►
From YouTube: Backdrop Weekly - Jan 30th, 2020
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).
A
All
right
we
are
live
on
YouTube.
According
to
this
meeting,
today
is
Thursday
January
30th.
This
is
a
weekly
development
meeting,
which
means
we
usually
talk
about
active
development
tasks
for
backdrop
CMS
this
week
going
to
do
something
a
little
bit
different
since
next
week
is
our
strategy
and
goals
for
2020
meeting
for
development.
We've
shortened
up
the
active
tasks
list
and
instead
added
a
section
where
we
can
prepare
for
next
week's
meeting.
A
Alright.
So
to
start
us
off,
I
wanted
to
welcome
Alejandro
to
the
backdrop
community.
He
is
ported,
both
the
views,
aggregator
plus
module
and
the
HMS
fields
module
and
has
maintainer
applications
in
the
queue
Tim
I
want
to
say.
Thank
you
again
for
responding
to
him
since
I
think
Gregory's
been
really
busy.
The
last
few
weeks,
I'm
happy
to
take
a
look
at
his
applications
after
this
meeting
and
make
sure
he's
reviewed.
A
We
also
have
a
new
module
that
was
released
this
week.
Two
protected
forms
module
has
the
stable
release,
which
is
great
and
that
this
next
section
of
our
meeting
is
usually
devoted
to
issue
review,
but
I
did
want
to
say
that
we
have
a
milestone
for
115
one
that
has
a
handful
of
things
in
them.
It
doesn't
look
like
we
have
anything
critical
that
needs
to
be
fixed
urgently.
So
I
was
gonna
recommend
to
neat
he's
not
here
today
that
we
do
a
push
of
the
115
zero
release
to
Pantheon
in
other
places.
A
If
it's
not
there
already
and
then
review
those
issues
than
115
one
q4
released
sometime
soon
next
week,
her
that
week
after
review
my
preference
and
then
Tim
a
few
and
I
can
work
on
a
newsletter
I
can
I
can
try
and
kick?
I
haven't
used
the
new
system
yet,
but
I'll,
try
and
see
how
we
can
get
something
from
our
MailChimp
newsletter
into
there
as
a
starting
point
to
put
that
stuff
in
and
so
then
I
think
two
weeks
is
sort
of
reasonable
to
get
that
time
line
up
for
that.
A
The
116
release,
which
is
scheduled
for
May
15th,
has
currently
four
issues.
They
are
tied
for
the
milestone.
Our
usual
process,
for
this
is
that
everybody
can
go
and
take
a
look
at
the
one
on
the
milestone
candidate
label
in
the
queue
and
see.
If
there's
anything
there,
you
think
really
needs
to
be
included
in
the
next
release.
A
If
you
do
you
can
advocate
for
that
issue,
and
if
that
issue
gets
an
advocate,
then
all
of
those
issues
get
submitted
to
the
PMC
for
review
and
then
the
PMC
would
decide
if
those
are
appropriate
for
our
priorities
or
not.
However,
there
is
a
discussion
going
on
in
the
forum
right
now
about
having
a
better
way
to
decide
priorities
than
letting
the
most
active
people
in
our
community
decide
what
it's
most
important
for
our
community.
A
So
it
could
be
that
there
are
a
whole
bunch
of
people
that
are
using
backdrop
that
needs
something
that
none
of
the
people
who
are
currently
in
the
conversation
are
aware
of,
or
it
could
be,
that
we're
all
missing
something
that
we
all
know
needs
to
happen,
but
first
some
reason
isn't
getting
the
intention
that
it
deserves.
So
there's
a
great
conversation
going
on
in
the
forum
about
how
we
can
try
and
better
set
the
priorities
for
our
project
and
I
would
love
feedback
from
anyone
who
has
thoughts
on
it
in
that
issue.
A
Tim
thanks
for
opening
it
Oklahoma.
If
you
watch
this,
thank
you
for
bringing
that
up.
I
know
it's
been
something
you've
been
championing
for
a
while.
So
I
think
has
a
great
time
to
talk
about
it
since
we're
about
to
set
goals
for
116,
and
it
could
be
that
we
just
decided
on
a
process,
but
the
process
can't
start
until
the
117
release
and
that's
also
fine
I
would
love
to
improve
the
process.
A
However,
we
end
up
getting
that
done,
so
there's
links
in
the
agenda
for
the
115
one
milestone,
which
will
be
the
next
bug-fix
release
in
the
116,
milestone
and
I.
