►
Description
Meeting minutes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lt8uGpiMFfgws8VF36xtTMaJAeHufha-7Dqz1tjrPGY/edit#heading=h.naeeah7jeanr
B
A
B
A
A
E
B
Got
like
a
bunch
of
random
stuff.
I
am
right
now
I'm,
showing
off
my
little
Argos,
because
I
was
on
a
call
with
the
Arco
team
and
we're
trying
to
get
them.
Graduated
and
I
was
like
all
right.
Fine,
but
if
I'm
gonna
do
this
for
free,
what
do
I
get
out
of
it
and
they're
gonna
like
if
they
graduate
from
cncf,
they
said
they
wanted
to
make
Argo
hats
and
I
was
like.
Oh,
my
God.
That
please
give
me
that
I
will
wear
that
to
every
conference.
B
B
B
A
B
Yeah
well
I'm
wondering
so
I
was
hoping,
I
think,
probably
what's
the
most
effective
use
of
our
time,
because
I
don't
think
the
list
has
changed
on
GitHub
I
haven't
seen
any
changes
this
week,
but
I
think
if
we
ask
for
an
async
update
on
the
stream
on
on
the
slack
I
think
that'll
be
a
good
place
to
make
sure
that
we
keep
things
moving,
because
it's
really
their
directives.
That
I
need
to
coordinate.
With
my
my
side,
yeah.
A
A
You
know,
because
we
had
also
an
overlap
and
I
I
wanted
actually
to
check
with
the
guys
what
now
the
ideas,
because
in
section
one
we
have
the
spoken
languages
conversion,
basically
that
once
that
section
one
wants
to
do,
but
we
think
yeah
it's
going
to
be
from
a
technical
point
of
view
quite
hard
to
actually
maintain
an
update
that,
and
we
were
wondering
if
it's
not
better,
to
actually
use
like
an
automated
translation
API.
So
we
actually
can
convert.
You
know
everything.
B
But
for
this
absolutely
not,
we
should
not
have
an
individual.
Maintaining
a
language
does
not
make
sense,
but
or
or
like
a
spoken
language
right
so
for
the
natural
languages.
Do
it
the
way
cncf?
Does
it
create
a
shared
glossary
and
validate
with
a
slack
where
you've
got
five
or
six
people
from
that
language?
That
understand
the
Tactical
content,
who
state
that
this
is
a
proper
translation?
B
That's
a
way
to
have
the
scalable
and
maintainable
and
accurate,
because
a
lot
of
times
the
reason
why
we
absolutely
cannot
have
one
person
doing
these
translations
is
I've.
Seen
this
come
up
a
lot.
The
last
year
I've
been
working
a
lot
on
like
Spanish
translations
for
supply
chain.
All
that
stuff
like
there
are
no
direct
translations
for
it.
So
you
do
have
to
make
a
proxy
sort
of
metaphor
and
you
can
lose
the
technical
meaning
in
that.
So
we
need
to
have
that's.
B
D
No
I'd
agree
with
you,
so
I
think
the
only
thing
I
would
say
is
as
a
proactive
step
in
this
like
simplifying
minimizing
the
language
like
the
originating
language,
like
a
style
guide
that
makes,
you
know,
pulls
out
the
jargon
steps
like
that
is
sometimes
just
as
important
right.
So
just
like
building
a
good
style
guide
that
says
this
is
a
voice.
These
are
the
words
we
use
and
then,
when
you
edit,
trying
to
pull
out
all
the
sort
of
localized
language.
B
A
I
mean
you
know,
I've
been
dealing
with
these
automated
apis
and
you
know
you
have,
of
course
free
version
stock
that
lack
indeed,
a
lot
of
you
know
the
fine
Prints,
but
you
also
have
some
paid
ones
that
use
also
Ai
and
they're,
actually
pretty
okay,
so
yeah!
That's
why
we
were
thinking
like
yeah.
Should
we
really
want
to
do
this
in
an
automated
technology
type
of
approach,
or
indeed
are
we
going
to
hire
for
you
know
all
the
different
materials
and
convert
them
update
them
so.
