►
From YouTube: CHAOSS Weekly Community Call 10-5-21
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).
B
Hi
everyone
it's
october
5th-
and
this
is
the
community
call
it's
our
special
community
call
because
it's
the
first
almost
monday,
first
tuesday,
of
the
month-
and
this
is
the
time
where
we
kind
of
do
a
wrap-up
of
what's
been
happening
in
each
working
group
over
the
course
of
the
last
few
weeks
since
the
last
monthly
one,
even
though
these
meetings
do
happen
weekly,
so
we
just
like
to
confuse
them
by
throwing
in
a
special
one.
Every
now
and
again,
so
welcome,
really
happy
to
see
everybody.
I
see
a
new
face.
B
Perry
hi
again
saw
perry
at
the
evolution
working
group
meeting
a
little
bit
ago,
so
glad
to
see
you
again
and
yeah.
If
oh,
hey
emily,
let's
drop
the
minutes
in
here
for
you
as
well.
B
If
people
can
add
their
names,
if
you
haven't-
and
you
want
to
that'd-
be
great,
if
you
don't
also
fine
and
again
just
a
reminder,
you
don't
need
to
keep
your
camera
on.
You
can
leave
it
off
and
if
you
would
prefer
to
chat
in
the
chat
on
the
side,
the
text
chat
totally
fine,
we'll
try
to
integrate
that
into
the
course
of
the
meeting.
B
B
Got
it
nope,
you're,
good,
okay,
oh
I'll,
even
have
my
name
here.
Maybe.
B
So
the
first
item
is
basically
we're.
Gonna,
add
some
things
in
that
we
don't
normally
talk
about.
Obviously,
chaos.
Con
recap.
So
thank
you
to
everybody.
Here's
a
lovely
photograph
of
us
being
silly.
It
was
a
great
conference.
It
was
awesome.
B
B
I
think
we
have
to
get
the
emails
from
the
lf,
since
they
were
the
one
that
ones
that
kind
of
controlled
registration
for
us,
and
I
think
some
people
kind
of
had
some
concerns
about
having
to
go
through
them
to
get
the
emails.
I
know
I
know
kevin.
You
had
a
comment
about.
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
speak
to
that
right
now
or.
C
So
a
lot
of
the
so
we
we
have.
We
have
this
really
nifty
deei
badging,
which
is
which
is
wonderful
so
for
for
chaos
con
this
time
around
a
lot
of
the
the
dei
badging
stuff
we
we
are
compliant
with
it,
because
we
were
co-located
with
open
source
summit
and
open
source
summit
was
compliant
with
with
dei
batching
so
which,
which
is
excellent
by
the
way
but
the.
C
But
the
comment
that
that
I
had
in
the
in
the
slack
channel
that
I
believe
that
you're
referring
to
is,
I
think,
in
the
future.
We
need
to
not
be
reliant
on
the
co-located
events
to
to
make
us
compliant
in
dei
badging.
We
should
and
specifically
those
those
dei
issues
we
should.
We
should
kind
of
own
those
ourselves
so
and
one
of
those
one
of
those
things
is
in
the
survey
right.
So
we
should
do
the
survey
ourselves
and
we
should
another.
C
Another
area
is
within
the
the
documentation
that
the
documentation
that
is
required
to
get
the
badging.
We
should
maintain
some
of
that
documentation
ourselves.
We
should
create
specific
dei
policies
and
supporting
documentation
and
have
that
publicly
posted
on
the
website.
So
that
we
are
compliant
with
ddi
badging
ourselves
and
I'm
thinking
primarily
for
the
next
event,
because
it
may
not
be
co-located
with
a
linux
foundation
conference.
D
I
mean
some
some
of
the
things
I
think
it's
completely
fine,
but
others.
I
agree
that
we
should
think
about
it
ourselves
so,
for
example,
say
like
a
mother's
room
would
be
I
mean
if
the
lf
provides
that
as
part
of
ossna,
that
wouldn't
be
something
that
we
would
have
to
do
just
because
we're
a
co-located
event,
but
I
agree
with
you
on
the
surveys.
E
D
D
F
C
G
Yeah
right
right,
yeah,
yeah,
that
it's
so
awkward,
it's
awkward.
C
I
think
we
could
use
some
language
when
we
do
that.
That
says
something
to
the
effect
of
you
know.
We
are
we,
we
were,
we
go
through
the
process
or
we
we
plan
the
events
so
that
it
so
that
we
are
compliant
with
with
ddi
badging
or
some
such
thing,
but
so.
