►
From YouTube: Brave+IPFS v1, Browser Design Guidelines, WebUI updates - IPFS GUI and Browsers Weekly, 2019-10-30
Description
About IPFS GUI and Browsers Weekly: https://github.com/ipfs/team-mgmt/issues/790
IPFS mirror: https://ipfs.io/ipfs/bafybeiabommw3g6fhukaffuypvrpsrbbawrzduem4yvrt6da3cn4gtfidy/
A
Welcome
to
GUI
antigua,
browsers,
weekly
call
for
the
last
day
of
this
month,
I'm
here
with
Dietrich
and
hug,
and
let's
jump
to
agenda.
If
anyone
wants
to
add
something,
feel
free
to
do
so.
I've
added
two
first
two
items
so
I
quickly
go
over
them
and
then
we
will
go,
spend
some
more
time
on
the
rest,
so
the
first
one
should
combine
and
recover
from
missing
local
gateway.
So
for
a
background,
we
are
working
on
improving
resilience
in
like
offline
or
like
censorship
and
by
maybe
not
driven,
but
like
impacted
environments.
A
So
if
request
for
ipfs
resource
files
due
to
HTTP
error
or
network
error
and
request
to
a
public
gateway,
we
will
recover
from
that
and
that
will
land
or
it
landed
in
the
latest
beta
we
which
soon
be
published
to
Chrome
Web,
Store
and
Firefox
MO.
But
basically
we
recover
requests
for
resources
at
the
public
gateway
and
the
question
is
what
happens
if
local
gateway
goes
offline?
A
A
This
is
like
a
seamless
experience.
The
potential
con
for
this
is
that
it
will
leak
information
about
which
resource
user
was
trying
to
open.
It
will
link
that
information
to
the
public
gateway
user
has
in
settings
such
as
a
public
gateway.
So
that's
like
an
open
question.
I
wanted
to
broadcast
if
there
are
other,
like
other
considerations.
A
B
B
A
We
install
IP
first
companion,
it
checks
if
local
gateway
runs.
If
not
it
the
on
the
welcome
screen,
we
explicitly
ask
people
to
install
ipfs
desktop
or
go
ipfs,
and
basically
we
communicate
that
that's
the
default
mode.
You
should
be
using
IP
FS
companion
as
a
companion
to
IP.
First
desktop,
so
I
feel
most
effective
as
companion
users
will
be
running
local
gateway,
but
sometimes
they
will
shut
it
down,
forgot
to
run
it
or
maybe
they
would
they
bookmarked
linked
to
local
gateway,
but
the
local
gateway
is
no
more.
A
A
C
A
A
C
A
A
B
B
Yeah
physical,
the
the
exposure,
especially
in
the
censorship
mitigation,
said
it's.
They
really
do
want
to
get
to
that
content,
and
that
is
probably
the
most
important
thing.
But
some
of
the
design
work
that
we
have
around
letting
them
know
the
relative
risk
of
doing
that.
It's
gonna
maybe
help
the
situation
and
mitigate
the
level
of
danger
there,
because
I
think
you're
right
like
there
is
a
leakage
and
exposure.
A
It
may
may
be
that
it's
feasible
to
do
this
as
an
opt-in,
because,
like
X
like
leaking
this
kind
of
information
as
a
default,
we
can
just
like
tor
project,
cannot
assume
people
reading
caldera,
docks
and
understand
it
fully.
I,
don't
think,
there's
a
risk
that
people
make
certain
assumption
if
we
say
that
companion
is
able
to
recover
from
like
censorship,
I
think
there's
like
a
deeper
discussion
around
what.
B
Well,
one
thing
also
what
let's
say
that
the
connection
is
made
to
the
local
gateway
and
in
the
case
so
everything's
working
local
gateways
up
companion,
makes
the
request
to
local
gateway.
Local
gateway
makes
that
then
you
that's
talking
to
your
desktop
nerd
and
then
you're.
Just
talking
makes
that
broadcasts.
