►
From YouTube: SLSA Tooling Meeting (January 6, 2023)
Description
Meeting notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15Xp8-0Ff_BPg_LMKr1RIKtwAavXGdrgb1BoX4Cl2bE4/edit#heading=h.yfiy9b23vayj
A
B
D
Yeah
yeah
not
sure
why
it's
not
on
the
calendar.
Invite
I
know
that
the
calendar
invite
got
deleted
off
the.
B
D
Inadvertently
got
deleted
off
the
the
thing
here.
B
A
C
A
D
Yeah
I
I
emailed
the
open
ssf
folks
to
to
fix
the
invite
but
I
guess
they
didn't
I'll
I'll
email
them
again.
B
B
C
B
C
D
D
All
right
for
folks
who
are
on
so
as
I
posted
in
chat
here
feel
free
to
add
your
your
name
into
into
the
attendance
and
as
well
as
anything.
C
D
I'm
not
sure
if
anybody
has
any
because
I
know
it's
been
a
few
weeks
so
I
know
some
folks
probably
forgot
that
the
meeting's
still
on
but
we'll
try
and
get
folks
back
on
in
the
coming
weeks.
Now,
because
we're
trying
to
drive
towards
1.0
so
yeah
we
can
get
started
just
as
a
reminder.
This
meeting
is
being
recorded,
it'll
be
uploaded
to
YouTube
shortly
after
and
your
participation
in
this
meeting
is
an
agreement
to
abide
by
the
openssf
code
of
conduct.
D
Okay,
so
anyway,
the
main
agenda
piece
other
than
anything
else
that
that
folks
want
to
bring
up
and
folks
want
to
kind
of
include
in
in
what
we're
doing
one
of
the
things
just
as
an
update
So.
The
plan
is,
you
know,
we're
already
sort
of
I
would
say
like
four
to
five
months
late
on
1.0
for
salsa,
but
the
idea
is
to
get
salsa
out
by
the
end
of
February
to
salsa
1.0
at
the
end
of
February,
with
the
idea.
D
You
know,
like
I,
think
now
that
there's
a
lot
more
eyes
on
it,
a
lot
more
eyes
on
salsa,
it's
a
little
bit
harder
to
make
some
of
the
changes,
because
there's
obviously
a
lot
of
community
feedback
and
those
sorts
of
things,
and
we
are
trying
to
also
build
out
a
a
bit
of
a
process
where
we're
trying
to
say,
let's
say
stuff
like
clarifications,
don't
necessarily
need
to
be
100
percent
done
in
order
to
have
another
release.
D
So
we
can
say
you
know
hey
if,
if
there's
a
little
bit
of
confusion
about
what
something
has
meant,
that's
okay,
as
long
as
like
it
is
clear
that,
like
it
doesn't
materially
change,
you
know
some
sort
of
meaning
right.
It's
it's
like
talking
about.
You
know
like
as
an
example
is
the
exact
thing
here.
You
know
when
we
say
hash
are
we
talking
about
which
hash,
algorithms
or
whatever
it's
like?
D
Look
that
is
going
to
get
updated
or
whatever,
but
this
is
what
it
means,
and
this
is
you
know
anyway,
that
that's
kind
of
where
we're
pushing
on
a
lot
of
the
1.0
stuff,
we're
hoping
to
get
that
out
in
Feb
as
part
of
that
we're
going
to
want
to
as
as
part
of
the
salsa
tooling
meeting.
The
thing
that
we're
gonna
want
to
do
is
make
sure
that
we're
prepared
for
all
the
1.0
changes.
D
So
there's
going
to
be
a
new
spec,
it's
a
little
bit
cleaner,
it's
a
little
bit
nicer
because
it
also
splits
up
reproducible
metadata
as
in
like
stuff,
that
is,
you
know,
The
Source
and
those
sorts
of
things
are
put
into
one
section.
