►
From YouTube: CHAOSS.Common.July.11.2019
Description
CHAOSS.Common.July.11.2019
B
A
B
A
A
B
B
B
C
A
C
B
B
D
A
B
E
B
A
And
so
maybe
I'm
overthinking
it,
but
in
the
one
that
I
sent
you
whatever
it
was
issues
active
or
something
like
that
in
the
filters
by
group
of
actors
right,
as
you
pointed
out,
and
so
I
mean
should
in
that
filter
instead
of
saying
like
by
group
of
actors,
should
it
just
point
to
the
organizational
affiliation
metric
from
common
saying?
This
is
how
you
should
think
about
a
group
of
actors,
or
this
is
one
potential
way
to
think
about
a
group
of
actors.
B
Oh,
my
god,
yeah
I,
don't
know
I,
think
that's
I
think
that's
possibly
ever
thinking
it
just
a
little
bit
because
because
that's
gonna
come
up
a
lot
right,
although
I
do
think
that
it
would
be
nice
if
we
used
common
language
so
rather
than
employer
used
organizational
affiliation
mm-hmm
because
you
could
be
I
mean
you
could
be
a
volunteer
at
an
organization
and
not
necessarily
be
employed
by
the
organization.
You've.
F
I
kind
of
see
where
Matt's
coming
from,
because
I
think
when
I
first
joined
this
group,
I
I,
that
was
sort
of
how
I
pictured
us
to
be
like
that.
We
were
overlapping
with
the
other
groups,
but
now
I'm
kind
of
wondering
if
we
like
in
my
head
I
sort
of
flipped
this
model
a
little
bit
and
I'm
wondering
if
we
should
maybe
take
the
approach
that
we
are
a
centralized
resource
for
thing
for,
like
all
groups
that
might
like
metrics.
F
That
might
overlap
to
every
group
like
in
sort
of
way,
not
yeah
we're
going
to
interact
with
the
other
working
groups,
but
more
as
a
centralized
repository
from
which
they
can
draw
tools
for
their
metrics
I'm.
Not
articulating
that
very
well,
but
we're
sort
of
like
we.
We,
instead
of
us,
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
work
with
them.
But
basically
we
can
just
be
a
centralized
resource
for
them
to
work
with
us.
C
F
A
G
F
B
E
F
B
H
C
I
think
there's
some
understanding
that
some
of
these
metrics,
regardless
what
working
group
drafts
then
are
going
to
sort
of
be
matrix
as
useful
for
different
working
groups
as
well
like
we're
Commons,
probably
not
the
only
record
that'll
define
a
metric
that
a
different
working
group
who's
got
a
lot
of
use.
Yeah.
F
D
That
kind
of
goes
back
to
what
I
was
trying
to
say
earlier.
The
the
focus
area
is
kind
of
belonged
to
the
working
groups,
but
the
the
detailed
metrics
kind
of
belong
to
everyone.
Well,
metrics
are
kind
of
a
grab
bag
that
can
inform
the
metrics
or
inform
the
the
focus
areas
in
each
in
each
working
group.
So
yeah.
D
A
And
it's
certainly
possible
that
one
metric
and
a
variety
of
different
working
groups-
areas
that
is
a
percent
positive
to
me.
Can
I
okay
I'm?
Sorry
can
I
finish
my
one
use
case
or
tonight
writer
jumped
in
right,
so
my
you
get
asked
a
you
get
asked
to
display
the
number
of
new
issues
right
and
so
you're
like
fine.
A
Just
give
me
it
you're
using
a
tool,
and
you
want
to
see
the
number
of
new
issues,
the
number
of
closed
issues,
and
so
we
would
obviously
go
to
evolution
and
take
a
look
at
how
these
types
of
metrics
are
defined
right,
and
so
that's
that
would
be
a
normal
use
case.
I
could
see
that
happening,
but
then
to
me
there
would
be
a
potentially
a
second
question,
which
would
say:
can
you
filter
these
based
on
organizational
affiliation?
A
Or
can
you
filter
these
based
on
geography
like
the
number?
The
number
of
new
issues
are
the
number
of
closed
issue
in
who's
closing
issue.
So
to
me,
then,
that's
where
common
steps
in
and
common
has
taken
taken
the
time
to
identify
organizational
diversity.