D
I
said
this
earlier:
I
don't
know
that.
I
totally
agree
with
that.
I
don't
think
that
we
should
prevent
ourselves
from
going
through
the
process
in
an
open
and
transparent
way.
We
can
have
objective
reviewers.
We
can
just
be
attentive
to
that.
So
I
I
actually
kind
of
lean
on
on
us
going
through
the
process.
First.
C
F
A
Differing
opinions,
well,
I
think
I
think
the
key
is
what
that
and
that's
matt
german
praise
point
was,
which
is
we
have
independent
folks?
Do
the
review
so
folks,
deeply
involved
in
the
badging
program
would
be
less
objective,
perhaps
on
the
in
terms
of
appearances
than
people
we've
recruited
from
the
larger
open
source
community.
A
A
D
Yes,
I
always
know
you're
around
when
I
hear
that
the
the
one
thing
that
we
might
want
to
make
a
note
here
and
just
kind
of
a
mental
note
for
everybody
that
we
did
have
a
little
bit
of
discrepancy
on
that
when
I
was
kind
of
going
through
the
process
was
we
have
our
own
code
of
conduct?
D
We
had
our
own
like
code
of
conduct
reporting,
but
then
we
also
kind
of
lean
on
the
lf
and
their
code
of
conduct,
because
we
actually
point
out
to
the
lf
code
of
conduct,
so
there
were
kind
of
there
were
a
few
little
mixed
messages
in
there
with
respect
to
like
so,
for
example,
if
if
there
was
a
something
that
needed
to
be
reported
during
chaos
con
like,
I
think
I
don't
remember,
because
I
don't
have
it
in
front
of
me,
but
like
maybe
gay
org,
you
were
listed
as
somebody
to
contact.
D
C
C
C
B
A
B
Okay,
so
we
don't
know,
I
feel
like
I
just
don't,
want
this
feedback
and
like
our
thoughts
right
now
to
get
lost
if
it's
going
to
be
another
year
before
we
plan
chaos,
con.
B
D
J
B
Okay
and
then
back
up
to
b
two
right
here:
can
we
just
post
a
link
to
the
survey,
so
is
that
is
our
people
cool
with
that?
Instead
of
waiting
on
the
lf
to
give
us
like
the
list
of
attendees
that
were
there?
Can
we.
B
Here
it
is
okay,
perfect
and
then
one
final
thing
on
the
survey
sophia
I
see
you're
on,
do
you
do
we
think
it's
good
enough
to
go
like.
K
It
probably
needs
a
little
help.
I
literally
started
throwing
it
together
in
the
middle
of
like
the
very
end
of
the
program
I
was
like.
Oh,
we
should
have
a
survey,
so
I
think
it
could
use
a
little
bit
of
love.
I
think
that
the
big
nuance
here
is
whether
or
not
we
want
to
have
a
feedback
question
for
every
individual
session
or
just
one
for
the
overall
content,
so
probably
I'll.
K
Think
about
adding
a
few
questions
that
are
just
sort
of
like
feedback
around
the
overall
event,
feedback
around
the
agenda
and
format
and
logistics
and
then
feedback
on
the
content.
Speakers
and
we
can
either
do
that
per
session,
or
I
mean
about
everyone
else
in
the
call,
but
I
feel
like
I
have
a
hard
time
remembering
what
was
what
afterwards,
but
we
didn't
only
have
it
wasn't
that
long
of
a
program,
so
we
could
ask
it
per
session
so
that
we
could
give
individual
speakers
their
own
feedback
scores.
K
I
I'm
happy
to
work
on
this
and
get
this
to
a
place
where
we
can
close
it
out
in
the
next
week
or
so.
So,
I'm
sorry,
I'm
mobile
right.
Now
so,
if
folks
want
to
put
the
link
in
the
chat
or
in
the
doc,
I
can
just
extend
access
to
anyone
who
wants
to
edit
it
and
suggest.
K
F
B
As
we
speak,
okay,
great
so
we'll
work
on
the
survey
a
little
bit
longer
and
then
we'll
just
tweet,
maybe
tweet
mailing
list
newsletter
standard,
the
use
to
post
it
out
there,
okay
and
then
the
live
stream
of
the
event
has
been
recorded.
I
think
that
the
goal
is
to
do
it
in
the
next
few
days,
because
I
know
matt
cantu
is
working
on
that.
I
don't
know
matt
if
you
want
to
say
anything
totally.
Fine,
if
you
don't.