E
Yeah,
so
let
me,
let
me
say
a
couple
of
things:
if
I
may
so
in
the
database,
we
have
a
limitation
of
how
we
can
store
things
and
how
people
can
retrieve
things
because,
like
the
skg
is
meant
for
people
to
like
put
together
their
own
security
Champion
training,
if
you
will
or
their
own
like
developer
training
as
well,
so
pretty
much.
The
graph
database
is
focused
on
how
people
retrieve
things
and
how
people
can
go
about
describing
what
they
need
to
get
information
out
of
it.
E
So
there
that's
kind
of
what
Glenn
is
talking
about,
because
there
is.
There
are
technical
limitations,
because,
essentially
the
more
that
we
add
like
randomly
that
doesn't
really
connect
to
anything
else.
Then
the
slower
it's
going
to
get
and
that
kind
of
also
goes
for
languages,
because,
if
we're
adding
a
bunch
of
like
languages
to
the
lexicons,
essentially
there's
like
multiple
definitions
for
a
node
good.
It's
not
necessarily
a
big
deal
but
like.
B
It's
just
a
really
really
really
stupid
way
to
engineer
this
right.
Think
about
this
as
an
engineering
problem,
there's
no
reason
why
we
should
have
right,
I,
don't
think
Developers,
almost
all
technical
documentation
unless
it's
on
getter
is
in
English
developers,
read
documentation
in
English,
primarily
right,
so
it
doesn't
even
make
sense
for
us
to
try
to
fully
translate
those.
It
does
make
sense
for
if
there's
any
clarification
for
them
to
be
able
to
copy
that
and
put
it
into
a
search
engine
on.
B
E
B
E
B
B
A
A
B
Yes,
so
this
document
a
well,
this
Excel
sheet
is
telling
us
the
known
trainings
and
the
Gap
analysis
that
we're
doing
for
them
shows
us
the
professional
personas
and
the
learner
personas.
So
what
I
would?
What
I'm
trying
to
do
here
is
be
able
to
ensure
that
right,
instead
of
tying
nodes
of
language
localization,
we
would
tie
a
node
of
the
identities
represented
for
each
of
those
trainings
right.
So
just
I
need
to
be
able
to
search
for
application
security
I
want
to
have
all
those
come
up,
I
also
transversely.
B
A
So
the
only
thing
I
wanted
to
raise
actually
as
a
concern
and
I
already
did
that
a
bit
in
the
overall
State
meeting
is
that
we
have
here
a
list
of
quite
some
references
to
materials,
but
actually
the
most
important.
Well,
okay,
two
most
important
thing
is
the
cost
of
training,
of
course
needs
to
be
free
and
we
also
have
the
reusable
column
basically
like
yeah.
Is
it
open
data
that
we
actually
can
consume
in?
D
A
E
Oh
going
back
to
databases
just
to
point
that
out
to
also
add
further
context,
so
we've
been
starting
to
model
the
database
and
yeah
like
if
we
have
a
course,
for
example,
that's
a
paid,
for
course,
then
we
don't
really.
We
can't
really
link
to
the
data
inside
of
that
course.
It's
just.
That
course
becomes
a
node
itself
in
the
database
and
it's
basically
just
an
orphan
node,
because
it's
like
an
end
point
I
like
everything.
B
E
Let
me,
let
me
ask
you
this
real,
quick,
real
quick.
Do
you
think
it
would
be
part,
or
it
should
be
part
of
our
mission
statement
of
the
SKF
team
to,
for
example,
if
there
was
someone
like
sonotype,
for
example,
that
had
training,
and
they
didn't
know
that
it
had
to
be
open
data
but
they're
willing
to
make
it
open
data?
So
should
we
assist
with
that?
B
Absolutely
so
what
I
would
say
here
is
instead
of
saying
we
can
say,
like
basically
open
closed
or
a
partnership
pending
in
the
way
that
we
submit,
because
some
of
these
are
super
valuable.
You
know
Google's
going
to
join
in
IBM
wants
to
join
in
already
so
those
the
things
that
are
on
here,
I
think
can
be
handed
over,
but
yeah
I
think
we
just
have
to
state
that,
as
we
conclude
the
Gap
analysis,
because
if
they're
pending
we're
not
making
the
guarantee
that
that's
openly
provided
at
this
time,.