D
As
well
as
sort
of
more
non-reproducible
metadata
stuff
like
time
stamps
and
those
things
are
going
into
a
separate
like
metadata
section
of
the
the
salsa
provenance
spec
with
the
intent
there
of
saying
like
hey,
if
you
just
want
to
check,
if
two
metadata,
you
know,
if
two
things
are
the
same,
and
you
want
to
just
look
at
the
those
pieces,
you
could
just
look
at
that
sub
object
in
the
Json
which,
which
you
know
simplifies
a
lot
of
stuff,
as
opposed
to
saying.
Oh
I
need
to
compare
all
of
these
fields.
D
D
I
know
that
I
believe
not
next
week,
but
the
week
after
I
think
is
supposed
to
be
the
next
like
full-blown
salsa
meeting
with
the
the
monthly
salsa
meeting,
where
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
that
a
little
bit
more
parth,
you
have
your
hand
up.
C
Yeah
I
had
a
question:
was
there
like
evidence,
field
going
to
be
added?
I
know
there
were
some
talks
about
that,
like
adding
in
evidence
like
hey,
you
know
for
some
other
things
like
I
have
a
traumatic
or
something
right
it
provided.
Some
kind
of
evidence
is
that
is
that
true,
or
is
that
being
added
or
not
yeah.
D
So
let
me
let
me
look
like
we
could
actually
look
at
the
spec
right
now.
What's
proposed,
there
I
believe
the
idea
was
to
allow
for
it.
The
thing
that
folks
were
talking
about
was
whether
or
not
some
of
the
existing
Fields
can
just
be
used
for
that
information,
and
you
could
just
sort
of
you
know
Point
folks
to
to
that.
D
Boy,
it's
one
of
those
big
those
big
PR's,
which
makes
GitHub
go
really
slow.
B
B
A
Sorry
Michael
just
to
clarify
you
need
PR
five
to
five
to
be
reviewed
by
the
committee.
Now.
D
Yeah,
no,
it's
it's
still
in
draft,
but
most
of
us
on
you
know.
Most
of
us
have
been
having
chats
in
in
the
the
slack
as
well
as
in
some
of
the
other
ones,
because
there's
the
salsa
specification
meeting,
which
it
happens
on
Monday,
which
is
where
a
lot
of
this
is
a
lot
of
that
discussion,
is,
is
happening
and
it's
it's
a
combination
of
folks.
But
you
know
who
are
part
of
the
committee
and
not.
B
A
Thanks
so
I'll
make
it
a
point
to
to
review
these
two.
D
And
so
right
now
they're
using
q
a
bit
to
sort
of
do
some
of
the
some
of
this,
but
but
even
I
believe
from
what.
D
Mark
was
saying:
is
he
didn't
want
it
to
be?
Let's
say
this
idea
here
was
not
supposed
to
be
fully
fledged
like
hey.
D
The
idea
right
now
is
to
be
more
like
just
syntactic
sugar
around
a
Json
spec.
This
is
not
intended
to
be
like
the
like
you
wouldn't
at
least
at
the
state.
D
It
is
right
now
this
is
more
intended
as
documentation
than
to
be
used
as
a
like
a
schema,
validator
right,
because
there's
certain
things
in
here
like
the
timestamp,
where
you
know
you
could
use
a
regular
expression
or
there's
some
hooks
in
in
queue
that
are
coming,
that
allow
you
to
sort
of
validate
against
the
timestamp
he's
just
saying
string
as
well
as,
like
you
know,
some
of
these
things
here
is
like
hey,
we're
just
sort
of
saying
shot:
256
String,
Shot,
512
string
and
so
on,
whereas
you
could
have
like
a
regular
expression
that
says
you
know
here's
what
the
you
know
so,
but
just
to
keep
it
simple
for
now,
that's
kind
of
what
he's
doing
there,
and
so
there's
a
bunch
of
stuff.
D
In
here
it's
been
a
few
weeks
since
I've
been
able
to
read
it
as
well,
because
I
was
out
of
the
country
for
a
while
foreign.
D
But
yeah
I
believe
there's.
