►
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
B
A
So
then,
now
let's
get
really
started
quick
recap
of
last
meetings
items
so
Concourse
stuff
is
done.
A
B
A
A
So
I
guess
we
just
go
for
the
opt-in
option
and
make
this
a
regular
Ops
file.
And
then
there
is
nothing
more
to
do.
I
would
say
sounds
good.
Okay,
the
up
timer
job
is
fixed,
so
not
sure
what
exactly
you
did.
Carlson
using
the
latest
CF
deployment,
Concourse
tasks,
image,
I,
guess,
yeah.
C
Switching
to
that
Concourse
image,
just
fixed
it,
so
okay,
good
I'd,
have
thought
that
maybe
it
was
the
Go
version
being
older,
but
I
that
doesn't
make
much
sense.
I
I,
don't
know,
I
didn't
look
too
much
into
it
as
soon
as
it
started.
Working
I
just
backed
off
because.
A
Okay,
fs4
roll
out
yeah
with
detailed
the
rollout
into
or
broken
down
the
rollout
into
two
steps,
so
I
think
compared
to
last
time.
The
only
news
is
that
the
engine
X
build
pack
is
now
available
for
CF
Linux
fs4.
A
The
static
file
build
pack
release
is
almost
available,
so
on
Master
we
already
have
the
fs4
package,
but
it's
not
yet
released
in
GitHub
and
Bosch
IO.
A
So
after
when
me
already
added
it
to
the
experimental
Ops
file,
that
was
a
bit
too
quick,
but
no
not
that
one.
Nevertheless,
everything
succeeded,
and
so
we
now
see
in
the
experimental.
B
A
No
damn
mixed
up
my
bookmarks
I
put
it
in
gym
so
now
yeah.
So.
B
A
Express,
the
the
Sea
of
Linux
four
cats
drop
now
shows,
as
expected.
Only
two
failing
tests,
PHP
and
static
file
is
missing.
Well,
so
far,
so
good,
we
wait
until
those
two
are
available
in
PHP.
We
are
not
so
sure
there
is
not
too
much
activity
on
the
on
the
project
yeah,
but
when
that
is
available,
we
can
then
proceed
with
step.
One.
We
at
sap
will
do
this
a
little
bit
earlier,
without
waiting
for
all
build
packs.
D
B
D
You
approach,
let's
say
end
of
March.
We
can
maybe
then
discuss
in
one
of
these
meetings
and
visit
Toc
if
necessary.
Again,
if
we
also
switch
the
stacks
and
and
let's
say
that's-
the
PHP
build
pack
once
it
gets
available,
but
maybe
we
don't
want
to
wait
on
that
one
if
it
is
really.
A
A
Previous,
maybe
maybe
okay,
then
the
my
sequel,
eight
zero
upgrade.
A
Is
it
in
here?
Yes,
so
the
pxc
release
has
a
new
or
they
brought
in
a
new
major
version
with
my
SQL
8
as
default,
but
to
not
break
anything.
A
The
version
is
pinned
here
to
the
old
5.7
version
per
default
and
there
is
a
new
Ops
file
in
expert
search
here.
No,
it's
experimental.
A
Mysql
8.0
for
those
who
want
the
new
version.
This
caused
some
problems
in
the
Cloud
controller
release
pipelines
because
they
picked.
They
do
not
use
the
released
CF
deployment
version,
they
use
the
latest
from
release
candidate,
and
then
they
got
first,
the
one
who
deploys
my
SQL
8
by
default.
That
means
they
got
an
upgrade
in
their
CF
deployments
and
then
later
came
that
5.7
in
and
the
downgrade
is
not
possible.
So
yeah
I
think
Johannes
is
trying
to
clean
that
up
and
Castle.
C
A
A
A
C
Maybe
ask
them
for
guidance,
but
I
guess
we
could
cut
a
few
CFT
releases
and
then
what
oh
plus
wait.
What.
A
A
D
D
This
is
according
to
one
RFC
that
was
discussed
half
a
year
ago
in
the
TOC
and
with
all
the
working
group
leads
and
yeah.
The
idea
was
on
to
choose
this
working
group
because
it
has
a
rather
small
number
of
repositories
compared
to
let's
say
applicational
Quantum
interfaces
in
case
something
goes
really
wrong
and
we
need
to
clean
it
manually
up.
Then
that
would
be
easier
and,
on
the
other
hand,
I
think
there
was
one
time
where
a
direct
commit
caused
some
trouble,
so
that
could
be
prevented
to
make
argument
yeah.
D
Actually
we
just
need
to
merge
it
and
then
wait
for
I,
don't
know
six
hours
or
something
like
that.
Then
every
six
hours
this
background
job
runs,
and
it
would
then
apply
those
branch
protection
rules
if
it.
