►
From YouTube: GitOps Principles Committee Weekly Meeting 20210728
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
It
did
not
notify
everyone
that
it's
recording
for
the
first
time
anyway.
Oh
it
did
oh
okay,.
A
Strange,
I
guess
it
usually
notifies
myself
too,
but
that's
maybe
that's
an
improvement,
a
feature,
not
a
bug.
Hi.
Everyone
welcome
to
the
july
28
2021
get
ops
working
group
events
committee
weekly
meeting
here
is
the
link
for
our
agenda
notes
and.
A
Looks
like
I
am
moderating
now.
If
anyone
wants
to
help
take
notes,
please
feel
free,
and
the
only
topic
on
the
list
today
is
to
talk
about
github's
con
and
we've
got
emily
and
rachel
from
linux
found
from
do
I
say
linux
foundation
or
just
cncf.
I
don't
know.
A
Yeah
from
the
from
the
kubecon
and
foundation
programming
events
group
to
answer
any
questions
that
we
might
have
and
chat
with
us
about.
This
welcome.
D
B
D
A
Right
cool
this
one's
from
from
from
suzane.
What
she
was
saying
would
be
good
to
know
of
any
upcoming
deadlines
for
sponsors
and
any
further
logistics
info
that
you
can
share.
It's
very
open-ended.
C
Okay,
I
can
give
you
a
couple
of
updates
for
that.
Just
for
those
I'm
I'm
checking
my
notes
here.
So
I
give
you
the
right
dates.
C
I
was
looking
for
the
day
sponsorship
sales
close
august
5th,
so
we
have
just
about
a
week
left
for
sponsorships
to
come
in
as
far
as
deadlines
for
things
that
sponsors
actually
will
be
needing
to
provide.
That
will
come
from
christy
davis
and
everyone
should
have
already
received
a
communication
from
her,
but
she
is
managing
all
the
the
sponsorship
deliverables
and
there
should
be
a
if
you
haven't
gotten
it
yet.
I
think
you're
getting
it
in
the
next
couple
of
days
like
a
a
portal
where
you'll
have
all
the
deadlines
built
in
great.
C
B
Can't
okay,
so
I
have
scott,
I
don't
know
if
you
you
already
had
any
other
questions,
but
I
do
have
a
handful
of
questions.
Let's
just
stick
with
some
of
them
actually
have
already
been
answered,
but
I
kind
of
want
to
get
a
clarification.
B
So
first
do
we
as
committee
members
or
we
as
I
guess.
I
think
the
cncf
has
done
an
amazing
job
like
logistically.
I'm
just
planning
everything
for
us,
but
in
terms
of
us
needing
passes,
so
I
get
that
we
have
to
register
for
kubecon,
but
do
we
also
have
to
register
for
this
day
zero
event,
and
will
there
be
a
need
to
differentiate
like
us
as
committee
members,
people
who
are
you
know
the
point
of
contact.
I
guess
during
the
the
event
there
as
like,
you
know,
designating
us
as
such.
C
So
good
question:
I
think
I've
caught
a
couple
of
couple
of
questions
in
there
one.
Yes,
you
do
need
to
register
for
kubecon
and
for
the
for
the
co-located
event,
git
ops
con
there.
Unfortunately,
there
is
not
a
comp
pass
for
that.
I
will
just
put
it
out
there
that
we've
got
a
couple
of
one-off
passes
available.
C
If
there's
someone
that
can't
register,
if
there's
some
reason,
they
can't
get
approval
to
to
pay
for
it.
Things
like
that
we
do
have
a
couple
like
kind
of
on
the
back
burner
there.
As
far
as
me,
listing
out
like
being
recognizable
on
site
I'll,
have
to
ask
how
that's
being
managed.
B
Okay,
cool,
so
it's
it's
it
for
me.
It
was
more
like
logistical
like
like
okay,
do
I
like?
I
just
register,
and
you
know-
and
I
don't
have
to
do
anything
else
or
is
there
like
a
special
thing,
so
it
just
sounds
like
just
just
register.
Yes
and
okay
cool
cool
in
terms
of
so
my
next
question
is
actually
multi-pronged,
so
I'll
try
to
ask
it
in
the
best
way
possible.
B
B
This
is
like
okay,
we'll
just
shove
that
in
somewhere,
but
if
we
don't
like
do
we
need
to
submit
a
cfp
for
that
and
do
we
approve
our
own
cfp
so,
like
I'm
kind
of
a
little
confused
in
terms
of
like
scheduling
of
how
much
control
we
have
because
of
like
things
like
this
right
like
if
we
wanted.
E
C
So
good
question:
yes,
you
have
complete
control
over
the
agenda.
The
intent
with
the
cfp
is
that
it's
open,
there's
committee
approval
committee
review
involved
as
long
as
it's
in
this.
This
isn't
what
your
approach
is.
It
sounds
like,
but
as
long
as
it's
not
self-serving
for
a
certain
company,
a
sales
pitch
type
thing,
you
can
absolutely
put
in
a
panel
that
discusses
get
off
the
committee.
Anything
like
that.
C
We
have
a
call
tomorrow
with
the
overall
co-located
event
planning
committee,
the
only
question
around
parameters
of
the
agenda.
Besides
the
time
frame,
which
is
pretty
straightforward,
we've
got
the
nine
to
five
time
block.
We
are
still.
Finally,
we
finalized
the
contract
with
the
virtual
platform,
but
we
need
to
it's
really
complicated
with
the
platform
they
they
charge
different
ways
and
for
different
numbers
of
speakers.
C
F
A
I
do
I
have
a
question
too.