E
Yeah,
so
we
have
the
full
live
stream
as
it
was,
I
covered
up
like
most
of
the
screens
and
all
the
ones
you
could
read
and
all
that
stuff.
So
that's
security,
I
think,
is
good,
but
I
just
want
to
know:
do
we
want
to
post
the
live
stream
or
the
linux
foundation
also
has
a
stream
that's
higher
quality
that
we
can
splice
in
our
audio
and
do
kind
of
cut
like
just
the
presentations
or
do
we
want
to
do
the
whole
live
stream
and
the
presentation
separately?
C
It's
also
a
question
of
whether
or
not
we're
going
to
be
able
to
get
the
the
live
stream
from
the
foundation.
So.
L
C
No
they
so
they
they
did
record
it.
So
I
talked
to
the
the
audio
visual
guy
that
was
there.
He
did
record
it.
However,
my
my
email
to
the
the
events,
people,
the
response
was
that
that
the
that
the
event
team
didn't
record
it.
So
so
there
may
be
some
confusion.
E
Should
I
go
ahead
and
publish
that
that
draft
that
we
have
with
the
whole
live
stream,
then.
C
I
would
yes,
I
would
go
ahead
and
put
the
whole
live
stream
up
and
then
what
we,
what
we
can
add
in
the
future,
is
we'll
we'll
go
through
and
we'll
we'll
separate
out
each
individual
presentation
and
we
can
use.
We
can
either
cut
up
the
live
stream
into
individual
presentations
or
we
can
use
the.
We
also
recorded
the
presentation
ourselves
or
we
can
use
that
and
possibly
if
the
linux
foundation
does
share
their
recording
with
us,
we
could
use
that
because
their
their
equipment
was
was
quite
impressive.
C
So
the
the
quality
on
their
recording
is
considerably
better
than
ours,
but
I'm
not
sure
we'll
be
able
to
get
it.
K
Oh,
I
was
going
to
say
a
plus
one
to
nicole's
message
in
the
chat
to
post
individual
sessions,
so
I
think
it
would
be
nice
to
do
that.
K
I
also
I
don't
know
if
we're
still
planning
to
do
this,
I
want
to
bring
it
up
when
we
initially
have
plans
chaos
con,
knowing
that
the
format
was
going
to
be
a
bit
wonky
in
the
hybrid
scenario,
we
would
discuss
potentially
re-airing
some
of
them
as
a
group
in
terms
of
say,
posting
the
video
and
then
maybe
hosting
a
live
q,
a
with
the
speakers
that
weren't
able
to
attend
in
person.
K
So
I
don't-
I
don't
know
if
we
still
want
to
do
that.
I
thought
it
might
be
nice,
especially
for
the
any
recorded
session
that
was
done
ahead
of
time,
but
also
maybe
for
sessions
like
mad
german
and
praise
that
we
had
to
cut
at
the
last
minute,
because
we
didn't
have
the
extra
30
minutes.
We
thought
we
had
in
the
room,
but
it
doesn't
have
to
happen
immediately.
The
speakers
have
already
agreed
to
do
this.
K
C
C
That
that's
maybe
the
first
step
and
then
the
second
step
would
be
to
go
through
and
upload
all
of
the
individual
presentations
that
we
recorded
and
then
once
those
are
once
we
have
a
youtube
channel
for
that
to
sophia's
point,
we
can
plan
an
event
or
group
of
events
around
those
videos.
Is
that.
F
F
B
Okay
and
then
the
slides
are
are
available
on
the
chaos
website.
You'll
see
if
you
go
to
the
that
link,
you'll
see
there's
a
summer
column
for
the
pdf
links
to
those
slides.
My
question
that
I
had
was
the
slides
for
the
lightning
talks.
I
know
they
were
in
the
chaos
con
slack
channel,
but
do
we
want
to
post
those
two
somewhere
else.
H
D
K
Yeah
I
mean
I,
I
guess
my
only
hesitation
would
be
because
those
weren't
part
of
the
the
submission
process
there
was
no
inherent
opt-in
for
displaying
the
content.
So
if
we
do
want
to,
then
I
I
guess
I
would
just
ask
the
presenters.
If
they
don't
mind
us
posting
it
just
to
ensure
that,
because
they
didn't
opt
in
officially
by
submitting
it
as
part
of
a
cfp.
D
D
It
was
just
so
great
to
see
everybody
and
I'll
put
it
in
the
the
survey,
but
I
love
the
half
day
session.