That's
the
ID
to
the
public
network
at
that
point
right,
if
it
doesn't
have
the
CID
it's
default.
Action
is
to
essentially
do
the
same
thing.
A
Yeah,
so
the
information
leakage
that
happens
at
the
idea,
fest
level
is
sort
of
like
I
want
to
like
box.
It
I
want
to
like
keep
that
sort
of
separates
cuz.
We
could
imagine
there
would
be
a
private
profile
in
ipfs,
which
runs
only
let's
say:
tor
transport
does
not.
It
has
a
ephemeral
peer
ID,
each
time
it
starts
and
things
like
that
and
then
the
only
like
leakage
affected
would
be.
Would
you
remain
in
companion,
yeah.
B
But
at
that
point,
like
you,
really
need
to
have
more
explicit
configuration
and
communication
around
that.
To
begin
with,
like
companion
and
desktop,
would
have
to
have
a
much
stronger
and
negotiated
like
communication
at
that
point,
so
that
the
user
using
companion
knows
that
they
are
protected
in
that
way.
So
I
feel
like
you're
gonna
solve
that
problem
in
the
UX
explicitly
in
that
case,
no
matter
what
yeah.
A
B
A
It
makes
sense,
and
if
there,
if
we
added
this
like
privacy
mode
at
some
point
in
the
future,
we
then
would
like
disable
this
behavior
detect
that
yep
all
right
I
think
that's
enough
for
that.
Let's
move
to
the
next
one:
I
try
to
make
this
even
shorter,
so
we
are
publishing
our
browser
extension
to
both
Mozilla
and
Google
stores,
so
every
chromium
based
web
browser
is
basically
installing
a
sign
package
from
Chrome
Web
Store
and
the
Google
is
in
the
process
of
like.
A
Introducing
a
new
set
of
web
extension
API
switch
significantly
change
the
capabilities
of
extensions
and
those
new
IP
eyes
are
not
even
published
yet
nor
we
know
what
to
really
expect.
There
is
no
nightly
chromium
built
which
enables
us
to
play
with
it.
Yet,
however,
Chrome
Web
Store
already
started
making
life
more
difficult
if
your
web
extension
is
using
those
powerful
API
eyes.
A
So
it's
very
unfortunate
for
us,
because
we
we
have
both
better
and
stable
channel
on
Chrome,
Web,
Store
and
right
now,
due
to
the
fact
that
we
use
those
powerful
api's
every
new
every
release,
both
beta
and
stable,
goes
into
this
in-depth
review,
which
means,
instead
of
like
being
published
within
one
hour.
It
may
take
now,
multiple
days
or
weeks
before
the
published
version
is
available
to
the
public
that
also
impacts
brake
integration,
because
that
toggle
and
brave
is
using
chrome,
webstore
sin
means
of
distributing
design
package.
A
So
that's
that's
unfortunate,
especially
for
the
better
channel,
because
I
released
a
new
better
today
and
the
problem
is
it's
not
on
the
Chrome,
Web,
Store
I
believe
at
least
it
was
not
before
this
code,
so
I
released
it
two
hours
ago,
and
maybe
it
is
nope,
it's
still
in
the
review.
So
that's
that's
the
problem
like
on
Firefox
it's
available
immediately
because
we
are
self
hosted
on
Chrome.
We
use
Chrome
Web
Store
for
our
distribution
of
the
better
channel
and
I
think
we
are
not
able
to
do
anything
about
this.
A
A
B
But
in
this
case,
like
you
know,
by
design,
they
want
to
eradicate
that
permission
like
they
they've
made
it
pretty
clear.
They
don't
want
ad
blockers
to
exist
and
that
permission
allows
you
to
do
like
it's
a
pretty
broad
permission.
So
I
kind
of
understand
that
you
know
it's
a
very
it's
always
we
know
when
we
were
building
Firefox,
it's
the
most
risky
permission.
I
could
give
an
add-on
view
into
every
bite
that
crosses
the
network
from
there
from
there
for.