Think
those
are
just
issues
that
have
rolled
over
from
the
115
milestone,
so
they
might
get
deemed
no
longer
priority
by
the
PMC
or
replaced
by
something
that
are
priority
based
on
our
conversations
in
the
forum.
But
it
is
a
tentative
list.
A
A
Does
anyone
have
any
objections
to
this
and
they
look
at
the
list
and
go
no
looks
fine
or
actually
I,
don't
think
that's
a
priority
or
whatever,
but
for
the
for
the
most
part
they're,
not
it's
not
like
an
active
discussion
about
it,
which
I
think
maybe
we
might
want
to
add
but
yeah,
so
they
have
always
been
aware
of.
What's
going
on
the
next
release
and
have
a
vote.
Yes,
no
on
the
issue
in
the
PMC
queue.
A
B
The
priority
setting
I
think
it's
worth
drawing
attention
to
the
difference
between
sort
of
new
features
and
bugs
I
know
20
different
and
I'd,
like
I
I
kind
of
like
the
advocacy
route
which
a
way
of
interpreting
priorities
for
for
new
features.
It's
not
perfect,
but
but
that's
still
leaves
a
big
gap.
The
bumps
are
we
determining.
Where
is
the
most
important
bugs
with
its
that's
opposed
to
the
easiest
yeah.
A
That's
a
good
question.
I
think
I
think
that
the
entire
discussion
that's
going
on
the
forum
right
now
is
about
new
features.
It
is
hard
to
determine
the
priority
of
bugs
in
general.
It
seems
like
visibility
of
the
bug
is
really
important
like
how
often
are
people
running
into
this
problem,
or
is
it
something
that's
an
extreme
edge
case
might
determine
it
and
usually,
if
there's
something
that
deletes
data,
that
is
always
a
critical
bug
and
I.
A
Don't
not
aware
many
of
those
that
we
have
right
now,
but
if
there
are,
they
should
be
marked
as
critical
and
then
any
bug
that
has
a
pull
request
is
assigned
for
the
next
milestone.
So
if
that
polar
bus
gets
marked,
our
TBC
it'll
get
merged,
regardless
of
whether
it's
important
or
not
just
cuz.
If
we
have
a
fix
for
a
bug,
we
should
include
it
but
yeah.
It
would
be
great
if
we
could
figure
out
a
better
system
for
adding
priority
on
bug.
Fixes
I,
don't
know
if
anyone
has
any
ideas
on
that.
A
The
first
thing
that
comes
to
mind
would
be
the
way
github
usually
handles
these
things.
Since
you
put
it
like
a
thumbs
up
on
the
top
issue,
but
that
assumes
that
everybody
who's
running
into
the
issue
is
on
github
and
that's
not
necessarily
a
match
for
what
our
community
is
doing
so
yeah.
It
would
be
great
if
we
had
better
ways
to
do
that.
These
add
thoughts
into
the
forum
post.
You
have
them.
A
So
next
section
in
the
agenda
is
to
talked
about
what
we're
going
to
be
doing
next
week
and
we
just
had
a
strategy
meeting
for
what
we
want
to
achieve
in
design
and
usability
improvements
in
2020
and
I.
Think
the
conversation
about
what
we
want
to
achieve
with
backdrop
of
the
product
is
gonna,
be
a
little
different,
but
I
don't
know
Tim.
If
you
want
to
outline
what
you
envision
happening
next
week
or
what
what
you
hope
will
happen
next
week,
then
we
can
help
set
up
outline
for
how
to
handle
our
I
I.
B
Think
at
a
minimum
that
we
should
do
sort
of
how
we
started
the
last
meeting,
which
is
everybody,
ought
to
give
a
chance
to
sort
of
say:
hey
here,
are
the
how
I
think
we're
doing,
and
so
far
in
handling
certain
development
issues
and
and
what
kind
of
goals
I
think
we
should
be
thinking
about
this
year.
So
at
the
very
minimum
we
just
leave
the
meeting
with
a
list
of
what
everybody
that's
participating.
Probably
we
should
have
somebody
also
review
the
issue
two
or
the
the
forum
post
then
review
it.
B
You
know
so
if
people
post
things
there
but
aren't
on
the
call
there,
their
ideas
also
dip
into
the
intent,
but
beyond
that
I'm
still
as
I
expressed
advised
me,
I'm
still
a
little
bit
conflicted
in
what
an
open-source
community
like
ours
can
do
in
terms
of
goals.
Sighs
it's
like
there's
this.
It's
your
own
scratch
mentality,
which
is
everybody,
does
what's
important
to
them
and
just
setting
a
goal
as
a
community
like
what
is
the
effect
of
that?
