►
From YouTube: CHAOSS Common Working Group Meeting September 28, 2023
Description
Meeting minutes can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xsii5tfmmDwWpuhrFcBJMeYeT3RipJdiCdHrbi0NalQ/edit#heading=h.ux9mp5diiysb
A
B
A
Back
to
the
the
common
page,
so
we
have
a.
We
have
a
basic
structure
that
we've
adopted
in
common.
We
start
with
open
Agenda
items
and
then
we,
when
we
drop
down
to
working
group
and
context
group
liaison
updates,
that's
where
we
jump
through
individual
issues
for
corporate
app
ecosystem
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
got
it
and
then
and
then
at
the
bottom.
A
A
And
we
don't
so
the
if
they're,
if
there
are
any
open,
Agenda
items
that
that
aren't
in
the
list
currently,
please
feel
free
to
to
add
them.
The
the
second
item
on
here
is
an
open
Agenda
item
from
last
week
discussing
how
we,
as
as
common
group
working
group,
would
like
to
basically
select
and
track
the
metrics
and
models
that
we're
working
on
right.
A
B
A
Okay,
so
the
so
the
the
second
item
is
selecting
and
tracking
metrics
and
models
to
the
work
to
working
to
work
on
in
common.
So
this
was
an
open,
Agenda
item
from
last
week
that
we're
pulling
in
this.
This
agenda
item
is
about
kind
of
us
as
a
working
group
deciding
what
we
want
our
workflow
to
look
like.
So
how
do
we?
How
do
we
decide
which
metrics
we
want
to
work
on?
A
How
do
we
decide
or
what
form
should
those
metrics
take
when
they
come
into
our
working
group
like
do
we
want
to
have
a
a
worksheet
that
we
we
fill
out
to
bring
it
in?
We
want
to
have
them
fill
out
a
template
when
we
get
down
to
app
ecosystem
you'll,
see
that
the
app
ecosystem
group
has
kind
of
created
a
table
describing
their
metrics
with
the
the
format
that
they're
using?
A
A
Are
there
edits
that
we
need
to
make
to
that
document
that
are
common
specific?
So
so
there's
a
lot
of
discussion
around
this.
If
you
I
did
I
did
kind
of
I'm
sure
Matt
will
have
some
opinions
on
it,
so
I
was,
which
is
why
we
pulled
it
into
the
the
next
meeting
we
can.
We
can
pull
it
into
the
the
following
meeting
as
well.
That
I
would,
if
anyone
would
like
to
share
some
opinions,
I.
B
C
B
If
I
look
at
the
spreadsheet,
the
queue
is
infinite,
but
I
have
no
way
of
identifying,
which
ones
are
the
highest
priority
for
specific
reasons:
priority
yeah,
okay,
thank
you.
So,
for
example,
I
know
that
got
his
names
escapes
me.
The
the
person
who's
running
the
work
group
for
ospo's
right
now,
Gary
Gary
I,
know
Gary
has
the
metric
model
that
he's
proposed.
That
requires
a
couple
of
new
metrics.
B
D
Yeah
I
mean
I,
think
it's
I
think
it'll
just
be
up
to
this
group
since
they're
doing
the
work
and
I
think
that
the
project
managers
can
help
like
remove
any
blockers
or
you
know,
keep
things
going
or
help
distribute
some
of
the
work.
If
we
want
to
open
issues
or
whatever,
to
distribute
the
work
a
little
better
but
I
think
as
far
as
the
workflow
I
think
it
might
be
up
to
this
group
to
just
decide
how
what
works
best
for
them.
B
A
Let's
say
in
the
in
the
past,
in
some
of
the
working
group
in
the
some
of
the
other
working
groups,
we've
resisted
using
GitHub
issues
to
track
this
because
it
becomes.
It
becomes
really
unruly
with
a
giant
list
of
metrics
to
work
on
in
GitHub
issues,
but
with
our
Focus
it
might
be
it
might.
Actually
it
might
work
better
for
us
if
we're
focused
on
metrics
and
model
development.
At
this
point,
I.
A
A
A
A
B
A
No
so
we
haven't
had
a
we
haven't,
had
an
update
from
that's
the
Osco
working
group
right
yeah.
So
if
we,
if,
if
you'd
like
to
give
the
update
for
the
Oscar
working
group
today,
then
then
we
can
talk
about
that
proposed
metric
and
and
maybe
add
it
to
our
metrics
in
progress.
So
so
we've
created
the
structure
for
those
those
liaison
updates,
but
we're
still
kind
of
figuring
out.
What
that
looks
like,
and
you
know,
because
of
sporadic
attendance,
we
don't
always
have
updates
from
all
the
working
groups.
A
E
B
E
B
A
A
A
B
The
only
update,
I
would
have
and
I
would
welcome.