So
in
that
case,
then
organizational
diversity
becomes
a
filter
for
the
age
of
issues
or
for
the
number
of
new
issues
or
for
the
number
of
closed
issues,
and
there's
no
reason
to
to
ask
evolution
in
that
case,
obviously
to
redefine
organizational
diversity,
I
think
to
Kevin's
point.
A
A
Even
look
that
doesn't
even
count
the
common
metrics
like
organizational
papers
that
he
might
be
a
common
filter
if
he
might
be
a
common
filter,
something
like
sadness,
metrics
that
may
not
have
been
that
filter
or
that
filter
category.
We
haven't
really
talked
to
your
responsiveness
metrics,
yet
maybe
it
would
be
well.
A
F
F
G
G
F
Have
the
advantage
of
being
small
enough
that
you
know
we're
not
producing
a
ton
of
work
here
right
now?
It's
not
like
a
fire
hose
so
I
mean
we
could
just
remind
people,
hey,
make
sure
you
and
check
on
what
the
other
teams
are
doing
and
here's
a
handy
newsletter
or
whatever
medium
we
use
to
do
that
and.
A
B
F
B
F
And
I
don't
really
see
us
being
hyper.
You
know
like
if
we
did
see
somebody
start
to
reinvent
something:
I
mean,
let's
just
say,
sending
them
a
polite
note
and
saying:
hey.
We
did
this
over
here,
don't
forget,
we
look
and
frame
it.
The
way
it
should
be
frame
which
is
not
territorial
but
just
say
we
just
don't
want
you
to
have
to
do
all
this
work
again.
Yep.
D
D
B
And
I
guess
I
sort
of
rely
on
you
Matt
to
help
us
with
some
of
that,
because
you
tend
to
go
to
all
of
the
working
group
meet
you
Sean
also
goes
to
a
lot
of
the
working
group
meetings,
so
I
do
think
that
having
a
couple
of
people
who
tend
and
most
of
the
working
group
meetings
also
helps
with
this,
because
you
know
you'll
notice,
people
talking
about
things
be
like
hey.
You
know
this
other
working
groups
also
talking
about
the
thing.
Okay,.
A
Well,
I
think,
okay
and
I'm
happy
I'm
totally
happy
to
do
that
and
then
I
think.
Maybe
perhaps
the
other
thing
too
is
that
I'll
keep
my
eyes
open
for
is
on
done
on
your
point.
Remember
when
you're
looking
at
that
filter-
and
it
said
by
groups
of
actors
and
then
one
of
them
was
employer
like
maybe
making
sure
that
language
is
consistent.
A
B
E
B
E
B
C
D
B
A
B
A
B
E
F
F
A
Well
then,
I
also
put
that
kind
of
on
my
to-do
list.
I,
don't
think
that'll
be
resolved
by
the
release.
It's
probably
something
to
think
about,
with
maybe
I
mean-
and
maybe
these
are
kind
of
as
a
different
note
here.
But
maybe
these
are
the
things
we
think
about
on
these
chem
midterm
releases
is
not
always
about
rolling
out
new
metrics.
F
Like
a
style
guide
based
on
what
each
metric
working
group
does
you
know
that
could
be.
That
would
be
a
good
thing.
This,
the
other
solution,
I,
had
my
be
a
little
bit
more
complicated.
But
what?
If?
What?
If
we
highly
recommend
each
working
group
go
through
the
other
working
groups,
metric
release
when
they're
in
the
time
for
comment
period
and
sort
of
look
for
things
like
that?
It's
a
good
idea!
You.
A
E
F
B
F
A
Like
this
idea
of
the
glossary,
okay,
I'm
gonna,
Elsa
I,
also
like
the
idea
Brian
of
perhaps
asking
the
working
groups
during
the
comment
period
next
time
around
to
maybe
spend
a
little
bit
of
time
in
one
of
their
meetings.
Taking
a
look
at
the
release,
metrics
in
a
different
working
group
to
think
about
language,
yeah.
B
B
A
B
I
was
trying
to
say:
Anderson
I
knew
that
wasn't
right
and
I
was
struggling,
I'm
strong.
You
know
you
can
have
a
central
account
system,
so
OpenStack
uses
one.
So
even
if
people
change
organization,
multiple
email,
social
identified
as
one
person
so
sorting
hat-
does
something
similar
in
the
grimoire
labs
world.