B
N
I
did
have
one
thing
that
maybe
we
should
talk
about
in
wrapping
up
chaos
con,
which
is
what
we
want
to
do
about
privacy
going
forward.
There
were
a
couple
threads
going
there
and
one
was
yeah.
We
want
to
think
about
this
and
then
what
exactly?
Does
it
mean
to
do
that
and
like
what
would
we
do
and
thinking
about
privacy
for
a
given
metric?
But
the
other
side
is
well,
that's
a
burden
and
kind
of
additional
overhead
for
every
metric,
I
think,
is
completely
true.
N
So
we
should
decide
what
the
consensus
is
on,
how
to
do
this
both
efficiently
and
good
enough
that
we
feel
satisfied.
D
P
N
I
think
that
would
be
the
maximal
version.
Yes,
so
like
with
a
ietf
media
type,
it's
there's
a
requirement
to
have
a
security
review
and.
N
You
know
like
making
a
media
type
is
really
burdensome.
It's
like
it's
the
simplest
possible
rfc
and
it's
still
a
lot
of
work.
So
I
don't
want
to
downplay
the
problems
created
by
adding
more
and
more
required
sections,
but
that
would
be,
I
think,
the
most
maximal
maximal
version
of
this.
D
N
D
N
I
F
K
I
mean
I
think
it
potentially
could
be
as
simple
as
just
a
published
checklist
where,
if
we
put
together,
say
a
template
of
areas
that
could
potentially
yield
privacy
concerns.
In
terms
of
say,
like
this
metric
requires
a
collection
of
sensitive
pii,
especially
as
it
relates
to
a
person's
how
that
person
identifies
or
affiliates
with,
like
those
are
things
that
we
know
are,
and
then
we
look
at
the
bring
back
then
this
categorization
of
pii,
or
something
like
that.
K
So
if
we
have
a
list
of
questions
or
indicators
that
could
go
with
each
metric,
that
relates
to
the
implementation
of
the
metric
and
the
privacy
implications
of
collecting
data
to
generate
that
metric,
then
it
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
have
a
warning
flag
or
any
sort
of
perceived
diet
like
guidance,
because
we
don't.
We
don't
want
to
overstep
here
again
from
a
liability
perspective,
we're
just
trying
to
service
more
information
that
can
help
anyone
who
might
implement
the
metric
consider
the
privacy
implications
of
actually
using
that
metric.
K
So
like
even
something
like
understanding
your
contributor
population
like.
If
are
you
collecting
names,
then,
like,
then,
you
get
like
that
box
is
now
checked
in
as
an
indication
that
you
might
want
to
consider
having
some
sort
of
privacy
policy
that
is
expressly
stating
how
you
will
be
collecting
and
storing
and
maintaining
this
information.
So
I
think
I
don't
necessarily
think
we
have
to
write
recommendations.
K
Does
this
collect
like
what
kind
of
information
does
this
collect
and
those
things
would
be
filled
out
by
the
metric
submitter
so
that,
if,
if
like
say
like
three
out
of
five
boxes,
are
checked
in
that
rubric,
then
then
the
automatic
recommendation
is
like
you
might
want
to
consider
privacy
documentation
around
this
or
private
documents.
Documentary
project
before
implementing
a
metric
like
this
kind
of
thing.
K
Yeah,
I
mean
lucas,
please
correct
me
if
I'm
I'm
wrong,
but
I
guess
for
me
and
my
role
you
when
you
need
a
privacy
statement
or
documentation
in
place,
is
when
you
actually
start
collecting
that
information
just
talking
about
it
is
not,
does
not
warrant
the
need
for
it.
But
if
you
actually
are
trying
to
measure
something
and
it
requires
a
collection
of
pii
in
order
to
measure
it
now,
you
have
a
data
set
containing
pii
and
you
need
some
sort
of
documentation
to
govern
how
that
data
set
is
maintained.
K
So
I
think
it's
it's
sort
of
the
like
the
indication
that
you
should
take
further
action
here
or
you
should
consider
taking
further
action
or
involve
your
your
legal
team,
depending
on
what
what
your
the
status
of
your
entity
is,
but
that's
kind
of
how
I
interpreted
it
in
terms
of
privacy
implications
at
the
point
of
measurement
versus
we're
just
talking
about
metrics,
so
there
there
isn't
any
privacy
implication
for
what
we,
what
we
publish
just
how
it
could
be
implemented.