A
People
who
are
not
familiar,
we
are
talking
about
web
request
api's,
especially
like
the
blocking
version
which
lets
you
both
like
inspect
every
request.
That
goes,
and
every
response
that
goes
back
so
you
can
check
like
headers
companion
is
using
that
to
tell
oh.
This
is
a
request
for
ipfs
resource
and
I
will
redirect
it
to
local
gateway
and
that's
why
we
need
this
permission
on
every
web
site.
So
every
web
site
can
use
content
addressing
and
it
will
be
supported.
A
Out-Of-The-Box
yeah
we'll
see
what
time,
what
will
I'm
waiting
for
manifest
version,
free
at
least
to
land,
to
this
nightly
build
of
chromium,
so
we
at
least
can
see
what
we
are
able
to
re-implement
and
what
functionality
of
companion
will
be
lost
because,
right
now
we
are
not
even
able
to
participate
in
discussion
curve
because
there's
like
no
API
draft,
not
even
like
a
document
with
example
of
API.
So
we
are
not
even
able
to
like
on
the
piece
of
paper
just
to
prototype,
nothing
yeah.
C
A
C
D
C
A
Now
I
think
it's
like
switched
to
2.0.
Is
it's
a
good,
a
better
idea?
Cuz,
we
effect
if
you
change
the
entire
back
and
how
those
websites
are
hosted.
Yeah,
yeah,
I,
I,
think
I
feel.
If
we
wait
for
like
this
decision
or
like
refactoring
Jessica's
out,
it
maybe
take
more
more
time
to
be
released,
so
maybe
just
released
2.0
and
then,
if
we
decide
to
convert
it
to
library,
find
them
it's
like
3.0,
just
a
number
right.
A
B
A
It's
is
it
a
problem
that,
like
is
the
problem
for
developer.
It
takes
more
space
like
node
modules.
Take
small
space
but
like
I,
just
combined
depends
on
Jase
ipfs
anyway.
Ip
first
desktop
may
add,
support
to
JSA.
Give
us
anyway
at
some
point
so
for
our
projects
it
does
not
matter
and
for
other
projects,
PRS
welcome.
B
B
So
a
quick
discussion
about
the
introduction
into
a
project
that
we'll
be
doing
over
the
next
few
months
with
a
designer
will
be
joining
us
temporarily
to
work
on
this.
This.
The
idea
is
that
when
we
talk
to
browser
vendors,
they
have
existing
web
standards
and
design
teams
and
security
teams
that,
at
that
intersection
of
security
and
user
interface,
design,
iconography
and
visual
communication
patterns
for
the
things
that
we
see
in
the
browser
relative
to
thinks
we
should
be
concerned
about.
B
So
is
your
connection
secure
or
not
the
padlock
very
familiar
with
everybody,
but
whether
they
understand
it
or
not?
It's
a
whole
different
question,
but
either
way
a
lot
of
thought.
A
lot
of
practice.
A
lot
of
experience
and
a
lot
of
care
goes
into
the
treatments
and
the
visual
treatments
of
how
things
are
communicated
when
a
navigation
event
happens
in
the
browser.
So
the
idea
here
is
that,
for
ipfs
we
have
a
set
of
use.
B
That's
really
ever
happened
in
a
in
a
meaningful
way.
We
can
use
this
materials
when
we're
talking
to
browser
vendors
and
when
we're
talking
to
standards
bodies
when
we
engage
that
w3c
in
the
IETF
to
communicate,
have
something
tangible
to
communicate
and
open
a
discussion
about
so
far.
You
know
we've
seen
several.
You
know
interactions
where
you
know:
standards,
Fridays
or
I
gotta,
that's
just
what
you
guys
are
just
doing.
It's
crazy
when
you
just
ask
them
to
come
to
your
world.
B
So
this
is
more
of
a
let's
bring
the
mountain
to
them
and
very
clearly
state
the
problems
that
we're
trying
to
solve
and
a
set
of
recommend
provide
a
set
of
recommendations,
almost
like
I,
said
of
instruction
manual
for
them
to
follow
or
a
design
kit.