E
E
How
that
all
happens,
and
that's
really
this
is
what
I
was
saying
last
time
that
it
that
the
graph
database
is
more
than
like
being
super
optimized
have
a
lot
to
do
with
like
being
consistent
so
like,
if
you
label
something
a
certain
way,
make
sure
that
you
keep
going
down
that
road,
because
if
you
start
getting
a
lot
of
Orphan
nodes,
then
yes,
it
will
slow
down
to
a
crawl
where
you
query
something
for
the
asvs
and
it
takes
like
45
minutes
to
respond.
So
that's
why
really?
E
D
B
I
could
switch
to
a
vectorized
database,
but
I
do
think
the
node's
the
best
option
for
this,
but
yeah
I,
think
I
mean
I,
think
I,
don't
really
think
we're
going
to
have
a
problem
efficiently,
engineering,
the
content
at
this
time.
We
just
need
to
Define
clearly
what
content
we
know
we
can
host
and
so
I'm
I'm
happy
to
sort
of.
So
did
you
put
a
column
on
here
already
Glenn
that
sort
of
makes
that
statement.
A
A
B
I
think
that's
a
good
idea,
so
I
do
think
to
make
this
easy.
We
should
just
I
would
just
put
a
column
on
that
side
of
reusable
for
all
cool
with
that
and
just
have
like
a
open
or
partnership
pending
and
make
sure
that
the
action
statement
is
that
within
two
weeks
or
so
we
try
to
get
our
contacts
set
with
that.
D
D
E
Could
actually
follow
storm
if
we
wanted
to?
Basically
what
I'm
saying
is
that
we're
not
limited,
because
we
can
add
pretty
much
unlimited
properties
to
the
node
like
language
like
category
whatever
it
is
you
want,
so
we
could
follow
storm,
but
essentially
in
a
graph
databases.
We
have
three
things
we
can
work
with,
which
is
relationships,
labels
and
properties
so
and
we
yeah
that
makes
sense.
Yeah.
D
No,
no,
that
makes
sense,
I,
think,
and
that
may
be
like
just
for
the
sake
of
of
interacting
with
people
that
at
those
links,
even
if
it
seems
you
know
not
open,
they
can
probably
export
something
in
that
scorm
format.
So
you
can
take
that
and
then
build
the
course
separately,
so
the
list
may
actually
be
bigger
than
we
think.
E
E
Where
it
kind
of
gets
tricky
is
when
you
start
getting
into
like
categories
like,
for
example,
like
network
security
or
like
those
things
that,
because
there
are
topics
that
Traverse
like
multiple
categories
and
that's
really
where
some
of
this
can
get
a
little
bit
tricky,
because
you
could
be
tempted
to
like
add
a
bunch
of
stuff.
But
we've
noticed
that,
like
you,
gotta
really
think
about
Concepts
and
whatnot,
which
is
kind
of
where
this
comes
into.
E
And
just
so
you
know
this
is
where
Glenn's
point
of
moving
the
library
into
section
two,
because
pretty
much
right
now
like
we
have
what
SKF
has
already
put
in,
which
is
pretty
much
Glenn
and
Ricardo
and
Glenn
has
an
educational
background.
So
one
of
the
big
fears
is
like
adding
someone
or
adding
too
many
people
here.
That,
like
are
like,
don't
understand
how
the
graph
database
works
and
they
think
it's
just
labeling
and
then
like
it
does
slow
down
to
a
crawl.
E
And
I
think
this
might
be
something
that
we
need
to
have
a
group
discussion
solved
between
all
the
groups,
because
I
think
that,
like
we
have
a
very
valid
point,
but
I
think
you
guys
have
a
very
valid
point
because-
and
there
is
a
way
to
align
both
of
these
things.
But
but
I
would
argue
that
the
library
and
then
would
have
to
know
how
neo4j
works
and
like
realize
that
part
of
using
neo4j,
because
they've
been
helping
us
out
is
they've,
told
us
that
refactoring
the
database.
E
B
Yeah
so
I
think
I
mean
I.
Don't
honestly,
if
you're
using
neo4j
right
now,
I'm
trying
to
tag
it
with
10,
professional
personas
and
even
less
learner
personas
like
I,
don't
see
this
being
an
optimization
issue
and
a
librarian
would
have
absolutely
zero
reason
to
index
an
object
which
is
not
in
one
of
our
categories
that
we're
supplying
so
I.
