►
From YouTube: D&I.Hangout.Dec.10.2018
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).
B
A
B
C
The
founders
of
bateria,
mostly
working
with
data
and
Intel,
they
totally
teach
about
open
source
and
interest
rates.
We
note
from
the
DI
working
group.
C
D
They
are
in
hyper
ledger
and
through
a
lot
of
those
programs,
there's
been
increasing,
focus
and
activity
around
diversity
and
inclusion,
whether
it's
mentoring
in
supporting
you
know,
kubernetes
arnoud
in
those
fronts
or
code
of
conduct
or
how
D&I
plays
out
in
advance
and
just
trying
to
get
more
involved
in
this
group
to
try
to
see
what
best
practices
and
work
that
you're
doing
might
be
shared
across
more
LFT
projects
and
to
hopefully
even
get
more
LFT
projects
engaged
in
this
too.
So
wanting
to
you
know,
learn
more
about
it.
A
Action
items
dawn:
you
wanted
to
create
a
pull
request
to
add
Matson
equals
github
account.
I
saw
that
is
complete.
Yeah
Matt
wanted
to
reach
out
to
the
left
for
the
mailing
list
and
I'm
I
think
he
did
snow
I
know
for
a
fact.
He
did
so.
I
still
need
to
that's
a
action
item
for
me
to
send
the
old
emails.
A
C
B
Just
a
point
about
the
notes
from
last
week:
we
do
need
to
be
a
bit
more
diligent
about
not
putting
things
as
agreed,
just
because
we
we
agreed
to
them
in
the
meeting.
So
there
are
several
things
that
are
marked
and
bold
is
agreed,
but
the
decision-making
for
the
project
is
not
to
make
decisions
in
the
meeting.
So
we
just
need
to
be
more
diligent
in
the
notes
that
that
that
those
are
recommendations
so
that
people
can
object
him.
We
could
agree
on
something
different
for
people
who
aren't
in
the
meeting.
B
C
B
Do
have
lazy
consensus,
but
the
point
is
we
can't
we
don't
get
lazy
consensus
in
the
meeting,
so
we
can't
in
the
notes
we
can't
say
agreed
this.
We
can
say
recommended
this
and
then,
if,
if
nobody
objects
to
it,
it's
basically
sort
of
de
facto
agreed
to.
But
we
just
need
to
be
clear
that
the
decisions
are
not
happening
in
the
meetings
that
the
decisions
are.
E
A
A
B
B
The
other
thing:
it's
not
something
Genda
but
I'ma,
bring
it
up
now
cuz,
it's
super
quick.
One
of
us
should
probably
take
the
action
item
to
send
a
message
to
the
mailing
list
and
discuss
which
meetings
to
cancel
over
the
holidays,
because
chances
are
we're-
probably
not
going
to
have
one
on
Christmas
Eve
I'm
guessing
nor
on
New
Year's
Eve,
but
we
should
probably,
rather
than
making
that
decision
here.
We
should
make
that
on
the
mailing
list,
I'm
happy
to
take
that
action
item
actually
Iceland
the
bring
it
up.
B
C
C
A
A
A
It's
a
pull
request
to
add
new
dimensions
of
demographics,
and
this
came
out
of
the
interviews
that
I
was
doing
and
I
even
posted
the
quote
specifically
addressing
these
dimensions.
One
is
what
is
the
motivation
for
someone
contributing?
Are
they
paid
or
unpaid,
and
the
other
is
what
is
their
organizational
affiliation
specifically?
A
The
last
one
is
something
we
have
been
somewhat
ignoring
the
organizational
diversity,
but
it
comes
up
in
a
lot
of
conversations
and
at
kiosk,
and
when
we
look
at
the
metrics
repository,
it's
one
third
of
all,
metrics
that
are
currently
there
for
diversity
and
inclusion
are
concerned
with
organizational
diversity
and
I
think
by
adding
organizational
affiliation
as
a
dimension
of
demographic.
