or
on
groups.
I,
don't
know
so
these
are
dependent.
So
these
ones
are
only
the
protocol
implementations,
while
the
other
one
will
have
the
the
what's
needed
to
to
send
and
receive
the
messages.
A
B
Thought
about
this
as
well
and
again
came
with
the
same
same
thing,
and
then
you
can
probably
for
the
for
the
messages,
because
the
messages
are
really
just
data
structures
right,
they're,
not
they're,
not
really
special.
In
that
sense,
so
I
guess
these
things
will
be
very
lightweight
if
these
protocol
libraries
and
even
just
Builder
or
something
in
that
regard.
B
Like
it
depends
on
how
great
you
want
to
go
with
decoupling,
everything
but
I
mean
I,
guess
you
could
d
couple
the
crypto
as
well.
Take
them
back.
You
know
that
stuff.
Yes,
if
you
want
like
bring
your
own
crypto
or
but
also
transports,
yeah
I,
don't
know,
I,
don't
know
how
many
transports
we're
going
to
have
in
the
end,
but.
C
A
Standard
transport
and,
and
and
also
almost
everybody
I,
have
to
to
do
it
today
they
are
only
supporting
HTTP.
So
there
are
a
lot
of
projects
like
leases,
for
instance,
that
they
only
use
http.
A
A
Like
the
yeah,
we
we,
we
were
having
some
some
ideas
about
that
in
our
team
when,
when
trying
to
implement
the
open
badge,
open
bad
specification
before
the
player
face
but
yeah
anyway,
but
it's
like
it's
too
complicated
from
Forever
from
the
start
right,
so
yeah,
okay.
So
we
can.
We
can
probably
leave
this
for
a
try.
B
Mean
other
people
who
were
here
yesterday
or
who
were
not
here
but
I,
think
Aries
working
group
yesterday
I
did
not
get
it
fully
because
I
wasn't
paying
full
attention
at
that
point,
but
I
did
hear
something
about
deprecating
and
they're
going
to
be
one.
Is
that
correct?
Look
at
that
yeah.
A
I
have
not
been
there,
but
I
was
in
the
VidCon
User
Group
call
when,
where
we,
when
there
was
some
and
and
he
really
wanted
to
to
move
forward
on
the
within
the
areas
Community
to
to
well
to
to
start
to
everybody,
start
using
the
ditcon
V2
right.
So
that's
why
the
well?
The
community
started
during
this
I.
A
Don't
remember
which
one
which
RFC,
but
this
economical,
Community
coordinated,
update
to
move
from
unqualified
this
to
qualified
dates
and
and
then
and
then
moving
to
to
did
confit
to
and
and
also
they
did
it
rotation
protocol
to
to
make
it
easier
for
existing
connections.
We
did.
We
want
to
to
be
too.
A
A
B
No,
that
was
that
was
fantastic,
I
think
I,
think
I
think
what
I
heard
was
that
that
it
was
going
to
be
deprecated
from
like
foreign
perspective,
which,
since
we
are
still
working
on
the
CPU.
A
D
Think
the
message
that
I
heard
was
that
the
we
need
to
get
the
work
wrapped
up
on
you
know
did
rotate
and
unqualified
dids
and
you
know,
did
peer
for
and
all
that,
because
it's
all
necessary
to
get
to
where
we
really
want
to
go,
which
is,
did
peer
two
and
we
need
to
get
our
focus
on
that.
And
so
we
need
to
get
those
other
things
wrapped
up
and
so
that
we
can
focus
on
that
and
the
intent
I
think
would
be
to
deprecate.
Did
peer.
D
One
sorry
did
calm
one,
but
that
I
don't
think
any
date
has
been
floated
for
that.
Only
that
you
know
that
that's
kind
of
the
the
intent
that's
the
way,
I
understood
things.
E
Maybe,
but
what's
actually
the
reason
for
deprecating
like
what
what's
the
because
it's
just
marking
something
that's
deprecated,
but
what's
the
purpose
of
that?
