►
From YouTube: Weekly CHAOSS Hangout - October 30, 2018
Description
Weekly CHAOSS Hangout - October 30, 2018
A
B
B
B
B
A
B
B
C
A
A
D
A
A
E
B
B
A
B
A
F
F
A
B
C
B
F
I
can't
I
can't
think
of
my
thing.
It
was
a
lot
of
sort
of
validation,
of
what
we've
done
and
and
the
only
two
pieces
we
really
went
through
were
events
and
governance
and
we
only
went
through
little
little
bits
of
those.
So
we
got
some
some
more
individual
feedback
on
and
those
I
think,
but
nothing,
nothing
too
specific.
How.
B
A
All
right,
this
is
great.
Were
there
any
things
that
the
were
there
any
things
at
the
conference
that
we
kind
of
have
it?
The
standard
thing
is
kind
of
new,
but
were
there
any
other,
you
know
like
requests
that
people
had
or
conversations
or
about
tooling
or
about
metrics
or
anything.
It
was
kind
of
heard
word
on
the
street.
C
Well,
it
was
a
bushing
ball,
you
know
panel
about
mentorship,
but
we
were
presenting
some
of
the
numbers.
We
had
broken
a
stack
and
what
I
was
mentioning.
I
was
detailing
about
chaos
and
the
work
we
were
doing
and
so
on
and
people
I
could
say
was
interested.
So
okay,
mentorship
is
something
we
should
definitely
have
more
in
detail
in
the
DNI
working
group.
C
A
G
F
That
went
really
well
people,
there
were
some
maintainer
x'
and
other
kernel
contributors
and
the
audience,
and
they
seem
to
agree
with
me
and
nobody
throw
anything
at
me
and
nobody
said
I
was
crazy
and
way
off
base,
which
is
good
because
I've
already
submitted
the
paper
copy
of
the
dissertations.
It
was
too
late.
F
A
F
No,
it
had
actually
nothing
to
do
with
nothing
to
do
with
DNI.
My
interest
in
DNI
is
separate
and
it
doesn't
have
that
much
to
do
with
the
chaos
project,
because
I
was
using
all
of
the
old
metrics
grimoire
tools,
so
ml
stats
and
the
CBS
and
Ally
some
of
the
some
of
the
older
stuff
cuz.
That's
what
I
started
on
three
and
a
half
years
ago
when
I
started
the
PhD.
Yes,.
G
H
F
B
C
B
E
B
E
B
From
companies
as
they
are
similar
to
how
you
have
consumer
ratings
and
others,
because
one
of
the
issues
talked
about
was
how,
if
you
donate
money
to
a
project,
you
get
a
one-time,
blog,
post
and
whatnot,
and
then
it's
gone,
and
so
we
want
to
create
a
list
where
it's
visible
over
a
longer
period
of
time.
This.
B
E
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
A
H
A
E
A
Encoder,
so
okay
I
have
a
proposal
for
people
and
I'm,
just
gonna
put
it
out
there,
so
this
is
with
respect
to
the
repository
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff.
So,
okay,
here
just
hear
me
out,
and
you
can
tell
me
it's
a
stupid
idea
if
you
want
but
I
proposed
so
right
now
we
have
essentially
four
working
groups.
We
have
DNI,
we
have
growth,
maturity
and
decline,
we
have
risk
and
we
have
value.
A
D
Yeah
go
ahead.
This
might
make
sense
just
because
risk
in
value
hadn't
received
much
attention.
Maybe
maybe
eventually
they
can
be
spun
out
into
separate
working
groups
that
they
have
enough
content
to
warrant
it.
I
would
say
one
thing
that
I,
don't
know
would
fit
into
growth.
Maturity
decline
is
human
factors.
That
seems
like
gets
me
more,
which
is
under
risk,
and
that
seems
like
it's
more
related
to
diversity
and
inclusion.
Okay,
because
when
you're
looking
at
a
diversity
of
yeah
I
mean
it's
it's
it's
developer
and
user
centric,
which
is.
E
D
E
A
D
F
A
In
that
meeting,
they
may
actually
get
more
long,
they're
actually
not
being
talked
about
right
now,
no
to
any
degree
so
I'm
hoping
this
will
actually
bring
these
ideas
into
an
existing
meeting
will
actually
talk
about
a
more
even
if
they
just
get
five
minutes
a
week
and
then
perhaps
to
Ben's
point.
If
they
really
do
become.
You
know
they
really
do
start
say
taking
over
that
meeting
time,
then
maybe
they
can
be
spun
back
out.