B
D
Out
foreign
and
then
we
could
see
if
that
causes
problems
and
then
yeah
wait
on
the
feedback
or
see
if
some
pipelines
have
issues
whether
the
Bots
are
all
properly
set,
and
then
we
could
give
some
feedback
whether
this
worked
out,
whether
or
not
and
then
advertise
it
to
the
other
working
groups.
C
Question
quick
question:
do
we
I
guess,
have
we
checked
whether
we
have
any
weird
Branch
protection
rules
already
in
place
and
Will
those
branch
protection
rules
be
wiped
out
by
this?
Like?
Is
this
an
additive
Branch
protection.
D
D
D
C
A
I
think
I
checked
all
repositories
and
cats
has
developed
as
a
default.
Okay,
and
the
question
was
if
we
can
change
this
to
Main
sure
if
yeah.
C
Yeah,
that's
the
thing
we.
We
already
have
a
concourse
task
that
marks
the
pr
as
failed
marks
to
Pure,
with
a
failed
status
check.
If
it's
not
went
to
that,
develop
right.
That
should
be.
A
Fine,
then
simply
change
this
to.
D
Is
maintained
in
this
cloud
found
in
the
TOC?
Okay,
okay,.
D
Okay,
it's
not
urgent!
So
if
we
let's
say
Beyond,
we
can
soon
contact
tomorrow
and
then
to
see
PRS
in
the
right
order.
A
D
Approve
and
then
it
can
be
merged
or
somebody
else
from
was
approval
rights.
D
Exactly
everything
that's
another
point,
but
it
will
be
cleaned
up
sooner
or
later
as
well,
because
there
are
still
individual
users
configured
on
the
repositories
and
that
will
go
away.
We
will
go
only
for
the
Bots.
Yes,.
B
D
Okay,
that
means
we
need
in
additions
and,
first
to
add
the
Bots
before
we
merge
this
as
a
PR.
C
Sure,
yes,
I,
think
I
think
we
want
that
one
at
least
possibly
the
other
one
to
be
in
the
I.
Don't
honestly
I,
don't
we
don't
use
CF,
kitbot
anymore
I,
think
that
was
a
bot
that
was
would
watch
repositories
in
order
to
create
tracker
stories
for.
C
Can
probably
just
remove
that
from
everywhere,
since
we
don't
use
tracker
but
but
that
one
or
both
of
the
CF
relent
release
bot
and
Status
bot?
We
should.
We
should
probably
list.
C
A
B
C
Yeah,
probably
probably
best
to
add
both
and
then
call
it
later.
Cf
acceptance
tests
uses
the
same
Bots
right,
I,
I,
hope
to
God.
We
didn't
have
different
Bots
for
CFA
acceptance.
B
A
Okay,
good,
then
then
I
will
also
update
bot
lists
and
then
we
can
merge
and
try.
D
What
was
now
the
proposal
was
a
main
branch.
Would
you
like
to
keep
some
develop
as
main
branch
for
cuts
or
would.
A
Yeah
yeah
I've
taken
a
note
on
that.
I
will
do
that
tomorrow.
B
D
I
mean
the:
if
you
need
an
example,
how
it
is
configured
Etc,
this
is
something
I
can
control,
but
there's
no,
no
big
surprises.
I
mean
it
doesn't
allow
to
remove
the
main
branch
yeah.
That's
amazing
things
that
are
not
so
difficult
to
find
out.
Yeah
and.
C
D
B
D
Just
would
not
automatically
generated
what
can
be
done
if
you
want,
you
can
have
a
static
own
configuration.
That
means
you.
You
take
the
generated
one
and
puts
that
into
a
branch
protection.
A
global
file,
so
side
by
side
was
a
cloud
Foundry
armor
where
the
repos
are
inside,
and
then
you
can
modify
as
a
barge
protection
as
you
need
and
that
one
takes
precedence.
So
here
you
could
add.
Okay,
I
would
suggest,
let's
start
with
the
default
and.
B
C
D
Another
feedback
somebody
wanted
to
have
status
checks,
that's
also
not
yet
possible
unless.
D
Configuration
because
we
can
discuss
that,
but
then
we
need
additional
configuration
on
the
working
groups
which
start
those
checks,
because
there's
no
common
set
that
we
can
generically
apply
so
yeah.
B
D
C
Yeah,
have
you
all
started
playing
around
with
go
120
yet.
C
This
is
like
one
big,
weird
thing
that
it
brings
in
like,
for
the
most
part,
I,
don't
think
it's
gonna
mess
up
a
lot
of
our
stuff,
but
there's
one
thing:
that's
a
little
weird
in
go
120,
some
sort
of
some
sort
of
like
C
linking
is
introduced
where
go
120
compiled
binaries
require
that
the
G
lib
C
version
that
they're
compiled
with
is
present
in
the
environment
in
which
the
binary
is
run.
C
Yeah,
it's
I
had
thought
that
go
binaries
were
completely
uncoupled
from
everything
and
like
good
to
go,
but
sigo
enabled
is
true
by
default,
not
false.