Don't
think
that's
going
to
be
a
problem
and
if
we
can
ensure
in
the
UI
that
they
can
only
choose
from
specific
tracks,
then
great
one
way
to
handle
this
right
for
cluster
cluster
analysis.
B
That's
why
I
have
specifically
stated
that
we
have
one
unknown
or
other
security
Persona,
just
consider
that
a
node
and
then
we
can
take
that
and
review
those
and
see
if
they
actually
need
to
be
put
into
sections
that
we
already
have
or
into
a
new
classification.
But
it
keeps
that
tidy.
Okay,
that's
how
I
would
right.
It's
I,
don't
think
that's
going
to
be
and-
and
we
do
I
even
if
we
were
to
discover
new
personas
I,
would
not
state
that
it's
going
to
be
more
than
two
in
a
year
or
so
right.
B
E
B
E
B
B
Would
be
really
useful
at
this
stage,
is
to
get
a
it
doesn't
have
to
be
low
level.
I
need
a
high
level
architecture
diagram
to
be
able
to
start,
not
for
me
to
think
about
it
really,
but
just
to
communicate
well,
yeah
I,
guess
to
communicate
to
Librarians
like
this
is.
This
is
what
underpins
this,
because
their
discussions
get
carried
away.
I
am
not
interested
in
talking
about
anything
that
cannot
be
built,
I'm
very
busy.
A
We
already
also
think
about
it
and
we
thought
we
should
actually
have
a
sort
of
you
know.
Data
structure
requirement
documents
yeah.
So
if
we
have
those
people
that
say
hey
we
want
to
partner
cool,
then
we
can
give
them
basically
a
document
how
we
would
ideally
like
the
information,
yeah
and
and
probably
in
the
future,
when
there
would
be.
A
E
That
how
that's
reflected
in
the
plan,
just
to
kind
of
show
a
couple
things
to
point
out
I
can
send
you
a
link
also
or
Glenn.
Could
you
send
her
the
link
to
master
to
the
one
that
the
latest
version
of
our
plan?
It's
also
in
the
pr?
If
you
want
to
see
it,
it's
already
hooked
up,
but
we
did
add
the
services
for
the
SKF
Ops
Team.
E
Most
of
that
we
see
being
maintenance
and
Steward
like,
in
other
words
like
a
lot
of
people
want
to
contribute.
We
can
indicate
help
them
out,
support
them
and
then
maintenance
in
the
terms
of
automating
setting
up
guidelines,
because
there's
a
lot
of
contribution
guidelines
that
we
don't
have
right
now.
E
There
I
mean
we
do
have,
but
they're
not
the
best
and
so
yeah
so
like,
for
example,
some
of
those
labs
we're
going
to
do
in
Ops
ourselves,
so
that
we
could
like
finalize
a
procedure
and
kind
of
put
a
procedure
into
place
and
then
we're
trying
to
use
a
lot
of
contractors
for
the
additional
stuff
we
have
to
add.
But
in
order
to
do
that,
we
have
to
have
like
an
organized
process
to
onboard
these
people,
which
we
don't
have
right
now.
B
A
Yeah
yeah:
we
wanted
to
actually
use
the
David's
course
for
that.
There's
security
fundamentals
because,
like
David
mentioned
it's
now
manually
added
in
SPF,
and
we
need
to
actually
have
an
get
a
back
question
that
does
it
and
ingest
it
automatically,
so
we're
actually
planning
to
do
that
already
and
work
actually,
as
we
speak,
we're
already
playing
with
that,
how
to
do
it,
how
to
break
it
down
that
makes
sense
for
the
skj
to
to
consume
it
Etc.
So
that
will
be
our
first
case.
A
B
E
B
E
Told
her
about
this
three
times.
Well,
let
me
say
this
so
there's
there's
another
section
of
this
because
there's
a
problem
here
with
David
and
that's
kind
of
why
we
wanted
David,
because
he
said
David
also
wants
to
add
the
test.
But
the
test
needs
to
be
like
on
the
LF
platform
for
the
certification
yeah.
