►
From YouTube: CNB Core Team Sync - 16 Feb 2022
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
May
or
may
not
make
it,
he
did
not
sleep
very
well
last
night
or
something
so
I
believe
he
has
a
quote-unquote
power
napping,
but
he
may
not
have
woken
up
from
his
power
nap,
so
it
may
be
nav
to
much
longer
sleep.
C
A
When
you
usually
kick
these
off,
am
I
should
we
wait
for
more
people?
Should
we
just
get
started
because
everyone
I.
B
A
B
A
A
C
B
C
B
A
It's
five
past
and
we're
always
late,
except
when
emily
runs
it,
but
you're
stuck
with
me
today.
So.
A
A
A
So,
starting
at
the
bottom,
I
guess
release
five
descriptor
o2.
I
see
I
have
some
javier
some
open,
stuff
and
kind
of
just
circling
back
around
to
it
to
stephen's
point.
This
is
already
out
there,
so
I
think
we
should
kind
of
get
this
out
without
a
ton
of
other
changes.
A
A
B
B
A
B
A
Yeah,
I
guess
I
just
don't-
have
a
concept
of
how,
when
we
remove
stuff
like
this,
like
how
widely
adopted
the
bomb
stuff
was
in
the
ecosystem,.
A
But
like
I
mean
I
know
selfishly
on
the
kind
of
sales
force,
heroku
side,
we
didn't
implement
it
on
the
broken,
build
packs.
I
know
there
was
we've
done
a
little
bit
of
it
on
the
salesforce
side,
but
it
looks
like
we're
on
the
path
to
move
away
from
it
as
well.
So.
A
D
B
A
Well,
I
I
guess
I
would
like
to
separate
the
just
in
general,
as
discussions
of
like
bill
pack,
authors
having
control
over
what
platform
they
run
on,
because
I
feel
like
that's
not
always
true,
but
I
mean
I'm
fine
moving
it
removing
it
from
the
label.
I
mean,
I
guess,
to
sam's
kind
of
point
like
do
we
care
or
want
to
put
it
somewhere
else,
if
someone's
still
using
it,
but
I
don't
know
if
that's
like
pedantic
or
if
people
are
would
act
like
this
actually
affects
people.
D
I
mean,
but
we
we
can't
get
rid
of
it
until
we
definitely
get
those
spellback
apis,
not
I'm
not
talking
about
putting
it
in
the
label.
I'm
just
saying
the
output
bomb
that
the
build
packs
produce
goes
in
that
same
directory
structure.
We
have
for
response
just
in
a
dot
normal
file,
rather
than
the
config
normal,
which
currently
contains
the
merged
or
or
you
can
just
move
that
merge
download
at
the
top
level
of
that
respond,
folder
with
just
so
that
you
do.
B
I
guess
it
depends
like
how
you
think
about
it
right,
so
we
added
something,
so
I
think
yeah
natalie's
trying
to
put
this
on
each
other,
not
talking
about
it.
Now.
I
can't
help
myself
I'm
going
to
finish
the
sentence.
Folks,
we've
gone
so
far
down
this
route.
It
depends
whether
you're
like
waiting
for
the
platform
to
remove
it,
so
that
the
build
packs
can
remove
it
or
waiting
for
the
build
packs
to
remove
it.
So
the
platform
can
move
it.
B
A
I
have
comments
on
that,
but
I'll
refrain
from
responding
to
you
right
now.
The
process.
B
C
I
think
just
waiting
for
your.
C
A
C
Yeah,
this
is
an
ask
that
came
up
in
slack.
It
should
be
a
relatively
small
change
to
our
api.
A
I
guess
my
one
concern
is
like
just
how
we
can
capture
context
for
some
of
the
stuff
that
is
easily
searchable
in
the
future,
but.
C
A
Quickly,
well,
at
minimum
eye
wall.
Add
folks
on
here.
C
I
know
that
I'm
guessing
javier
you're
gonna
have
something
to
say
about
the
project
descriptor
I
just
since
we
were
just
on
the
platform
and
the
build
pack
apis.
I
just
want
to
point
out
the
build
pack
08,
I
think,
has
a
couple
of
like
enhancements
to
the
spec
which
do
we
want
that
to
block.
C
How
high
priority
are
these
terminology
and
bill
pack
type
section.
B
B
The
one
thing
that's
felt
really
high
priority
to
me
is
that
we
bandy
about
this
term
meta
buildback
that
doesn't
have
a
formal
meaning
all
the
time,
and
I
think,
aside
from
any
features,
either
clarifying
what
that
means.
That
word
or
assigning
a
different
word
to
it,
because
metabolic
doesn't
make
sense,
is
a
high
priority
thing.