That
speaks
the
language
of
the
of
the
design
teams
that
would
be
implementing
this
in
browsers
sort
of
their
very
least
reviewing
it
so
they're
aiming
to
start
hope.
Hopefully
there's
a
couple
of
weeks
on
this
work
and
will
definitely
be
present
to
get
here.
B
The
I
prevents
desktop
and
ipfs
companion
applications
are
the
the
user
facing.
Are
you
know,
artifacts
of
the
office
project
for
the
most
part,
so
in
or
at
least
for
the
internal
work
that
we
do
so
we'll
probably
be
using
those
as
guinea
pigs
to
test
out
some
of
this
material
and
up
experiment
with
applying
it
to
how
we're
implementing
user
interface
related
I
professed,
but
it
should
be,
should
be
pretty
fun
and
useful
and
something
we'll
hopefully
be
able
to
leverage
all
through
next
year.
B
A
It's
super
exciting
and
especially
like
in
Firefox
I,
see
how
companion
could
be
like
a
vessel
for
look
like
implementing
it
and
look
at
how
it
would
look
like
because,
like
in
interesting
facts
in
chrome,
you
are
not
able
to
add
both
page
action
and
browser
action.
So
browser
action
is
this
button
icon
in
the
toolbar
and
the
page.
Action
is
also
an
icon,
but
it's
on
the
right
side
of
location
bar
address
bar
sorry.
B
A
B
B
A
I
can
look,
give
a
quick,
very
short
overview,
and
then
we
can
discuss
so
there's
a
project
called
brave
in
ipfs,
companion,
repo,
which
gives
you
sort
of
like
an
overview
of
related
tasks
and
what's
ongoing
and
what's
done.
However,
there
is
this
progress.
This
is
the
big
meta
meta
issue,
which
has
some
challenges
already
tackled.
Some
are
not
I
need
to
go
over
this
list
again
because
I've
been
not
looking
at
this
most
like
working
here
and
update
this
this
project,
but
long
story
short
things
that
really
remained
to
be
implemented.
A
Our
local
discovery
for
browser
nodes
so
right
now,
embedded
JS
ipfs
is
able
to
detect,
go
IP
affairs
in
local
network,
but
it's
not
able
to
announce
itself.
There's
this
open
problem
of
DNS
its
coverage
service
being
already
taken
like
the
port
being
already
taken.
That
may
be
the
problem
with
polyfills,
or
it
may
be
just
a
problem
with
Chrome
OS
API.
A
So
it's
something
I
need
to
look
at.
What
reminds
him
to
be
done
is
to
see
if
it
can
be
addressed.
If
not,
we
probably
need
to
add
additional
discovery
method
just
for
like
Chrome
OS
notes,
running
in
Chrome,
OS,
environment.
Basically,
all
were
browser
notes
such
as
select
brave.
They
would
have
additional
discovery
method
on
top
of
all
the
standard
ones.
So
it's
not
like.
We
are
introducing
something
custom
to
replace
the
generic
one.
The
generic
one
will
still
be
there.
A
We,
when
the
note
he
discovers
other
notes,
it
runs
all
discovery
methods
in
parallel
and
he
gets
all
the
results
from
all
of
them.
I
feel
that's
that's
the
plan
for
addressing
this,
and
we
should
plant
this,
and,
apart
from
that,
that's
like
the
only
liquor,
miss
missing
feature
on
our
end.
The
rest
is
mostly
performance
improvements,
so
there
are
like
quirks
buts
like
there
are
multiple
issues
related
to
performance
improvements,
but
honestly,
most
of
them
fall
under
the
problem
with.
A
Extensive
use
of
preload
or
delegate
nodes,
so
I
introduced
this
throttling.
When
you
we
don't
send
more
than
four
parallel
requests.
However,
there
are
like
there
are
additional
limits
in
chromium,
not
this
one
gosh,
where
is
it
brave,
Great
Wave?
Yes,
I,
believe
this
one
yeah,
so
it's
like
we
are.