So
one
of
those
things
that
we
have
on
our
plan
is
figure
out
an
integration
between
those
things
and
make
a
UI
for
the
tests
and
the
quizzes
which,
where
we
can
address
the
answers.
C
A
B
Also,
it
also
alleviates
a
sort
of
implicit
user
sort
of
issue
that
I
don't
want
us
to
be
forced
into
I,
want
professionals
to
be
able
to
get
themselves
certified
without
mandating
that
they
take
some
of
this
training,
if
they're
already
in
that
space
right.
So,
if
we're
creating
a
structure
where
we
want
the
best
security
people
to
be
validated,
go
for
the
ones
that
already
exist
right,
so
I
want
them
to
be
intentionally
separated
functionally
and
keep
things
that
work
on
platforms
that
already
work
do
not
rebuild
whales
that
are
already.
B
B
Stuff,
exactly
and
there's
a
secondary
problem
of
you
like
this
platform,
I'm
gonna
have
a
I
I
can
talk
to
Dave
about
this.
It
just
does
not
make
sense.
This
platform
is
an
educational
platform.
The
reason
why
that
cert
is
on
the
Linux
Foundation
is
because
they
have
their
internal
verification
right,
we're
not
here
to
set
up
an
internal
validation
verification
program
on
this
platform.
This
is
literally
only
training
platform
right.
You
do
not
have
the
budget.
We
do
not
have
the
budget
to
recreate
the
Linux
Foundation
certification
program.
B
E
B
B
E
B
They're,
absolutely
only
going
to
be
willing
to
do
that
if
it's
with
Linux
Foundation,
so
yeah,
okay,
so
I
think
that's
fine
and
I
can
talk
a
little
bit
more
Dave
about
that,
but
yeah
that
would
that
would
have
to
be
an
extreme.
That's
a
completely
different
platform
on
the
back
end
than
what
you're
building.
That
would
be
a
secondary
engineering
project
where
we.
E
Even
in
the
Ops
Team,
we
only
have
8
000
hours
next
year
we
did
the
math
yeah
more
or
less
so
we're
going
to
be
busy,
which
is
another
reason
why
I
like?
What's
your
opinion
style?
Do
you
think
we
should
have
Ops
hours
on
there
or
do
you
think?
That's
too
distracting,
because
the
Ops
Team
are
full-time
employees,
so
essentially
the
ideology
is
that
they're
just
gonna
go,
but
we
we
that's
one
of
the
debates
we
had
in
our
plan.
B
Yeah
I'm
not
sure
I
mean
it
definitely
wouldn't
be
a
I
mean
if
it
was
monetized.
It
would
be
probably
like
a
25
sort
of
thing.
I
don't
know,
but
that's
definitely
when
the
place
where
I
always
had
to
like
take
my
hands
off
is
like.
Ultimately,
if
it's
a
dollar
sign
decision,
it's
got
to
be
c-rob
right.
So
just
guess
we'll
have
to
have
with
him.
Well.
B
C
E
E
E
So
so
so,
well
that
that
entails.
Is
that,
like,
for
example,
me,
Glenn
and
Ricardo
will
not
be
on
this
budget
because
we
should
be
just
kind
of
the
management
team
is
what
we're
calling
it
that
like
manages
SKF
you
know,
and
then
from
there
the
Ops
team
will
expand
or
contract
based
on
the
amount
of
work.
That
is
on
the
plan
because
yearly
we
will
review
that.
So
that's
kind
of
what
we
were
talking
about
and
have
in
mind.
B
A
B
That's
also
I
mean
just
as
someone
who
has
done
federal
grants
and
reviews.
That's
the
kind
of
thing
I
want
to
see
in
there
right
I
want
to
say
that
this
is
a
best
laid
plan
with
the
intention
of
also
restricting
funds
when
they're
not
needed
or
expanding
them.
So
right,
let's
make
sure
that's
something.
E
Well,
I
know
there's
an
expectation
that,
like
at
some
point,
the
investment
would
level
off.
But
if
you
actually
look
at
the
plan,
we're
only
asking
for
three
developers
in
a
UI
ux
developer,
that's
it
and
it's
not
a
lot
of
time,
because
in
three
developers
you
have
about
two
thousand
hours
per
developer.
You're.