Other
updates
from
different
perspectives
is
that
this
we've
just
had
our
first
meeting
merging
these
two
groups
and
that
meeting
happened,
sort
of
in
a
hybrid
format
where
we
had
a
bunch
of
University
Hospital
people
in
a
room
at
OSS,
EU
and
then
some
of
us
on
Zoom
so
and
I
know.
Don
was
there
in
the
room,
and
so
there
was
there
was
just
we
didn't
even
keep
notes.
E
They
don't
have
the
metrics
Focus
that
we
do
so.
A
lot
of
that
conversation
that
we
had
was
talking
about
what
what
they're
doing,
what
we're
doing,
how
we
can
make
those
connections.
So
it
was
almost
more
of
kind
of
a
get
to
know
you.
What
do
we
need
to
do
next
sort
of
meeting,
but
there
wasn't
any
discussion
of
metrics.
A
B
A
A
C
B
C
This
is
fine.
The
the
background
is
that
in
the
app
ecosystem
working
group
restarted
well.
What
was
it
two
years
ago,
three
years
ago,
I
don't
know
on
creating
metrics
for
Phenom
and
KDE
app
ecosystems,
and
we
defined
this
in
the
context
of
or
for
the
user
of
event
organizers,
and
so
we
created
these
metrics.
We
published
them,
but
we
never
brought
them
back
into
the
chaos
published
metrics.
C
We
also
did
not
check
whether
chaos
published
metrics
could
be
used
instead
of
the
metrics
that
we
defined
and
by
providing
this
table,
we're
hoping
to
close
that
Gap
and
bridge
between
what
is
official
chaos
metrics
and
what
we
did
in
the
app
ecosystem
working
group
and
for
some
some
of
these
metrics
it
might
be
appropriate
to
Define
them
fully
and
publish
them
and
for
others
it
might
be
that
there
is
a
different
chaos
metric
that
is
more
insightful
or
we
say
hey.
This
isn't
really
a.
C
We
can
look
at
that
together
and
you
can
see
that
context
better
when
we
have
event
organizers
all
of
the
goal.
Question
metric
approach:
we
have
these
three
hot
four
high
level
goals
and
then
for
each
goal.
We
go
in
and
Define
metrics
to
support
that,
and
so
that's,
where
everything
you
see
in
the
table
came
from.
Okay
copied
out
of
this
slide
deck.
A
The
second
and
fourth
pages
of
the
document
are
all
are
all
basically
event
of
that
metrics
as
well.
So
so
it
looks
like
the
the
first
first
two
pages
or
first
page
and
a
half
looks
like
measuring
kind
of
project
activity
in
relationship
to
events
and
then
the
last
two
pages
it
looks
like
they
are
more
about
measuring
the
events
themselves.
C
B
I
think
and
I
can't
remember
who
else
was
in
these
discussions,
but
I
think
some
of
the
folks
on
the
call
were
I
think
to
the
extent
that
these
questions
get
at
the
the
impact
of
an
event
on
a
community.
Then
I
think
there's
a
broader
interest
than
just
the
app
ecosystem
working
group
within
chaos.
To
pursue
these
kinds
of
measures
and.
A
So
maybe
from
a
as
far
as
a
common
working
group,
maybe
that's
maybe
that's
how
we
want
to
begin
to
bring
this
into
into
the
Common
working
group.
Let's
maybe
let's,
let's
propose
a
three
to
four
metric
model
impact
of
event
on
a
community,
and
maybe
we
we
try
to
try
to
build
it
based
on
some
of
these
metrics
that
are
in
here
and
we
and
then
we
can
Define
the
metrics
as
well.
C
I,
like
that,
we
were
thinking
about
proposing
metric
models
also
from
App
ecosystem,
but
the
template
for
the
metric
model
says
include
the
link
to
the
published
metric
on
the
chaos
website,
and
so
we
said
Okay.
First,
we
need
to
get
you
these
metrics
before
we
go
that
step
of
creating
a
metric
model,
but
maybe
it
can
be
done
in
either
direction.
A
C
Also
conversation
in
the
data
science
work
group
or
in
profit
and
you're
much
more
in
tune
with
creating
metric
models.
If
you
can
maybe
draft
something,
I'd
be
happy
to
look
at
that
in
the
app
ecosystem
working
group,
rather
than
us,
trying
to
stumble
through
creating
a
metric
model
because
I've
not
been
part
of
any
of
those
conversations
did.
B
B
E
B
C
A
Okay,
I
think
it
might
in
regards
to
that
full
list
of
metrics
as
you,
as
you
heard
in
the
beginning
of
the
the
meeting,
we're
still
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
want
to
track
the
work,
we're
doing
and
and
kind
of
prioritize
that
work
as
well
so,
but
we
have
that
list.
So
we
have
that
list
that
we
can
add
to
our
cue
once
we've
once
we've
figured
out
what
that
mechanism
looks
like
sounds.
