►
From YouTube: CHAOSS Metric Models Working Group (new!) 8-24-21
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
D
A
Exactly
it's
not
good
all
right!
Well!
Thank
you!
So,
let's
see
the
first
thing
on
the
agenda
oops
the
first
thing
on
the
agenda
today
and
I'll
share.
My
screen
was
to
to
move
this.
We
had
talked
about
doing
a
bi-weekly
cadence.
I
think
we
just
wanted
to
meet
today,
just
because
this
was
only
our
second
meeting,
but
we
could
set
it
up.
So
it's
bi-weekly,
but
I
wanted
to
tomorrow
morning.
U.S
time
is
the
chaos
asia,
pacific
call,
so
it
might
be
nice
to
set
this
one
up
like
opposite.
A
A
A
That'll
be
great,
we'll
meet
next
week
and
then
from
there
pick.
A
Great,
thank
you
so
sean,
okay,
so
part
of
the
metrics
model
working
group
is.
We
have
a
similar
working
group
called
the
app
ecosystem
working
group
who's.
Also
taking
a
look
at
how
metrics
can
be
drawn
together
in
meaningful
ways,
but
to
I
think
sean
had
spent
some
time
so
sean
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
you
and
kind
of
talk
about
the
app
ecosystem
working
group
and
I
might
fill
in
a
few
things
just
kind
of
from
my
own
perspective,
as
as
sure.
D
So
the
way
I
would
frame
this
is,
can
you
have
it
a
little
bigger
just
for
oh
yeah
yeah?
I
think
how's
that
yep
that's
better
okay,
so
the
app
ecosystem
working
group,
I
would
say,
works
from
the
top
down.
In
other
words,
they
haven't
developed
very
many
metrics
in
the
full
chaos
way
of
developing
metrics.
D
Instead,
what
they've
done
is
they've
thought
about
the
model
first,
and
I
think
many
of
the
metrics
that
they're
proposing
but
not
have
not
developed,
are
metrics
that
could
be
developed
by
multiple
different
working
groups
and
the
place
where
they've
done
the
most
work.
Interestingly
enough
so
far
is
in
the
area
of
event
organization,
and
that
may
reflect
the
interests
of
that
group,
but
they
think
about
the
development
of
metrics,
as
they
first
start
with
the
goal
over.
D
You
know
so
example,
for
example,
goal
of
the
retaining
and
attracting
of
contributors,
and
then
they
have
a
series
of
questions
and
the
metrics
that
correspond
to
those
questions,
and
this
is,
I
think,
at
least
structurally,
similar
to
the
models
that
we're
talking
about.
It's
just
that
they've
developed
them
from
the
top
down
and
they
haven't
gotten
all
the
way
to
the
bottom.
D
Yeah
and
then
so,
given
a
person
who's
new
to
the
project,
not
a
member,
how
much
more
likely
are
they
to
become
more
involved
and
stay
longer
in
the
project?
I'd,
presumably
that
they've
proposed
a
couple
of
metrics
here
and
suggested
some
data
and
they
have
documentation
that
does
go
into
a
little
bit
more
detail
about
what
would
be
involved
in
the
metric,
but
not
they've,
not
fleshed
out.
I
think
any
metrics
really
and
then
also
under
the
goal
of
retaining
and
attracting
contributors.
D
What
role
do
events
have
in
engaging
contributors?
So
contributions
of
attendees
contributions
to
the
segment
of
a
project
are
our
two
metrics
for
that
question
and
there's
two
more
questions
for
that
goal.
Just
to
flesh
out
the
full
example
how
many
attendees
are
also
contributors
and
then
the
metric
is
number
of
attendees
who
contributed.
So
here
we
have
a
one-to-one
mapping
between
the
question
and
the
metric
and
finally,
for
that
example.
D
A
Right,
okay,
I
will.
A
Marine
okay,
so
I'm
gonna
share
my
screen
now
too
yeah,
and
this
is
what
sean
is
talking
about.
So
in
the
repo,
this
is
what
they've
developed,
and
so
they
follow
the
goal.
Question
metric
approach
of
the
chaos
project.
So
basically,
this
is
a
technique
that
we
use
in
the
chaos
project
to
define
a
goal,
have
questions
that
address
that
goal
and
then
metrics
that
can
address
the
question.