How
do
we
use
that.
C
Well,
for
example,
in
Drupal,
and
there
are
I
think
they
caught
initiative,
and
that
would
be
an
idea,
but
I
think
it
works
only
if,
if
there
are
people
who
make
part
of
the
initiative,
so
we
could
collect
ideas
for
initiatives
and
if,
for
example,
minimum
two
people
build
a
team
and
there's
consensus
that
is
important
core.
They
just
could
start
and
do
that.
So
it's
maybe
a
bit
similar
to
advocating
for
an
issue
which
is
also
most
a
small
team,
one
person
who
is
advocating
and
another
person
who's
working
on
the
future.
B
Think
we
have
a
chicken
and
egg
problem
with
things
like
initiatives
and
that
we
don't
really
have
a
core
group
of
volunteers.
That's
big
enough
to
justify
initiatives.
On
the
other
hand,
if
we
had
initiatives,
we
might
get
more
volunteers,
because
people
might
be
more
inclined
to
like
get
on
a
very
narrow
committee
that
meets
at
a
different
time.
B
A
I
think
there
that
I
think
we're
talking
about
the
same
thing
like
an
issue
with
an
advocate.
An
initiative
is
the
same
thing.
We
just
need
to
figure
out
like
how
to
make
it
more
attractive
for
somebody
who's,
not
our
project
participating
in
something
to
participate
in
something.
So
maybe
we
need
to
change
the
responsibilities
for
the
Advocate.
A
So
not
only
do
you
pester
people
to
review
your
issue
if
they're,
if
it's
not
getting
reviewed
or
rewrite
it
if
it
needs
to
rewrite
or
whatever,
but
you
can
also
be
sort
of
the
point
person
for
people
who
are
curious
about
this
initiative
to
reach
out
and
say,
like
hey
I,
also
am
interested
in
X.
What
can
I
do
to
be
of
help
and
then
the
issue
becomes
less
like,
but
you
know
here's
the
problem
and
here's
a
pull
request,
but
it
becomes
bigger
more
like
an
initiative
like
we're.
A
Gonna
improve
the
translation
interface
in
backdrop
core
or
something,
and
then
it
can
have
a
bunch
of
sub
issues
that
are
all
related
to
the
initiative
rather
than
just
being
one
and
and
it
can
carry
across
more
than
one
release.
So
it
could
even
be
a
wonder
these
called
project
on
github,
where
you
can
sort
of
say
this
is
the
number
of
things
we
have
tied
to
this
project,
and
this
is
the
number
of
things
from
moving
towards
goal.
A
Or
what
have
you
I
think
it's
the
same
concept
and
I
wouldn't
want
to
limit
something
from
being
an
initiative
by
the
number
of
people
who
are
working
on
it
because
I
think
if
we
have
one
person
working
on
an
initiative
as
an
advocate
or
whatever
we
want
to
call
it,
it
can
still
make
just
as
much
progress.
I've
seen
a
bunch
of
core
initiatives
start
that
way
in
Drupal.
A
My
question
would
be:
how
do
we
select
those
initiatives
in
the
first
place?
Is
that
something
that
we
just
have
people
volunteer
and
say:
I'm
really
passionate
about
X,
and
then
we
have
the
project
management
committee
approve
it
the
same
way.
We
do
with
issues
that
are
scheduled
for
milestones,
or
is
it
something
we
want
to
have
more
of
an
open
conversation
about
in
the
forum
I
think
set
setting
that.
B
Sure
so
I
mean
I
think
it
either
could
be
sort
of
a
formal
decision
by
like
the
PMC,
but
the
other
I
mean
the
advocacy
right
is
largely
determined
by
somebody
stepped
forward.
So
I
could
envision
a
scenario
where
we
had
looked
next
week.
We
brainstorm
initiatives
and
I
get
your
point
about
advocacy
and
initiatives
being
the
same
I
guess,
I,
just
sort
of
see,
initiatives
being
a
little.
You
know
advocacy
to
be
a
very
really
tight
issue.
B
B
You
might
lose
me
at
any
point.
I
turn
off
my
video
to
hopefully
save
a
little
bandwidth.
Anyways
I
could
envision
that
we
brainstorm
them
and
then,
like
initiatives
just
advocates,
do
the
choir
two
or
three
people
to
sort
of
become
official
I
mean
because
you
can
always
still
advocate
for
an
issue.
The
Lord's
wrestle
right.