That's
that's.
That's
awesome
when
you
emily,
when
you
said
you
need
to
make
sure
there
are
no
specific
parameters
we
need
to
be
in.
I
don't
know
that.
I
totally
understood
what
that
means.
C
B
As
you're
typing
that
I
do
have
another
question,
so
one
last
question:
it's
it's
an
open-ended
question
and
and
every
time
I
ask
no
one
knows
just
yet
and
I
understand
because
of
the
circumstances,
so
I'm
just
wondering
if
there's
any
more
new
information.
How
is
the
hybrid
event
going
to
work?
B
Because
I
have
there's
people,
you
know
pinging
me
obviously
about
like
hey
like
you
know,
some
of
these
people
are
in
europe
and
they
won't
be
able
to
make
it
in
you
know
they're
they
want
to
do
the
you
know
the
online
thing
how's
that.
B
In
a
hybrid
event
like
is
it
just
gonna
be
pre-recorded
videos
that
are
on
the
platform?
Is
there
gonna
be
streaming
how's
that
gonna
work
generally
yeah.
C
I
I
think
I
have
probably
more
information
than
you've
heard,
maybe
since
the
last
call
or
something,
but
if,
if
someone
is
presenting
and
they're
not
going
to
be
there
in
person,
we
will
require
that
they
pre-record,
so
that
pre-recorded
session
will
play
in
the
platform
and
live
in
person.
C
C
Same
thing
goes
for
a
panel
if
there's
a
panel
that
has
live
and
pre-recorded
or
live,
and
virtual
participants
will
do
the
same,
so
the
the
virtual
person
will
need
to
pre-record
their
piece.
So
if
they're,
they
may
or
may
not
be
part
of
the
discussion.
If
there
is
any
like
questions
afterwards,
that
would
be
up
to
the
panel
the
the
in-person
folks
to
manage.
C
I
did
I
does
that
answer.
The
general.
B
Feedback
yeah
yeah,
yeah,
generally
yeah,
okay,
so
that
that
makes
that
makes
sense.
At
least
it's
clearer
now,
at
least
for
me,
okay,.
F
And
since
everything's
being
pre-recorded
or
streamed,
if
you
will
will
playbacks
be
available
on
all
sessions
this
year
or
not
at
all
or
how
will
that
work.
C
I
will
have
to
confirm
that
because
it
does
have
to
do
with
the
platform,
and
I
think
if
I'm
I'm,
I
think
this.
This
is
how
we
did
it.
Last
year,
it's
the
the
pre-recorded
sessions
were
available
immediately.
C
C
D
On
how
many
talk
submissions
there
were
I'm
sorry
I
was
late.
D
And,
and
just
for
for
anybody
else,
that's
here
we
had
had
a
few
people
that
were
still
trying
to
submit
talks,
and
so
what
we
did-
and
I
think
scott
shared
this
over
email
and
in
slack
is
we
basically
have
a
link,
that's
open
that
people
can
still
submit
to,
even
though
we're
past
the
deadline,
just
because
we
know
that
several
people
were
like
converse,
we're
having
conversations
with
end
users
and
stuff.
D
I
was
talking
to
several
people,
so
I
think
that's
gonna
be
open
for
like
this
next,
you
know
week
or
two.
So
if
you
have
anybody
that
you're
already
in
conversation
with
or
somebody,
you
really
wanted
to
get
in
to
submit
a
talk,
you
can
send
that
link,
even
though
the
cfp
is
technically
closed.
C
Close
yeah
because
we
still
have
to
get
the
reviews
done
so
we
are
at
46
submissions,
so
it
is
pretty.
B
Healthy
yeah:
well,
that's
enough
for
a
nine
to
five
cool
should
be
good.
D
Do
you
have
you
like
the
list
of
like
companies
that
have
submitted.
A
C
So
then
yeah
we
will
send
the
the
final
list
tomorrow
morning
once
we
get
online
and
that's
when
we
can
start
the
reviews,
the
rachel
will
be
sending
that
out
and
it'll
be
formatted
where
everyone
can
add
in
their
own
comments,
their
own
scores,
and
then
we
will
tally
the
scores
and
come
up
with
kind
of
the
top
level
sessions
and
then
we'll
do
the
the
review
all
together
on
a
call
of
august.
D
Oh
yeah,
I'm
looking
at
the
list
and
we've
got
some
good
end.
Users
in
here
we've
got
chick-fil-a,
we've
got
intuit,
we've
got,
we've
got
wayfair,
we've
got
cisco
intel,
so
I'm
I'm
pretty
happy
with
the
group
in
here.
Cern
is
in
here.
That's
cool.
A
There
are
others
that
there's
a
panel
that
included
a
number
of
end
users
as
well,
and
one
of
them
that's
not
on
that
list
is
starbucks
who
they
they
will
be.
They
do
plan
to
participate
as
well,
but
I
haven't
had
confirmation
until
today.
C
C
A
Understood
and,
and
just
to
be
also
just
so
that
we're
fairly
clear.
I
know
this
is
recorded,
but
I
don't
believe
it
has
wide
viewership
and
it
will
only
be
after
the
fact,
but
I
I
think
we're
we
should
not.
We
should.
I
know
it's
the
last
day,
but
we
just
to
be
clear.
We
should
not
be
publicizing
this
widely
correct.
A
It's
just
distributed
correct
for
one-off
communications
and
other
folks
that
we're
in
contact
with
or
folks
that
do
reach
out
to
us
right
so
that
we're
still
doing
it
fairly,
and
you
know
so
somehow
this
group
isn't
getting
special
treatment
or
anything
like
that
amongst
any
of
the
other
groups.