We
are
triggering
anti-ddos
protection
at
both
preload
nodes.
Now
and
as
well.
A
There
is
a
separate
I
believe
yes,
so
this
one
is
our
preload
nodes
throttling
us,
and
this
one
is
chrome
itself
is
saying:
oh,
this
extension
is
not
naughty
and
it
blocks
outgoing
requests
before
they
leave
your
machine
because
turns
out.
There
is
like
a
built-in
anti-ddos
protection.
So
if
you
have
an
extension
which
starts
behaving
badly
and
there's
like
a
terroristic
here,
so
if
you
get
multiple
HTTP
errors
in
some
time
window,
your
extension
is
blacklisted
and
it's
not
able
to
send
requests.
And
basically
the
problem
is
our
api's
are
returning.
A
Http
error
500,
if
like
DNS
link,
is
not
present,
which
is
like
not
very
HTTP
semantics.
It's
like
a
technical
depth
from
the
time
when
HTTP
API
was
used
only
from
by
the
command-line
client
of
the
go
ipfs,
but
now
it
has
unexpected
consequences
like
this.
So
but
you
can
see
it's
mostly
like
related
to
the
fact
that
when
we
start
when
your
bra
nodes
start
browsing,
let's
say
Wikipedia,
because
all
those
errors,
I
just
show
you.
A
Those
errors
come
from
the
fact
that
I
love
that
Wikipedia
page
and
there
are
multiple
pictures
and
then
each
picture
is
one
or
more
blocks
and
all
those
blocks
are
requested
using
like
delegated
the
engage,
the
queries
delegate
that
concentrating
computing
and
that's
like
a
lot
of
requests
to
the
rubber
preload
nodes,
so
long
story
short,
do
something
we
need
to
figure
out.
Something
are
about
this
either
add
a
better
limit
or
like
remove
limits
at
our
preload
interrogate
nodes.
Try
to
add
a
wholistic
on
our
end
to
be
below
this
threshold
of
chromium.
A
So
that's
a
mitigation
long-term
solution
is
to
remove
delegated
routing
and
replace
that
with
native
DHT,
but
that
won't
happen
this
quarter.
This
quarter
is
basically
focused
on
a
secrete
factor
and
if
we
are
able
to
do
that
in
jail
and
that's
very
good
quarter,
so
we
probably
it
will
be
at
least
six
months
before
we
have
tested
and
highly
functional
DHT
in
Jas.
So
until
that
happens,
we
will
probably
need
to
solve
the
problem
on
the
problem
with
delegate
delegate
its
requests.
A
A
A
B
A
That's
the
problem
yeah!
That's
this
like
HTTP
500
is
a
problem.
It's
a
big
problem
across
entire
API,
because
it's
not
just
this
one
endpoint,
the
entire
API
behaves
that
way
and
all
the
HTTP
clients
expect
that
behavior.
So
you
can
see
how
fast
we
balloon
the
scope
of
this
change.
That's
why
I
again.
A
B
Right
and
I
understand
so
I
have
another
question
which
is
less
about
the
contents
of
these
things.
Then
maybe
we
it
then
then
reframing
what
1.0
means.
We've
kind
of
assumed
that
so
far,
that
embedded
note
is
part
of
1.0,
even
though
embedded
note
is
clearly
marked,
experimental
and
actually
not
necessarily
recommended
for
for
production
use.
So
I
I
wonder
if
we
are
able
to
just,
maybe
if
for
one
of
the
options
that
we
have
to
be
able
to
kind
of
make
sure
that
we
close
up
this
work.
B
It
also
kind
of
aligns
with
how
opera
is
approaching
it
to
which
is
just
gateway.
Is
their
initial
release.
What
if
we
pushed
on
the
local
network
discovery
bit
for
1.0
and
made
that
part
of
2.0
when
we
have
kind
of
better
understanding
of
what
embedded
node
capabilities
are
going
to
be
anyway,
and
better
understanding
of
the
performance
and
and
I
can
resource
consumption
of
that,
and
instead
fix
some
of
these
performance
issues,
and
then
all
that
call
that
at
one
point
oh
yeah.