It's
an
initiative,
it's
a
bigger
thing
than
we
sort
of
make
the
decision-making
process
that
we
need
to
get
three
people
ranking
another.
B
An
advantage
to
an
initiative
is
the
ability
for
three
people
that
again
can't
meet
at
this
time.
To
like,
say,
oh
we're,
gonna
start
meeting
on
this
issue
and
focusing
on
this
issue,
and
they
can
pick
their
own
time,
and
maybe
we
get
people
that
can't
come
to
these
meetings
that
don't
want
to
be
involved
so
I,
don't
know,
then
the
rest.
The
downside
to
this
is
we
declare
five
initiatives
and
we
get
the
same
side.
People
are
outside
initiatives.
C
A
All
right
so
in
terms
of
setting
goals
for
the
project
is
this
something
we
should
do
in
next
week's
meeting?
Maybe
we
can
think
about
it
before
then,
and
set
them
try
and
try
and
determine
a
list
of
a
few
things
that
we
want
to
be
initiatives
for
all
of
backdrop
and
then
run
that
by
the
PMC.
Is
that
the
kind
of
thing
and
then,
if
those
initiatives
are
big
enough,
that
they,
you
know,
aren't
gonna,
have
a
single
issue
with
them?
We
could
assign
a
person
or
people
who
are
responsible
for
each
initiative.
A
And
we
could
select
an
issue
in
each
initiative
for
every
milestone
or
something
like
that
to
make
sure
that
that
issue
with
that
initiative
moves
closer
towards
its
goal.
I,
don't
know
I
mean
it
doesn't
have
to
get
done
in
the
milestone
about
having
something
or
like
this
is
an
initiative,
and
we
care
about
this
and
so
we're
gonna
prioritize.
This
issue
might
be
good
I,
don't
know
if
you
your
silences
that
you
just
could
just
I'm
brainstorming.
B
If
we
go
this
route,
I
mean
there
has
been
discussion,
I
think
in
the
past
and
bad
rap
about
having
like
maintenance
of
different
subsystems,
but
we
just
didn't
have
the
number
of
volunteers
to
make
that
necessary
and
I'm
trying
to
think
about
what
the
difference
between
like
a
system,
maintainer
would
be
an
initiative
leave
and
they
might
be
kind
of
it
could
be
different,
but
they
might
also
be
very
much
the
same
and
I'm
thinking
about
you
are
the
new
wet
stuff
we
just
talked
about.
If
we
had
a
UX
initiative,
our
UX
lead.
B
That
would
also
help
us
with
that
problem,
about
like
breaking
log
jams
and
making
decisions
right
that
there
were
some
people
that
we
had
given
some
authority
over
to
do.
Acts
like
to
be
the
decision,
makers
and
I'm
wondering
if,
like
I'm
also
wondering
is,
with
these
initiatives,
be
restricted
to
core
or
as
a
community,
to
decide
that
were
contributing
is
a
priority
right
that
one
of
the
road
big
obstacles
to
getting
these
are
used
to
just
a
lack
of
confirms.
So
let's
have
an
initiative
whose
goal
it
is
to
get
more
contributors.
A
B
B
B
Okay,
one
last
point:
not
necess
what
you
said:
I
feel
like
over
the
years
there's
been
the
chicken
and
egg
right
and
that
it's
been
hard
to
do
something
like
initiatives,
because
the
community
wasn't
just
big
enough
and
I'm,
not
a
hundred
percent
sure
we're
there
yet,
but
I
think
we're
on
the
edge,
and
it
might
be
it's
just
the
right
time
to
try
it
and
it
could
actually.
The
hope
is
that
it
it
brings
new
people
in
when
they
have
more
specific
things
to
work
on
and
or
you
know,
more
opportunity.
B
A
F
G
A
C
A
And
I
think
references
in
the
core
might
also
be
something
that
would
be
small
enough
to
be
an
issue
and
how
an
issue
advocate,
because
it's
a
feature
rather
than
like
an
ongoing
thing.
So
if
we
I
mean
I,
don't
know,
maybe
maybe
it
is.
But
I
was
thinking
like
something
like
the
new
menu
system
right.
A
We
can
just
let
those
stand
and
when
someone
gets
around
to
solving
them,
they
can
be
solved
and
we
have
more
important
initiatives
that
might
need
to
be
solved.
Then
improving
the
help
text
on
a
radio
button
or
whatever
I,
don't
know
what
the
issues
are,
but
something
like
that.
But
I
could
see
how
something
that
was
super
important
might
start
as
one
bug
fix
and
in
a
conversation
about
it,
we're
like
well.