E
E
That
so
so,
what
we're
actually
thinking
is
when
you
actually
start
going
down
the
Years
it'll
probably
expand,
because
you'll
probably
have
more
contributors,
more
content
like
so
so
yeah,
that's
just
our
view,
so
yeah
and
if
you'd
like
to
be
a
part
of
the
conversation
with
Brian,
I'm
sure
you're,
more
than
welcome
I
mean
we're
trying
to
facilitate
as
much
as
possible.
To
be
honest,.
B
E
The
money
goes,
let
me
also
say
that.
So
let
me
also
say
this:
a
part
of
that
plant
is
re-engineering
the
labs
because
we're
trying
to
go
for
a
more
guided
environment
as
opposed
to
like
what
we
have
right
now,
because
we
like
break
ux
like
Bible,
like
you,
gotta,
like
highlight
the
link,
go
to
a
separate
browser,
got
it
the
write-ups
on
a
separate
page.
E
C
E
Correct
our
our
sins
with
the
ux
gods,
but
part
of
that
is
also
making
releasing
hack
OS
as
a
distro,
so
we'll
end
up
having
our
own
version
of
like
Kali
Linux
within
SKF,
and
this
Sig,
which
I
think
will
be
a
great
marketing
thing.
I
think
a
lot
of
you
I
wouldn't
be
surprised
if
we
end
up
on
the
top
10
distros.
Just
because
we're
like
the
open
ssf
has
an
indirect
hacking,
distro.
E
So
yeah
it's
on
the
plan
too.
But
the
reason
we're
doing
that
is
because
we
kind
of
like
we're
thinking
about
operating
budget
in
the
way
that
we're
running
things
right
now
is
sub-optimal,
because
we
can
have
images
that
are
running
at
four
or
six
gigabytes
of
memory,
which
is
amazing,
so
we're
trying
to
simplify
that
so
that,
like
with
Labs,
if
you
really
wanted
to,
you,
could
put
it
on
your
own
computer
and
just
do
it
on
your
own
computer.
I.
B
Just
really
like
what
you
just
said
to
me:
you're,
like
look
the
front
end,
doesn't
really
work
and
also
the
back
end.
It
doesn't
really
work,
but
it
works
it.
Does
you
get
my
point?
Yes,
yeah
no
I
think
that's
a
it's
a
completely
reasonable
developer
and
then
yeah.
If,
if
this
was
expanding,
I
would
maybe
state
that
we
would
argue
for
like
possibly
the
addition
of
one
or
one
point:
five,
one
and
more
of
an
operations
role
for
year.
Two
after
the
thing
is
built,
it
needs
a
little
bit
of
configuration.
E
B
B
B
I
can
spend
a
little
bit
of
time
next
week
on
my
beautiful
vacation
time,
figuring
finishing
up
that
spreadsheet,
at
least
getting
us
all
of
all
of
what
we
have
there,
but
we
did
want
to
have
at
least
two
to
three
people
reviewing
all
these
just
to
make
sure
that
they're
tagged
in
ways
that
make
sense,
don't
know
if
that's
gonna
happen
in
reality
and
I
also
think
it's
fundamentally
less
essential
right.
So
I'm
going
to
de-prioritize
all
the
ones
that
we
know
we
don't
have
open
access
to.
B
A
Least
we
have
for
for
year
one
we
have
a
lot
of
work
like
Randall,
said
all
ready
to
do
right
with
the
material
that
is
open
data,
and
indeed,
if
we
want
to
speed
up
there,
we
can
always
have
a
talk
like
half
in
the
year.
Go
back
to
the
the
board,
say:
hey
look.
We
now
identified
these
as
well,
but
we
need
them
more
budget
or
Implement
implementing
it.
Whatever
I
mean
that's
all
fine
but
yeah.
A
So
at
least
we
we
do
have
already
good
data
to
start
with,
so
we
just
see
how
far
section
one
will
get
yeah
with
with
more
open
data
types
that
we
potentially
could
also
still
add
in
this
current
proposal
right
and
otherwise
they
will
just
continue
working
on
it
in
the
year
and
if
they're
identify
it
created
those
partnership
and
it's
open
data
according
to
the
requirements,
we
can
just
pull
it
in
consume.
