►
From YouTube: CHAOSS.Evolution.April.10.2019
Description
CHAOSS.Evolution.April.10.2019
C
B
C
C
From
Kenner
start
with
discussing
about
the
union's
themselves,
I
may
concern
arose
about
water.
We
had
pension
system,
not
addition
happened
excuse,
but
the
idea
was
to
use
little
obstacle
denotes
their
traditional
things.
What
was
tough
to
the
meeting
so
that
we
happen
to
try
it
with
everything
lays
in
the
working
group,
which
is
the
big
picture,
and
we
had
this
issue
were
we
were
discussing
base,
and
my
idea
was
that
we
have
his
concerns
with
that
I'm,
not
sure
so.
C
A
C
Happy
if
you
prefer
to
believe
that
way,
my
burden
was
the
usual
amenities
for
that
is
that
he's
not
that
easy
to
find
faster
systems
like
doing
file
and
you're
sick
for
there,
yeah
I
know
that
the
reserve
use
an
extra,
an
extra
job
in
doing
the
coop
request
and
okay,
but
at
the
same
time,
is
such
an
opportunity
that
if
anyone
is
not
agreeing
with
the
middle
to
the
minutes,
for
any
reason,
what
can
you
can
save
in
degree?
I
wanted
to
do,
but,
moreover,
I'm.
C
A
C
Okay,
I'm
going
to
go
through
the
issues
for
those
of
you
who
are
not
familiar
with
this
procedure.
What
we're
doing
now
is
going
to
their
WG
g
md
repository,
which
is
the
roughest
curve
for
the
working
book
and
go
through
the
open,
GC,
just
very
quickly
see
whether
we
can
and
block
some
of
them
or
we
need
extra
actions,
and
some
of
them
are
wearable.
So
right
now
we
have
with
him
with
him
issues
and
the
first
one
which
is
number
101,
create
with
asking
for
feedback
on
measuring
efficiency.
C
Yes,
for
you
all
now,
the
reason
after
his
issue
is
I,
wasn't
aiming
to
work
on
efficiency,
which
is
one
of
the
goals
for
code
development
and
before
starting
to
deal
with
the
metrics
I,
prefer
to
start
a
discussion
to
see
where
people
can't
they're
the
current
questions-
with
our
short
of
prison
all
or
we
should
be
adding
or
removing
some
of
the
vectors.
So
this
will
gas
the
equipment
we
do.
You
have
to
look
at
the
issue
and
if
you
want
to
say
something
or
say
something,
and
that's
it
any
comment
on
this
issue.
C
C
B
B
B
C
C
Is
that
we
are
going
to
have
reference
implementation
and
prefer
implementation
are
supposed
to
be
working
and
introducing
natural
numbers,
and
so
on?
The
idea
would
be
to
test
that
they
are
actually
working
so
that
every
time
the
researcher
may
be
automatically
run
the
tests
on
the
reference
implementations
and,
for
instance,
you
can
dominican
testing.
But,
for
instance,
you
can
ran
the
reference
implementation
from
same
a
specific
repository
from
which
we
now
the
result
that
demanded
took
it
and
then
we
can
convert.
A
C
C
Exactly
exactly
so
that
the
area
would
be,
for
instance,
you
included
integrational
for
Travis
CI
in
our
degree,
so
that
every
time
it
is
to
me
to
the
notation
I'm,
a
scripture,
Ron,
there's
chicken
pudding
thing
with
you
know
troops
and
results
that
be
not
good
for
you,
I'm
taking
them
against
counts
on
some
data
that
we
know
so
that
we
can
check
that
the
notebooks
are
really
working.
Listen
to
me
this.
B
Know
kind
of
my
thinking,
I
was
just
throwing
this
coming
on.
The
issue
is
that
this
could
be
a
way
of
prototyping
or
demonstrating
for
other
working
groups
of
expressed
in
interest
and
seeing
implementations
how
how
a
basic
implementation
of
those
metrics
could
be
sort
of
continuously
tested
in
a
way
that
you
know
if
something
changes
and
how
I
get
repository
is
stored,
it
needs
to
be
caught.