What
what
should?
What's
the
goal
with
like
saying
that
this
is
deprecating?
What's
the
reason
for
that,
do
we
know
or.
D
I
think
there's
a
couple
of
reasons.
One
is
that
right
now
getting
new
people
up
to
speed
and
in
court
in
into
the
VidCon
world
is
really
hard,
because
there's
you
kind
of
have
to
talk
about
these
two
different
versions
and
that
a
transition
is
happening,
and
so
the
quicker
we
can
get
to
the
point
where
we
don't
have
to
talk
about,
like
as
new
people,
are
joining
an
ecosystem
everything's
already
on
V2.
You
don't
need
to
talk
about
V1
anymore,
as
you're
growing.
D
The
ecosystem,
I
think
I
think
the
finding
that
a
challenge
and
so
deprecating
that
and
then
you
know,
ultimately
you
know
dropping
support
for
it.
I
don't
know,
but
certainly
getting
you
know,
deprecation
means
that
you
don't
really
need
to
talk
about
it
anymore.
If
everybody
always
supports
V2
and
V1
is
just
the
fallback,
for
you
know,
connections
that
haven't
been
upgraded
yet
because
they
haven't
used
yet
or
whatever.
A
Something
like
like
an
analogous
to
the
case
of
Indian
in
the
credentials
and
other
credits
right
It's
like
because
they
did
convey
one
is
something
that
came
from
the
Aries
community
and
then
move
to
the
or
was
a
standardized,
let's
say
to
the
to
the
div.
So
right
right
now,
at
this
moment
there
are.
There
are
different
implementations
of
Bitcoin
B2,
which
are
not
related
to
areas.
A
E
Yeah,
like
I
I,
understand
that,
but
but
to
me
it's
I
I
worry
that
sometimes
this
deprecating
stuff
can
cause
feelings
to
other
people
that
they
have
to
hurry
and
get
rid
of
current
versions
and
I
like
and
and
yeah
that
feels
like.
Okay,
now
we
are
working
on
some
interoperability,
let's
say
with
other
company,
and
we
are
in
the
middle
of
that
and
that
someone
just
say:
okay,
no,
no,
stop
stop
everything
we
just
move
on
and
then
we
all
move-
and
this
is
a
hypothetical
example.
E
Then
we
say
okay,
that
let's
move
to
bitcoin
V2,
then
we
will
be
working
on
that
for
a
few
months
and
then
someone
says
okay
deprecated,
because
there
is
V3
or
V4
or
whatever,
and
then
it
it
go.
It
goes
like
another.
Stop,
stop,
stop!
Stop!
Let's,
let's
move
on,
let's
move
on
and
then
I
feel
like.
Maybe
we
are
just
moving
somewhere
and
we
don't
have
like
a
line
base
and
we
are
solving.
E
We
are
not
solving
like
real
problems
with
this
technology,
but
we
are
just
upgrading
the
technology
like
if
you
know,
for
example,
react
native.
It's
like
all
of
us
about
upgrading
and
those
upgrades
are
crazy,
so
you
are
not
solving.
You
are
not
solving
business
problems,
but
you
are
updating
right,
half
of
the
time
so
and
and
I'm
just
I
I.
Don't
against
like
saying
that
this
is
the
project.
E
I
was
just
curious
and
then
just
sharing
my
perspective,
why
I
I
feel
that
sometimes
because
you
know,
if
someone
asks
me
right
now,
what's
the
Bitcoin
and
how,
where
is
the
specification
I
would
say
like?
Well,
there
is
the
Bitcoin
V2,
let's
look
at
it.
This
is
the
this
is
the
latest
version.
If
you
are
starting
like
right
now,
work
on
that,
maybe
right.
E
A
E
Yeah,
that's
the
problem,
but
I
I'm,
not
I'm,
I'm,
not
sure.
It's
like
saying
it's
deprecated,
if,
if
it's
solving
really
anything
right,
I
think
like
this
is
a
bit
messy,
I'm,
not
sure
like
if
you're
just
saying
like
Okay.
