...
EF: Yes. Means they can evolve separately.
RK: Should taxonomies always be public?
JK: Suggest to park it now and come back with play-throughs or examples
DJ: Not sure if I understand the exact solution. Variants could be solved like dependency conflicts.
RK: Attempt is to make it extensible.
DJ: What if we introduce an element “conflicts”? Referring more to the bundle. Think the feature originally proposed by ST is subset of entities we are discussing since related to API objects not general set of files. Closely related to general configuration problem that we’ve decided to postpone.
JK: Excluding configuration of components.
DK: Bundle variant should be covered in dependencies and not in the classification.
RK: Think we are in alignment to explore public taxonomy category list.
Contribution Topic
JK: How to contribute (slide). Have discussions, proposals and change requests. For design decisions think it’s important to have a GitHub issue first. For larger items it would be good to capture it in Jira, break it down and assign resources to it. We have representatives from companies with write access in Jira and everyone has read access.
EF: On digital signing …
JK: Pascal responded
Tooling - Discussion Item 12
RK: This is pitching the long-term goals. In a yaml file can specify it and get a meaningful editor extension. Have an interactive user help. Could type ‘ST’ and get a list of devices that would match.
EF: You mean to make a prototype?
RK: Yes
JK: In summary it’s not an interactive CLI but specified by a yaml file.
DJ: Agree for the minimal implementation as a yaml file.
PH: Would agree to have something that doesn’t wait for inputs.
EF: Think it would simplify the initial end goal.