A
This
actually
leads
to
an
underlying
problem
of,
like
I,
don't
know
making
user
interfaces
that
non-technical
people
can
use,
and
maybe
that
becomes
the
initiative
rather
than
fixing
this
one.
But
with
this
you
know
no
2%
terminology
that
confuses
everyone.
There
might
be
an
underlying
issue
there.
That
does
deserve
an
initiative,
even
though
the
current
task
is
only
concrete
one
you're
down
to
one
issue,
but
it
also
could
be
the
r1
issue.
Right
now
is,
like
you
know,
we're
having
a
problem
with
a
chat
tool
or
whatever,
but
maybe
there's
an
initiative
behind
that.
A
That's
like
we
need
to
choose
better
tools
for
free,
open
source
software
projects,
and
so,
even
though
right
now
there's
only
one
issue.
If
that's
something
that
is
initiative,
then
every
really
cycle
will
be
like
hey.
Is
there
anything
we
need
to
do
in
terms
of
this
particular
initiative?
Are
we
doing
a
good
enough
job
with
our
tooling
for
our
project
or
something
like
that,
and
it
might
keep
us
in
line
with
continuing
to
ask
in
question
questions
that
are
important,
even
though
we
may
not
have
an
issue
that
directly
maps
to
that
problem.
So.
B
No
I
agree
with
all
of
that.
I,
don't
think
we
need
to
decide
on
the
minimum
size
of
an
initiative,
because
if
an
initiative
carries
with
it
the
weight
of
being
an
official
endorsement
of
the
PMC,
then
I
think
the
PMC
sort
of
decides.
What's
big
and
small
enough
to
be
an
initiative,
it's
not
there's
no
risk
of
something
sort
of
accident,
some
small
issue
accidentally
becoming
individual
because
we
actually
have
to
have
a
an
affirmative
decision
on
it
and
they
can
decide.
B
You
know
it
could
be
a
very
small
issue
as
to
super
important
worth
becoming
an
initiative
or,
but
probably
not
I
would
think
of
it
more
that
way
and
the
other.
But
the
reverse
is
true.
You
know
we
can't
have
the
PMC
just
create
an
initiative
with
nobody
behind
it.
Right
so
I
mean
I.
Think
it's
less
the
size
of
the
issue
and
more.
Is
there
somebody's
willing
to
take
charge
of
it
that
that's
critical?
Because
if
the
PMC
says
oh
we're,
gonna
do
an
issue
that
was
initiative
on
search
because
people
keep
telling
us.
B
A
A
Do
think
it
might
be
a
good
idea,
though,
to
get
documented
somewhere
the
things
that
PMC
members
think
should
be
initiatives,
so
something
like
search
is
a
good
example
where
it's
like.
We
know
this
is
a
problem.
We
would
love
it
if
somebody
wanted
to
step
up
and
own
this
initiative,
but
right
now
it's
not
active
because
there
isn't
anyone
to
do
that,
and
that
way
I
think
also
creates
a
space
for
people
who
want
to
be
more
involved
that
don't
know
where
they
can
help
to
look
at
that
list
and
go.
A
Oh
I
also
really
care
about
search
and
then
all
of
a
sudden
feel
like
there's
a
good
place
for
them
to
step
in
so
I
would
say
that
in
our
brainstorming
next
week
it
would
be
good
to
throw
all
of
these
like
all
of
our
ideas
into
the
pot
and
see
what
comes
out
as
being
a
priority
for
the
project
and
of
those.
If
we
have
people
who
are
willing
to
step
up
the
initiatives,
we
should
note
that,
like
there
are
people
who
want
to
own
these
four
initiatives,
really
perfect.
A
B
B
Nobody
else
has
endorsed
this
yeah,
so
I'm
just
wondering
how
that
works.
If
we
could
just
throw
that
out
as
I
go
suppose
this
is
our
proposal.
Is
that
that
there'd
be
this
new
initiative,
kind
of
status
and
and
overall
next
week,
is
to
to
nominate
you
know
eight
or
ten
possible
initiatives
that
appeals
events
besides
I,
and
if
people
don't
like
the
initiative
thing
I
guess,
then
we
just
abandon
that
and
do
something
else.
B
This
initiative
allows
for
a
little
bit
more
of
innovation,
just
in
terms
of
how
we
communicate
and
how
we
organize
ourselves,
because
some
of
us
might
prefer
to
meet
in
zoo
meetings,
but
others
prefer
that,
and
so
now
you
know
smaller
groups
and
it
choose
the
way
that
they
choose
to
work
together
and
experimenting,
and
it
might
be
that
some
people
join
the
good
not
because
of
the
topic,
but
just
because
of
the
way
they
like
that
group.