B
E
B
B
C
E
C
You
get
the
data,
so
imagine,
for
instance,
that
you
get
all
different
requests
for
a
given.
I
can't
have
the
three
then,
on
that
we
are
running
some
metrics
like
how
many
of
them
are
still
open,
and
if
we
have
the
reference
repository,
were
we
now
the
number
of
total
books
open
are
red
words
according
to
stand,
definition
that
we
have
agreed
for
the
metric
should
be
135.
C
We
can
just
check
them.
We
can
check
whether
the
current
version
of
the
notebook,
the
current
Miroku
Vegas
open,
and
they
were
always
there.
Many
people
is
going
to
start
working
on
that
now
with
google
Summer
of
Code
and
all
that
we're
going
to
have
newer
versions
of
the
stories
and
the
idea
is
to
avoid
regression
so
that
maybe,
when
implementing
some
metric,
some
of
the
metrics
start
to
fail
and
yeah
I.
F
Yeah
regarding
me,
pipeline
of
I
think
that
it
would
be.
It
would
be
more
like
a
package
where
we
could
give
from
the
command
line
the
input
as
the
list
of
metric
names
and
the
repository
which
needs
to
be
for
which
the
matrix
need
to
be
calculated,
and
it
would
give
us
the
result
in
the
form
of
a
CSP
or
any
other
file
format
that
you
want
for
that.
F
B
Like
I,
like
I,
like
the
idea,
conceptually
I
worry
about
the
working
groups
that
are
defining
metrics,
creating
coupling
between
themselves
and
these
reference
repositories
and
some
particular
ways
that
one
piece
of
software
might
pull
the
data.
So
the
tools
that,
like
some
like
a
I,
think
the
suggestion
in
here
is
like
we
might
use,
first
of
all,
to
generate
an
output
file
for
the
for
the
metrics
chosen.
But
what?
B
If
a
working
group
decides
to
use
some
other
tools,
for
example,
and
the
risk
working
group
Percival's
really
not
applicable
at
all
in
and
I
think
outside
of
and
I?
Think
there's
not
a
universe
and
I
had
like
a
like
a
software
code
smell
about
creating
coupling
between
the
working
group
in
a
particular
way
of
getting
the
data
just
because
I
know
that
there
are
multiple
ways
that
this
date
has
gotten.
B
On
the
other
hand,
I
mean
the
idea
of
having
this
is
not
I
mean
it's
also
an
advancement
in
the
work
that
we're
doing
right
so
I'm,
trying
to
balance
this
in
my
head
and
I
haven't
thought
about
it.
A
lot
before,
like
two
minutes
ago,
from
I'm
trying
to
think
about
how
to
balance
the
risk
of
coupling
the
software
with
the
definition
of
metrics
too
tightly.
C
All
change
no
I
mean
I.
Think
it's
it's
a
bit
early
to
know
how
to
do
that,
because
the
issue
right
now
is
discussing
about
what
we
do.
Do
we
want
to
do
with
this.
So
I
think
that
the
specific
idea
how
to
do
that
with
frozen
repositories
or
not.
It's
maybe
a
bit
generic
right
now.
Okay,
we're
still
discussing
what
do
we
want
the
test
info
and
in
that
respect
it
remains
nice
very
relevant,
because
right
now,
the
here
that
we
have
is
to
try
to
hand
provenance
implementation
for
as
mass
matrix
possible.
C
If
reference
implementations
are
right
in
their
writing
in
software,
and
so
we
can
fail
and
can
have
progressed
in
all
of
them.
So
I
would
say
that
the
primary
of
the
people
phase
is
to
install
as
much
as
possible
that
the
reference
implementations
are
working
as
intended,
and
then
we
can
discuss
as
app
like
same
community
to
try
to
be
careful
as
method
for
building
specific
tools
and
all
of
the
enemies
every
day
but
Indian.
We
have
slow
flow,
which
is
implementing
some
networks,
and
that
can
fail
thinking
a
progression
and
the
idea
is.