It's
just
that
this
is
something
you
always
do,
which
is
to
try
to
work
with
people
at
the
end,
based
on
the
submissions
right,
okay,.
C
I
will
just
also
add
in
there
there
is
a
rule
that
someone
cannot
if
they
oh
shoot.
I
want
to
make
sure
I
say
this
correctly:
we
rachel,
if
you
have
the
language
somewhere
quickly,
let
me
know,
but
it
was
if
we
have
an
internal
team
that
will
be
vetting
the
submissions
to
make
sure
it's
not
someone
that
is
also
presenting
at
kubecon
or
is
it
that
was
declined?
C
D
H
B
D
C
No
because
the
I
don't
think
those
have
gone
out
yet
the
the
main
cube
cons.
I
think
they
go
out
this
coming
monday,
so
they
could
submit
to
both.
But
that's
why
we
have
the
the
process
afterwards,
that
we'll
dedupe
to
make
sure
they're
not
presenting
the
same
thing
twice
got.
A
It
okay
makes
sense,
and
I
I'm
one
of
those
well
myself
and
some
tochi
are
one
of
those
people
that
have
submitted
the
same
one
to
both,
just
just
in
case,
but
hey
we
have
until
midnight
tonight
to
if
that
is
new
information
permit
for
anyone
we
have
until
midnight
tonight,
we've
been
a
new
proposal.
Oh.
A
I
am
well
you
know.
What's
funny,
is
our
rcfp
page
essentially,
is
inviting
folks
to
do
that,
so
I
think
we're
within
the
within
the
law.
Just
just
just
know
that
we
can't
do.
D
A
I
I
do
have
one
more
question.
I
think
I
I
think
I
know
the
answer
to
this,
but
just
you
know
we
received
info
from.
A
Both
emily
and
rachel,
both
of
you
about
the
program
committee
and
how
that's
going
to
work,
which
all
looks
great
last
year,
because
we
were
in
a
self-hosted.
Well,
I'm
not
sure
what
what
you
call
it,
but
we're
not
as
integrated
with
this.
The
co-located
event
was
integrated
in
a
different
way
right.
We,
the
cntf.
A
Right,
thank
you
not
hosted
or
not
running
by
cncf
right
ram.
Oh
my
god.
Anyway,
we
had
a
method
that
we
used.
That
was
recommended
by
a
few
folks
on
the
program
committee
that
had
been
used
for
other
past
events
that
allowed
us
to
to
have
a
fair
and
balanced
approach,
and
we
we
we
essentially
put
that
in
a
spreadsheet
and
added
some
metrics,
and
all
of
this
to
help.
A
You
know
make
sure
that
the
the
voting
and
and
the
scores
were
all
you
know-
really
rose
the
the
correct
proposals
to
the
top
and
any
that
were
unclear
or
when
there
was
a
we.
We
made
sure
that
this
was
interesting.
We
made
sure
that
there
was
that
there
was
ample
discussion
for
any
proposal
that
had
a
wild
divergence
or
a
big
divergence
in
scores.
So
if
everyone
more
or
less
was
around
the
same
page
in
their
scores
it
just
we
just
kind
of
let
them
fall
where
they
fell.
A
But
if
there
was
a
divergence
we
we
had
the
spreadsheet
to
highlight
those
and
we
we
discussed
them
at
that
point.
That
was
after
we
did
our
scoring.
Is
that
is
there
something
that
cncf
does
like
that,
or
is
that
just
something
that
we
can
feel
free
to
to
do
as
the
programming
committee?
Once
you
get
back
with
the
numbers.
C
Yeah
a
little
bit
of
both
I
mean
you
certainly
have
the
flexibility
to
do
that.
There
is
no
formula
where
that's
actually
set
in,
but
what
we
typically
do
is
once
we
get
all
the
scores.
We'll
then
add
another
column
that
has
the
average
score
and
then
we
just
rate
them
like
five
down
to
one.
So
if
anything
got
a
four
or
a
five,
it's
putting
the
initial
category
of
accepted
threes
are.
We
should
absolutely
discuss.
Twos
and
ones
are
put
into
the
assumed
rejected.
C
C
Maybe
they
wrote
their
cfp
poorly
or
if
someone
could
be
a
four
and
someone
could
chime
in
and
say,
I've
seen
this
person
present
before
and
it's
going
to
be
a
sales
pitch.
So
those
are
the
kind
of
conversations
that
we
that
can
be
had
when
we
review
everything.
So
there's
definitely
a
time
for
discussion
for
them
all.
A
So
I
don't
it
sounds
like
unless
anyone
has
a
burning
one
in
their
mind,
play
cue,
jeopardy,
music.
I
think
we're,
I
think,
we're
done
with
that
q,
a
side
of
things.
Thank
you
too,
very
much.
A
I
don't
know
if
you
want
your
time
back
or
if
you
want
to
just
come,
if
you're
you're
also
welcome
to
hang
out
for
the
rest
of
this
events
meeting,
but
I
just
want
to
be
respectful
either
way.
C
A
B
B
Yeah
so
I
mentioned
it
earlier
with
the
q
a,
but
I
do
think
I
know
we
discussed
having
like
a
panel
about
the
working
group
about
like
hey.
This
is
kind
of
like
a
this.
Is
us
right
and
ask
us
anything,
or
you
know
kind
of
a
thing
about
that,
and
I
I
think
I
don't
want
to
shove
it
in
here
I
mean
we
can
talk
about
it
whenever,
but
I
do
think
we
need
to
start
talking
about
if
we
want
to
do
that
and
how
that's
going
to
look
like.