We
solve
that
problem
by
integrating
it
into
our
way
of
representing
metrics.
C
This
is
a
good
question.
I,
don't
really
have
an
answer
at
the
very
beginning,
what
we
started,
David
or
as
I
said.
Basically
organizational
diversity
was
out
of
the
discussion.
We
were
mostly
focused
on
what
the
first
engendered
a
basic
Garcinia
at
the
very
beginning,
but
then
we
are
started
to
have
a
broader
concept
of
diversity.
Of
course,
I
don't
know
if
this
is
well
I,
don't
know
and
I
don't
really
have
a
strong
opinion,
maybe
don't
I.
B
Yeah
I
don't
know
that
I
have
a
strong
opinion,
and
this
is
my
initial
reaction
to
it
was
that
organizational
affiliation
doesn't
necessarily
impact
diversity
and
inclusion,
but
but
the
more
I
think
about
it.
The
more
I
think
that
if
all
of
the
contributors
are
from
a
specific
company
that
that's
not
particularly
inclusive,
maybe
they're,
excluding
other
people
based
on
I,
don't
know
other
other
diverse
characteristics.
A
I
can
give
you
a
specific
example
where
I
have
experienced
this,
and
this
is
back
in
the
days
with
the
openoffice.org
community,
where
called
the
main
developers
were
located
in
Hamburg
at
the
Sun
location
or
Sun
company,
and
they
would
have
halva
chatter,
they
would
have
meetings
about
Open,
Office
and
the
community
was
often
left
out
of
decisions
where
they
didn't
know
why
things
happened
or
delayed
or
anything
so
I
think
having
diversity.
Even
within
organizations
is
very
much
a
diversity
inclusion
issue.
B
B
My
other
concerns
at
13
and
14.
Look
like
there's
some
some
overlap
between
the
two,
because
it
really
is
it
really
an
issue
with
paid
contributors
versus
unpaid
contributors,
or
is
it
organizational
affiliation
itself?
I
just
don't
know.
I
was
just
so
yeah
I'm
just
trying
to
wrap
my
head
around
this
yeah.
A
So
the
organizational
affiliation
is
something
that
many
people
I
have
talked
to
care
a
lot
about,
and
that
is
how
well
are
different
companies
represented
in
a
project,
and
it's
not
so
much
that
they
care
about
the
individual
people,
that's
really
which
companies
have
control
over
it.
The
other
point
about
paid
versus
volunteer
contributors
is
what
is
the
motivation
for
these
people
to
be
in
the
community?
D
From
a
marketing
perspective,
if
a
project
is
really
heavily
dominated
by
one
vendor
that
can
sometimes
influence
the
marketing
to
or
the
out,
you
know
how
the
branding
of
a
project
or
how
you're
trying
to
grow
the
project
is
not
always
in
the
healthiest
of
ways.
I
think
that
having
many
different
companies
creates
sort
of
a
balance
of
vendor
viewpoints
so
that
you
don't
have
one
that
dominates
so
I
think
it
ends
up.
D
B
Absolutely
I
mean
I
would
agree
that
makes
a
huge
difference
when
it
comes
to
the
health
of
the
community
yeah.
The
bit
that
I'm
struggling
with
is
does
this
belong
in
the
diversity
and
inclusion
working
group,
or
does
this
belong
in
an
GMT
I
guess
is
a
bit
of
what
I'm
what
I'm
struggling
with
a
bit,
because
in
paid
contributor
versus
unpaid
contributor,
an
organizational
affiliation
are
very
different
from
the
twelve
that
come
above
it
mm-hmm,
and
so
that's
the
bit
that
I'm
struggling
with
gehrig.
It's
not
that
I.
B
A
C
So
after
this
you
have
made
point
of
view
right
now,
it
would
be
well
when
an
experience
having
this
kind
of
information
in
the
dashboards.
So
if
we
have
company's
affiliation,
this
is
quite
easy
bed
to
gamify.