N
I
was
visualizing
that
there's
a
metric
like
attribution,
for
example,
that
would
pretty
likely
clash
with
gdpr
in
a
in
a
typical
implementation,
and
an
implementer
would
want
to
have
that
flag,
because
there
are
potential
real
consequences
for
implementers
like
you
could
violate
the
github
terms
of
service,
and
then
your
business
would
have,
you
know,
would
be
risking
being
disconnected.
C
Yeah,
so
we
we
have.
Oh
sorry,
no
yeah
go
ahead,
so
so
we
we
have.
We
have
given
this
some
thought
in
the
past.
C
C
So
we
we
we
mention
it
in
the
objective
section
of
the
template
and
when,
when
we
talked
about
this,
so
when,
when
we
talked
about
that
privacy,
as
it
relates
to
each
of
these
metrics
the-
and
you
had
mentioned
this
earlier,
it
does
become,
it
would
become
quite
burton's
burden
burdensome
to
to
each
individual
metric.
C
So
I
think,
prior
what
we
had
kind
of
decided
was
to
treat
the
privacy
issues
and
and
data
collection
issues
at
a
higher
level
rather
than
at
a
metrics
level.
So
as
as
the
chaos
project,
we
we
could
have
a
the
data
ethics
statement
or
a
disclaimer
statement
that
says
you
know
hey
using
some
of
these
metrics
may
violate
gd
pdp
gdpr
gdpr,
however,
so
it
and
obviously
that
this
decision
could
change.
K
I'm
sorry
can
you
share
an
example
of
where
something
is
actually
out
of
sync
with
gdpr,
because
I
always
thought
it
had
to
do
something
with
how
it
was
implemented
in
terms
of
see
like
where
the
data
is
stored,
how
it's
protected
and
maintained,
as
well
as
the
ability
to
redact
and
remove
like
if
you
are
able
to
achieve
all
of
those
governing
efforts.
Whereas
where
are
we
still
running
into
issues
of
it
being
out
of
compliance
with
gdpr.
N
Which
outputs.
A
A
list
of,
and
so
in
this
I
mean
in
that
case
I
think
the
way
the
metric
functions
in
the
drupal
community
and
I
can't
speak
for
matthew
tiff.
But
people
want
that
attribution
and
want
that
disclosure
of
what
they've
done,
and
I
I
think
make
I
think
to
your
point,
though
we
would
want
to
make
a
note
that
there
may
be
people
who
don't
want
the
attribution.
B
Okay,
so
this
is
an
excellent
conversation
and
I
hate
to
cut
it
short,
but
I
know
that
we
have
metric
stuff
to
talk
about
as
well.
So
can
we
put
this
on
the
agenda
for
next
week
as
well
and
just
kind
of
keep
thinking
about
this,
because
I
think
it's
super
important
and
I
don't
want
to
lose
this
momentum-
is
that,
okay
with
everybody.
B
Just
want
to
give
enough
time
for
kevin
yoshinoritek
to
talk
about
the
metrics
release,
which
is
is
happening
pretty
soon,
since
the
review
period
is
now
over.
So
I
will
let
kevin
kind
of
take
this
and
run
with
it.
If
that's
cool,
you
want
to
just
say
whatever
you
want,
I
don't
know
I
mean
I
can
read
the
the
agenda
items
if
you
want,
but
I
know
that
yash
and
and
kevin
also
have
some
things
to
add.
So
y'all
can
take
it
away.
C
Okay,
so
for
that
for
point,
a
the
review
period
is
now
closed.
So
I
would
like
to
kind
of
make
that
explicit
and
say
the
the
public
review
period
is
now
closed.
C
However,
I
would
encourage
all
of
the
working
groups
to
go
back
and
do
a
a
review
of
the
metrics
to
get
them
ready
for
released
for
release,
so
so
that
review
would
include
going
through
and
making
any
edits
based
on
the
comments,
but
it
would
also
be
a
a
review
just
go
through
and
read
it
and
make
sure
that
the
metric
looks
the
way
that
you
want
it
to
look
when
it's
released,
so
the
target
date
for
the
release
is
october
18th,
which
gives
the
working
groups
two
weeks
to
to
get
the
metrics
into
a
release
date,
minimum
of
one
meeting
per
working
group.
C
Basically,
so,
following
that
october,
eighth,
english
metrics
release
date,
we
are
going
to
give
the
the
chinese
translation
team
about
a
week
to
update
their
metrics
based
on
our
ads.
So
right
now
their
their
the
chinese
release
should
look
exactly
like
ours
does.
However,
after
we've
gone
through
and
made
our
edits,
there
will
be
some
minor
changes
so
in
the
the
chinese
translation
team
has
said
that
they
that
they
think
they
can
do
that
in
a
week
in
the
past.