The
way
that
group
in
Iraq
you.
B
B
A
Also
think
like
getting
it
highlighted
in
a
roadmap
on
the
roadmap
page
or
a
separate
initiative
page
or
something
will
help
with
our
sort
of
core
value
statement,
or
it's
like
these
are
the
things
that
are
important
to
backdrop
and
that
will
continue
to
get
attention
beyond
a
single
release.
So
something
like
solving
this
one
issue.
We're
working
on
right
now
is
good
for,
like
hey.
This
issue
has
an
advocate,
and
this
is
what
we're
doing
today,
but
something
like
we're
gonna
continue
to
improve.
A
C
And
then
another
thing
could
be
a.
It
was
already
mentioned,
I
guess
infrastructure,
so
we
could
think
more
precisely
about
it,
for
example,
in
get
out
or
zoomed
it
to
a
separate
channel
of
the
topic
like
we
have
now
for
localization,
for
example,
and
so
that
when
people
arrive
there
and
we
see
over
here
is
the
search
group
and
kind
I
can
join
them,
because
I'm
interested
and
so
on.
So
and
maybe
the
project
functionality
which
you
mentioned
github
so
I
think
we
should
collect
some
of
these
ideas
and
then
yeah
document
blend
somewhere.
A
Supposed
to
be
updated
after
every
release,
so
as
soon
as
we
know
what's
coming
so
it
gets
updated
when
we
know
what's
in
there
really,
so
it
should
have
been
updated
on
January,
1st
and
then
it'll
get
updated
again
as
soon
as
we
have
a
plan
for
the
next
release.
So
after
the
next
meeting,
when
the
pmc
gets
to
vote
on,
the
next
issues
will
be
updated
again.
So
I
think
our
roadmap
thus
far
has
been
very
focused
on
like
what
new
features
are
coming.
F
A
A
F
A
B
So,
in
the
spirit
of
brainstorming,
you
know
they
don't
know
how
this
meshes
with
the
initiative
discussion,
but
something
else
that
we
could
do
it
like.
The
Delft
planning
meeting
is
to
just
brainstorm
a
long
list
of
like
priorities
that
each
bit
that
we
have
set
goals
for
the
year.
Like
your
things,
we'd
like
to
see,
we
have
three
releases
here.
B
A
A
Now,
if
you
want
to
dump
them
into
the
today's
agenda,
I
have
a
little
section
there.
That's
just
those
ideas
for
initiatives.
I'm
gonna
copy
this
into
next
week's
agenda,
and
then
we
s
when
this
meetings
over
and
then
we
can
put
them
in
there
and
that
way
they
won't
get
lost
and
I
can
post
a
link
and
that's
up
into
the
git,
er
or
Sula.
If
I
can
get
logged
in
there
to
keep
meaning
to
try.
F
B
One
thing:
I
missed
with
Joseph
what
you
were
just
saying,
so,
if
I'm
going
in
a
tangent,
that's
why
I'm
at
the
roadmap
I
mean
I,
want
I
want
to
stress
so
that
if
we
do
have
like
aspirational
goals,
they're
pointless,
if
we
don't
occasionally
review
them
like
each
ordered
like
stop
and
say,
how
did
we
do
this
this
quarter?
You
know
this
release
on
this
call.
It's
a
very
minimum
yeah
I.
A
Mean
that's
good.
It's
something
I,
think
that
we
can
put
in
with
a
PMC
issue.
That's
like
here's!
What
we're
doing
next
issue
we
can
be
like
here
the
stated
goals:
here's
what
we
did
this
issue,
here's!
What
we
want
to
do
next
issue.
Are
we
still
on
track?
Yes,
no,
and
you
know,
maybe
there
will
be
something
that's
like
hey.
A
We
haven't
done
anything
on
core
search
improvement
in
a
while
can
can
we
find
someone
to
advocate
for
an
issue
for
that
finished
release
or
something
it
might
steer
us
back
to
the
things
that
we
said
were
important,
that
we
might
not
be
working
on
and
also
might
be
like?
Oh
that's,
not
important
anymore.
You
take
it
off,
so
yeah
I
think
reviewing
makes
a
lot
of
sense
and
we
should
do
it
with
every
release.
Minor,
Li's,
okay,.
A
B
A
I
haven't
looked
at
that
issue
in
the
last
few
days,
I'm
sure
there's
been
more
progress
there,
but
yeah
so
we're
trying
for
those
of
you
who
are
following
along.