Basically,
it's
kind
of
this
nesting
and
it's
worked
very
well
in
the
chaos
project
and
they're
they're,
clearly
doing
it
for
personas
too.
A
So
this
isn't
just
they
follow
this
persona
model
and
then
to
sean's
point
like
the
length
of
it
of
a
time
length
of
time
of
attendees
membership
is
not
currently
a
chaos
metric,
and
this
one
I
don't
think
you
know.
A
D
A
This
is
different
than
I
think
what
we've
been
talking
about:
structure,
wise
art
and
like
looking
at
the
contributions
from
the
folks
at
huawei
and
taking
a
look
at
kind
of
how
we've
been
talking.
It's
like,
let's
take
a
look
at
our
existing
metric
set
and
then
how
can
those
be
brought
together
right
so
that
they
can
be
kind
of
implemented?
E
I
think
I
think,
when
it
comes
to
the
types
of
models
and
the
way
we
are
talking
about
the
metrics
I've
in
my
head,
I've
been
thinking
about
kind
of
more
traditional
software
design
models.
This
is
this
is
really
close
to
our
metrics
definition
work
and
I,
I
think
it's
almost
too
close
to
our
metrics
definition.
Work.
E
A
I
agree
with
that.
I
mean
like
I
would
in
the
app
ecosystem
might
disagree,
but
I
would
look
at
this
and
say:
okay
job,
to
do
build
this
metric
right.
You
know,
and
I
think
that's
what
you're
saying
kevin
like
this
is
kind
of
the
logic
we
follow
and
then
it
lands
us
on
a
metric
to
build
right,
yeah.
E
And
it's
a
good
model,
it
works
great
for
defining
metrics
yeah,
but
when
it
comes
to
use
case
models
and
personas
and
flow
charts
and
all
of
these
things
these
are.
These
are
tried
and
true
software
engineering
design
tools.
You
know
there
are,
there,
are
standards
around
them
and
I'm
kind
of
I'm
kind
of
leaning
towards
taking
advantage
of
those
existing
structures
that
already
exist
and
and
using
those
models
to
to
model
our
metrics
into
forms
that
can
be
easily
translated
to
software.
D
This
question
may
not
actually
be
answered
solely
by
these
metrics
or
by
these
metrics,
but
there
may
be
other
metrics
that
need
to
be
integrated
to
answer
that
question
and
it
may
not-
and
maybe
in
fact,
a
different
question
that
gets
asked
that
we
build
the
models
around
and
say.
I
agree
too
they're
different
things.
B
Yeah,
actually
I
I
share
the
same
ideas
about
it.
I
I
basically
I
I
want
to
use
this
matrix
model
to
to
make
thing.
I
just
some
dependencies
in
the
software
point
of
view,
to
rebuild
on
build
some
new
applications
based
on
those
exact
step
metrics
and
to
show
how
it
works.
Yep,
okay,.
A
A
Group
to
develop
somebody
give
me
some
words:
develop
models.
E
A
E
A
To
their
respective
working
groups,
so
all
right
great-
I
mean
I
can
already
tell
one
of
the
action
items.
If
somebody
can
can
anybody
create
the
repo
right
now.
D
A
The
model
the
wg
yep
wg
dash
dash
what
rick
here
wg
dash
metric.
E
D
D
E
The
governance,
repo.
D
Do
you
have
a
standard
license
that
we
use?
We
do
yeah,
that's
in
the
governance
repo
as
well.
C
Mit
yep,
okay,
if
you
pull
the
read
me
standard,
read
me:
it
has
that
licensing
option
in
that
bottom
column
of
the
readme.
Already
yes
I'll.
D
G
So,
on
the
license
thing
by
the
way,
one
of
the
things
that
we're
starting
to
do
at
ieee
is
a
lot
of
documentation
is
actually
going
apache
too,
and
the
reason
we're
doing
that
has
to
do
with
ipr
issues,
especially
in
regards
to
standards
and
metrics.
So
you
might
want
to
think
about
those
different
pieces.
Just
in
case
anything
comes
up
that
you
worry
about
someone
patenting
after
the
fact.
G
We
should
probably
take
that
that
happen.
In
fact,
that
was
a
concern
at
hyperledger
when
we
were
doing
aries,
because
people
were
bringing
things
in
in
the
documentation
level,
not
in
the
actual
implementation
level
that
could
be
construed
as
patentable,
and
so
what.