We
are
the
best
hero
blog,
just
something
different
from
the
point
of
view
of
the
things
we
want
to
try
to
change
in
this
working
group.
So
perhaps
what
we
need
to
have
here
is
an
I
would
say:
having
a
diverse
set
of
companies
helps
to
have
a
different
point
of
view.
C
Even
if
they
are
terrifically
distributed,
we
can
have
company
from
Australia
Asia
Europe
and
the
US,
for
instance,
in
South
America.
So
then
we
are.
We
are
bringing
lot
of
people
in
a
lot
of
different
point
of
view,
all
fixed
prominence
and
so
on,
which
is
a
good
way
to
be
more
inclusive.
So
you
are
having
people
from
several
part
of
port
which
is,
at
the
same
time,
really
heavily
related
to
the
time
channel
and
so
on.
C
Then
we
need
to
say
the
other,
the
other
point
of
view
which
would
be.
But
if
we
have
a
diverse
set
of
annotations,
then
we
should
avoid
these
behaviors
that
we've
seen
before
us
what
we
have
been
perhaps
trained,
even
perhaps,
and
so
I
kind
of
disagree
with
you
two
trying
to
to
ignore
that
commercial
point
of
view.
Some
cases
I
agree
about
the
marketing
and
importance
of
having
different
point
of
view
for
the
marketing
actions
fashion
right.
A
A
C
B
Yeah
I'd
sort
of
like
the
idea
of
tabling
this
for
now
in
this
meeting
and
then
talking
about
it
in
the
broader,
broader
meeting.
I
think
should
also
think
about
whether
or
not
we
should
rephrase
it
a
little
bit
like
yeah
I.
Don't
know
like
welcoming
to
volunteers
or
I.
Don't
know
this
is
a
list
of
dimensions,
so
it's
kind
of
hard
yeah.
I
nevermind,
let's
just
table
and
talk
about
it
and
bring
it
up
in
the
meeting
tomorrow.
B
B
B
Okay,
I
also
think
that
given
given
that
this
meeting
is
a
little
slightly
lightly
attended,
I
mean
that
Emma
and
Nicole
aren't
here
Georg.
It
might
be
good
to
send
an
email
to
the
diversity
inclusion
mailing
list
with
a
small
request,
and
let
them
know
that
we're
gonna
talk
about
it
tomorrow.
I'm
just
think
we
might
be
able
to
get
some
more
perspectives
on
the
mailing
list
before
me
before
we
take
it
into
the
other
meeting.
A
A
A
So
we
want
to
have
a
wave
for
saying
we
implement
these
metrics
as
of
this
version,
and
then
if
chaos
comes
out
with
a
new
version,
the
software
might
still
be
running
on
older
definitions
and
the
definition
of
a
metric
might
change
the
way
it's
calculated,
so
it
could
potentially
becomes
important
to
know
which
version
is
implemented
and
used
right.
That
makes
sense.
Okay,.
A
A
Right
now,
the
sense
I
am
getting
is
that
the
people
in
the
community?
What
paper
that
we
just
say
this
is
a
version
one
metric
and
release
a
portfolio
of
metrics
under
version
one.
So
we
as
diversity,
inclusion,
workgroup,
would
say
here
are
all
the
metrics
that
we
have
ready
for
release
or
let's
say
it's
a
beta
release.
So
please
give
us
feedback
and
try
implementing
them,
and
then,
after
three
months
or
six
months
or
whatever
we
release
the
next
version.
B
A
C
B
So
my
opinion
on
this
from
a
diversity,
metrics,
Joris
inclusion,
metric
standpoint-
is
that
our
metrics
are
probably
probably
less
complicated
from
a
versioning
perspective.
Maybe
then
some
of
the
other
other
metrics
I
mean
I
I
would
be
curious
if
the
GMD
working
group
has
any
specific
requirements
like
I
can't
I
can't
see
that
either
way
would
be
particularly
more
or
less
difficult
for
us.