This
is
one
of
the
issues
that
was
in
the
115
milestone
and
got
bumped,
because
the
user
interface
was
confusing,
and
so
what
I'm
noticing
in
testing
is
that
maybe
there
isn't
user
interfaces
confusing
is
because
different
people
are
expecting
it
to
do
different
things
and.
A
The
issue
here
is
that
I
think
there
is
a
problem
that
needs
to
be
solved
that
is
currently
impossible
to
solve,
and
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
change
core
to
make
it
possible
to
solve,
but
not
entirely
solve
it
in
core,
and
so
we
have
to
really
see
user
interface.
That
makes
sense
for
what
is
in
core
and
allow
contribute
to
do
the
rest
and
so
Tim
I,
don't
know
if
you
are
more
up
to
date
on
this
somewhere
I
am
but
last
I
read.
A
A
B
I
write
the
difference
you
when
I
were
having
it's
the
way
you're
defining
the
problem,
like
is
I,
don't
understand
what
where
you
would
have
like
an
act.
You
where
you
would
I,
don't
understand
why
you
would
have
an
active
revision
that
is,
meat
that
isn't
published
or
the
most
current
write
to
me.
It's
like
by
default.
If
it's
the
active
version,
it's
the
most
recent,
if
it's
not
published,
and
so
the
only
thing
I
need
to
know
is
whether
it's
published
or
not,
but
you
seem
to
see
that
differently
in
this.
B
B
For
this,
but
like
in
our
current
situation,
I
don't
know
when
you
would
ever
have
an
active
issue
that
isn't
either
published,
or
it's
just
the
most
recently
revised
and
by
default
the
way
the
system
currently
works.
Every
time
you
edit
something
it
becomes
the
most
recently
edited
it.
Could
you
can't
edit
an
old
version
right.
F
F
B
E
A
Not
sure
what
you
mean
by
active,
because
I
think
I
was
confused
about
that
and
they
issued
two.
But
the
use
case
that
I
am
worried
about
is
I
have
like
a
very
complicated
about
page
that
needs
to
go
by
my
legal
team,
and
somebody
has
decided
to
rewrite
like
three
paragraphs
of
it.
So
we
have
a
revision
that
is
new
and
unpublished.
A
That's
not
new
and
not
yet
visible.
The
old
version
is
still
visible.
That's
under
review
by
the
legal
team,
but
the
current
version
that
is
visible,
has
a
bug
that
needs
to
be
fixed
like
a
typo
and
so
I
need
to
be
able
to
edit
the
current
page,
and
if
that
means
edit,
the
older
vision
becomes
actually
clone
it
and
make
a
newer
revision.
That's
fine!
A
We
just
need
to
communicate
that
in
some
way
and
then
we
still
have
the
older
vision,
older
version
that
is
under
review,
not
yet
visible,
but
gonna
be
the
next
version.
But
now
we
have
a
newer
version
that
is
about
to
be
replaced,
and
so
just
having
some
way
to
communicate
that
process
in
the
user
interface
is
really
confusing.
E
A
B
And
that
might
reinforce
my
point,
which
is
what
confuses
me
right
because,
to
the
extent
that
we're
trying
to
communicate
something,
that's
describing
what's
happening
behind
the
scenes,
but
isn't
necessarily
being
implemented
in
the
UI
apps,
because
it's
just
too
complicated.
That's
when
I
start.
You
know
it's
like
I'm,
totally
focused
on
the
current
use.
What
you
know,
what
the
current
users
going
to
be
able
to
do,
yeah,
not
what
the
underlying
capacity
is,
and
so
some
of
what
I'm
the
feedback
I'm
giving
might
be
totally
missing
that
point.
Yeah.
F
A
So
I
need
to
look
at
it
again
and
I
want
to
test
the
power
crest
again,
but
my
experience
the
last
time
I
tested
it
was
that
the
user
interface
made
me
think
the
system
was
doing
something
very
different
from
what
it
was
actually
doing,
because
the
user
interface
matched
what
it
did
before.
But
now
there's
this
new
functionality
that
it's
doing
instead
and
so
I
was
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
change
the
user
interface
to
map
to
what
is
actually
happening.
A
And
if
we
need
to
change
what's
happening
to
match
what
happened
before
and
that
would
might
be
a
more
complicated
change
than
once
there
currently
so
I'm,
not
entirely
sure
where
things
stand
right
now,
because
I
haven't
checked
on
it
in
the
last
few
days
and
I
haven't
tested
it
recently,
but
I
remember
being
very
confused
about
it.
