►
From YouTube: Learning Sync: 2021-06-29
Description
Meeting notes: https://bit.ly/38pal2Z
A
All
right,
so
the
first
thing
is
note
taker,
there's
only
two
of
us
so
we'll
just
we'll
pair
on
it
yeah
not.
A
Let
me
give
it
to
you
there.
You
go
thanks
all
right.
The
first
thing
status
updates
from
my
part.
There
isn't
really
much.
I
know
that
there's
been
some
discussion
about
the
contributors
guide
being
in
the
communities
page.
We
do
have
a
volunteer
for
some
of
that,
so
I'll
be
assisting
as
best
as
I
can,
and
you
know,
if
yeah,
if
there's
anything
needed
there,
I'll
I'll,
try
to
jump
in,
that's
pretty
much
it.
For
me,
I've
been
focused
on
other
things.
What
about
you?
Sam
anything.
B
It
was
off
last
week,
so
didn't
have
much
to
do.
I've
been
like
trying
to
write
some
documentation
internally
for
buildbacks,
and
I
mean
I
I
think
we
can
discuss
that
later
in
if
you
want
to,
but
I
have
some
like,
maybe
useful
points
on
how
like
we
could
possibly
organize
the
upstream
docks
to
make
it
easy
for
like
first
time
users
but
yeah.
A
Okay,
yeah
yeah.
It
I'd
be
interesting
to
hear
how
your
dogs
differ
from.
I
guess
what
we
have
right,
because
I
think
that'd
be
a.
A
Cool,
I'm
not
sure
we'll
have
a
lot
of
use
of
research
if
we're
moving
on
to
the
next
item
going
forward.
So
I
I
do
wonder
if
we
should
just
kind
of
take
it
off
the
agenda.
What
are
your
thoughts
on
that.
B
Yeah,
I
guess
if
we
are
not
doing
this
regularly,
we
could.
I
know
that
I
think
last
time
that
we
had
some
wanted
to
create
a
service
test
ticket
about,
like
figuring
out
like
any
data
policies
that
cncf
has
for
conducting
more
user
research.
A
Yeah,
I
could
definitely
follow
up
on
that
specifically,
but
more
broadly
do
do
you
think
it's
worth
touching
basis
on
it.
Every
single
meeting.
A
Cool,
I
agree
and
we
could
re-add
it
if
stuff
gets
added.
A
All
right
next
onto
steel
issues,
oh
no!
We
have
too
many
of
them.
B
Oh,
I
think
we
should
also
update
like
the
date
there,
but
it's
the
same.
Anyways.
A
B
B
Not
so
similar
tools
to
feature
comparison
list,
I
think
we
recently
did
that
with
talker
file.
Right,
like
all
the
things
I
see
there
like
docker
builder
mechanical,
at
least
the
first
three
do
taken
docker
files
as
inputs
yeah.
So
I
think
sorry
go
ahead.
B
A
Yeah,
so
I
know
builder
and
conoco,
maybe
conoco
less
than
builder,
but,
like
builder
it
you
know,
has
a
cli
component
where
they
do
it.
That
way,
and
I
know
that
that's
actually
come
up
specifically
on
its
own,
so
I
personally
feel
inclined
to
have
something
you
know
more
directed
towards
builder
itself.
A
Yeah-
and
I
think
that's
why
for
me,
like
it,
maybe
wasn't
like
a
comparison
chart,
it
was
more
like
a
a
paragraph
right
that
described
like
build
a
doesn't
necessarily
compare
to
build
packs,
because
it's
paradigm,
it's
different
right
and
essentially
what
I
was
going
to
do
for
docker
even
was
the
same
thing
right.
A
It's
like
docker
itself
doesn't
necessarily
compare
with
build
packs
because
it's
a
different
paradigm
right
and
I
think
that's
where
now
that
we've
added
it
to
the
comparison
list,
it's
a
little
bit
awkward,
but
what
I
had
originally
envisioned
was
like
the
the
things
that
do
compare
were
already
up
there
and
then
everything
else
is
going
to
be
like
a
separate.
You
know
again
section
right
that
says
you
know
these
are
all
the
docker
downsides.
A
You
know,
or
more
verbally
described
comparison
as
opposed
to
a
checklist,
and
I
think
because
of
that
then
builder
and
conoco
kind
of
felt
fell
into
that
same
thing.
A
I
do
wonder
if
a
better
approach,
maybe
to
create
a
blog
post
for
each
one
of
these,
instead
of
like
bloating
our
our
features,
page
right,
saying
like
alternatives
and
then
linking
to
you,
know
conoco
versus
build
packs
as
a
blog
post
or
build
up
versus
you
know,
build
packs
as
a
blog
post.
B
I
mean
there
are
so
many
tools
out
there.
I
think
the
blog
post
is
a
valid
thing.
Maybe
we
can?
I
don't
know
if
we
do.
We
have
like
some
sort
of
a
publication
somewhere
like
for
buildbacks,
where
we
can
tag
things
like
built
by
comparisons,
and
you
just
click
on
that
tag,
and
it
has
like
a
series
of
blog
posts
that,
because.