A
A
We
will
also
probably
discover
this
address
bar
from
the
v1,
that's
probably
for
the
next
next
iteration.
Hopefully
we
will.
If
we
have
guidelines,
we
will
provide
those
guidelines
to
brave
and
then
pray
for
you
implement
I,
like
sort
of
like
started.
This
discussion,
like
maybe
not
that
this
started
discussion
just
like,
showed
the
problem
and
a
different
direction
in
which
we'll
probably
move
right
like
when
you
remove
local
gateway
from
the
picture.
How
do
you
present
that
in
address
bar
that
the
green
padlock
is
go
away?
What
replaces
it's
things
like
that?
A
B
I
think
I
think
that
makes
sense
and
well
I
think
maybe
what
we
should
do
is
kind
of
like
it
is
in
very
coarse
blocks.
We
can
think
of
like
v1
of
integration
as
things
like
companion
by
default
local
gateway
access.
These
types
of
things
you
know
the
v2
of
browser
integration
that
next
major
step
would
be
deeper,
deeper
levels
of
integration,
either
in
the
UI
or
embedded
node,
and
then
like
that
final
third
layer
and
I
kind
of
lead
this
out
in
the
browsers
post
as
well.
B
A
A
B
Okay,
so
I
think
I
think
that
means
then
so
that
these
days,
a
couple
of
performance
issues
are
gonna,
be
the
priority
for
brave
for
this
the
quarter
and
then
in
our
next
meet
up
with
them.
We
can
talk
about
what
may
be
a
unified
like.
Let
them
know
about
this
phased
plan
and
then
talk
about
when
we
want
to
when
we
would
expect
Chavez
performance
issues
ready
when
they
would
and
when
they
would
be
ready
for
a
kind
of
like
a
joint
announcement.
A
A
Was
trying
throughout
the
section
and
now
my
hot
bath
is
offline?
Oh
now,
it's
online
I
think
in
the
past,
like
when
it
was
with
the
GUI
working
group.
We
had
like
a
highlight
section,
so
maybe
we
could
like
replace
this,
like
team
updates
with
highlights
and
basically
have
drug
or
just
copy
specific
links
there
yeah.
B
Exactly
it
just
copied
up
there,
because
I
think
it's
really
nice
to
be
able
to
see
what
you,
the
log
of
things
that
you
both
thought
were
important
enough
to
do,
and
your
individual
work
stream
as
well.
I
think
that's,
that's
totally
cool.
So
if
there
are
specific
things
that
you're
like
people
should
know
about
this,
then
maybe
yep
but
pop
them
up
on
the
top.
B
I
know
it's
just
so:
booked
Earth's,
an
email
out
or
slack
miss
or
something
like
that
about
a
system
he
came
up
with
for
using
crypt
pad
and
like
Auto
meeting
notes
generator
for
it
and
I
owe
you
my
talk.
I
I
know:
I
was
looking
for
the
link
to
before
this
medium,
like
it's
I,
can't
remember
where
he
posted
it,
but
I
just
thought:
I'd
bring
it
up
with
something
we
could
look
at
to
reduce
the
the
overhead
of
of
doing
the
the
new
generation.
I.
C
C
E
B
A
I
think
like
I,
can
try
use
it
like
this
week
for
this
call
and
maybe
give
feedback
how
it
went.
Yeah
so
I,
remember
this:
it's
basically
creating
a
peer
out.
It's
automating
all
those
manual
steps.
We
usually
I
need
to
do
to
publish
this
idea.
First,
team
management,
people
yep
it's
right
there
is
it
when.
A
Like
different
projects,
articles
data
set
services
built
or
using
EFS
and
it's
backed
by
a
repo
and
problem
is
the
repo
has
a
lot
of
PR
so
pans,
and
we
don't
have
a
written
policy.
What
is
considered
awesome
or
not
awesome.
What's
the
threshold
for
including
something
into
this
website,
we
did
not.
