►
From YouTube: CNB Core Team Sync
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
Let's
see
how
that
works,
don't
forget
to
sign
the
doc
if
you
haven't
already.
I
don't
know
if
you
said
that
yeah
do
we
have
any
new
faces,
it
looks
like
we
don't.
Let's
move
on
to
outstanding
spec
vrs.
A
Platform
creation
time
which
natalie
moved
out
of
draft,
I
think,
a
week
or
so
ago,
seven
days
ago,
yeah
I
merged
the
rc
for
you,
natalie.
A
I
guess
abusing
my
core
team
powers,
you
know
not
on
the
sub
team,
and
so
if
people
could
just
review
this,
I
think
we
get
steven's
approval.
We
can
merge
this
one
is
that
right.
C
A
C
A
Can
you
maybe
just
respond
here,
emily's
saying
you're
on
board
with
the
plan.
C
A
Outside
of
that,
is
there
actual
other
feedback
on
the
non-deprecation
pieces?
I
think
we're
seeing
pretty
clear-cut
to
me.
A
That
wraps
up
spec
yards
unless
you
want
to
talk
about
your
draft
stuff
at
all
of
emily,
for
the
image
extension
work.
C
Yeah
it
does
I
built
off
of
what
he
did,
but
I
think
this
could
just
replace
that
pr
should.
C
C
We
we're
about
to
ship
the
release
candidate
for
lifecycle
014,
which
will
have
support
for
build
paco8
and
platform
09.
A
Okay,
go.
C
Ahead,
oh
the
last
time,
we
sort
of
said
that
we
were
gonna,
be
sparring
and
require
those
top
two
issues
to
go
in
before
we
could
cut
the
specs
like
adding
some
clarification.
C
I
think
you
know
emily
and
myself
have
both
volunteered
to
take
those
on.
So
that's
probably
the
last
remaining
blocker
for
cutting
this.
A
Are
positional,
is
this
positional
arg
also
blocking
and
in
life
cycle
14?
Oh.
A
C
Platform09,
could
you
click
on
it?
I
think
that
one's
already.
C
C
A
All
right,
I
think,
that's
probably
it
for
upcoming
stuff
and
release
planning,
also
missing
something.
D
I
guess
distribution
of
three
I
know
I
was
kind
of
championing
that
a
little
bit
before
I
went
on
a
break.
Welcome
back.
Thank
you.
Do
we
know
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
the
distribution
team
is
kind
of
managing
this.
D
A
B
B
B
Certain
pieces
of
data-
maybe
the
life
cycle-
needs
a
certain
piece
of
data,
but
right
now
the
life
cycle
doesn't
specify
distributions
that
it
looks
at
to
me.
They
feel
like
open
questions
that
we
would
have
hammered
out
in
an
rfc.
So
although
I
don't
have
strong
objections
to
the
plan,
I
feel
like
there's
there's
holes
in
our
conversation
about
what
it
would
take
to
roll
it
out.
D
Yeah,
I
could
agree
with
that.
I
guess
it
seems
like
a
more
holistic
conversation
than
a
very
specific
targeted
feature.
Would
you
say
that
the
rfc
is
the
idea
or
proposal
of
moving
the
build
and
run
images
into
the
distribution?
Spec?
B
It
seems
like
in
this
rfc
the
distribution
spec
is
like
taking
on
more
it's
the
place
where
we're
not
just
describing
specifically
how
to
distribute
a
build
pack
image,
we're
describing
how
to
distribute
a
life
cycle
and
build,
and
iran-
and
you
know
we're
making
decisions
about
all
these
labels.
And
whenever
we've
made
big
decisions
like
that
in
the
past
has
been
an
rfc.
D
Yeah,
I
think
it
all
like
organically,
evolved
from
conversations
on
how
to
progress
with
the
stack
removal
changes
and
some
of
the
discussions
that
spun
out
of
that
were
about
how
we
already
kind
of
intermingle
a
lot
of
the
interfaces,
the
way
that
they
currently
stand,
and
so
this
was
sort
of
like
a
path
to
creating
that
clear
separation.
So
I
think
that's
sort
of
what
has
happened
and
why
we
are
where
we
are
not
opposing
the
rfc
discussion.
I
guess
I'm
just
not
sure
exactly
how
how
to
go
about
it.