I,
don't
I,
don't
know
that
it
would
makes
that
much
of
a
difference
to
this
group.
B
C
The
metric
and
find
Universal
for
each
of
them
we
have
to
contain
all
of
the
metrics
just
kind
of
my
opinion,
basically
against
this,
so
it
referred
to
go
for
perhaps
there's
a
set
of
metrics
that
we
can
define
as
math.
You
know
so
we
say
is
how
those
and
then
we
have
some
integrative
metrics
or
it
some
work.
Then
we
have
some
two
levels,
but
everything
is
all
together
in.
C
A
The
thoughts
I
have
is
it
doesn't
matter
at
all
how
its
versioned
I
don't
even
care,
whether
it's
working
or
whether
we
use
they
get
commit
timestamp,
whatever
the
benefit
of
having
a
version,
a
chaos,
white
version,
coordinated
original
release
is
that
we
have
a
forcing
function
to
review
our
metrics
and
clean
them
up,
but
that's
the
only
benefit
that
I
see
otherwise
implementation
wise,
the
metrics
we
have
so
far
there.
They
will
vary
widely
in
how
they
are
implemented
right
now.
A
A
A
B
C
B
I
mean
I
I
agree
with
you.
I
do
think
that
that
would
be
definitely
a
simpler
approach.
If
the
GMD
group
had
some
specific
reason
to
want
first
in
each
metric
separately,
then
made
then
I
do
like
the
idea
of
kind
of
packaging
it
all
up
together.
So
it's
like
one
set
of
chaos,
metrics
every
quarter
or
something
like
do
periodic
releases,
I
I,
just
sort
of
like
that
idea.
B
C
The
point
of
all
this
is
that,
as
most
of
our
warm
in
the
wiki
town,
they
should
be
based
on
the
metrics.
If
you
send
it
improve
request
and
so
on,
because
him
released
that
the
list
of
commits
we
have
a
you,
timorous
this
and
then
you
have
all
of
the
areas
we've
been
working
through
in
the
last
quarter.
If
you
want
to
see
the
advances
from
these
to
the
other.
A
B
B
C
B
A
A
A
Groupings
of
metrics
in
the
metrics
committee
and
these
groupings
have
now
evolved
into
their
own
workgroups
around
these
groupings,
and
we
have
two
of
them.
One
is
the
growth,
maturity
and
decline,
workgroup
and
the
other.
Are
we
with
the
diversity
and
inclusion
work
group
and
each
work
group
is
advancing
the
metrics
in
this
category
right
and
so
that's
where
we
are
today.
That's
how
it
came
about.
A
A
B
C
C
D
See
these
goals
when
I
reviewed
this
document,
maybe
a
week
or
two
ago-
and
you
know
I
had
but
I.
You
know
I'm
sort
of
familiarizing
myself
with
them.
You
know
to
get
a
little
bit
more
ingrained
in
that
you
know,
understand
them
and
wrap
my
head
around
them
or
but
I
did
see
them.
But
I'd
love
to
hear
your
perspective
to
how
you
serve
came
to
these
four
there's
any
history.
There.
C
B
C
B
Then
we
made
sure
we
had
a
coherent
set
of
goals
for
the
whole,
the
whole
working
group,
because
we
hadn't
really
had
that
we'd
all
been
kind
of
kind
of
doing
the
things
that
seemed
seem
bright
to
us,
but
we
hadn't
really
had
a
set
of
goals.
Emma's,
really
the
one
who
drafted
these
and
came
up
with
came
up
with
all
of
this,
and
then
we've
been
providing
providing
feedback
to
her
to
get
them
into
a
state
where
we
can
all
sort
of
agree
that
these
are.
B
B
A
Other
portrait
is
where
we
are
right
now
in
the
process
of
establishing
chaos
we
started
last
year.
