Table of Contents

Date

12 Jul 2017

Actions items from previous meetings

All: If your organization is interested in seeing Symphony support DB's Plexus interbank interop framework, tell Jonathan Christensen.
Lynn Neir (Deactivated), Leslie Spiro, and Former user (Deleted): schedule time before the members meeting to discuss compatibility issues between Container.JS and the Symphony web app.
Lynn Neir (Deactivated) and All: Review Tick42's proposal for a container API specification, including Leslie's email to the list and Kiril's pull request (especially the TypeScript specification), and comment on the mailing list.
Former user (Deleted) and Leslie Spiro: follow up with Lynn Neir (Deactivated) to discuss Symphony LLC's strategy regarding Symphony Electron desktop interop/on-behalf-of functionality.
Lynn Neir (Deactivated): test Container.JS with Symphony Electron if possible
Lynn Neir (Deactivated): add file download API method (and any other planned methods) to list in Confluence
Former user (Deleted): revise proposed charter to clarify that group's priority is portability of Symphony to various containers, with portability of other apps being a secondary goal.
JC & Lynn Neir (Deactivated): check whether documentation of Symphony web app API is accessible
JC & Lynn Neir (Deactivated): let WG members know whether the API methods used by Symphony Electron are exposed in Symphony 1.46
Aaron Williamson: send ODP info to list (esp. to Former user (Deleted) & Former user (Deleted))
Aaron Williamson: arrange meetings between member firms and DB re: interest in Plexus

Meeting notes

Open Actions.

1^st two (ODP info and arrange Plexus meetings) assigned to Aaron Williamson were skipped. The next two (Documentation and Symphony 1.46) were assigned to Lynn Neir (Deactivated), possibly as a result of requests from Nick. Nick said he had started implementing the code to support the Symphony HTML 5 app (i.e. the frontend/UI) in OpenFin. Lynn said the code in the SSF repo was preliminary and subject to change as development of the UI progressed.

Former user (Deleted) asked Lynn if/when/how there would be a pre-release version of the UI for people to test in other containers. Mazy Dar also asked Lynn if there were time scales for the UI release. Lynn said he did not have any. He said the first step is an internal ‘trial run’ of the UI and this has not started. Mazy asked if the pre-release UI could be made available via the SSF Pod so that Vendors could test against it pre-release.

Members discussed practical issues about how changes to the API and the UI can be communicated to ‘interested parties’ so they can prepare for changes and ensure support in their container. Lynn said he would present a proposal about if and how this info could be made available. Lynn said that this would become easier if the UI code was open-sourced, and that he believed that was the plan, but there were some blockers and also they wanted to redesign some stuff before open-sourcing.

Members discussed the deployment model for the UI and Lynn confirmed that the LLC would release some kind of desktop installer that installs Electron and suitable pre-load scripts that connect to a URL in the client’s POD to load and run the UI.

Mazy asked Lynn for dates on the Symphony releases 1.47 and 1.48.

Lynn was asked to confirm that other containers would be able to run the UI in the same way, namely having the API implementation and then launch against the relevant URL which he confirmed. Lynn was then asked to get an official statement of the LLC position of the UI running in ‘other containers’ and how it would be supported.

Leslie asked whether members were interested in DB’s Plexus contribution and said that Tick42 were. Discussion of the remaining Container.JS actions were postponed until the Container.JS agenda item arose.

Draft Charter.

Leslie read each of the four points in the draft charter and asked for comments.

“1. The group will seek to define and standardize APIs required to integrate the Symphony HTML5 application into a desktop container, with a specific goal such that the application can be hosted in different desktop wrappers (aka desktop containers).”

Johan Sandersson asked if this point should include language directed at confirming that the LLC supported their UI running in other containers that correctly implemented the agreed desktop API. Members expressed uncertainty about how that might work and more fundamentally whether the WG should take a position on LLC development/release plans.

“2. The group will seek to define and standardize APIs to enable any HTML5 application to run in a compatible desktop wrapper and take advantage of the standardized desktop integration features.”