D
I
concur.
I
like
the
idea
of
having
a
panel
and
people
can
ask
questions
and
I
don't
think
it
has
to
be
crazy
long.
You
know,
I
think
it
can
be
like
a
30
or
40
minute
session
that
we
do
and
we
have.
I
think
three
keynotes
is
that
right,
yeah
because
of
the
diamond
sponsors,
we
have
three
diamond
sponsors.
Each
one
gets
a
keynote,
so
we've
got
three
keynotes
right
off
the
bat.
D
We've
got
a
couple
of
really
good
end
user
talks,
so
I
actually
think
I
put
didn't
somebody
submit
scott
in
the
talks
for
a
oh.
There
was
a
panel
discussion
posted
for
end
users,
correct
yeah,.
B
A
Oh,
I'm
sorry
dan
did
you
want
to
continue?
I
don't
I
didn't
mean
to
interrupt
you.
Okay,
yeah.
We
had
we.
We
had
that
plan
last
year
and
essentially
executed
that
fairly
well,
we
tried
to
do
it
because
it
was
a
strange
event
in
the
sense
that
it
was
online.
Only,
and
you
know
everyone
was
trying
to
figure
out
what
to
do
and
how
to
make
these
events.
Both.
I
don't
know
something
that
anyone
would
want
to
tune
into
when
they
have
like
a
maybe
30.
A
Second
attention
span
to
be
pulled
into
anything
else,
so
we
tried
to
make
it
a
bit
entertaining
so
we
did
get
into
some
of
that,
but
I
think
I
think
we
can
still
do
that.
You
know
we
can.
We
can
still
make
it
fun
and
interesting
I
mean,
even
if
even
if
people
are
a
captive
audience
of
sorts,
you
know,
but
it's
really
the
state
of
the
githubs
working
group,
the
state
of
the
open,
get
ups
project.
A
Well,
I'm
saying
state
because
we're
thinking
of
get
ops
now
but
state
of
the
union
right,
but
essentially
like
what
is
the
status
of
these.
Of
these
things-
and
we
can
announce
certain
things,
of
course
we
can
do
that
ahead
of
time
like,
for
example,
the
website
different
other
important
items.
That
folks
should
know
the
version
of
the
principles
which,
hopefully
we
are
at
a
full
release
by
then
I
I
seriously
hope
so
we'll
talk
about
that
on
the
next
meeting.
A
The
next
call,
but
I
thought
I
had
something
to
wrap
that
up
with,
but
that's
what
I
was
thinking
yeah
we
would,
we
would
essentially
get
up
there
and
do
that
and
dan
and
I
had
talked
about
or
in
the
last
events
meeting
we
had
talked
about.
You
know
you
know
I
had
volunteered
again
to
co-host,
but
I
suggested
dan
being
a
co-host
this
time.
Since
that
was
a
we
had
changed.
We
had
done
it
differently.
Last
time.
A
Like
everybody
was
bored
for
that,
but
we
could
just
we
could
we
could
wrap
that
in
and
then
basically
transition
to
to
either
like
have
them
all
the
maintainers
up
or
something
like
that.
D
Yeah
and
the
maintainers,
I
think
the
the
official
list.
It
would
be
like
yumi
jesse,
from
aws
christian
from
red
hat.
D
The
chris,
the
chris
is
from
github
and
microsoft,
just
like
trying
to
remember
everybody
off
the
top
of
my
head.
So
there's
like
I
don't
know
six
or
seven
people
that
are
there
exactly.
B
And
always
on
sundays,
too,
no
yeah,
I
know
if
yeah,
if
it
comes
down
to
it,
you
know,
I
think
end
user
stories
should
take
precedence,
definitely
and.
A
That's
why,
last
year,
right
that's
what
that's
why
we
didn't
end
up
doing
a
longer
panel.
We
just
did
we
scrolled
it
into
the
intro,
essentially,
because
we
had
so
much
good
content
right.
D
Yeah,
but
the
the
end
user
panel,
I
would
say
for
me,
is
a
high
priority.
Like
an
end
user
panel,
like
dude,
I
would
love
hosting
an
end
user
panel
like
I
would
have
so
much
fun
with
that.
Just
pulling
out
lots
of
different
ideas
from
those
people,
and
I
think
people
would
love
to
see
like
these
big
name
companies
and
what
they're
doing
and
hearing
that
they're
getting
this
on
hands
on.
D
I
think
it
brings
a
lot
of
legitimacy
to
get
ops
and
you
can
have
kind
of
some
divergent
opinions
and
some
you
know
I
I
think
that
that
one
I'm
really
really
excited
about,
I
think
doing
a
q.
A
with
maintainers
would
be
cool
if
we
have
time
for
it.
So,
let's
pencil
it
in
and
when
we
get
into
the
schedule,
we
can
do
some
horse
trading
and
see
where
we
feel
how
we
feel
about
it.
Exactly.
A
I
think
it
makes
sense
for
you
to
to
be
the
host
portion
for
that
panel
for
the
customer,
one
and
user
yeah
yeah
for
that
for
the
end
user
panel,
especially
since
a
you
just
expressed
like
a
lot
of
enthusiasm,
I
mean,
I
think,
it's
cool
too
about
I'd,
say,
go
for
it,
man
and-
and
secondly-
because
you
know
cornelia
from
weaveworks
like
I
am
is-
is
monitoring
that
panel.
So
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
round
that
out
and
not
have
like
me
also
hosting
them.
You
know
yeah.
D
Can
I
go
to
that
who
wants
to
have
an
after
party?