C
A
Honestly,
taking
a
look
at
the
issue
and
just
kind
of
listening
to
the
conversations
here,
one
of
the
the
comments
that
Sean
had
put
on
the
issue
was
perhaps
pilot
or
some
sort
of
demonstration
as
I.
Think
that's
what
you're
saying
Sean
yeah
for
what
those
might
look
like
right
might
be
helpful.
So
maybe
I
suggested
couple
of
things.
A
One
is
for
the
the
software
folks
who
are
on
here
or
those
who
have
an
interest
in
soccer
to
kind
of
think
about
what
this
would
reality
from
idea
to
reality
would
be
number
one
and
then
number
two
play
the
pilot
thinking
about
piloting
that
reality.
Oh
I,
don't
think
we'll
solve
this
problem
here.
So
maybe
I
have.
F
A
C
F
Wanted
to
like
I
just
went
out
I
just
have
it
out
like
once
the
matrix
are
implemented,
then
how
are
we
planning
to
use
them
with
the
repulsive
trees?
Suppose,
once
we
have,
we
are
having
reference
implementations
right
for
the
purpose
of
actually
using
the
matrix.
We
would
have
to
do
something
like
integrating
them
into
some
structure
or
to
actually
use
the
use
them
for
analyzing
deposit.
F
Actually,
what
I
am
asking
is
that,
once
there
are
reference
implementations
for
all
the
matrix,
then
how
like
they
would
be
a
they
would
be
separate.
There
would
be
separate
implementations
for
all
the
matrix,
so
how?
How
would?
How
are
we
planning
to
use
the
matrix
to
analyze
the
repositories
like
like?
Would
they
be
used
directly
for
analyzing
the
repositories,
as
we
have
done
in
the
micro
tasks?
No.
C
But
those
are
different
issues.
One
thing
is
whatever
we
have
any
specific
in
reference
implementation
20-pin
that
way
and
another
one
is
got
a
terrific
tool.
There
there's
a
step
so,
for
instance,
in
El
Campo
Abu,
anga
Marla,
which
are
tools
that
can
actually
be
used
for
retrieving
data
visualizing
it
and
all
affect
that.
This.
F
C
Mostly
that
the
reference
implementation
is
asked
about,
saying
we
are
counting
two
mates
in
that
way
and
that's
what
the
method
definition
phase
and
then
the
reference
implementation
is
there's
a
way
of
doing
that,
so
that
you
can
convert
with
any
tool
and
say,
while
the
result
by
this
in
this
metric
is
exactly
the
same
as
growth,
incidentally,
and
also
a
way
that
people
can
learn
how
exactly
we
are
doing
that.
You
can
see
now
that
you
can
do
this
track
things
in
code.
That's
not
ambiguous
mainly
when
we're
doing
that
in
English.
C
Maybe
that's
not
something
that
can
be
understanding
different
ways,
but
when
you
write
the
code,
because
it's
nothing
big
wasn't
you
can
see.
Okay
exactly.
This
is
the
way
this
metric
is
defined.
So
the
notebooks
for
the
matrix
are
reference.
Implementation
are
not
intended
for
doing
the
way
that
people
analyze
those
but.
F
I
just
have
one
suggestion
like
that:
busty
notebooks
are
implemented,
then
it
would
be
like
I
understand
that
these
are
two
separate
things.
So
once
the
notebooks
are
implemented,
the
reference
implementations
of
matrix
is
over.
Then
this
could
then
the
notebooks
can
easily
be
converted
to
Python
scripts
to
just
make
software.
So
this
is
a
second
thing
which
I
am
talking
like.
F
There
is
a
write
file
in
command
which
would
easily
convert
all
the
notebooks
to
corresponding
Python
scripts
and
that
could
easily
be
used
to
make
the
package
or
whatever
we
can
call
it
an
integrated
pipeline
of
all
the
matrix
so
that
that
would
be
a
that
would
be
an
additional
thing
that
would
be
added
to
this
project.
If.
F
C
G
G
B
A
C
We
are
a
bit
late
in
the
meeting
I'm
going
to
try
to
go
only
through
the
issues
word.
It
could
make
sense
cause.
