►
From YouTube: CHAOSS Common Working Group 9-16-21
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
A
It
did
awesome
great,
so
we
have
live
transcripts
on
this
on
this
meeting
and
we
can
have
them
for
the
rest
as
well.
That's
great
all,
right!
So
with
respect
to
the
agenda,
I'm
gonna
share
my
screen
here.
A
We
need
to
review
any
comments
that
we
might
have
on
the
common
metrics
that
are
under
community
review.
Take
a
look
at
the
spreadsheet
and
really
kind
of
I
think.
Most
of
it
is
just
talking
about
the
metrics
that
we'd
like
to
work
on
next
in
common
and
maybe
start
because
maybe
work
on
one
today
and
or
start
assigning
folks,
you
know
what
I
mean
to
just
to
kind
of
build
those
out
just
a
tiny
bit
so
close
that
hold
on
just
a
second.
A
And
we'll
come
back
and
share
my
screen
all
right,
so
here
we
are
with
the
the
metrics.
B
B
This
one
so
scroll
down
on
the
yep
yep
on
this
okay,
so
I
have
provided
the
review
for
all
of
these.
Thank
you
so,
like
the
things
that
are
remaining
are
highlighted
in
this
section,
especially
like
in
programming
language,
the
issue
was
of
the
naming
convention
and
I
was
not
sure
if
I
modified
the
name,
will
it
break
on
the
website,
so
I
that
part,
I
have
not
done
it.
This
is
like
changing
the
title.
B
B
So
like
convert.
B
Into
image
that
is
not
done
yet,
so
if
you
go
into
the
metric
there's
a
table
and
as
for
new
standard,
we
don't
need
the
table.
We
have
to
convert
the
table
into
an
image.
B
Naming
so
file
name
is
language
distribution.md,
whereas
title
is
programming
language
description.
B
A
B
C
Yes,
yes,
it
will
break
the
website,
but
you
are
correct
that
it
needs
to
be
fixed,
so
I'm
kind
of
I'm
surprised.
I
didn't
flag
this
one.
There
were
in
the
release.
There
are
three
metrics
that
have
this
issue
when
I,
when
I
put
them
on
the
website,
I
went
out
of
my
way
to
make
sure
they
were
on
the
website
using
the
correct
name:
okay,
which
is
which
is,
as
you
point
out,
programming
language,
distribution
and
you're,
also
correct
that
that
is
a
that
is
a
checklist
item
yep.
So.
B
So
so
I
have
like
marked
all
the
checklists.
This
particular
item
is
not
marked
on
the
checklist,
so
once
it
is
fixed,
then
it
will
be
marked
on
the
checklist.
B
So
the
checklist
was,
I
don't
remember
exactly
in
most
of
the
cases
when
I
was
going
through
all
these
as
a
my
action
item,
most
of
the
checklists
were
not
marked,
as
so.
I
was
going
through
every
step
and
marking
them
checklist,
so
I
don't
remember
exactly
which
one
is
marked
or
which
one
was
not
marked,
but
I
was
going
through
all
of
them
and
marking
them
accordingly.
C
Well,
good
good
for
you!
That's
that's
exactly
why
the
checklist
is
here.
So
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
doing
that.
Yeah.
A
B
Yes
I'll
take
those
images
and
fix
them
just.
A
Screenshot
them
or
yes,
it's
probably
the
easiest
way
to
do
it.
Yeah.
Okay,
great,
thank
you,
so
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna,
take
this.
Maybe.
C
B
This
was
not
following
the
naming
convention
for
the
image.
Only
other
things
were
all
done,
so
the
image
was
directly
like.
If
you
go
to
the
raw
food,
it
was
embedded
from
some
website
or
something
that's
where
I
was
like.
What
should
I
do
here.
A
B
B
The
image
okay
yeah,
so
what
is
the
name
yep
that
it
was
not
following
the
naming
convention?
Sorry,
yes!
So
if
you
look
at
the
name
of
this
collaboration
platform
and
our
naming
convention
is,
it
was
a
like
combination
of
the
activity
and
the
focus
are
like
name
of
the
image
and
name
of
the
matrix.
B
A
B
B
B
B
A
C
C
Is
easier
for
for
someone,
if
they're,
if
they're,
if
they're
using
a
forked
copy
or
clone
copy
on
their
machine
to
yeah,
to.
B
A
B
Yeah
all
right
technical
fork
so
in
this
contributors
are
not
mentioned.
Who
are
the
contributors.