We
don't
have
to
block
it,
but
I
feel
like
this
is
the
kind
of
thing
that
just
causes
consistent
pain
and
be
nice
to
fix
it.
B
B
A
C
Let's
say
I
just
occurred
to
me:
you
know
with
the
docker
files
tracker
work
and
you
know
just
thinking
about
adding
extensions,
but
we
need
to
go
on
the
build
pack
spec
somewhere,
like
we
might
be
doing
some
refactoring.
I
guess
like
I
don't
know,
I
could
see
that
occurring
and
maybe
that
would
be
a
very
convenient
time
to
also
organize
the
specs
so
that
regular,
build
pack
and
let
it
build
pack
that
makes
sense.
C
B
B
I
think
a
lot
of
this
came
out
of
the
stack
pack
conversation
where
I
feel
like
it
was
almost
the
opposite.
End
of
this,
where,
like
stack
packs,
were
originally
sort
of
inserted
into
the
spec,
with
a
bunch
of
like,
if
statements
throughout
the
bill,
pecks
back
to
be
like
if
it's
a
stack
pack
x,
if
it's
a
stack
pack,
why,
like
everywhere,
to
make
it
technically
correct
where
it's
like
that's
kind
of
bad
information
architecture?
B
A
A
A
Did
you
want
to
say
anything
on
platform
9?
Not
only
you
were
mentioning.
A
E
A
E
Yeah
we
have,
as
far
as
I
know,
we
have
other
stuff
that
we
want
to
throw
in
there
before
that
release.
A
Cool
all
right,
I
think
that's
it
for
at
least
playing
unless
someone
else
has
something
else.
We
can
move
on
rcs.
A
B
B
E
Is
there
an
alternative
proposal
to
actually
getting
rfc's
through
and
spec
changes,
because
you
know
I
I
feel
like
we
did
this
part
and
intentionally
painful
so
that
we
could
get
some
actions
out
of
it,
but
if
we're
still
not
getting
actions
out
of
it,
I
feel
like
that
was
the
core
goal.
Are
there
alternatives
there.
A
A
A
Well,
I
guess
I'll
just
try
to
quickly
go
through
each
of
these
and
then
hopefully
this
pain
will
spur
us
to
move
forward
to
either
close
or
merge.
Some
of
these
things
then
go
ahead.
Sam.
D
I
was
just
going
to
say
I
mod
some
of
my
rfc,
so
I'm
not
actively
working
on
back
to
draft.
I
think
like
it's,
I
I
I
don't
have
the
bandwidth
to
continue
working
on
those
anymore
and
I
want
to
focus
on
the
rfcs
that
I
want
up.
So
I
have
marked
the
previous
one
of
those
plots
for
now
and
I
can
pick
them
up
again
and
I
have
the
time.
A
Okay,
thank
you
soon,
support
dockerfiles.
A
I
know
in
the
I
know
you
blocked
previously
on
us
merging
him,
even
though
we
have
the
votes
to
move
this
fct
I've
been
following
along
a
little
bit
but
kind
of.
What's
this
state
of
this
rce.
E
C
Yeah
or
give
feedback,
if
I
didn't
capture
it
correctly,
I
think
there's
one
I
mean
in
my
mind.
Most
of
the
uncertainties
have
been
resolved,
but
this
conversation
here
about,
like
the
restrictions
that
we
place
on
build
docker
files,
I
think,
could
use
just
a
little
more
clarity.
E
A
Okay,
the
only
kind
of
other
comment
I
have
is,
I
know
joe-
has
that
spec
vr
open.
Do
we
want
to
kind
of
roll
that
in
and
review
that,
along
with
this
to
some
degree,.
A
A
Okay,
should
we
are
we
plan
to
do
those
discussions
async
on
that
spec
pr,
or
we
want
to
have
more
instant
time
to
talk
about
that
yeah,
I'm
fine
doing
them
async,
I
just
I
kind
of
lost
sight
of
where
the
whole
the
whole
project
is
at.
C
It
might
be
valuable
to
have
like
not
only
the
office
hours
or
sometime
when
we
just
sort
of
share
all
of
the
the
work
that's
been
done
so
far,
so
I
think
kind
of
going
through
the
flow
together
could
help
organize
that
discussion
about
all
right.
What
still
needs
to
be
defined
like
I
don't
know
what
questions
do?
We
still
have
that
kind
of
thing.
C
C
A
B
A
Anyways,
thanks
do
we
have
stuff
for
tomorrow.
A
I
don't
know
not
sure
I
guess
the
javier's
point
we
usually
set
agenda
for
tomorrow
before
we
call
it.
Even
if
we're
gonna
go
through
all
the
rc's.
B
B
D
B
D
D
A
D
B
C
A
D
A
Okay,
I'm
happy
to
call
that
with
those
two
topics
for
tomorrow.