This
is,
if
it's
solving
the
issue
that
it's
it's
a
bit
messy
to
get
oriented
in
everything.
So.
B
E
Okay,
but
we
don't
yeah
and
we
don't
have
to
like
discuss
this
like
so
much
I'm
just
curious
I,
just
want
to
express
this
and
and
and
and
I
will
say.
I
was
interested
in
in
your
opinions
on
that
that
communication
Style
to
me.
A
So
I
will
I
will
say
that
well,
actually,
if
I
would
like
to
to
use
it
from
for
my
project,
for
instance,
I
would
like
to
use
it
right
now
because
for
me
it's
the
same
right,
I
mean,
and
also
there
are
some
features
on
the
Bitcoin
V2
that
are
are
simpler
and
so
that
that
make
it
a
little
bit
easier
or
faster,
I
would
say,
I
mean
we
don't
have
to
to
to
to
to
to
extract
to
do
the
read
exchange,
for
instance,
and
that
is
that
this
rotation
is
it's
very
simple,
because
it's
just
a
header
that
we
that
will,
that
will
tell
you
that
you
have
to
rotate
the
div.
E
Yeah
I
agree
with
that,
like
100,
like
I
I,
definitely
like
I,
actually
I
would
rather
Implement
like
I
would
run
just
just
did
you
just
did
convey
too,
and
and
even
even
for
this
separation
we
we
were
discussing
and
maybe
next
future
things
we
should
do.
E
I
I
would
even
suggest
that
we
should
just
just
do
version
V2
and
not
not
bother
with
the
with
the
older
one
for
for
like
the
new,
let's
say
new
architecture
or
like
new
I
I'm,
not
sorry,
I,
don't
know
to
say
version
of
afj
or
whatever
it
will
be,
but
for
that
kind
of
thing,
I'm,
I'm,
even
happy
to
like
start
with
Bitcoin
V2
right
so
I
understand
that
but
and
and
yeah
in
the
chat.
E
I
I
understand
that,
but
honestly
I
feel
like
in
the
software
engineering
community.
This
war
deprecation
is
exactly
what
the
more
wrote
but
I
feel
like
it's
not
understood
in
that
way.
I
feel
like
any
time
I
hear
someone
says
so:
okay,
it's
the
package
or
where
we
are
all
moving
moving
away
like
we
don't
touch
it
from
tomorrow.
Right
I
I
feel
that
I
feel
that
that's
happening
so
I'm
I'm
a
bit
worried
about
like
if
we
say
like
if
we
start
saying
like
yeah.
Okay,
this
is
deprecating.
E
This
is
deprecated
and
then
someday
in
the
future.
Maybe
there
will
be
Bitcoin
V3
right
and
then
we
say:
Okay
V2
is
the
bracket
now
and
that
that
could
end
with
some
spiral
that
that
we
are
like
always
in
the
middle
of
implementation
of
the
protocols
so
yeah.
That
was
my
point
but
but
I
yeah,
I,
I,
think
I.
Think
yeah.
E
Let's
see,
let's
see,
definitely
because
I
I
I
already
hear
it
from
my
colleagues,
for
example,
right
like
if,
if
someone
says
something
is
deprecated,
then
then
I
I
already
hear
like
the
next
meeting
will
be
about
like
okay,
let's
move
on,
let's,
let's
go
and
get
rid
of
this
and
I'm
just
I
just
want
to
say
that
maybe
that's
not
how
I
would
like
to
communicate
these
things.
A
Yeah
yeah
actually
I
the
last
time.
I
I
was
wondering
because
in
the
Aries
bcx
team
they
are,
they
are
working
on
the
on
the
new
protocols
for
the
V2
protocol
for
issue
for
credential
and
present
proof
right.
So
I
was
wondering
why
it
didn't
what
I,
don't
they
just
moved
to
the
V2
to
the
computer
and
and
that's
it,
but.
