►
From YouTube: Spec 3.0 meeting (April 13th, 2022)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Now
the
thing
is
that
when
I,
when
I
left,
I
just
clicked
like
kick
everyone
out
instead
of
instead
of
just
leaving
myself
and
it's
the
mechanical
memory
of
my
my
of
my
hand
like,
because
I
always
lit
like
this,
because
I'm
always
the
host
and
the
other
meetings.
B
Yeah
not
the
same
okay,.
B
D
B
I've
seen
it
like
what
was
the
other
day.
I
I
don't
know
what
happened
today
with
magic.
B
Magic
names
is
also
like
magic
names,
but
it
was
with
the
name
and
the
and
the
surname,
so
it
was
magic.
Urbantic.
A
A
B
I
got
I
got
asked
on
twitter
like
when
do
we
plan
to
release
version
three,
and
I
said
like
because.
D
A
E
Nope
just
comment:
I'm
excited
to
see
the
hive
mq
talking
out
loud.
I
I
missed
it
live
unfortunately,
but
looks
really
good.
B
So
I
I
really
I
have
something,
but
let's
leave
it
for
the
end.
After,
on
the
last
question.
A
Okay,
so
a
little
update,
so
I've
been
trying
to
push
through
getting
everything
set
up,
so
you
can
actually
move
rfcs
forward
because
at
the
moment
there
is
no
branches
for
you
to
target
your
changes
for
3.0.
A
A
A
A
A
The
only
thing
I'm
missing
is
targeting
this
to
next
major
spec,
which
is
what
we
agreed
upon
in
the
circus
issue
for
his
proposal
for
branch
namings
next
is
creating
these
branches,
which
is
up
to
you
friend,
dale
and
lucas.
To
do
I
added
the
to-do
list
down
here
what
needed
to
be
done
by
you,
because
I
don't
have
the
permissions
to
set
this
up,
so
this
needs
to
be
done.
You.
B
Want
you
want
it
to
be
based
out
of
master
right.
A
B
A
A
B
On
the
json
schemas
repo
and
the
parser
reaper
right,
yes
in
respect
on
the
spec,
it's
next
major.
A
A
Can
send
you
the
the
comment
it's
right
here?
Okay,
probably
no
problem.
I
fully
trust
you
no
problem,
but
it
was
just
to
stay
consistent.
I
think
I
actually
never
considered
it
like
next
major
spec
for
the
spec
reaper
is
like
next
major.
It
makes
sense
right
so
maybe.
B
A
A
I'm
not
sure
if
it
needs
to
be
retargeted
towards
next
back
yeah
new
release,
so
that's
in
the
pipeline
afterwards,
I
also
added
two
blog
post
or
a
blog
post
and
I've
added
another
page
for
the
website
for
preparing
towards
breaking
changes
and
migration
guide,
because
this
is
something
that
we
didn't
have
for
the
2.0
version,
changes
or
version
two,
but
for
version
three
I
feel
like
we
need
a
place
where
all
the
migration
guides
are
for
how
you
would
manually
change
from
version
2
to
version
3,
which
is
what
the
converters,
for
example,
are
going
to
be
based
on.
A
I've
added
this
page
down
here
migrating
to
version
3,
which
makes
kind
of
set
up
for
then,
whenever
we
want
to
do
a
vision
for
as
well
what
is
within
this
file
and
if
it
should
be
here,
I
have
it's:
it's
not
set
in
stone.
So
if
you
have
any
suggestions,
how
this
can
be
better,
please
feel
free
to
to.
Let
us
know.
A
So,
yes,
that
is
setup
breath,
release
block
I've,
also
added
that
for
whenever
that
time
comes,
and
we
can
slowly
add
the
changes
there
as
we
go.
A
A
A
So
yeah
that's
kind
of
the
update
from
my
side,
which,
in
terms
of
what
we
need
in
order
to
be
set
up
for
moving
ifc's
forward,
and
that
doesn't
mean
you
have
to
wait
for
all
of
these
things
to
be
fixed
in
order
to
actually
come
to
a
maybe,
not
a
conclusion,
but
a
semi-conclusion
in
your
whatever
issue
you're
championing
like
do
it.
While
everything
is
going
on
slowly
progressing,
it
makes
more
sense.
A
A
Yeah,
that's
kind
of
the
update
from
me.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
for.
C
A
So
it's
in
terms
of
this
migration
right
yeah,.
A
Because
it's
not
something
that
we
have
in
any
way
discussed
or
or
considered
yet,
because
this
is
the
first
time
we
actually
need
it.