C
And
I
will
be,
I
will
be
showing
up
to
as
many
working
group
meetings
as
possible
this
week
to
to
gently
remind
you
all.
Q
C
C
B
C
Correct
so,
as
far
as,
if
there's
no
changes
to
the
metric,
they
don't
need
to
do
anything
with
the
translation
team.
However,
every
metric
will
have
a
minor
change,
because
there
is
a
at
the
very
top
of
the
metric.
There
is
a
piece
of
text
that
says
this
metric
is
under
review
and
that
text
needs
to
be
removed,
so
so
every
metric
will
have
an
edit,
but
that
that
top
text
doesn't
affect
the
trend.
The
chinese
translation.
C
Or
at
least
it
shouldn't,
and
maybe
I
should
double
check
with
the
translation
team
to
see
if
they
were,
including
that
that
text
in
their
translations.
F
My
suspicion
is
that,
with
switching
the
default
branch
name
on
github
to
main
from
master
to
main
that
some
of
those
links
were
broken,
so
would
be
great
if
everyone
could
just
look
at
the
metrics
make
sure
all
the
links,
work
and
all
the
images
load
and
if
not
open
issues,
and
then
the
other
question
I
have
is
whether
all
working
groups
with
with
this
release
now
is
a
good
time
to
make
that
so
we'll
use
the
main
name
for
the
default
git
branch
because
then
moving
forward.
We
are
consistent.
A
B
B
B
M
C
Best
question:
it
does
need
to
be
done
in
coordination
with
me
so
that
it's
not
broken
on
the
website.
However,
you
know
that
that's
easy
enough
to
do.
You
just
need
to
tell
me
tell
me
when
so
we
could
set.
We
could
set
that
october
18th
deadline
for
moving
to
main
as
well,
so
edit
review
and
edit
your
metrics
and
change
your
repo
to
your
your
main,
your
main
repo
branch,
I
think
most
of
the
working
groups
have
done
that
already.
C
Don't
think
so:
no,
okay,
risk
evolution
and.
A
F
C
F
A
A
Yeah,
I
think,
there's
there's
dependencies
on
some
of
the
more
software
intensive
repositories.
So,
for
example,
moving
auger
was
a
bit
more
work
than
moving
a
working
group
because
we
have
integration
and
testing
tools
that
tie
into
that.
That
branch
that
had
to
be
reconfigured,
and
I
think
that
all
the
gremore
lab
tools
face
the
same
workload
over
more
repositories.
A
So
I
don't
think
I
think
I
think,
there's
just
it's
going
to
take
some
software
projects
longer
to
do
it
than
it
will
take
the
working
groups,
because
the
number
of
dependencies
they
have
are
more
complicated
and
numerous.
C
So
to
the
to
the
point
that
gjorg
had
made
about
some
of
the
links
and
images
being
broken,
I'm
wondering
if-
and
this
is
kind
of
this
is
kind
of
a
concern
I've
been
having
anyway,
with
some
of
the
metrics
getting
a
little
stale,
I'm
wondering
if
the
for
the
next
review
period,
perhaps
we
could
ask
the
working
groups
to
go
through
and
revisit
all
of
their
metrics
and
do
kind
of
a
review
to
make
sure
the
links
work
and
make
sure
the
text
is
still
good
or
I
wonder
I
wonder
if
we
could
focus
on
that
for
the
next
review
period.
C
C
O
D
D
B
Okay,
well,
we
have
one
minute
before
the
meeting
is
over.
We
will
have
to
skip
the
working
group
updates
this
time,
but
it's.
B
Right,
it's
mostly
yeah
going
over
metrics
feedback,
and
so
oh
a
quick
question,
though
do
we
have
somebody
is
common
working
group
this
week?
Does
anyone
know
up
top
their
head.
C
Okay,
hold
on
a
second,
I
can
tell
you,
oh
oh,
it's.
B
Okay,
because
dawn's
out
right
for
that
conference,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
somebody
was
going
to
be
there
to
do
the
changes.
But
if
it's
not
till
next
week,
then
we're
good
we're.
C
Good
her,
we
actually
talked
at
the
conference
about
that
she
was.
She
was
a
little
bit
worried
about
the
release,
because
common
is
the
comment
doesn't
meet
until
next
week,
right
so
the
so
we
have.
We
have
kind
of
talked
about
that
a
little
bit.
Okay,
awesome!
She
is
aware
of
it.