B
So
this
was
basically
update
of
an
old
release
metric,
so
the
contributor,
as
per
new
format,
the
contributors
were
not
there.
So
what
should
we
do?
Should
we
just
leave
it
as
it
is
because.
B
A
C
Yeah,
I
think
we
had
decided
we
weren't
going
to
go
back
and
retroactively.
Add
contributors.
However,
we
should
be.
If
we
are,
if
we're
editing
metrics,
we
should
probably
add
them
during
the
the
editing
process,
and
I
think
that's
what
I
think
that's
what
bernard's
point
is
this.
This
metric
was
actually
discussed
fairly
thoroughly,
along
with
the
the
clone
metrics
so,
and
I
think
that
led
the
efforts
on
this
one,
so
he
could
probably
put
together
a
contributor
list
fairly
easily.
B
So
so
my
only
question
was
yes.
I
can
do
that,
but
the
only
question
was:
should
the
revised
metrics
need
to
have
the
contributor
list
or
because
they
are
released
earlier,
they
should
be
kept
as
intact.
Only.
I
was
not
sure
on
that.
Whatever
the
decision
is.
A
C
Should
we
update
it
so
that
it
matches
the
templates
and-
and
I
would
say
yes
and
part
of
updating
it
to
match
the
template
is
adding
that
contributor
section?
I.
A
C
We
did
we
did
so.
We
worked
on
this
one
in
conjunction
with
the
clones
metric
when,
when
we're
revising
it,
so
I
think
that
the
easiest
fix
would
be
to
just
copy
the
clones
metric
contribution
section
and
just
paste
it
into
this
one,
and
I
think
those
are
those
are
all
people
that
are
regularly
on
the
common
coldness.
I
believe.
C
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Vernad
clones
looks
like
it's
done,
so
we're
good
there
yeah.
B
Everything
is
good
in
there
angular
there
was
no
outstanding
noise,
yep,
okay,.
A
A
B
A
C
Yeah
edit,
the
edit
the
first
post
and
put
it
at
the
very
top
of
the
list.
C
Okay,
this
one
actually
will
be
a
a
download
and
upload
because
we'll
need
to
we'll
need
to
take
that
image
from
wherever
it's
located
and
upload
it
into
the
put
it
in
to
get
github.
A
Kevin
are
you
doing
this
one
or
no
yeah?
I
can
probably
do
this
one
too.
If
it's,
I
don't.
If
it's
not
too
much
trouble,
you
seem
to
imply
the
other
one
wasn't
too
much
trouble.
C
Yeah,
the
other
one's
just
a
name
change
this
one
will
actually
be
grabbing
the
image.
It's
it's
really,
not
that
much
trouble.
Okay,
I
am
kind
of
wondering
about
our
our
naming
convention.
C
This
is
yeah.
It's
not
a
that's,
not
a
standard
naming
convention.
C
We
would,
I
wonder
if
we
should
follow
a
standing
standard,
naming
convention
where
bot
activity
is
actually
a
folder
and
bot
activity
in
kubernetes
is
the
file
so
just
like,
like.
C
Yeah
yeah,
I'm
wondering
I'm
one
that
that's
a
standard,
that's
a
standard
structure
for
storing
images.
The
this
this
other
thing
is
kind
of
weird,
and
I
don't
because
we
because
the
the
template
was
done
this
round,
we
haven't
really.
C
Standardizations
that
we
that
we
put
into
play
any
thoughts
on
this,
because
I
think
the
so.
C
We
have
an
images
folder
at
the
at
the
focus
area,
level,
right
yeah,
so
the
reason
that
they
want
to
name
these
in
this
fashion
is
so
that
you
can
kind
of
different
so
that
you
understand
which
met
which
which
images
belong,
to
which
metrics
yes-
and
I
would-
I
would
say
that
the
standard
way
the
proper
way
to
do
that
would
actually
be
just
to
have
a
folder
in
the
images
folder
that
is
connected
to
that
metric.
C
Yeah,
what
are
your
thoughts
on
that?
Because
if,
if
that
is
the
case,
I
would
say,
let's
maybe
hold
off
on
renaming
these
images,
because
I
I
think
that
would
involve
a.
I
think
that
would
involve
some
activity
kind
of
similar
to
the
restructuring
of
working
groups.
A
A
A
A
Okay,
yeah,
maybe
so
it's
your
is
your
question
kevin?
Maybe
just
stay
with
this
format
for
the
time
being,.
C
Until
we
have
the
the
bandwidth
or
someone
who
who
could
go
through
each
working
group
and
do
this-
yes.