E
Yeah
does
that
those
these
are
my
colleagues
right
and
that's
the
problem
right
yeah.
So
now
now
yeah,
it's
a
question
like
if
we
say
like
it's
different,
what
what
they
will
do
or
what
we
will
do,
I
I
should
be
done,
should
even
stop
or
and
honestly
I,
don't
know
I.
If
someone
says
this
one
is
deprecated
and
then
what
should
we
do
right
now
like?
Should
that,
because
until
we
have
on
V2
I
think
is
that
that's
another
few
months.
E
A
Now
we
have
a
as
a
community
and
and
also
the
libraries
are
Maybe
a
bit
more
mature,
but
but
anyway,
it
takes
a
few
months
to
to
implement
that
it
can
be
to
at
least
you
know.
We
have
this
this
PR
or
this
branch
open
or
it
can
be
too
open
since
I,
don't
know,
maybe
10
months
or
something
like
that,
and-
and
we
have
still
things
to
do
right
to
to
to
make
it
really
usable
and
and
I
was
going
to
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
that.
A
We
have
this
I
I
guess
last
week
or
two
weeks
ago,
I
opened
this
PR
for
the
for
the
VidCon
V2
branch,
where
we
are
supporting.
A
So
in
this
in
this
PR,
what
I
added
was
a
way
of
of
allowing
a
protocol
to
Define
the
the
messages
for
for
for
the
two
bit
conversions.
So
the
idea
is
that
in
the
in
the
message
hand,
the
the
the
message
receiver
we
can,
we
can
ask
for
the
handlers
to
filter
by
not
only
message
type,
but
also
they
need
conversion.
A
So,
in
this
case,
for
instance,
I
think
I,
yeah,
I
I've
added
the
two
messages
for
for
from
this
protocol,
which
is
disclosures
and
queries,
I
defined
them
for
for
the
Bitcoin,
which
and
and
then
in
the
Handler
in
the
Handler
I
I
put
that
I
support
both
I
mean
this
is
Handler
supports
both
it
can
be
one
of
each
and
it
will
in
the
receiver
it
will.
It
will
ask
for,
for
the
correct
one
to
to
deserialize
it
all
right,
well
and
they're.
A
Also
in
this
PR
in
particular,
there
are
also
other
fixes
found
during
the
implementation
of
other
protocols
that
are
useful,
like,
for
instance,
to
transform
attachments
and
and
that
stuff,
and
also
some
headers
that
were
missing
for
for
this
conv2,
like
timing
and
and
others,
so,
basically
the
I.
What
I
wanted
was
to
to
do
this
PR
and
once
it
is
reviewed
and
approved,
and
what
we
did
the
changes
that
were
that
are
needed.
A
A
We
can
merge
this
this
one
and
then
and
then
continue
with
the
with
the
others
once
without
the
other
ones.
Besides
that
beside
this,
we
have
also
I
know
that
we
will
also
need
to
implement.
They
did
rotation.
A
And,
of
course,
as
artem
said
the
other
day,
we
have
to
integrate
the
mediation
and
pick
up
protocols
for
for
B2.
Okay,
maybe
we
can
once
we
anyway,
we
are,
we
are
in
in
our
roadmap.
We
we
said
the
other
day
that
we
we
will
release
the
zero
five
without
Bitcoin
V2,
and
we
will
do
it
on
zero
six,
but
maybe
once
we
we're
gonna
start
merging
first,
the
this
this
one
and
probably
one
one
or
two
protocols,
and
then
we
can.
B
Our
rfcs,
but
I
don't
know
if
this
is
because
it
feels
like
you're
gonna
step
outside
of
the
rfc's
a
little
bit
right
by
the
extra
messages.
But
if
you
want
videos
or
am
I
not
saying
that
correctly,.
A
No,
the
problem
is
that
that
the
that
the
well
the
the
basic
message
is
B2,
for
instance,
is
not
an
RFC.