It
yeah,
if
needed,
maybe
do
an
additional
budget
request,
but
let's
see
yeah.
E
E
I
wonder
if,
because
David
remember
how
David
said
that?
Because
if
we
wanted
to
be
an
LF
project
which
we're
working
on
like
we'll,
have
access
to
all
of
their
resources,
so
I
wonder
if,
like
we
could
just
use
their
Outreach
like
we
don't
really
need
a
budget
like
because
we
are
SKF.
We
could
just
use
the
Outreach
channel
that
we're
allotted
to.
A
B
Yeah,
so
right
now,
where
I'm
sitting
I
really
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
I
mean
kind
of
happy
with
The
Gap
analysis.
I
need
to
go
through
and
touch
that,
but
really
what
I
need
to
be
able
to
jump
onto
is
the
well
I
was
figuring
we're
going
to
do
the
application
Security
First
right.
So
as
long
as
like.
B
So
if
we're
happy
with
that
content-
and
it's
like
done
done-
The
Next
Step
that
we
need
to
go
through
is
tag
that
to
the
different
levels
of
security,
awareness
from
it
and
then
I.
So
the
only
real
update.
That's
happened
on
that
in
the
last
week
was
the
conversation
with
GitHub,
seeing
if
they
were
interested.
B
So
the
way
that
that
discussion,
kind
of
played
out
was
that
yes,
they're
interested
on
a
general
level.
They're
absolutely
seem
to
be
like
very
disinterested
in
a
badging
system
only
because
what
they
stated
is
they
haven't
seen
any
value
from
those
and
I
said
this
is
not
a
badge.
This
would
be
a
verification
system,
and
so,
with
that
discussion
they
seem
to
be
more
open.
A
A
E
B
But
yeah,
so
they
need
to
be.
They
need
to
be
verifiable
digital
assets.
So
that's
why
I'm
part
I'm
trying
to
work
through
GitHub
for
that
at
this
time.
If
not,
we
will
lean
back
into
the
LF
certification.
So
what
I?
What
I
need
functionally
from
your
architecture
is
to
be
able
to
import
LF
certification
badges
at
this
time
perfect.
B
E
B
B
Yeah
and
I
so
from
the
sko
team,
yeah
I
need
the
like
first
draft
of
an
architecture
diagram
and
then
a
like,
say
that
one
more
time
data
structure,
what
why
can't
I?
Remember
this
data
structure
requirements,
requirements
yeah?
If
you
can
give
me
just
like
a
one-pager
markdown,
that
we're
gonna,
we'll
start
playing
with
I,
think
that
moves
us
sufficiently
ahead
on
bringing
together
curation
and
implementation.
E
B
Where
does
the
database
point
in
theory
at
this
time
right,
yeah
and
like
get
me
down
to
some
like
vague
API
endpoints,
and
for
me,
that's
just
going
to
help
a
lot
conceptually
to
be
able
to
really
know
where
we're
sitting
and
it
also
from
there
I
can
sort
of.
We
can
use
like
a
C4
model
and
like
step
down
inside
of
their
right
and
say
right
in
a
particular
object.
This
is
what
it
looks
like
for
a
podcast.
This
is
what
it
looks
like
for
this
curriculum
series,
but
I
just.
C
C
B
B
A
B
I
would
really
love
so
we've
got
the
session
tomorrow
for
the
rewards
and
incentives,
I'd
really
love
to
make
that
just
a
working
session
and
blow
into
some
of
those.
Now
now
we're
much
clearer
on
really
what
it's
going
to
look
like
so
yeah.
If
we
can
use
that
time,
I
think
that
would
be
super
valuable.
A
B
Good,
it
sounds
like
Glenn
and
I
are
kind
of
in
the
same
place.
We've
had
like
so
much
to
do
and
then
it's
like,
oh
I've,
got
a
week
of
vacation.
I
guess
I'll
do
Linux
Foundation,
so
but
I'm
I'm
open
the
next
hour,
if
so,
I'll
be
on
that
and
see
if
on
the
collect
and
carry
if
there's
anyone
there.
That
has
a
particular
agenda.
If
not
do
you
want
to
just
use
this
next
hour
super
efficiently
and
just
sort
of
like
walk
through
those
exactly.