I
did
not
look
at
it
nor
road
and
it
thoughts
on
this
policy.
A
A
C
C
Apparently
why,
when
I
picture
this
updates,
it
is
supposed
to
connect
it
up
check
the
latest
start
yml
file
checker
serves
the
new
release
and
download
it,
which
is
normal.
This
is
HTTP,
but
this
is
a
partisan
RCE
system.
I
didn't
know
about
I,
don't
know
what
that
is,
but
apparently
for
some
reason:
I
professor
stop
disconnecting
now
trying
to
download
load
and
using
git
for
some
weird
reason:
I,
don't
know
how
to
check.
If
that's
really
happening
like
this,
that
specific
image
is
not
wrong.
C
It
should
connect
a
good
app
through
HTTP
or
the
binary.
So
it
stands,
but
it's
part
and
the
node
part.
That's
something
I
don't
know
about,
because
electron
has
nodes
built
in
so
I
think
it
might
be
node
itself
checking
if
there
are
updates
for
nodes.
I,
don't
know
if
that
can
be
the
reason
I
searched
about
it.
I
couldn't
find
anything
about
it,
but
it
might
be
I,
don't
know
if
node
itself
checks
for
new
releases,
yeah.
A
B
A
C
A
That's
also
like
I
think
we
are
using
github,
which
is
like
centralized
service
for
publishing
our
artifacts,
instead
of
like
using
our
gateway,
might
be
right,
because
if
you,
if
the
domain
here
was
IDF,
Sao
I,
don't
think
he
this
issue
would
be
here
or
the
discussion
around
this
issue
would
be
different.
The
problem
is,
you
have
github
here
which
is
like
owned
by
Microsoft,
and
then
you
who.
A
Then
you
have
AWS,
which
is
owned
by
Amazon,
and
then
you
got
and
both
are
used
by
a
TFS
which
is
like
sort
of
like
trying
to
replace
an
AWS,
s3
and
I'm
like
yeah
I
agree.
Why
why
it
could
raise
some
eyebrows,
but
I,
don't
know
if
we
are
able
to
solve
this,
assuming
it's
like
our
upgrade
mechanism,
which
is
like
checking
this
URL
around
it.
It's.
C
A
A
The
quick
could
run
have
like
a
dedicated
subdomain
for
that,
like
like
updates,
ipfs
io
or
something
so
in
those
tools.
It's
like
self,
descriptive,
hostname.
That
removes
like.
Oh,
why
this
software
is.
We
could
call
it
like
out
updates
ipfs
ago
or
something
and
there's
a
valuing
dad's
like
all
like.
A
D
A
We
we
either
need
to
do
a
PR
to
the
district,
or
we
need
like
a
separate
domain.
I.
Think
that
that's
not
a
topic
for
this
call.
We
can
like
take
this
a
sink
and
decide,
but,
like
personally
I
I
see
it
like
a
way
to
address.
This
is
to
basically
move
to
a
self-hosted
solution,
because
I
fully
understand
why
people
get.
B
Right
I
like
the
idea
that
we're
dogfooding,
as
well
as
the
fact
that
we
will
never
stop
fighting
those
battles
as
long
as
the
mission
of
our
organization
is
to
allow
people
self
agency
in
owning
their
own
data
and
be
able
to
communicate
without,
is
specifically
that
list
of
software
companies
I
think
that
no,
we
will
always
be
fighting
that
battle
for
as
long
as
that,
we
are
really
really
using
them.
As
apart.
A
B
A
That
person
could
be
targeted,
the
like
certificate
for
the
trap,
or
something
could
be
in
theory,
replaced
by
some
countries
and
the
green
padlock
will
still
be
there
right.
Yep
I
think,
like
the
gist
of
this
discussion,
is
we
need
to
look
what's
needed
to
switch
to
self
hosted
solution?
So,
if
you
remember,
if
you
remember
in
Italy,
please
write
down.
If
not,
we
probably
need
to
make
this
research
and
OH
anything
we
need
from
like
infra
team.