It's
only
it's
on
vidcon.org
you.
If
you
look
for
basic
messages,
maybe
two
they
put
two
examples:
you
see
for
V1
and
V2
so
that
that's
why
and-
and
the
same
is
for
for
the
the
Discover
features,
because
the
discovery
feature
2
is
under
an
Aries
RFC,
but
it
is
also
defining
the
spec
with
the
same
versioning.
B
You
said
query
you
mentioned
one
of
the
theme
of,
and
the
one
you
were
working
on
was
was
that
discover
features
design.
A
B
Fair
enough,
no
I
think
it's
a
fun
idea
as
long
as
as
those
messages
are
also
documented
in
the
overseas.
A
A
About
the
the
zero
five
release,
currently,
we
are
still
waiting
for
well.
Our
idea
was
to
to
drop
note,
16
support
s
and,
and
also
integrate
here.
This,
which
is
something
else
I
would
like.
I,
really
want
to
have
in
day
of
shape,
the
his
nations
of
vocabulary,
credentials,
which
is
waiting
for
since
I,
don't
know
April,
but
we
are
dependent
on
the
shared
components
wrappers,
and
there
was
a
problem
with
the
individr
I
think
right.
G
G
I'll,
create
a
PR
to
just
add,
learn
as
a
dependency,
and
that
might
fix
it
because
it
just
says
like
no
error
and
it
finishes
like
the
CI
perfectly
fine,
but
it
just
doesn't
get
released.
So
it's
very
strange
state.
A
Yeah
I,
don't
know
if
you,
if
you
have
seen
But
I
I've
added
that
there
because
well
Andrew,
made
a
comment
because
at
first
I
I
added
it
as
a
dependency.
But
Andrew
told
me
that
oh
it
was,
it
was
adding
about
two
thousand
or
three
thousand
of
lines
of
dependencies
just
for
for
that
right.
But
but
anyway,
if
it's
needed,
it
will
be
needed.
G
A
F
I
thought
like
we
could
do
another
release
before
we
go
zero.
Five
zero,
but
I
was
also
a
bit.
The
package
is
currently
being
released,
are
zero
one
four
Alpha
well.
F
Four
one,
so
it
should
be
zero.
Four
two
alpha
so
I
was
wondering
if
there's
something
went
wrong
and
if
we
go
to
zero
four,
two,
whether
that
will
solve
the
issue
or
that
there
is
like
some
bug
in
the
publishing
script,
because
the
text
being
created
now
are
also
zero
for
one
Alphas.
F
A
Okay,
so
if
you,
if
you
want
to
we
can
we
can
release
it
I
I've
added,
there
are
actually
two
two
things
I
would
like
to.
Well,
maybe
no,
no,
no
not
for
for
this
release,
but
to
fix
it
that
I
think
it
will
be
needed
to
handle
this.
One
was
something
that
I've
added
recently
it's
about
the
implicit
invitations.
A
You
know
that
for
the
implicit
invitations
we
are
simply
directing
an
invitation
to
a
public
deed
right,
but
actually,
when
I
was
reviewing
the
the
RFC,
the
RFC
about
the
direction
protocol.
A
A
A
A
I
guess
so
or
not
well,
on
the
the
other.
One
is
about
the
the
import
error
in
iOS.
You
know
that
caroling
was
using
the
bifold
project
and-
and
she
found
that
in
iOS
they
react
native
FS
library
is
working
differently
and
it
it
does
throw
an
error
when
the
wallet
already
exists,
which
is
something
that
I
think
it
should
be
like
that
right.
A
A
Yeah
I
I
try
to
see
how
how
did
it
did
it
work
on
in
the
SDK
and
actually
I
what
I
didn't
test
it,
but
I
think
it.
It
also
throws
an
error,
because
what
Indie
does
when
importing
is
actually
creating
a
wallet
and
importing
the
data,
so
it
will
not
be
able
to
create
a
wallet
if
it
already
exists,
so
I
think
it
it.
It
will
fail.