A
B
A
D
You
know
I
think
it
also
helps
prevent
a
dilution
of
the
message
you
know
so
now,
if
you
go
to
like
the
metrics
repo,
and
you
see
these
four
different
domains,
but
really
only
two
of
them
and
I've
had
a
lot
of
thought
put
into
them.
Then
it
kind
of
deletes
the
message
a
little
bit.
If
there's
a
lot
of
content
that
just
isn't
getting
the
attention,
it
should
be
a.
F
E
F
And
I'm
pretty
interested
in
the
value
bits
to
be
honest,
I.
It
didn't
really
have
the
bandwidth
to
engage
as
that
kid,
since
we
hadn't
really
done
anything
with
it
and
I
didn't
want.
You
know
the
band
was
to
kind
of
start
it
up,
but
if
a
lot
of
that
is
going
to
move
into
the
GMD
working
group,
maybe
all
I'll
start
coming
to
that
as
well.
Okay,.
A
These
are
great
I
took
I,
took
a
few
notes
and
I
think
to
Ben's
point
into
Don's
point
is
making
sure
that
the
others
are
able
to
incorporate
what
has
already
been
discussed
to
this
point
in
these
other
work
makers.
Again
I'll
bring
this
up
next
week,
but
I
just
wanted
to
kind
of
get
some
feelers
here.
Then
there
was
another
part
on
this
is,
and
this
actually
came
from
a
discussion
in
the
I
think
it
kind
of
stemmed
from
the
DNI
group.
A
It
was
on
github.
That
was
the
metrics
repository
when
you
click
on
DNI
should
just
point
to
the
work
that's
occurring
in
the
DNI
group
yeah.
So
right
now,
the
way
that
it's
set
up
is
the
the
metrics
repository.
Actually
has
these
four
kind
of
working
groups
that
that's
where
I
think
you
were
looking
been
to
see
kind
of
what
was
in
in
the
risk
one.
You
know
what
I
mean
I'm
guessing:
that's
where
you
went
to
see
how
risk
was
structured.
A
So
the
proposal
was
is
that
when
you
click
on
diversity
and
inclusion
within
the
metrics
repository,
you
actually
just
go
over
to
the
DNI
work
group
you
just
head
over
there.
Those
are
those
are
the
metrics,
that's
it.
Those
are
what
DNI
is
about
at
the
moment,
and
then
you
know
it's
not.
Conversely,
but
in
a
similar
vein
it
would
hold
true
for
GMD
that
you
would,
if
we're
gonna,
do
that
for
diversity
and
inclusion
do
the
same
thing
with
GMD.
A
But
if
you
go
to
the
metrics
repository
and
click
on
growth,
maturity
and
decline,
you
simply
go
over
to
the
growth,
maturity
and
decline,
work
group
and
take
a
look
at
the
metrics
that
they
are
forward.
I
mean
just
in
terms
of
consistency
and
then
risk
and
value
would
subsequently
go
away
or
they'd
be
rolled
into
the
other
into
those
other
working
groups,
and
then
the
metrics
repository
really
honestly
just
becomes
the
laundry
list
of
metrics.
A
A
B
A
The
initial,
let's
go
from
four
working
groups
down
to
two
and
then
clean
up
their
respective
repositories
so
seems
like
it's
fairly
positive.
Does
anybody
want
to
chime
in
against?
So
so
explain
explain
to
me
what
changes
with
to
the
metrics
repository,
so
the
I
think
there's
I'm
not
looking
at
it
right
now,
but
I
think
there's
a
for
markdowns
that
go
to
diversity
and
inclusion,
growth,
maturity
in
decline
and
risk,
and
so
and
so
forth.
A
If
you
click
on
that
markdown
page,
it
actually
takes
you
to
an
another
page
within
the
metrics
repository
that
kind
of
defines
what
the
important
metrics
are
for
DNI
or
what
the
important
metrics
are
for:
growth,
maturity
and
decline.
So
that's
that
bottom
page
that
I
just
mentioned
would
actually
go
away.
So
you
would
click
on
diversity,
inclusion,
markdown
page
or
the
diversity
inclusion
that
MD
and
it
would
just
take
you
to
the
diversity
and
inclusion
workgroup
I
granted.
It
wouldn't
be
a
markdown
anymore.
It
would
just
be
a
link
over
to
the
workgroup.
D
A
E
D
Out
to
be
so,
it
almost
seems
to
me
like
we're,
eliminating
the
entire
reason
for
the
metrics
repository
to
even
exist
and
we're
just
breaking
this
up
into
two
separate
projects:
one
for
diversity,
inclusion,
one
for
growth,
attributed
climb
and
I;
don't
know,
I
don't
and
might
be,
and
I
don't
think
that
spark
they
be
to
be
the
best
approach.