The
idea
here
is
to
have
elements
in
a
build
definition.
There's
elements
of
the
Run
details,
there's
going
to
be
metadata,
which
is
like
the
time
stamp
information
and
so
on
and
so
yeah,
let's
see,
is
there
anything
that
yeah?
D
He
also
has
this
document
which
he
went
over
in
one
of
the
meetings
where
the
idea
here
is
he's
trying
to
sort
of
separate
out
the
stuff
that
is
stuff
that
you
don't
necessarily
control
like
the
stuff
in
Orange
right
like
you're,
not
you
know,
at
least
when
you're
sort
of
looking
at
it
you're
like
yeah
you're,
not
exactly
sure
what
dependencies
you
might
be
pulling
in
if
you're
not
using
the
right
sort
of
build
or
whatever
and
and
there's
a
lot
of
things
there,
and
these
are
all
sort
of
external
sort
of
stuff
and
yeah
yada
and
then
the
stuff,
that's
in
green,
so
the
stuff
that's
in
Orange
is
mostly
like
the
external
pieces.
D
The
stuff
that's
in
red,
obviously,
is
the
build
itself
and
then
the
stuff,
that's
in
green
is
stuff.
That's
supposed
to
be
part
of
like
owned
by
the
build
platform
itself.
In
this
case,
you
know
the
build
platform,
any
sort
of
parameters
that
fit
into
the
system,
the
environment
that
that
you're
building
on
and
that
sort
of
thing,
cool,
I,
don't
remember!
If
there's
like
what
else
there
is
here.
D
Yeah
I
mean
one
of
the
things
as
well
is
I.
Believe
byproducts
here
is
one
of
those
things
I
believe
that
was
at
least
the
one
of
the
intents
here.
Let
me
just
make
sure.
D
So
yeah
byproducts
is
just
like
what
like
these
could
be
any
sort
of
output
from
a
build,
and
some
of
those
outputs
could
be
even
include
stuff
like
evidence
whether
or
not
we
want
to
split
that
into
its
own
separate
field.
I
haven't
really
given
it
much
thought
personally.
D
C
D
Let
me
and
remember
that
Monday
is
when,
when
the
majority
of
of
sort
of
talk
about
that
sort
of
thing
goes
into
place,
I
think
for
this
this
meeting,
the
main
focus
is
like
how
for
this
group-
or
you
know,
some
of
the
tools
like
the
GitHub
generator,
techton
and
so
on
will
need
to
be
updated
to
support
that
1.0
spec
and
you
know
what
can
we
do
to
to
get
that
over
the
line
as
well?
D
We're
hoping
to
also
have
Fresca
integrated
with
with
1.0,
like
the.
B
D
One
of
the
first
or
whatever
yeah
yeah,
so
that's
that
any
that's
all
I
had
for
you
know.
D
D
Okie
dokie
yeah,
we
could
probably
end
it
a
little
early
I
know.
A
lot
of
folks
are
still
a
few
folks,
don't
get
back
till
like
a
week
or
two
from
now.
D
I
know,
for
example,
like
Brendan
still
out
in
Asia,
and
a
few
other
folks
had
said,
like
yeah
they're
still
on
on
vacation
this
week,
cool
so
yeah.
Just
as
a
reminder,
you
know
we'll
I'll
probably
like
if
folks
have
questions
or
whatever
about
some
of
the
different
salsa
tooling
things
we
can
chat
about
it
in
in
the
slack
I
believe
you
know,
there's
some
talk
here
about
how
what
can
we
do
to
make
you
know?
D
One
of
the
things
we
want
to
do
is
maybe
have
some
canonical
tooling,
which
is
already
something
like
the
salsa
generator
and
salsa
validator.
That
is
under
here,
like
what
can
we
do
to
make
that
1.0,
maybe
a
few
things
to
make
it
easier
to
consume
and
all
that
good
stuff,
but
yeah?
If
that's
it,
everybody
happy
Friday
everybody
and
have
a
good
weekend.