We
have
discussed
now.
Okay,
the
first
one
that
the
next
one
134
is
7,
don't
issues.
We
are
basically
discussing
what
gas
main
event
on
issues.
I,
guess
a
that
joined
a
discussion
if
you
want
I
think
there
is
nothing
specific
to
decide
in
a
new
name
for
this
working
group.
We
can
either
comment
that
now
or
the
call
to
the
issue
to
the
item
that
we
haven't
agenda.
C
C
C
H
A
B
B
B
B
A
B
C
The
next
issue
in
my
list
is
reviews,
instead
of
so
that
issue
110
and
just
to
to
motivate
this,
remember
that
we
have
code
for
all
the
tests
were
ready
to
code
review,
but
at
some
point
it
will
work
in
the
proposal.
A
word
name
that
nobody
really
is
using
mister
friends
and
I'm
decided
to
discuss
other
options.
B
A
C
Okay,
that
that's
fine
I'll
go
with
that.
But,
however,
just
in
case
somebody
thinks
a
bit
about
this
and
camps
with
it
with
a
better
name.
We
can
leave
the
issue
open
for
a
couple
of
days
and
recommends
I
can
close
it
and
start
the
food
request
with
a
right.
We
already
have
to
prove
it
without
that.
I
can't
wait
for
a
couple
of
days,
and
somebody
says
something
and
if
nobody
says
something
we
just
rotating
and
say:
okay,
that
works
for
me:
Thanks,
okay,
okay,
hey.
A
C
C
C
You
start
a
pull
request
and
the
idea
here
is
to
try
to
track
the
old
names
that
we
have
for
methods
when
we
are
changing
to
new
names,
so
that
people
can
find
the
current
name
for
a
metric
that
maybe
they
were
using
by
empirical.
So
this
was
the
other
side
of
the
past
meeting
and
if
somebody
can
take
that,
that
would
be
great
I.
Think.
B
I
think
we
could
would
I'd
suggest
maybe,
as
a
modification
is
that
we
begin
this
now,
so
that
anything
you
changed
from
now
forward
will
create
this
map
for
and
we
let
all
the
things
that
we
have
changed
in
the
last
couple
years
just
be.
That
would
be
what
they
are
now,
and
so
it's
like
changes
from
this
moment
in
time
that
oh
that's,.
F
Needs
to
be
done.
Do
we
need
to
include
all
the
matrix
in
the
structure
of
our
next
training
site,
I.
C
Think
there
is
no
specific
structure
that
could
be
just
a
table
with
all
nine
I
think
you
met
with
something
like
that
and
if
it's
not
way
what
I
can
do
is
since
I
have
this
pull
request
for
moving
from
proposals?
Reviews
I
can
add
a
new
file
with
historical
table
for
this
one,
and
if
you
like
the
idea-
and
we
can
follow
with
that
format,
but
that
could
be
like
a
table-
all
name
new
name
date
of
change,
something
like
that.
C
The
next
ones,
I
think
that
all
then
are
waiting
for
some
action
and
I.
Don't
think
it
makes
a
lot
of
sense
to
go
one
by
one.
I
think
that
some
of
them
are
Indian
action
by
seeing
some
of
you
know
are
finding
a
cure
by
me.
Some
of
them
are
trained
in
acting,
but
somebody
owes
and
but
I
think
there
is
nothing
that
we
need
to
discuss
right
now
is
that
some
of
you
think
it's
better
to
discuss
right
now.
D
I
C
No
not
that,
but
but
they
were
reviewed,
because
what
we
are
having
is
in
the
specific
case
of
use
cases,
we
are
quite
interested
in
having
the
feedback
from
the
people
that
proposes
them
and
for
some
of
them
we
didn't
have
the
typical.
So
I
don't
know
if
this
is
one
of
those
pieces
that
the
main
problem
with
that
is
that
either
we
close
and
we
don't
have
them,
they.
C
So
the
first
one
which
is
132
is
just
updating
the
with
me,
so
it
has
a
long
long
history
made.