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
So
I
think,
in
its
more
most
basic
form,
the
ask
is:
oh,
this
thing
no
longer
works,
but
like
there's
a
certain
number
of
places
where
we
had
to
manually
list
all
the
builders
that
you
could
enter
tecton
circle,
ci
stuff,
like
that,
where
a
builder
is
a
keyword
or
sorry
a
parameter
right
and
then
you
want
to
say
like
these
are
the
ones
that
you
can
use
there,
because
that
might
be
the
the
intro.
A
Like
start
the
entry
point
for
these
users,
and
so
they
don't
know
what
kind
of
you
know
value
they
could
enter
there.
So
a
suggested
builder's
list
is
kind
of
necessary,
and
the
ask
of
this
is
just
having
a
single
place
where
we
could
have
this
and
now
you
know
like
consider
having
a
central
catalog.
A
B
In
the
registry
api
there's
a
issue
for
listing
builders
or
adding
builders,
I
think
I
pointed
it
out
to
so.
Aussies
manager
was
asking
about
this
on
monday.
I
think
on
the
well
packs
general
chat.
I
don't
remember
his
name,
but
he
was
asking
like.
Are
there
any
plans
to
add
like
have
a
central
place
to
list
builders
and
stacks
so
that
they
could
not
their
own
like
red,
hot,
specific
ones?
I
guess
yeah.
A
B
B
B
A
No
add
my
heart
back
in
all
right.
Well,
so
maybe
we
could
push.
A
A
A
Cool
so
added
a
little
bit
of
fire
to
it.
I
would
say
in
that
case
like
it,
we
should
probably
block
this
on
the
registry
doing
it.
B
A
And
then
we
could
just
put
all
our
efforts
in
that
other
arena.
A
Well,
I
think
that
was
two:
let's
go.
A
B
A
That
thing
is
crazy.
No
I'm
definitely
thinking
more
like
a
from
a
product
perspective
right
like
when
you
see
all
these
like
faded,
little
logos
and
stuff
at
the
bottom
as
like,
maybe
footer,
or
something
like
that.
A
That
you
know
similar
to
the
the
linux
foundation
and
stuff,
like
that.
I
believe
we
we
talked
about
in
the
past,
that
there
there's
probably
some
designer
based.
B
B
A
A
A
B
This
pr
is
a
thing
which
is
just,
I
think
it's
just
shows
pr
for
in-lane
buildbacks.
A
Unlabeled
issues
we
don't
have
any
that'll
work,
okay,
so
general
topics
there's
a
meta
one
that
I
wanted
to
bring
up,
which
has
to
do
with
scheduling.
I
know
in
other
meetings
or
sub-teams.
A
The
discussion
has
been
floating
around
about
the
frequency
of
these
meetings,
the
sub-team
sinks
and
primarily
the
idea
that
it
seems
like
based
on
some
of
the
either
attendance
or
or
things
that
need
to
happen.
A
It
would
probably
be
more
beneficial
if,
instead
of
weekly,
we
didn't
bi-weekly
and
I
think
what
that
would
also
entail
as
a
net
positive
is
that
maybe
we
could
have
oscillating
sinks
or
time
slots.
So
to
elaborate
on
that.
It's
basically
like,
let's
say
tuesday.
You
know
right
now.
This
hour
can
be
used
up
by
two
different
sub
teams
right,
so
we
can
oscillate
between
the
learning
sub
team
and
you
know
some
other
sub
team
that
may
come
up
and
yeah.
A
So,
overall,
we
could
just
kind
of
take
advantage
of
as
much
time
as
possible,
but
also
be
as
optimized
with
our
time.
B
A
All
right,
so
I
think
the
action
item
here
is
on
my
part.
I
was
already
going
to
recommend
or
suggest
what
this
looks
like
I'll.
Probably
it
seems
like
what
we're
doing
is
creating
prs
against
the
community
repo
with
like
the
suggested
changes,
and
then
we
kind
of
have
the
discussion
there
once
we
see
it
cool
all
right.
The
next
item
is
just
wanted
to
follow
up
on
embedded
catacota.
A
B
Was
so
I
was
supposed
to
bring
it
up
in
the
leadership
thing
for
someone
to
create
the
service
desk
ticket
because
I
don't
have
access
to
do
that
yet,
but
the
last
one
was
cancelled
and
I
was
away
last
week,
so
I
still
haven't
done
that.
B
A
Cool
okay.
I
know
I
have
access
to
service
desk,
but
at
the
same
time
I
do
feel
like
it
would
be
valuable
for
everybody
on
the
maintainers
list
to
have
access
to
it.
So
I
don't
want
to
take
it
from
you.
If
you
want
to
be
the
one
that
creates
the
ticket.
B
I
can
I'm
basically
waiting
for
someone
to
get
me
access
to
it
so
once
I
have
that
I'll
probably
bring
it
up
in
the
next
leadership
meeting
and
then
I
can
create
the
ticket.
Okay.
A
Yeah,
I
thought
I
thought
I
saw
stephen
said
that
yeah
he
was
working
on
access
and
I
believe
the
request
was
made.
So
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
follow
up
with
him.
B
A
Cool
all
right,
I
guess,
is
there
anything
else
we
want
to
discuss
in
this
forum.
A
B
A
Well
then,
I
guess
we
are
done
with
the
meeting
and
I
believe
it
was
right
on
time
cool
all
right.
Talk
to
you
later
son.