G
Ieee
didn't
have
anything,
and
that
was
the
other
problem
with
hyperledger
is
it
was
just
the
documentation
and
creative
commons
doesn't
cover
that.
So
you
know
it's
I'm
just
saying
it's
one
of
the
things
that
we're
moving
towards
and
I'm
trying
to
get
josh
to
write
up
the
official
statement
in
regards
to
it,
but
he
just
got
back
from
paternity
leave.
So,
but
it
is,
you
know
one
of
those
things
that
did
bring
up
okay
and
actually
I'm
I'm
kind
of
surprised.
I
would
go
talk
to
mike
about
it.
G
All
right,
well,
anyhow,
that's
I
had
a
conversation
with
aaron
williamson
about
that
too.
G
We
did
have
that
problem.
I
had
that
happen
distinctly
in
a
open
source
project
where
a
certain
company
apple
came
in
and
talked
about
something
while
we
were
in
the
design
phase
and
then
when
we
actually
went
and
implemented
it,
we
thought
everything
was
fine,
because
we
were
doing
the
typical
dco
model
and
then
they
came
out
and
said
the
patent
and
had
and
it
it
basically
killed
the
project.
Interesting.
A
Okay,
that's
good
thanks
for
the
tips
alona
yeah!
We
should
it.
F
A
G
G
D
G
D
G
G
F
A
All
right,
okay,
so
from
I,
just
wanted
to
bring
us
from
the
prior
meeting
from
the
first
meeting
that
we
had
where
we
made
really
great
progress.
A
We
had
talked
about-
and
I
just
part
of
me
wants
to
just
kind
of
think
through
these
two
components,
so
we
had
talked
about
like
the
idea
of
personas
use
cases
and
relationships
between
metrics
right
as
kind
of
motivators,
and
then
we
had
also
talked
about
like
focus
areas,
and
I
think
it
was
yahoo
that
had
kind
of
mentioned,
like
the
operations,
governance,
development
and
community
engagement.
A
D
I'm
I'm.
I
do
think
that
they're,
really
that
the
app
ecosystem
working
group
did
break
down
a
bunch
of
personas
that
I
think,
are
useful,
and
so
it's
not
as
though
they
they're
again,
but
that's
very
top-down
right.
So
I
think
what
we
have
here
is
we
want
to
talk
about
personas
and
use
the
existing
metrics
to
build
models
that
serve
those
personas.
We
can
act,
we
can
be
we're
able
to
act
much
faster
because
we
have
tools
that
already
build
these
to
generate
these
metrics,
so
yeah.
D
I
think
the
let
me
see
if
I
can
find
their
list
of
personas,
because
it
was
a
pretty
good
list.
I
thought.
E
D
The
question
is,
do
you
is
it
starting
with
a
use
case,
I
think,
seems
more
at
the
same
level
as
a
model
than
starting
with
a
persona.
B
B
In
our
meeting
yeah
we
lost
the
meeting.
Yeah
did
not
notice
scroll
down.
A
B
And
also
who
who
care
about
this
metrics
mod?
This
is
the
tool,
for
example,
the
community
managers.
They
they
will
care
about
the
operations
we
and
also
we
need
care
about.
I
mean
the
developers
in
the
communities
also
need
to
be
concerned
by
the
matrix
model.
That's
the
typically
two
ways
to
think
about
it.
Yeah.
A
So
would
so
how
okay?
So
if
we
have
these
focus
areas
right
that
we
would
develop
metrics
models
in
so
we'd
have
the
metrics
that
are
included
in
this
metrics
model
are
one
two:
three
and
four.
You
know
what
I
mean
like.
We
have
some
metrics
that
are
included
in
a
particular
model.
We
provide
a
link.
Is
this
like?
E
I
think
the
use
use
case
models.
We
could
link
use
case
models
to
personas,
for
example,
we
could
create
a
community
manager
persona
and
then,
within
that
community
manager
persona
we
could
actually
create
kind
of
a
running
list
of
use
case
models
that
we've
created
that
are
applicable
to
that
persona,
but
in
general
I
think
those
models
would
be
built
separately.
A
D
Sean
did
you
have
a
comment
just
that
that
I
did
post
a
link
to
there's
another
document
from
the
app
ecosystem
group
where
they
do
enumerate
personas
and
identify
goals
related
to
those
personas.
I
think
our
activity
is.