I
don't
know
after
party
at
my
house.
I
guess
you
guys
are
partners
for
so
for
this.
I
I
don't
think
this
is
an
official
sponsorship
opportunity
through
the
cncf.
D
You
know
this
is
just
something
we
can
just
put
on
if
we
want
and
we'll
see,
if,
if,
if
emily
and
rachel
pipe
up
and
they're
like
no,
if
you
throw
a
party
you
have
to,
you
have
to
give
us
the
money,
but
I
think
I
think
that
the
schedule
is
slated
to
end.
I
can't
remember
what
time,
but
there's
definitely
time
in
the
evening.
D
If
we
wanted
to
do
something
and
that's
an
opportunity
for
somebody
like
you
know,
I
think
I
don't
know
if
code
fresh
would
be
willing
to
go
like
man
that
thing,
but
if
we
wanted
to
do
one,
you
know
like
we've
done
these
at
for
helm
summit.
D
We've
done
other
ones,
and
it's
like
hey
you
throw
out
like
those
thick
coasters
you
throw
out
you
throw
out
like
branded
coasters
and
some
balloons
and
whatever,
and
then
it's
just
a
chance
for
people
to
talk,
because
the
most
valuable
part
of
any
conference
for
me
is
always
the
hallway
track.
It's
always
like
talking
to
people
and
meeting
people,
that's
always
what
I
get
the
most
out
of.
So
I
like
the
idea
of
us
throwing
a
party
and
maybe
doing
it
that
night,
but
I
also
think
we're
we're.
D
We
probably
on
the
code.
Fresh
side
are
have
a
lot,
our
hands
full
with
with
the
argo
contributor
summit
that
we're
doing
and
the
rest
of
kubecon.
So
I
don't
know
that
we'd
be
able
to
like
do
much
heavy
lifting,
but
we
might
be
able
to
contribute
like
some
cash
if
we
need
to
or
or
whatever.
A
That
would
be
great.
I
can.
I
can
say
that
on
the
side,
there's
already
some
discussion
about
that
too,
from
the
developer
experience
team
anyway.
So
so
tommo,
who,
who
has
been
on
the
events
committee
or
was
part
of
the
business
committee
last
year,
is
very
interested
in
helping
with
that
so
I'll
loop.
Her
in
we
can
start
a
conversation
between
all
of
us.
B
Yeah
yeah,
so
I'm
I'm
all
for
it
and
I
am
happy
to
help
in
terms
of
yeah.
I
mean
just
like
logistics
and
all
that
stuff
here
and
I
don't
know
yeah
see
dan,
I
don't
know
if
we
it'd
be
it'd,
be
definitely
nice.
If
we
can
get
someone
to
sponsor
or
co-sponsor
or
you
know,
I
I
already
went
to
the
well
a
few
times.
I
don't
know.
B
If
I
can
do
it
again,
aubry
would
know
how
many
times
I've
gone
to
the
well
so
far,
so
it
would
be
nice
if
we
get
it
sponsored
right
like
if
someone
wants
to.
B
D
A
Point
of
order
emily
under
hand
raised
so
she's,
nice.
C
Sorry,
I'm
back
yeah,
so
the
just
on
the
can
you
host
a
reception
or
anything
like
that.
I
I'm
trying
to
say
you
can
have
a
reception.
It
cannot
be
formally
attached
to
this
event
like
we
can't
put
it
on
the
agenda
things
like
that.
But
if
there's
just
something
I
know.
C
About
their
own
thing
off
to
the
side,
so
yeah
it
just
couldn't,
go
through
cncf,
that's
really
the
biggest
piece
and
one
other
little
point
I'll
apologize
later,
if
I'm
overstepping
here,
but
there
is
a
discussion
of
a
cncf
co-located
group
reception.
So
all
of
the
cncf
coalition
events
will
have
one
mass
reception
right
after,
but
that
budget
is
still
being
looked
so
just
know
that
there
is
that
chance.
I
wouldn't
want
someone
to
sign
a
contract
with
some
sort
of
a
venue
or
anything
and
not
know
that.
C
No,
it
will
not
be
decided
until
after
august
5th.
D
F
H
C
D
No,
so
I
was
gonna
add
to
what
christian
was
saying.
I
think
code
fresh
can
pony
up
some
cash
because
sponsoring
a
party-
usually
I
don't
think
they
cost
crazy
amounts
of
money.
I
think
we,
if
we
but
but
the
thing
that
we
don't
have,
is
we
don't
have
any
more
head
count
to
say:
hey,
go
plan
this
thing,
so
that's
what
we're
missing,
but
we
could
probably
pony
up
a
little
cash
like
a
couple
thousand
bucks.
D
We
did
a
really
cool
one
at
kubecon,
seattle
that
was
at
a
it,
was
like
a
barcade.
There
was
like
a
really
big
barcade
by
the
venue,
and
we
put
out
like,
like
everybody,
got
like
a
bunch
of
free
passes
to
go,
use
the
arcade,
and
then
we
just
had
like
drinks
and
stuff
served,
and
I
think
in
total
we
probably
spent
like
it
was
like
six
grand
or
something
like
it.
Wasn't
that
much,
and
we
split
that
between
two
people
and
people
loved
it
so
yeah.
B
Yeah,
it
doesn't
have
to
be
anything
like
extravagant
yeah.
I
I
think
you
know
something
as
as
simple
as
that.
I
think
should
be
enough
right.
It's
it's!
It's
mainly
like
damn
like
what
you
said.
It's
mainly
like
the
networking
right
it
doesn't.