C
C
And
they
put
it
into
this
format,
and
I'm
just
I'm
wondering
if
maybe
we
should
have
a
little
more
discussion
about
the
format
before
before
they
did
it,
but
that's,
okay!
It's!
I
think
it's
just
one
of
those
little
things
that
you
catch
once
you
start
working
with
it
right.
A
C
Yeah
and
the
first
step,
I
think-
and
maybe
that-
and
maybe
this
is
something
we
could
do
now-
we
could
actually
go
and
change
the
template
guidance
on
how
to
do
this
so
that
any
future
metrics
we
do
do
get
done
correctly,
and
then
that
would
also
provide
a
bit
of
a
road
map
for
someone
going
in
and
fixing
the
images
that
are
incorrectly.
A
A
B
A
All
right
cool,
okay,
good
question:
actually
we
had
talked
about
in
yesterday's
dei
work
group
meeting
about
operations
group.
Do
you
remember
this
elizabeth.
E
Yeah,
the
idea
was
that
there
would
be
a
committee
or
a
team
that
was
focused
on
chaos,
operational
things,
so
exactly
like
what
we
just
were
talking
about.
You
know
that
would
be
the
kind
of
thing
that
this
team
would
address.
I
mean
because
we
don't
really
have
a
team
like
that.
Now
it's
kind
of
ad
hoc
and
whoever
happens
to
have
the
bandwidth
and
or
passion
to
do
things.
E
A
All
right
this
made
me
think,
while
we're
here
sean,
I'm
gonna
call
on
you
for
a
second.
So
do
you
want
to
introduce
yourself
as
the
as
the
and
the
person
doing
the.
F
F
F
The
docs
links
all
the
testing
and
integration
links
that
were
pointed
at
the
old
default
directory
and
pointed
to
the
new
one,
but
when
you're
not
doing
automated
builds
and
things
like
that,
as
is
the
case
for
the
metrics
working
groups,
changing
the
name
is
a
fairly
straightforward
exercise,
with
only
really
one
side
effect
that
kevin
has
to
handle
with
regards
to
publishing
our
metrics
automatically
on
the
website.
So
with
that
setup,
I'm
just
gonna
inquire.
If
this
group
would
be
okay
with
that
change
or
is
interested
in
that
change
or
has
concerns
about
it,.
C
F
F
C
C
I'll
need
about
an
hour
to
do
the
fix,
so
could
could
you
could
you
push
it
on?
Could
you
could
you
make
that
change
on
well
tomorrow?
Sure
yeah,
so
absolutely
I
can.
I
can
do
the
fix
anytime
tomorrow,
but
my
schedule
today
is
a
little.
F
That's
not
a
problem
I'll
schedule
it
as
a
task
for
myself
right
before
the
chaos
cast.
A
C
F
Haven't
done
it
yet
so
I'll
bring
it
up
at
risk
meeting
today
and
then
I'll,
let
you
know
kevin
that
they've
both
been
done
when
they've
been
done
tomorrow
morning,
probably
before
8.,
okay,.
A
No,
all
right,
oh
okay,
so
we
got
that
done.
A
Okay,
all
right!
So
I'm
gonna
take
a
just
a
second
here,
because
I
don't
we
don't
have
a
ton
of
time
and
I
just
wanna
take
a
look.
If
we
have
any
outstanding,
we
have
no
outstanding
pull
requests
and
our
issues
does
everybody
kind
of
agree.
Our
issues
are
not
of
an
urgent
nature,
no
they're,
all
about
new
metrics
and
at
least
metrics.
So
there's
nothing
really.
That
needs
to
be
addressed.
Total
consensus
for
me
at
this
point.
A
E
E
Okay,
I
couldn't
remember
who
said
that,
so
I
just
wanted
to
bring
that
up
again.
It
is
it's
confusing
for
me
personally,
like.
F
Concern
than
drive-by
and
it's
yeah,
we've
gotten
rid
of
drive
by
this
is
yeah
through.
This
is
the
people
who
come
back
occasionally
what
about
occasional
contributors?
I
thought.
F
C
Episodic
contributors
can
also
be
one
and
done
right.
So
the
I
think
the
with
the
definition
there
is
that
with
an
episodic
contributor
they
come
to
do
they
come
to
do
one
thing
right
and
then
they
and
then
they
and
then
they
leave.
Now
they
could
come
back
to
do
one
thing
at
a
later
date
or
another
thing
at
a
later
date,
but
but
they're
not
they
don't
really
become
part
of
the
community.
They
just
show
up
when
they
need
to
fix
something.