A
A
I
just
jumped
down
to
so.
Okay,
we
can.
We
can
continue
this
discussion
and
we
can,
if
we
want
to,
we
can
wait
and
see
if
something's
going
to
come
in
from
Brian
or
it's
it
would
be
a
model.
I
mean
I
I'd,
be
in
favor
of
working
on
it
in
the
model
in
community
in
in
the
Common
working
group
too.
If,
if
others
are
interested
as
well,
but
we
can,
we
can't
wait
and
see
if.
B
A
In
the
in
the
scope
that
we've
discussed
in
the
past,
we
we
do
have
the
it
is
part
of
our
purview
to
create
models
if
we
want
to
or
create
models
based
discussions
in
other
working
groups,
I
know
they're.
The
metrics
model
working
group
is
another
place
where
that
happens
and
I
think
the
data
science
working
group
is
another
place
where
that
would
happen
as
well.
B
E
E
E
No
I
think
that's
that's
probably
good
for
the
data
science
working
group.
The
only
thing
to
mention
is
that
we're
because
of
conferences
and
the
U.S
Thanksgiving
holiday,
we're
actually
not
going
to
have
any
data
science
working
group
meetings
from
in
October
or
November
we're
gonna
pick
back
up
on
December
6th.
E
B
A
A
B
A
So
I
mean
we
we
could
take.
We
could
just
take
updates
in
the
form
of
text.
Maybe
then-
and
if
the,
if
it,
if
we
need
clarification
on
those
updates,
then
we
could
talk
to
them,
for
example,
so
the
the
those
working
group
and
context
group
liaison
updates
on
there.
If
you
are
the
liaison,
you
can
drop
in
the
relevant
information
or
or
you
can
just
put
an
N
A
there
if
there.
A
So
we
don't,
we
don't
need.
We
don't
need
kind
of
General
Community
updates
for
those
groups
we
need.
We
would
like
updates
on
what
metrics
they
would
like
us
to
to
work
on
or
if
there
are
any
action
items
we
can
take
from
those
working
groups
in
regards
to
metrics
or
models
so
I
suppose
we
could
those
updates.
We
could
just
take
in
text
form
and
then
we
could
dig
into
them
if
they're.
If
there's
something
that
we
need
to
to
understand
a
little
bit
deeper.
A
B
A
B
B
B
E
A
C
B
From
auger
yeah
we
don't
have.
Obviously
we
have
all
the
core
data
that
would
feed
a
backlog
index,
but
we
don't
have
a
metric
built
out
for
the
backlog
index.
We
we
certainly-
and
we
certainly
could
take
that
on
in
the
API
development
work
that
is
coming
coming
next
week
so
well,
but
it
does
not
exist
today.
A
E
D
B
D
A
B
Liturgia
yeah
I
mean
I,
think
I
think
this
looks
pretty
now
trying
to
think
of
our
process.
I
mean
I,
don't
know
what
I
would
add
to
it
other
than
I
suppose
at
some
point
in
the
future.
When
auger
implements
this
metric,
we
can
include
that,
but
it
doesn't
today,
so
we
don't
need
to
hold
up
the
train
for
that.
D
B
B
B
A
A
If
we're
using
common
as
the
the
mechanism
to
release
the
metric,
then
the
way
that
we
would,
what
we
would
do
is
we
would
take
it
put
in
the
pr
and
basically
present
it
back
to
the
relevant
working
groups
or
to
the
community
for
feedback,
okay,
but
but
the,
but
that
feedback
process
would
be
more.
It's
not
really
formal,
it's
more.
A
We
we
do
the
pull
request,
and
then
we
contact
the
the
working
group
that
it
came
from
or
the
context
group
that
it
came
from
and
we
present
it
back
to
them
for
feedback
or
in
the
case
of
if
it's
a
metric
that
doesn't
have
a
doesn't,
have
a
specific
context
group.
We
could
present
it
back
to
community
the
community
working
group
for
for
feedback.
So.
E
B
A
And
actually
I'd
actually
like
to
hold
off
I'm
gonna
I
want
to
edit
the
description.
Okay,
so
about
half
of.
What's
in
that
description,
probably
belongs
in
the
objective
and
I
think
the
I
think
the
description
needs
kind
of
a
it
needs
to
kind
of
explicitly
say
what
we're
measuring
so
I'd
like
to
add
a
sentence
or
two
to
that.
So
I.
B
A
B
B
A
A
A
E
Of
group
or
an
ospo
working
group
meeting,
we
should
have
the
Liaisons
just
drop
that
update
into
the
common
the
next
Common
working
group
meeting
agenda
so
that
we
don't
forget
and
not
think
about
it
later.
So
we
should
probably
get
better
about
being
more
diligent
about
that
in
the
other
working
groups
and.