We
don't
have
to
have
like
we
don't
have
to
like
put
up
a
concert
or
anything
right.
We
just
have
to
have
like
an
open
space.
B
Maybe
serving
you
know
some
food
or
drinks
right
after
people
can
drink
and
eat
at
the
leisure,
so
so
yeah
I
would.
I
would
help
in
terms
of
headcount
it's
just
I.
I
can't
obviously
can't
do
it
alone
right
so
like
if
we
get
some
some
more
some
other
people
helping
out
I'll,
definitely
throw
my
hat
in
to
help
out
with
that.
D
Okay,
maybe
we
will
have
to
put
a
call
out
onto
the
slack
channel
or
something
because
it
sounds
like
nobody
is
able
to
take
it
and
own
it.
But
there
are
people
that
are
willing
to
help.
A
I
just
don't
want
to
say
we
can
yet,
but
I
I
believe
that
it's
well
we'll
see
I'll
double
check
with
I'll
trouble
check
with
tommo
there's
been
some
discussion
about
it.
There's
also
a
potential
venue,
a
potential
friend
of
a
friend
or
something
like
this-
that
owns
a
venue
there
that
that
we
may
be
able
to
work
with.
A
D
I
guess
we
we
could
always
even
bring
it
way
down
to
just
like
we're
all
going
to
that
place
you're
on
your
own,
but
that's
where
we're
all
gonna
go
get
drinks
afterwards
and
it's
not
sponsored
you
have
to
pay
for
your
own
drinks,
but
you're
all
gonna
expense
it
anyway.
So
why
do
you
care-
and
you
know,
drinks
on
none.
A
Right,
I
mean
it's
pretty
much
like
you
know
how
daniel
aka
dj
desired
state,
often
spins
at
these
kinds
of
events,
so
he's
very,
very
possibly
going
to
be
able
to
do
that
again
and
things
like
that
we
could
anyway,
we
can
definitely
make
it
a
little
bit
more
than
we
just
needed
to
bar,
but
but
but
I
guess
we'll
see
what's
between
that
and
some
giant
shindigs.
A
A
Do
we
want
to
cover
often
on
these
calls?
We've
discussed
the
website
as
an
agenda
item,
probably
because
it's
the
most
visible
aside
from
cncf
promotion,
it's
the
most.
A
It's
the
most
centralized
way
for
the
adopts
working
group
and
open,
get
ops
to
communicate
to
people
and
put
everything
in
one
place.
Should
we
chat
about
that
for
a
few
minutes
unless
there
was
any
okay
cool?
If
we
need
to
circle
back
on
the
other
stuff,
we
can,
but
all
right,
just
a
few
quick
things.
There
are
a
few
pull
requests.
A
A
Out
of
control,
I
know,
but
you
know
it's
just
because
I
was
trying
to.
I
had
like
a
mental
block
around
something
else,
so
I
just
plus
it
just
seems
like
it
seemed
like
it
would
be
helpful
for
us.
So
I
thought
what
the
hell!
Why
not.
A
I
think
the
biggest
one
dan
is
is:
is
this
issue
or
this
pull
the
oh
sorry.
A
Let
me
send
the
link
the
not
the
biggest
issue.
It's
actually
not
the
most
important
thing.
It's
just
the
one
on
which
all
the
other
pr's
rely.
There's
that
build
break
there's
just
one
missed
file
name.
You
know
it's
kind
of
like
really
in
the
weeds
here,
but
once
that's
once
that's
in
the
others.
The
other
pr
is
all
cherry-picked
that
commit.
A
A
Sorry
about
this,
I
thought
this
was
still
in
draft.
A
Well,
in
any
case,
the
the
prep
website
for
principles
version
2.0
or
0.2.0.
Oh
maybe
I
just
never
opened
that
on
draft
mode.
It
doesn't
really
matter
anyway,
that
one
can't
be
merged
until
after
we
we
we
merged
that
other
pr
and
cut
the
tag
like
we.
We
probably
will
today
in
the
principles
committee
meeting
I'm
guessing
at
least
it
feels
that
way
to
me.
A
I
don't
know
we'll
see
so
that
just
really
is
just
drawing
one
from
one
to
that
from
that
pr,
as
it
is,
the
others
are
just
fixing
links
and
fixing
charter
links.
One
other
thing
is
there
was
a.
D
A
This,
oh
specifying
the
principal's
version.
I
wanted
to
know
what
folks
thought
about
this
and
how
it
looks.
A
That
was
my
kind
of
dumb
attempt
to
do
that
without
kind
of
rewriting
all
of
the
styles
and
stuff.
It's
basically,
it
has
the
same
line
height
as,
let's
see
the
little
v1
0.1.0.
It's
a
link
to
that
release.
A
That
is
all
that's
added
and
it
it
on
different
screen
sizes.
It
appears
to
look
fine,
it's
just
that.
It's
not
like
immediately
below
the
adopts
principles.
It's
basically
on
this,
the
same
the
same
line
height
away
from
it
as
they
are
from
each
other,
I'm
not
really
a
pixel
culture.
In
this
this
phase
of
my
life,
I
guess
so.
If
anybody
has
a
you
know,
thoughts
on
that
or
if
you
would
rather
be
different.
D
Well,
that
looks
good
to
me,
I'm
going
to
add
a
review
right
now
and
if,
if
christian
or
leonardo,
if
you
guys
want
to
give
a
thumbs
up
I'll
merge
it
right
now.
A
E
A
D
B
A
A
It's
though
it
is
just
because
of
the
way
it's
set
up,
I
I'm
get.