By
default,
so
binaries
that
do
not
have
cigo
enabled
set
equals
zero
set
when
they're
built
will
need
to
be
run
in
the
same,
like
Linux
environment
that
that
they
were
compiled
in
basically.
C
People
were
pretty
confused
about
it,
I'm
like
I'm,
honestly,
not
the
most
sure
about
what
it
means
yet,
but
I
like
I
know.
But
like
someone,
someone
said
something
about
how
there
was
like
in
previous
Go
versions.
It
was
dynamically
linked.
So
as
long
as
you
compiled
it
in
an
older
in
a
version
of
as
long
as
you
compiled
it
in
a
version
of
Linux
and
then
ran
it
in
a
version
of
Linux
that
was
as
old
or
newer
than
the
version
of
Linux
that
you
compiled
it
in.
It
was
fine.
C
But
now
that
might
not
be
the
case,
it's
a
little
unclear.
But
what
it
does
seem
to
mean
is
that
if
we
compile
go
binaries
in
on
a
Jammy
VM,
for
instance,
and
then
run
them
on
in
like
CF
Linux
fs3
they'll
fall
over
and
pause
like
and
possibly
vice
versa.
I
I
can't
confirm
the
reverse,
but
it
it's
possibly
true,
unless
ego
enabled
is
set
to
zero.
D
C
D
Because
I'm
waiting
actually
for
a
feature,
Let's
see
changelog,
no
119,
okay,.
C
C
It's
just
like
I
was
running
it
and
cats
kept
falling
over
because
we
compile
the
catnip
binary
in
the
synchronized
before
suite
and
I
was
running.
Cats
inside
of
a
Jammy,
VM
and
I
was
TR
and
I
was
trying
to
deploy
to
a
CF
Linux
fs3,
cfd
and
cats
was
continuously
failing,
because
the
compiled
catnip
binary
refused
to
push
and
deploy
in
CF
Linux,
fs3,
okay,
yeah,
yeah
I
think
we're
going
to
be
seeing
some
more
issues
related
to
this
down
the
line.
C
Probably
the
fix
for
cat
amp
was
relatively
easy.
Those
just
add
Sego
enabled
equals
zero
to
the
compilation.
Flags
foreign.
A
Good
then,
we
will
have
to
keep
this
in
mind
when
updating
go.
Where
else
could.
C
This
was
with
catnip,
we
were
I
was
deploying
cat.
We
got
a
cat's,
deploys
catnip
with
the
binary
build
pack,
so
that
was
a
separate,
a
separate
thing,
but
yeah
I,
I
hadn't
thought.
A
C
C
Yeah,
it's
sort
of
or
timing
on
their
front
because
we're
starting
that
CF
Linux
fs4
thing
push
right
now.
So
if
it,
if,
if
the
go
compilation
does
not
work,
the
reverse
way
like
a
CF,
Linux
fs3
binary
does
not
compile
and
see
if
in
inside
of
or
it
won't
run
with
the
binary
build
pack
CF
Linux
fs4.
That
would
be
a
huge
pain
in
the
butt
I
think
most
a
lot
of
errands
inside
of
cfd
probably
use
go
binaries.
C
C
C
C
D
C
D
Has
set
it
up
and
we
have
migrated
everything:
two
championships:
there's
no
bionic
anymore
and
I'm
pretty.
B
C
C
That's
kind
of
what
I
would
expect
to
be
happening
right
now,
but
yeah
weird
anyway,.
D
Look
up
which
oh
it's
also
complex,
meanwhile,
so.
A
We're
getting
a
bit
more
complex
here:
yeah,
okay,
good,
so.
C
Yeah
I
think
the
easiest
fix
is
wherever
possible
to
disable
seago
when
we
compile
apps
I'm,
not
completely
knowledgeable
about
the
effects
of
that
I
read
somewhere,
that
it
could
have
minor
performance
implications,
but
it
also
seems
like
some
smart
people
within
VMware
have
been
throwing
in
a
lot
of
threads
like
if
you
don't.
If
you
don't
need
cigo,
you
should
disable
it
so
I'm
sort
of
inclined
to
go.
Go
that
path.
If,
when
we,
whenever
we
run
into
problems,.
C
Yeah,
unless
last
time
we
did
this,
we
sent
out
slack
and
see
it
out
of
blast.
We
should
probably
do
the
same
this
time,
not
to
mention
there's
no
rush
on
doing
this
upgrade
because
yeah,
you
know,
go
120
just
came
out.
A
If
there
is
nothing
more,
then
we
should
be
done
I'm,
giving
an
update
on
the
workings
group
status
in
the
talk
meeting
on
March
7th
next
week,
I
can't
and
the
next
working
group
meeting
I'm
on
vacation,
so
I
would
be
Thursday
the
9th
so
well
as
there
is
likely
some
fs4
progress.
We
shouldn't
cancel
the
meeting,
so
maybe
Stefan
has
to.