Okay,.
D
A
So
I
am,
I
been,
I
jutted
down
your
notes
about
fracturing
effort
and
maintaining
consistency.
I
just
I
can't
respond.
I
have
to
go
because
I'm
at
the
bottom
of
the
hour.
I
will
talk
about
this
next
week,
ignoring
this
hundred
percent.
These
are
points
very
well
taken
and
I
can
bring
them
probably
next
week
and
in
the
next
week's
meeting,
or
we
can
continue
this
conversation
at
least
I
just
have
to
roll.
Let's
do
them
yeah.
E
A
E
F
F
E
E
F
E
E
That
would
typically
be
recorded
in
a
code
review
and
I
suppose,
to
the
extent
that
a
repository
is
a
testing
suite,
that's
running
against
it,
we
could
evaluate
that
it's
going
to
become
more
important
as
a
lot
of
the
open
source
projects
go
to
the
end
of
the
wire
and
become
more
Internet
of
Things
safety,
critical,
something
critical,
I,
think
I.
Think
quality.
D
E
D
Mean
there's
equality
by
definition,
a
qualitative
thing.
So
if
it's
qualitative,
it's
not
really
something.
You
gather
numbers
on
per
se,
it's
something
that
you
have
to
analyze
to
understand.
There
are
metrics
that
could
contribute
to
inequality
of
something
like
the
number
of
security
bugs,
for
instance,
mm-hmm,
but
that
isn't
necessarily
a
gauge
equality.
It's
a
this
part
of
it's
just
one
component
of.
D
E
D
C
Yeah,
basically,
depending
on
depending
on
the
domain,
there
are
several
metrics
that
might
be
useful.
As
far
as
me
note
it
in
terms
of
quality
of
the
code
I
mean
we
have
the
usual
matrix
as
Sigma
D
complexity
or
all
of
these
stuff,
so
basically
the
more
complex
things,
the
less
quality
suppose
they
have
and
so
on.
C
Well,
there's
a
whole
domain
and
a
bunch
of
companies
working
in
that
area.
So
we
can,
if
you
want,
one
of
the
things
we
can
do
within
KF
is
to
look
for
specific
white
papers
and
academic
papers.
That
might
be
of
interest
say
well.
This
is
this.
Is
there
and
as
far
as
my
perception,
this
is
a
well-known
domain
in
the
industry,
so
it's
just
a
matter
of
bringing
the
knowledge
to
carriers.
If
we
are
interested.
B
E
C
Then
there
are,
of
course
other
so
for
just
an
example.
I
remember
when
I
was
I
was
when
I
was
doing
the
PhD.
There
was
a
paper
by
knock
upon
some
researcher
from
Microsoft
and
basically
what
this
researcher
was
saying:
it's
if
we
are
using
the
usual
quality
metrics
for
the
source
code
we
have
to
saturate
or
when
looking
for
code
smells
right,
which
are,
you
know,
she's
many
areas
of
the
code
that
might
be
prone
to
be
buggy
and
so
on.
C
While
we
try
to
use
human
approach,
which
is
counting
things
like
number
of
people
leaving
the
community
well,
they
were
talking
about
so
the
development
teams
within
Microsoft.
They
they
realized
that
they
had
a
higher
accuracy
in
those
terms
when
looking
for
those
code
smells
so
what
does
it
mean?
The
quality
of
the
code
is
that
that
interesting,
you
compare
to
other
metric.
It's
probably
something
that
we
can
discuss
here
in
chaos.
C
I,
don't
know
if
it's
interesting,
interesting
by
itself,
just
to
focus
on
one
of
the
areas,
but
I
would
say
that
we
may
need
more.
What
support
holistic
approach
engineers
like
having
several
components
in
mind,
so
that's
as
we
were
discussing
before.
We
are,
for
instance,
focusing
in
diversity
and
inclusion.
There
are
several
areas
that
we
may
need
to
look
for
concepts
as
value
or
impact
right
within
the
within
the
community.
In
that
working
group.
B
A
G
E
A
B
C
E
D
B
F
Yeah
yeah
because
we
haven't
I,
feel
like
we
haven't,
really
revisited
sort
of
the
goals
for
chaos
overall
and
we've
all
been
working
on
this
pretty
hard
for
for
a
little
over
a
year.
It
might
be,
it
might
be
good
just
to
sync
back
and
make
sure
that
the
things
that
were
initially
defined,
sorry
as
the
goals
are
still
really
really
the
goals
and
the
Charter
and
things
like
that.