I
was
thinking
it's
a
mistake
in
that
and
that
most
likely
wasn't
able
to
actually
preview
the
changes
because
of
that
block
that
build
that
build
error.
That's
my
that's
my
guess,
because
it
it's
true
that
it
does
show
up
under
a
list
of
members,
but
then
on
the
front
page.
It
says
founding
members
and
that
would
not
be
accurate.
A
So
I
think
what
we
said
last
time
is
that
we
we
would
revisit
this
and
really
try
to
find
a
good
solution
for
for
people
who
are
involved
in
the
devops
working
group
to
really
to
really
list
themselves,
and
I
think
we,
you
know,
we
we
kind
of
stopped
once
we
got
to
the
point
where
we
said
well,
we
have
an
interested
parties
document
and
I
think
then
someone
had
said
well.
You
know
we
really
need
to
ask
people
before
they.
We
had
their
logos
and
I
think
we
just
kind
of
said.
A
Oh
jesus,
that's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
work
and
we
didn't
do
it
yet.
That's
my
recollection,
but
okay,
that's
all!
I
have
to
I
pass
leonardo.
G
Or
leo
just
just
a
quick,
a
quick
comment
that
I
saw
some
email
or
something
from
motion
saying
that
he
suggested
the
idea
of
founding
members
being
replaced
with
just
members
and
then
adding
to
like
what
was
it
like.
Some
other
two
categories
of
kind
of
participants
or
something
I
can't
accept
it.
But
where
I'd
saw
that?
But
just
as
additional
context,
there
is
or
he's
interested
in
proposing
those
changes.
A
Cool
yeah:
do
you
mind
if
you
have
a
link
to
that?
Do
you
mind
linking
that
to
that
pr.
E
On
the
you
know,
it's
on
the
on
the
discussion
that
you
linked
to
scott
and
I
think
it's
associated.
A
Yeah
before
thanks
for
trying
out
on
that,
but
do
you
mind
going
after
dan
because
he
had
his
hand
raised?
I
just
wanted
to
be
fair.
Okay,.
D
Yeah,
so
this
might
be
contentious
because
we're
talking
about
like
how
to
represent
continued.
You
know
contributions
and
things
like
that,
and
what
I
would
maybe
propose
is
that
we
actually
have
two
separate
discussions.
One
is
like
this
person
that
submitted
this
pr,
I'm
happy
to
just
put
them
on
the
members
company
member
companies
list
right
now
right.
D
So
if
we
look
at
their
pr
and
we
just
remove
the
one
change
to
the
features
file,
it's
done
then
it'll
be
on
then
it'll
be
on
the
member
company's
thing,
and
so
I'd
like
to
keep
people
just
into
there.
Now,
as
for
the
founding
members,
what
I
think
I
would
like
to
see
in
the
long
term
and
if
you
look
at
like
if
you
look
at
argo's
website,
for
example,
we
have
a
created
by
intuit
and
then
we
have
it
maintained
by
these
companies
and
what
we
created.
D
There
is
a
couple
of
distinctions.
One
of
the
distinctions
was
that
you
may
be
a
member
of
a
company
and
you
may
be
contributing
to
this
is
appreciated.
There
are
many
people,
many
people
from
many
different
companies
contribute
to
argo,
but
some
companies
have
said
we're
making
a
strategic
decision
to
invest
in
this
project.
We're
going
to
allocate
multiple
resources,
multiple
engineers
we're
going
to
support
marketing
data.
D
All
these
other
things,
and
so
what
that
section
on
the
argo
website
represents
is
is
like
official
corporate
maintainers
and
so
like,
if
you're
from
a
small
company,
and
you
contribute
and
you're
contributing
we're
stoked.
We're
excited
you're
part
of
it,
and
we
want
to
recognize
that.
D
But
it's
also
like
you
know
if
a
company
is
going
to
say
we're
going
to
dedicate
several
engineers
and
all
this
time,
and
all
these
other
things
we're
going
to
do
in
an
official
capacity
and
we're
we're
making
a
commitment
that
we're
going
to
make
give
me
maintain
maintenance
over
this
long
period
of
time.
Then
that
kind
of
has
like
a
special.
You
know
recognition.
So
I
think
I'd
like
us
to
go
to
that
at
some
point.
D
Maybe
we
have
like
a
founders
founding
members
section
and
a
and
a
maintained
by
section,
because
I
think
about
like
github
github.
Frankly,
like
you
know,
they're
not
doing
a
ton
of
work
on
the
project.
You
know
chris
from
github
and
chris
from
azure
they're
helping
out
they're
doing
stuff,
but
there
are
lots
of
people
that
are
more
proactive
in
the
project,
but
right
now
I
really
appreciate
having
github
and
azure
up
there,
especially
because
they
give
a
lot
of
credence
and
authority
to
the
project
and
they
are
they
are
giving
thumbs
up.
D
They
are
giving
approvals,
so
they
are
involved,
I'm
not
trying
to
downplay
their
involvement.
But
you
know
there
are
a
lot
of
people
that
show
up
in
these
meetings
every
week
right
and
are
doing
you
know
more
day-to-day
stuff.
D
So
anyway,
I
would
separate
it
two
separate
things
I
would
say:
let's
get
people
onto
the
members
board
as
fast
as
we
can
and
then
let's
come
up
with
a
new
way
to
to
maybe
separate
like
current
maintainers
and
founders,
because
it
is
special
that
their
participation
is
special
and
I
want
to
keep
it
recognized.
E
Yeah,
I
I
just
linked
to
the
this
discussion
and
and
the
wording
there
was
what
was
it
advocates
and
adopters,
but
but
I
think
it's
just
important.