B
Could
we
capture
it
in
there
to
me?
It
feels
like,
like
I
can
sort
of
understand
how
this
all
these
changes
flow
out
of
both
the
stack
rfc
and
the
builder
spec
rfc,
but
I
feel
like
there's
a
gap
in
my
understanding
of
what
the
plan
is
for
how
we
roll
these
things
out.
B
D
D
Yeah,
I
would
definitely
defer
to
the
core
team.
D
B
A
Yeah
there's
a
stack
stuff,
but
I
feel
like
the
original
kind
of
intention
that
emily
was
kind
of
independent
of
that
right,
like
this
is
just
a
larger
change
kind
of
moving
a
bunch
of
stuff
like
the
lifecycle,
distribution
into
distribution
or
distribution,
spec
kind
of
having
larger
service
area.
A
So
if
I'm
understanding
your
ass
correctly,
maybe
this
is
more
well
scoped.
For
me,
the
guidance
javier
is
looking
for
is
that
those
are
two
separate
asks
like
there's
the
rfc
for
basically
increasing
the
surface
area
of
distribution,
kind
of
moving
some
of
those
things,
and
then
there
is
not
the
like.
Actual
rollout
plan
is
not
asking
for
an
rvc,
that's
just
a.
We
need
to
go
and
do
that
work.
A
A
Is
is
this
something
you're
interested
in
if
we
were
to
ask
for
an
rc?
Is
this
something
you'd
be
interested
in
driving
a
hobbier
with
help
and
input
from
others.
A
Okay,
well,
we
don't
have
this
side
right
here,
but
we
should
probably
get
an
owner
for
driving
out.
Definitely
at
least
the
stack
rollout
plan
for
how
we're
actually
gonna
go
do
that
this
year,
which
I
think
now
has
been
asking
for
since
the
beginning
of
the
year,
so
something
we
need
to
get
going
on
in
the
last
five
or
so
minutes.
Let's
move
on
to
rc's,
like
this
list
has
been
dueling
down.
C
Maybe
we
should
leave
a
comment
just
to
direct
people
to
this
pr
as
a
place
to
hammer
out
further
details.
I
think
that
would
be
the
most
productive.
A
C
A
Awesome
running
a
chest
on.
C
A
All
right
moving
on
next
one
support
for
pack
tumble.
I
think
this
is
blocked,
but
javier
left
a
bunch
of
comments
I
was
seeing.
I
saw
today
yeah.
A
B
I'll
confess
that,
in
this
constellation
of
back
tomorrow,
project
tumble
rfcs
I've
sort
of
lost
track
of
which
one's
the
latest
or
like,
where
to
focus
my
reviews,
which
is
maybe
more
delinquent
about
doing
it.
So
just
if
you
could
prime
me
in
the
right
direction
for
what
the
highest
priority
area
to
get
feedback
at
the
moment,
yeah.
D
A
C
A
Is
josel
driving
and
owning
pact
towel?
Are
you
taking
that
on
javier.
D
I
know
he's
very
opinionated,
so
yeah.
I
definitely
want
to
get
his
buy-in
on
anything
that
I
put
forth.
Okay,.
A
C
C
A
Anytime,
you
change
the
labels
specifically,
the
labels.
Do,
I
have
to
add
to
another
chain,
create
an
event.
A
I
think
the
only
outstanding
comments
are
the
one
from
emily
on
this
around
the
two
basic
executables.
B
Sorry,
since
leaving
that
comment,
I
haven't
looked
at
the
changes.
I.
A
Don't
think
he's
made
changes
just
commented
on
basically
explaining.
Why
maybe
that's
something
we
can
drive
inside
of
that
on
friday.
A
Cool
running
adjustment.
A
Is
this
something
you
want
to
talk
about
tomorrow?
Natalie.
A
A
B
A
A
Cool:
what's
why
don't
we
talk
about
that
tomorrow
then,
and
javier
came
in.
C
A
I
think
that's
it
for
rc's.
Do
we
have
other
stuff?
Besides
those
two
things
we
wanted
to
put
on
jenna
for
tomorrow,.
A
I'll
take
the
people
doing
nothing
and
just
looking
at
their
cameras.
Isn't
that
awesome
I'll
see
everyone
tomorrow,
hopefully
for
working
group
thanks
everyone.