D
We
have
to
decide
if
we
want
to
start
at
the
persona,
which
is
really,
I
think,
a
role
in
open
source
and
and
think
about
how
how
do
we
aggregate
models
so
where,
where
the
community
well,
the
app
ecosystem
group
has
a
persona
and
then
a
list
of
goals
related
to
that
persona.
We
would
have
a
persona,
possibly
probably
the
persona
names
themselves,
are
very
similar,
but
we
would
have
models
related
to
those
personas.
E
D
E
E
Is
a
goal
I
think
is
a
little
more
explicit,
whereas,
whereas
a
used
case
is
going
to
be
yeah.
G
E
E
G
D
Yeah,
there's
a
linguistic,
I
think,
there's
a
linguistic
divide
and
I
think
the
use
case
is
effectively
say
expressing
here's
a
situation
where
somebody
wants
to
answer
some
particular
collection
of
questions
with
a
collection
of
metrics
to
accomplish
some
goal,
and
I
think
framing
things
through
use
cases
is
probably
easier
than
trying
to
explicitly.
You
know:
go
back
through
the
goal.
D
Question
metric
model,
if
we
say
here's
a
use
case
and
a
model
that
that
meets
that
use
case,
and
then
that
model
can
then
go
pick
from
the
70
chaos
metrics
and
the
model
being
the
metric
model
right.
The
metric
model
right,
I
mean
metric
model
when
I
say
model
yeah
and
all
this
other
language
we
can
throw
out
so.
E
E
A
D
And,
and
so
if
we
focus
our
efforts
on
collecting
chaos,
metrics
that
fit
together
as
models
and
then
don't
worry
about
the
language
around
them,
but
focus
on
how
are
these
actually
being
used
operationally
by
people?
How
are
these
metrics
collected
and
used
operationally,
and
that
becomes
a
model
then
those
models
they
end
up,
matrixing
with
the
number
of
personas,
so
we
have
a
lot
of
assets
in
the
model
in
the
metrics
that
are
already
developed
that
we're
trying
to
group
together
here
right.
That's
the
big
difference.
C
A
little
bit
how
I
perceive
this,
I'm
thinking
through
an
example,
is
like
I
take
a
persona
of
a
community
manager
that
fits
into
a
personal
destination
and
how
a
community
manager
uses
different
cases
of
a
metric
model
like
a
collection
of
metrics.
In
a
different
situation,
for
example,
a
community
manager
wants
to
assess
the
growth
of
a
community.
C
C
A
E
E
D
E
A
E
H
Again,
oh
sorry,
go
ahead.
I
was
just
going
to
ask
a
question,
then
would
the
model
change,
though,
first
depending
on
who
the
person
is
that's
using
it
so
like
a
community
manager,
may
care
about
growth
in
the
community,
but
may
also
want
to
see
a
component
of
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion
as
well.
But
someone
planning
for
you,
know
a
hackathon
or
something
wants
to
see
growth
of
the
community,
but
in
a
different
way.
E
And
I
think
that's
I
think
you're
getting
it
at.
My
point
is
that
we
do
need
to
keep
these
use
cases
agnostic
to
certain
personas.
Otherwise,
what
you'll
see
is
we
will
create
duplicate
or
very
similar
use
cases
exploring
these
things
in
subtly
different
ways
right.
So
if
we,
if
we
keep
them
agnostic
to
the
persona
we
can,
we
can
include
some
of
those
subtle
things
within
the
use
case
and
let
the
persona
decide
which
parts
of
the
use
case
are
helpful
to
them.
A
So
sean
and
kevin
you're
you
have
like
there
there's
it's
still
extremely
confusing
to
me,
because
I
think
we
keep
so.
There
are
a
couple
reasons.
One
is
we
keep
using
a
lot
of
different
words
and
like
and
they
get
collapsed
on
each
other,
and
we
also
have
a
bunch
of
different
layers
that
we're
trying
to
to
manage.
E
A
A
B
B
This
is
some
something
like
use
case
to
say:
okay,
we
are
gonna
to
create
this
matrix
model
to
help
them
to
evaluate
the
whole
nps
night
promoter
score.
So
this
is
for
me
it's
a
use
case,
it's
very
in
the
practice
in
our
community
gotcha.
So.