So
I
I
just
took
whatever
made
most
sense
for
me
at
that
time,
but
yeah
I'll
add
it
to
the
journal.
Make
sure
to
do
that.
B
B
I
was
wondering
like
what
was
missing
to
you
to
start
working
like
start
creating
actual
changes,
but
that's
a
I
mean
your
result
answered
my
question.
That's
why
I
wanted
to
live
to
leave
it
for,
for
the
end,
just
in
case.
B
So
yeah
nothing
else
other
than
that
is
there
anything
else
blocking
you,
folks
that
we
could
be
doing
or
but
I
killed
can
I
could
be
doing
at
least.
A
B
Okay,
so
let's
try
to
push
this
forward,
I
think
so
we
can.
So
it's
only
missing
my
review
there
on
introduce
play
definitions.
A
A
B
A
A
B
That's
going
to
be
cool,
let's
see
the
very
moment.
We
start
seeing
like
version
3
as
something
tangible
that
you
can
already
use.
That's
going
to
be
cool
and
even
I
will
say
like
well,
it's
going
to
be
possible
on
parser
once
we
have
parser
updating
the
reference
on
the
next
major
branch.
B
Next,
major
spec
branch,
that's
going
to
be
cool
because
we
can
then
play
with
it
and
then
actually
build
stuff
and
see
how
it
goes.
A
Another
thing
that
I
kind
of
noticed
like
next
time
we're
doing
a
major
version.
Change,
don't
pair
it
up
with
major
version
changes
in
the
tooling
like.
Do
it
completely
separate,
like
being
a
blog
like
us
being
being
blocked
by
the
split
of
definitions,
is
a
problem,
and
we
shouldn't
have
done
it
like
in
backside.
Hindsight.
B
B
C
I
would
say
it's
going
pretty
well,
the
reality
is
that
this
week
is
like
a
bit
stopped,
but
we
are
not
facing
so
many
issues.
Both
matcha
and
soviet
were
working
on
this
and
I,
I
would
say
it's
going
smoothly.
To
be
honest.
Sorry,
what
oh
the
names
make.
Oh
my
god.
D
I
was,
I
was,
I
was.
B
I
was
looking
at
this
and
it
was.
It
was
saying,
like
both
my
chicken,
my
with
my
chicken
was
so
big
and
it
was
magic,
something.
C
C
It's
super
good
that
I
mean
it's
more
more
work
right,
but
I'm
not
concerned
at
all
to
achieve
it
like
to
have
this
for
way
earlier,
3.0.
To
be
honest,
oh
yeah,
yeah,
yeah,.
B
C
In
the
next
10
months,
yeah,
the
next.
A
So
you're
probably
also
gonna,
have
to
when
you
release
the
2.4,
I'm
assuming
that
the
spec
repo
is
gonna,
get
a
major
like
that
will
be
merged
by
then
so
we'll
need
to
figure
out
how
you
can
merge
those
two
together,
because
if
you
target
master
and
you're
using
the
old
schema
setup,
then
we
need
to
merge
those
two
in
some
way
or
another.
C
C
If,
okay,
if
you
merge
that
so
the
plan
is
to
port
those
changes
into
the
new
to
the
new
split
files.
C
Wouldn't
be
hard,
I'm
I'm
wondering
if
if
we
should
ask
the
contributors
to
do
it
now,
like.
C
A
B
Yeah,
I
will
do
it
instead
of
asking
each
contributor
to
do
it.
I
will
just
take
the
link
here
and
do
just
the
migration
after
not
after,
but
let's,
let's
do
it
right
before,
but
that's.
B
Happen,
but
not
exactly
not
not
afters,
but
what
I
mean
is
is
that
you
do
it
before
exactly
you
did
before
it's,
it's
actually
merged
right,
but
it's
only
one
person
doing
it
and
I
think
it's
going
to
be
more.
Let's
say:
agile,
you
don't
have
to
wait
for
the
yeah
yeah
yeah
and.
C
The
bullet
puts
everything
into
the
release
branch
and
yes,
whenever
everything
is
merged,
then
yeah
we
do
yeah.
I
agree
it's
fine,
I
mean,
because
there
are
not
a
lot
of
changes,
and
this
is
exactly.
I
don't
think
there
are
there.
There
will
be
many
so
otherwise
I
would
prefer
like
contributors
to
do
it,
because
not
not
because
the
job
of
the
work,
because
of
them,
you
know
like
authoring
like
having
them
involved
in
the
process,
even
yeah.