A
C
A
Need
to
be
a
separate
issue
to
improve
that
interface
or
change
the
interface
to
match.
What's
happening
now,
but
I
I,
don't
know,
I
mean
I,
want
to
try
it
again
and
refresh
myself
with
everything
but
I,
remotest
being
very
confused,
because
I
thought
I
know
what
was
happening
and
then,
when
I
clicked
all
the
buttons,
nothing
that
I
thought
happened,
happened
and
part
of
it.
I
think
was
just
just
like
the
word
published
and
then
also
like.
A
We
have
the
ability
in
court
like
schedule,
schedule
future
revisions,
but
we're
not
enabling
that
look
like
that's
something.
We're
gonna
leave
Kim
Tripp.
So
having
that
like
schedule
button,
there
also
was
really
confusing
because,
like
how
do
you
indicate
like
on
one
forum,
there's
a
button
that
lets
you
schedule,
but
on
the
other
ones
there
is.
It
was
just
like
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
make
sense
of
all
of
the
features
that
exist
that
don't
apply
so
yeah
I.
C
You
have
to
prepare
a
backdrop
for
idea
of
Cronos
to
have
a
recycle
bin
instead
of
only
being
able
to
delete
content,
and
so
that's
quite
an
indirect
goal
and
is
also
asking
you,
for
example,
if
we
need
that
in
court,
because
there
are
these
contrib
modules
like
workflow
and
drupal,
and
we
could
use
them
for
them
to
have
all
this
functionality
in
a
very
good
tested
way
and
I'm.
Also
not
sure
if
we
need
all
that
stuff
and
coral
just
to
have
a
recycle
bin,
and
we
don't
have
it
with
that.
C
A
Maybe
we
need
to
start
over
with
a
new
issue,
not
like
start
over
the
code,
but
a
new
issue,
the
new
title
and
a
new
summary
of
exactly
what
this
is
doing
and
just
italia
the
pull
request
to
this
issue
instead
and
say
this
is
exactly
the
time.
So
I
think
you're
right.
We
have
changed
the
focus
a
lot
of
times
where
initially
it
was
a
very
big
issue
and
then
I'm
like
oh
well.
A
Let's
just
do
this
little
bit
and
now
the
little
bit
has
changed
a
lot
little
bit
and
it's
a
little
bit
wise.
So
that
might
be
a
good
place
to
start
with
just
feed
it
like
restate
and
then
maybe
people
when
they
visit
that
she
would
read
it
top
to
bottom
will
make
a
lot
more
sense.
What
we're
supposed
to
see
in
the
FOIA
request
we're
not
going
to
see
and
what
the
expected
behavior
should
be.
So
that's
a
good
idea
and
my
understanding
and
again
I
want
to
try
it
again.
A
The
things
like
in
can
trim
the
core
workflow
workbench
solutions
were
really
clunky
because
of
a
problem
in
core,
and
so
this
pull
request
is
supposed
to
fix
that
problem
in
core,
but
the
problem
is
fixing
it
in
court
might
also
allow
for
trash,
since
I
wasn't
even
thinking
about
that
as
part
of
it,
but
it
presents
some
user
interface
issues
that
I
think
we're
running
into
now.
So
I
would
love
to
see
an
updated
summary.
I
already
do
the
whole
current
issue.
Now,
maybe
I
can
do
a
summary
in
the
making
of
them.
A
B
A
A
B
B
It
occurred
to
me:
I
ran
into
his
after
giving
him
a
hard
time,
eventually
after
trying
to
help
him
and
then
getting
frustrated,
I
ran
into
a
situation
where,
if
Joseph
I
don't
have
seen
this
issue
yet
I
changed.
My
CSS
right
and
I
went
into
I
could
see
that
my
CSS
was
changed
and
I
refreshed
the
cache
and
I
did
everything.
I
could
and
it
was
still
not
getting
read
by
the
browser
and
I
eventually
realized
it's,
because
I
was
using
the
color
module
and
the
color
module.
B
It's
rewriting
that
CSS
into
a
new
file
and
I
just
had
to
rebuild
the
color.
Mods
are
gonna,
re,
save
my
theme
and
then
it
would
read
and
I
feel
like
that's
that
most
of
us
don't
ever
use
the
color
module,
and
so
we
never
have
to
do
this
and
I'm
only
using
the
color
module
because
I'm
trying
to
like
figure
out
ways
for
people
like
this
guy
to
do
what
he
needs
to
do
and
I
think.
So.
We,
like
maybe.