B
Yeah,
because
we
we
have
do
some
investigation
about
to
say,
okay,
if
you
wanted
to
see
one
metric
or
matrix
model
to
tell
us
to
tell
other
people
that
how
your
communities
are
going
well
so,
but
I
don't
want
to
using
some
healthy
okay,
my
my
company
is
healthy,
no
we're
only
using
some
score,
so
we
pop
up
this
idea
so
something
like
night
pro
night,
pro
motor
skull
npis
to
tell
them.
Okay.
B
This
is
some
general
score
to
describe
our
community
if
it's
good
or
not,
and
it
belongs-
and
behind
these
npis
we
create
a
model
for
for
this
school
data.
Yes,
okay!
This
is
something
how,
in
our
practice,
work
for
the
metrics
model.
B
D
B
To
this
matrix
model,
so
we
are
thinking
about
the
whole
development
as
a
code.
We
are
thinking
about
this
documentation
as
its
trainings
as
content,
and
we
are
thinking
about
the
different
events
like
in
the
in
the
in
the
community
so
like
seriously
to
describe
these
npis.
D
B
C
I
have
posted
a
issue
on
in
the
chat
which
is
which
I
brought
it
up
in
the
value
working
group
was
like
similarly,
a
situation
where
you
see
different,
you
can
pick
different
metrics
and
then
develop
a
model
out
of
it
and
solve
that
particular
situation.
That
was
business
readiness
rating
of
open
source.
C
A
A
B
A
So
that's
why
this
is
if
this
is
what
this
model
is
largely
based
on,
we
could
get
like
a
bigger
description
of
why
you
might
care,
and
then
the
metrics,
I
you
know
we
don't.
I
don't
have
the
metrics
in
front
of
me,
but
you
had
mentioned
code
content
and
community
metrics
helped
ultimately
define
this
nps
model
and
so
kevin.
If
we
did
like
the
badging
program.
A
A
A
E
A
little
bit
for
me,
but
not
quite
so,
the
I
think,
what
we're
what
we're
kind
of
talking
about
is
having
creating
a
standardized
way
of
creating
these
these
models
right,
so
the
nps
model
and
the
de
dei
badging
model.
I
could
see
those
existing
in
kind
of
a
standard,
a
standard
text
based
model
that
that
describes
the
metrics
that
are
involved
in
the
activity
involved.
The
code
development
model,
on
the
other
hand,
is
more
of
a
that's
a
process,
flowchart
type
model.
So
it's
the
the
perspectives
are
different.
It's
it's
kind
of
a
it's.
D
B
B
You
know,
I
think
my
personal
view
is
that
for
the
code
development
model,
I
share
the
same
problem
with
with
kylie
knight
it's
it's
kind
of
high
level.
It's
a
flowchart,
it's
involved,
it's
a
included.
The
different
metrics
and
also
many
different
personas
would
care
about
it
like
a
release,
manager,
delivery
manager
and
community
manager.
It's
just
the
flowchart
to
to
including
the
everything
in
I
mean
the
matrix
into
this.
B
To
show
this
the
whole
development
process,
but
we
cannot
trigger
it
just
some
some
matrix
model
into
the
development,
because
not
only
one
or
us,
some
use
case
would
care
about
the
whole.
The
whole
whole
development
process.
So
I'm
thinking
about
except
we
have
such
focus
area
right,
use
case
of
personnels.
B
We
also
need
to
create
some
big
view
about
the
whole
matrix
model,
a
matrix
in
the
chaos
to
show
how
the
connections
with
each
other,
to
give
them
the
general
view
we
can
treat.
We
can
treat
it
as
some
some
training
documentation
from
the
magic
smoke
from
the
chaos
matrix
to
show
how
it
works,
but
it's
just
the
basic
ideas
and
based
on
this
basic
idea,
we
can
deep
down
deep
dive
into
this
focus
area
to
do
some
more
practice
in
practice.
Work.
E
So
I
I
agree
with
that
completely
and
I
think
so
to
be
clear.
I
think
there's
room
there's
room
for
these
for
different
types
of
models.
E
When
I
was
talking
prior
I'm
talking,
I
was
talking
about
having
exactly
exactly
what
you
just
said:
a
way
to
connect
these
different
types
of
models
that
we're
creating,
and,
I
think,
to
sean's
point.
Perhaps
the
best
place
to
start
is
with
that,
and
I'm
sorry
that
I'm
gonna
I'm
gonna
use
that
the
use
case
model.