We
have
what
the
first
year
really
to
set
up
the
processes
around
how
we
want
to
work
and
getting
up
an
initial
set
of
metrics
and
moving
forward.
A
major
goal
is
to
drive
adoption
and
see
these
metrics
used
in
practice,
and
so
you'll
see
that
reflected
in
the
objectives
that
we
have
yeah.
D
A
B
Emma,
we
were
just
talking
about
the
the
goals
document
and
we've
people
have
provided
a
lot
of
feedback,
but
we
wanted
to
sort
of
cycle
back
with
you
on
the
feedback
to
try
to
decide.
You
know
get
that
in
a
more
final
final
state,
but
it
sounds
like
like
I
said
you're
in
an
airport.
We
only
have
about
15
more
minutes.
B
B
Okay,
well,
let's
I
say
we
keep
going,
but
maybe
we
maybe
we
do
that
for
for
the
agenda
for
next
week,
start
with
the
start
with
the
goals
and
hope
that
hopefully
I
can
be
here.
D
D
B
D
E
A
B
E
B
B
A
A
A
And
I
posted
the
link
in
the
agenda.
What
the
original
metrics
were
I
think
the
individual
diversity
is
a
teaser
to
what
we
have
done.
We
have
gone
way
more
in
detail
on
contributor
demographics,
leadership,
demographics
and
new
contributors
versus
maintainer
x'.
Although
I
don't
know,
if
you
have
new
country,
which
is
worse,
maintain
us
as
a
metric
anywhere,
so
that's
a
question
I
would
we
would
have
to
look
into
an
organizational
diversity?
A
And
then,
with
regards
to
inclusion
that
last
group,
we
have
code
contributions
from
different
contributors,
we
have
path
to
maintain
ership,
maintain
a
promotion,
change
of
maintainer
members,
all
those
I'm,
confident
that
we
already
covered.
So
the
only
questions
really
this.
What
do
we
do
about
organizational
diversity
before
we
get
rid
of
this
page.
A
A
E
E
B
E
E
I
think
we
have
to
like
I've
seen
other
sort
of
like
I.
Don't
know,
there's
like
a
word.
We
need
to
come
up
with
like
like
what
like
scope
creep
for
diversity,
like
you
know,
like
things
like
a
welcoming
readme
is
technically
I,
wouldn't
say
that
that
helps
diversity,
but
we
I
think
you
said
to
be
careful
about
creep
of
the
diversity
creep.
That's
not
the
right
word,
but
you
know
what
I
mean.
I
think
that
that
this
is
that
I
think
that's
good.
B
B
A
Posted
in
the
chat
again,
the
page
that
I
was
thinking
about.
Okay,
that's
there's
metrics
page,
alright,
okay,
that's
the
page!
I
was
looking
at
okay
and
this
page
existed
before
he
started
the
workgroup
mm-hmm.
It
came
out
of
conversations
we
had
in
LA
back
in
September
last
year,
and
then
we
started
the
workgroup
around
February
of
this
year
and
we
have
developed
our
own
set
of
metrics.
B
E
I
had
a
feeling
that
I
was
otherwise
I
will
and
I
will.
I
will
send.
My
comment
read
the
other
stuff
another
way.
Okay,
I
can
look
through
this
mm-hmm
trying
to
create
an
issue
for
some
cream
issue
and
assign
it
to
us.
So
we
don't
lose
it
in
or
is
there
already
one
I
think
that'd
be
helpful,
so
I'll
be
going?
Oh
that's.
B
A
D
I
look
through
this
some
metrics.
You
know
that
you
brainstormed
and
then
some
of
the
newer
developments.
You
know
in
this
plan
that
you'd
captured
and
how
your
your
thinking
has
evolved
and
I
just
sort
of
want
to
get
my
head
around
both
of
those
pieces
and
see
where
how
it's
grown
and
then
I
think
this
is
I'm,
just
sort
of
excited
to
start
digging
in
and
learning
more
about
the
work
you're
doing
and
get
involved.