This point generated the most feedback. Mazy asked if anyone was using Container.JS or planning to use it. He was concerned that discussing this in the WG would waste people’s time if no one was using it. Nick thought discussing this and DB’s Plexus contribution was a mistake because there was a lot of work required to support the first and primary objective. Leslie said he thought there was not a lot of work required—that the APIs had been reviewed and he thought that Colin had implemented a shim between the Symphony API and the proposed more general API within Container.JS (but that this is not confirmed).

“3. Enable and expand the capabilities of the Symphony Desktop Container project(s) by direct contributions from the Foundation members and collaboration with Symphony LLC, in order to influence the direction of the project to meet the requirements of the Foundation members.”

Mazy asked if this was valid, and suggested that the process should be that the LLC defined the API for point 1, the WG reviewed it, and interested parties produced their own implementation. Mazy asked if anyone else had contributed to the API. Leslie said he thought that Former user (Deleted) may have made contributions to the project and if not had reviewed and given feedback on the project.

“4. The group will seek to influence and standardize the integration APIs used to both interact with the Symphony Desktop application and for more general desktop application interoperability. This influence will happen through working with Symphony LLC and direct contributions from the Foundation members”

Mark Hu said he thought Interop was a very important and useful area. Former user (Deleted) asked if DB were planning on including the message types for interop for example message definitions. Leslie said that Former user (Deleted)’s powerpoint contained a detailed description of which bits were planned for inclusion, but that when Leslie had asked Slava about including type definitions he was told this had not been decided. This also has relevance to the OpenML specification.

Nick and Mazy thought this was a very big area and should be in a separate WG. Leslie said that this had been discussed and could be reviewed when DB make a decision about whether they are releasing Plexus and whether it will be included with the UI, and that in the meantime it was a valid discussion point, and that an Interop API definition that could work with multiple Interop buses was currently part of Container.JS specification.

Gareth Davies said that it was important to keep a tight focus on the work covered by the WG and to focus on deliverables, which might indicate dropping this.

Leslie proposed moving any decisions on charter revisions to a later meeting, ideally one that Aaron and James could attend.

Action items

Jonathan Christensen: provide rough timeline for release/pre-release of the HTML5 app revisions; continue to update the WG as information becomes available.
Jonathan Christensen: inform the WG whether the LLC pre-release the HTML5 app on the SSF Open Developer Platform.
Jonathan Christensen: confirm that Symphony intends to open-source the HTML5 app and provide a rough timeline.
Jonathan Christensen: provide an official statement of the LLC position on enabling the UI to run in alternative containers, and how such third-party containers would be supported.

Agenda

Time	Item	Who	Notes
5 min	Convene & roll call
10 min	Review action items from previous meetings		See Action Items from previous meetings
20 min	Review revised draft charter and set discussion & vote schedule	Former user (Deleted)
20 min	Discussion of Container.JS approach and proposed API specification	Leslie Spiro

5 min	AOB & adjourn

Attendees

Name	Organisation	Present?
Former user (Deleted) (chair)	Credit Suisse
Leslie Spiro (interim chair)	Tick42	Y
Jonathan Christensen	Symphony LLC
Andrew Christie	Ipreo
Gareth Davies	Goldman Sachs	Y
Colin Eberhardt (He/Him)	ScottLogic	Y
Matthew Gardner	BlackRock
Mark Hu	Citi	Y
Brian Ingenito	Morgan Stanley	Y
Richard Kleter	Deutsche Bank
Former user (Deleted)	OpenFin	Y
Former user (Deleted)	Citadel
Former user (Deleted)	Deutsche Bank
Adam Lancaster	Tick42	Y
Ian J. McDermott	JP Morgan
Lawrence Miller (Deactivated)	Symphony LLC
Lynn Neir (Deactivated)	Symphony LLC	Y
Former user (Deleted)	JP Morgan	Y
Ed Sanders	JP Morgan
Johan Sandersson	FactSet	Y
Former user (Deleted)	Morgan Stanley
Former user (Deleted)	HSBC
Ryan Sharp	ChartIQ
Former user (Deleted)	Symphony Software Foundation
Peter Monks	Symphony Software Foundation
Aaron Williamson	Symphony Software Foundation