E
C
I,
like
I,
actually
I
I
like
occasional,
too
and
and
keep
in
mind
we're.
I
think
all
of
these
other
terms
are
going
to
be
mentioned,
probably
almost
immediately
in
the
description.
Yes,
that's
probably
it's
probably
the
last
sentence
in
the
description
like
this
metric
is
often
referred
to
as
episodic
contributors
or
drive
by
or
drive
through,
or
so.
A
C
C
C
But
I'm
just
I'm
wondering
so
is
this
term
going
to
make
sense
when
we
talk
about
different
types
of
contributors?
So
if
we,
if
we
call
the
other
types
of
contributors,
core
contributors,
does
this
make
sense
to
have?
These
are
core
contributors,
and
these
are
occasional
contributors
or
or
is?
Is
there
a
better
term
than
core.
C
A
C
Regards
to
contributors
right,
which
isn't
a
problem,
I'm
just
saying
it's,
not
it's
not
a
term,
that's
being
used.
Currently
that
I
know
of,
is
it.
C
And
so
I'm
I'm
just
wanting
to
make
sure
that,
as
we
move
forward
the
term
that
we're
using
can
fit
in
with
fit
in
with
in
conversations
where
we're
talking
about
different
types
of
contributors.
So
if
we
name
this
occasional
contributors
now
and
then
at
a
later
date,
when
we're
talking
about
well.
So
what
are
the
other
types
of
contributors?
C
I'm
just
I'm
just
asking
that
we
have
a
little
bit
of
foresight
in
how
this
term
would
exist
in
the
world.
I
guess
is.
C
We
we
haven't,
we
haven't
yet,
I
think
in
the
in
the
the
episodic
contributors
literature.
I
think
it's
episodic
and
non-episodic
and
then
in
the
in
the
core,
which
vanad
mentions
it's
core
and
periphery.
C
C
And
I
don't
know
that
opposite,
opposite
really,
isn't
the
right
term,
for
it,
I'm
just
okay,
it's
it's
other
types
of
contributors,
so
we're
identifying
this
one
type
of
contributor
and
I'd
just
like
us
to
think
a
little
bit
about
how
what
other
types
of
contributors
would
exist
and
if
we're
naming
them
are
are
the
names
do
the
names
need
to
be
kind
of
related
a
little
bit
right.
A
I
mean
I,
I
can
see
a
scenario
where
you
have
an
occasional
contributor
who
may
may
actually
be
perceived
as
a
core
contributor,
depending
on
how
you
define
the
term
of
core.
C
Yeah-
and
I
agree,
I
think
if,
if
if
we,
if
we
choose
to
use
core
contributors
to
identify
this
other
type
of
contributor,
I
think
core
and
occasional
do
work
together
or
would
fit
together.
You
could
make
the
case
that
yeah,
an
occasional
contributor,
could
become
a
core
contributor.
C
Yes,
yes,
I
I,
like
the
term
I'm
just
I'm
just
having
a
little
bit
of
foresight
about
just
want
us
to
think
for
a
moment
about
how
this
would
affect.
A
A
Yeah
we
could
so
with
respect
to
core
contributor,
I
mean
I
could
see
at
least
the
papers
the
academic
papers
kind
of
treat
these
differently
right.
So
it
can
be
things
like
it
can
be
around
issues.
It
can
be
around
pr's.
B
A
A
C
B
So
are
those
companies
treated
as
a
core
or
peripheral.
A
C
Only
unrelated
unrelated
note
this
this
closed
captioning
is
amazing.
A
A
A
C
B
E
Yeah,
because
I
think
that
a
peripheral
contributor,
the
the
connotation
is
like
it's
not
that
important.
Your
contribution
was
out
here,
whereas
a
core
contributor
is
like
contributing
to
them
to
the
meat
of
the
project,
as
opposed
to
like
the
frequency
with
which
that's
my
that's
the
way
I
interpret
core.
It's
like
these
are
important.
You
know
heavy,
hitting
changes
that
you're
making
versus
you
know.
Other
things.
C
A
C
Yep
I
do
like
I
do
like
that.
The
occasional
and
consistent,
though
I
think
that's
that's
good,
okay,
and
I
think
we
can.
We
could
back
that
up
with
existing
literature
as
well,
so
we're.
A
B
A
Thank
you
very
much,
so
it's
super
helpful
and
brought
up
some
good
points.
All
right.
Everybody
enjoy
the
rest
of
your
thursday.
If
I
don't
see
you
enjoy
your
weekend
and
I'll
see
you
next
week,
yeah.