The
summary
is
I
think
that
we
can
merge
it
because
it's
version
of
the
Whitney
and
we
can
use
it
as
their
as
the
first
situation
for
the
next
change
with
me.
So
if
the
roll
at
me
I
would
be
as
affinity
now
in
a
little
while
and
the
only
thing
is
keep
an
eye
on
it
on
the
Whitney,
so
that
so
because
probably
we
can
still
improve
Italy.
C
C
Then
the
next
one
126
is
apart.
Spicy
me
I'm,
more
I
commented
that
I
think
that
there
are
two
things
mixed
in
you,
because
there
are
still
some
changes.
Maybe
were
they
were
merging
an
old
branch
or
something
because
I'm
storing
some
deep
profiles
that
I
think
are
not
intended
to
do
with
this
yeah.
B
C
C
Then
there
is
another
one
which
is
thinking
purpose
of
the
reviews
which
we
already
commented
on,
looking
nothing
new
and
then
there
is
two
use
cases
which
are
these
two.
But
we
can
either
close
at
some
point
or
wait
for
wait
for
more
depends
and
if
a
person
takes
same
I
think
this
is.
What
do
you
intend
applaud
agents
to
the
part.
B
C
The
only
thing
is,
and
if
you
have
to
look
at
both
of
them,
we
have
final
comments
and
I
think
that
your
grades
or
days
so
have
a
look
at
them
and
then
we
can
move
on
from
that.
But
I
don't
know
if
it
is
going
to
be
easier
to
start
with
a
phrase
full
records,
because
things
move
a
lot
in
the
river.
Yes,
I,
don't
know
what
is
better.
B
C
B
B
It's
just
the
community
manager
use
case
with
the
changes
that
you
asked
for
under
the
other
one,
and
then
there's
changes
to
the
readme,
which
really
are
only
conformed,
and
maybe
you
do
this
and
the
other
pull
request.
That's
up
there
for
the
review.
It's
just
putting
our
meeting
information
at
the
top,
which
conforms
to
the
structure
that
the
other
working
groups
use.
C
120
I
think
I
think
it
can
be
off
with
me
just
one
second,
because
I
don't
know
if
this
variable
right
now
so
right
now
in
my
my
village
said
this
cannot
be
with
based
in,
but
let
me
check
if
it
can
be
yeah,
it
can
be
friend
with
the
Abu
Bakr's.
It
could
be
marked
I
mean
it
can
be,
it
can
be
moved.
So
what
I'm
going
to
do,
if
you
all
agree,
is
I
can
merge
it
right
now
and
there,
since
we
have
a
bend,
improve
request
on
the
with
mean.
C
C
C
C
H
C
Oh,
don't
fret,
then
we
only
have
depending
who
work
worst.
One
is
mine
and
they
will
be
working
in
it
in
the
next
two
days
and
the
other
one.
Is
this
all
use
case
that
we
need
to
repeat
back
five
powerfully
I'm
going
to
try
to
think
him
again
and
if
he
doesn't,
if
that
doesn't
work,
maybe
we
can
close
it
for
a
while,
okay,
okay
and
I
think
we
are
done
with
the
issues
and
pull
requests.
Any
other
comment
about
any
anything
of
the
insole.
C
B
C
B
The
only
thing
we've
really
been
discussing
with
regards
today
working
your
structure
are
the
repository
structures
and
how
we
work
with
this
repository
compared
to
the
metrics,
apposite
ori
and
there
are
different
working
groups.
They
many
of
us
have
been
in
those
conversations
that
use
slightly
different
strategies
in
our
case,
I
think
like
in
the
case
of
but
I
think
common
with.
B
What
the
intention
seems
to
be
is
that
they're
going
to
do
most
of
the
actual
metrics
changing
work
on
forks
of
the
metrics
repository
but
administer
their
working
group
inside
of
their
working
group
repository?
So
it's
a
it's
a
slightly
different
strategy
than
we're
using
I.
Don't
know
that
it
and
if
somebody
remembers
something
else,
I
don't
know
what
we
called
for
us.
Culture
ought
to
change.
Anything
I
think
it
was
probably
put
in
there
more
as
a
point
of
discussion.