F
Yeah
I
mean
should
we,
it
doesn't
have
to
be
this
here's
my
thing
I
mean
I,
thought
that
the
menu
and
maybe
I'm
wrong,
but
my
impression
of
the
metric
was:
what
are
what
do
we
have
to
identify
at
that
point?
How
do
we
identify
organizational
affiliation
and
my
in
my
project
at
that
point,
I,
don't
really
I,
don't
know
if
I
care,
like
I,
didn't
know
well,
okay,
so
do
our
metrics
deal
with
this
stuff
over
time.
E
But
just
just
throw
a
use
case
out
there
reading
through
this,
to,
for
instance,
I,
have
people
on
my
development
team,
because
our
company's
changed
names
like
six
times
in
the
last
three
years
for
for
email
addresses,
so
I
have
people
who
develop
right
now,
who
have
you
know
one
email
address
associated
with
get
a
different
email
associated
with
Jarrett
in
a
different
email
associated
with
the
con
services
we
use
and
but
they're
all
the
same
person.
So
I,
don't
know
how
that
that
factors
into
like
your
initial
release,
yeah.
B
I
mean
Brian
yeah,
you,
you
make
a
good
point,
because
I
think
we
deliberately
didn't
want
to
be
prescriptive
about
a
lot
of
this,
because
it
depends
on
what
you're
trying
to
do
if
you're
trying
to
look
at
the
snapshot.
It's
like
what.
How
diverse
is
my
my
community
right
now
from
organizational
diversity
standpoint?
Then
you
don't
need
to
care
about
over
time.
B
So
I
think
what
I
think
we
might
want
to
do
is
just
add
a
section,
okay,
that
that's
sort
of
like
things
to
think
about
or
caveats,
or
something
that
as
you're
measuring
organizational
diversity
for
your
for
your
project,
you
may
want
to
think
about
these
couple
of
things,
because
it
depends
on
depends
on
what
you're
trying
to
do
so.
He'll
make
care
about
us.
Some
people
may
not,
but
it
is
important.
I
think
that
they
at
least
think
about
it.
Yeah.
F
A
B
F
F
B
F
B
F
C
The
document,
what
good
job
I
just
posted
it
in
the
chat
sean
is,
is
google
doc?
I
use
the
search
function
on
google,
it's
very
powerful.
B
C
B
A
B
A
A
B
B
Okay,
so
here
it's
actually
it's
actually
later
in
the
doc,
there's
a
affiliations
data
model
section
which
talks
about
how
the
handle
changes
over
time,
how
to
handle
ambiguity
so
pair
programming,
multiple
affiliations,
contractors,
subsidiaries,
contributor
preference
where
you
like.
Sorry,
it's
on
the
side.
B
B
C
And
I
mean
the
in
the
case
of
identifying
individuals
and
their
affiliations.
There's
I
mean
there.
We
do
some
things
in
order
to
find
emails
and
affiliations
and
I
think
sorting
hat
tries
to
do
something.
Similarly,
but
ultimately
it's
a
curation
process
and
like
there's,
no
canonical
place
right
now,
where
we
can
identify
open-source
developers
affiliations.
D
D
A
Not
particularly
for
common,
but
while
we're
on
here,
I'd
like
to
just
put
in
a
plug
for
the
work
that
John
has
done
on
the
constituent
model,
did
he
share
it
out
to
the
list,
though?
Thank.
B
A
F
E
E
B
I'm
in
this
chicken
egg
thing,
where
I
can't
I
can't
just
a
Leah,
sit
to
automatically
add
a
signed
off
by
because
in
the
kubernetes
community,
you're
not
allowed
to
have
at
signs
in
commits
because
it
triggers
it
triggers
other
things,
and
they
have
all
this
automation
around
it.
So
you
can't
I
can't
just
do
all
of
them
signed
off
by
that's.
B
Well,
at
science
can
automatically
like,
basically
it
automatic
it
yeah,
it
adds
them
as
reviewers,
okay,
email
or,
if
it's
they
call
it
like
a
github
username
the
bots,
not
smart
enough
to
see
that
it's
them
in
the
middle
of
an
email
address.
So
then
it
tries
to
do
something
with
it.
It's
confused
in
any
ways
so.