►
From YouTube: CHAOSS Common Working Group 4/28/22
Description
Links to minutes from this meeting are on https://chaoss.community/participate.
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
C
A
C
A
E
A
A
C
And
then
that
first
comment
it
was
basically
just
we
sometimes
the
like.
What
is
proposed
to
be
edited
is
really
pretty
simple.
It's
like
a
list
is
poorly
formatted
or
you
know
like
a
likert
scale,
goes
one
to
five,
but
we
use
one
to
x.
You
know
what
I
mean
so
they're,
usually
pretty
easy
things
to
fix,
and
so
we
put
that
in
the
newcomer
channel.
The
dei
has
these
issues
and
if
you
want
to
participate,
that'd
be
great
and
we
had
a
couple
people
who
expressed
interest
in
participating
cool
yeah.
C
C
A
A
B
So
I'm
going
to
ask
a
technical
question
just
to
refresh
my
memory.
We
can
create
issue
labels
at
the
organization
level
and
then
all
the
working
groups
would
inherit
those
projects
like
auger
gremore,
lab
sorting
hat
that
want
to
use
a
different
set
of
labels,
and
you
can
just
overwrite
that
with
their
own
file
and
that
repository
is
that
right.
B
C
A
I
want
I
want
to
mention
one
thing
and
I
don't
know
so
so
I
don't
know
what
we
did,
but
we
did
implement
something.
We
put
the
labels
in
a
yaml
file
and
some
of
us
had
been
creating
labels
through
the
github
user
interface
and
for
the
cncf
contributor
strategy
tag.
We
lost
all
of
our
labels
through
something
in
an
automation
process.
Now
I
don't
know
that
they
were.
A
I
don't
know
if
we
were
doing
it
through
the
dot,
github,
repo
or
github
directory,
or
if
we
were
doing
some
other
kind
of
automation
like
I
know,
we've
got
some
stuff
set
up
with,
like
you
have
actions
and
things,
so
it
might
not
be
the
same
thing,
but
I
would
before
before
we
implement
something.
Let's
look
at
possible
side
effects
for
the
existing
labels
that
were
created
through
the
interface.
B
A
A
F
C
C
B
C
And
that
was
really
the
easiest
way,
because
the
issue
templates
were
really
only
applicable
to
the
working
groups
because
they
were
about
revising
metrics
or
releasing
metrics,
and
the
same
might
hold
true
for
issues
that
they
might
only
be
applicable
to
really
the
five
working
groups.
And
at
that
point
it's
really
just
easier,
maybe
just
to
copy
the
folder.
C
A
Over
time
waiting
for
reviewer
action
because
to
know
you
said
you
were
gonna,
you
were
gonna.
Look
at
that
one.
I
know
that
when
we
go
through
the
metrics
that
takes
some
time,
and
so
I
wanted
to
just
hit
all
the
rest
of
the
items
before
we
talk
about
that.
So
you
want
to
give
us
an
update
on
where
you
are
with
that.
F
A
F
A
A
B
E
E
F
F
B
E
E
E
C
C
B
B
F
A
F
F
F
C
C
E
E
E
F
Yep,
that
was
the
initial
goal
when
this
metric
got
started.
Like
first
was
submitter
action,
then,
in
that
discussion
this
was
evolved
and
we
discussed
that.
Okay,
we
have
a
duration
review
cycle
duration
and
first,
the
discussion
was
whether
to
have
a
time
waiting
or
a
duration.
Then
we
realized.
No.
This
is
a
subset
of
that
duration,
metric
okay.
So
so
my
understanding
based.
A
B
B
F
C
C
E
And
the
most
important
use
of
this
one
is
probably
actually
to
get
time
of.
First
response
of
a
review
would
be
my
guess
like
how.
How
long
is
that,
how
long
until
you
get
that
first
response
by
a
reviewer,
when
you
submit
a
review
that
that
would
to
me
that
would
be
the
most
important
bit
in
here,
and
it's
not
it's
not
coming
through
in
the
text.
Don't.