You
know
break
down
some
of
these.
E
I
I
think
that
it's,
it's
perfectly
fine
to
have
this
like
founding
companies,
because
there
was
a
lot
of
people
from
these
companies
that
came
together
and
started
the
whole
thing,
but
I
agree
with
moshe
that
you
know
it's
it's
kind
of
just
recognizing
them
is
is
is
kind
of
bad
for
the
people
that
came
in
after
the
fact.
E
You
know
me,
for
instance,
wasn't
aware
until
later
on,
so
I
had
no
no
way
of
being
a
part
of
that
and
if
we
could
just
just
for
now
say
that
we'll
add
people
to
the
members
and
not
have
them
featured
that
would
be
kind
of
like
a
first
step,
but
I
think,
having
different
categories
like
having
some
sort
of
end
user
thing,
where
people
that
do
a
lot
of
projects
with
githubs
in
mind
can
put
themselves
on.
E
Just
you
know,
show
their
support
and,
having
you
know,
some
companies
that
kind
of
flow
to
the
top.
Because
of
their
involvement,
I
know
for
a
fact
that
you
know
the
crayon,
which
I
work
at
will
be
doing
a
lot
but
get
ups
and
getting
that
kind
of
recognition.
Recognition
would
also
you
know,
and
they
help
me
convince
other
people
to
you,
know
back
things
up
a
little
bit
and
and
and
and
get
on
board
with
this
project
in
particular.
E
So
just
having
that
would
automatically
you
know,
have
a
lot
of
people
go
hey
thumbs
up
cool
all
right.
Let's,
let's
do
stuff
with
us
and
all
of
a
sudden
there's,
there's
more
talk
about
get
ups
that
way
so
the
faster
I
can
have
that
going,
the
better
for
me,
so
so
having
that
kind
of
figuring
out
what
how
to
distinguish
between,
I
would
say,
end
users
and
people.
A
Great
that
that
sounds
really
good.
So
we
have,
we
have.
It
sounds
like
we
have
one.
We
know
what
we
want
to
do.
We
definitely
want
to
rate
we
have
a
charter
and
that's
to
be
that's
that's
to
be
an
open.
First
of
all,
the
working
group
is
an
open
group
and
open
git.
Ops
is
an
open
participation,
open
participation
project,
so
there
is
no
intent
of
gating
at
all.
A
There
is
an
intent
of
making
sure
that
anyone
participating
in
the
project
as
an
open
source
project
like
normal,
follows
the
cnc
conduct.
You
know
like
you
know
that
there
is
a
healthy
working
relationship
and
things
like
that.
What
one
issue
we
have,
the
one
okay
leo,
see
you
one
issue
that
we
have
that
tracks
like
what
is
the
particip?
How
does
one
participate
in
the
kidnaps
working
group?
We
had
several
several
roles
in
mind
and
so
far
we've
already
done.
A
Some
of
those
in
the
comments
in
that
that
linked
issue
do
actually
show
that
we've
created
committees
and
that
we've
we've
been,
you
know,
here's
how
you
can
get
involved
in
them
and
so
on.
We've
made
the
meetings
very,
very,
very
public
and
very
known
and
very
friendly
to
join
and
there's
been
no
bars
at
at
the
same
time
that
we
want
to
list.
You
know
companies
like
crayon
and
and.
A
Organizations
of
whatever
kind
right
whose
members
are
participating
in
in
these
meetings
and
in
the
get
ups
working
group
in
some
capacity
we
we
also
want
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
that
we
have
some
sort
of
criteria.
So
we
don't
just
leave
it's
not
a
gate
as
much
as
it
is.
We
don't
want
to
just.
I
don't
know
what,
if
I'm
not
going
to
mention
any
company
by
name,
because
maybe
there's
I
don't
want
to.
A
I
don't
want
even
an
example
to
stigmatize
anyone,
but,
let's
say
xyz
company
right
who
is
has
nothing
to
do
with
what
with
this
they
say,
they're
doing
get
ops
because
they
keep
their
code
in
in
in
github
or
something
else,
and
they
do
ci.
You
know
they
don't
really
necessarily
follow
the
foundational
principles
of
git
ops,
they're
not
really
involved
in
anything.
But
yet
someone
thought
oh.
This
would
be
a
great
idea
to
have
us
more
visible
and
listed
on
this
page.
A
A
So
as
long
as
we
actually
follow
that,
I
think
we
can
use
common
sense
and
make
sure
that
we,
just
you
know
that
the
people
who
are
the
deciders
for
that
just
talk
out
each
one
and
we
can
do
it
by
pull
request.
That's
my
suggestion.
Anyway,
christian.
B
Yeah,
I
think
I
think,
we're
all
we're
on
agreement
right.
I
think
we're
all
kind
of
saying
the
same
thing
in
different
ways.
I
think
it
is
valuable
to
have
the
the
members
who
are
contributing
a
lot
be
up
there.
Also
having
member
having
an
open
membership.
B
You
know
having
people
who
are
involved
and
also
having
people
who
are
who
adhere.
You
know
should
also
be
mentioned.
It's
just.
We
need
to
figure
out
how
that
looks
like,
I
think,
that's
that's
that's.
My
point
is
like
we
we
need
to.
I
I
saw
that
I
saw
that
issue.
Scott
that
you
have
is
like
what
does
quote-unquote
membership
even
mean?
We
need
to
define
that.
We
don't
know
we.
We
recognize
it's
important.
B
You
know,
for,
I
think,
for
a
lot
of
what
dan
said.
I
think
I
I
agree
with
with
a
lot
what
dan
said
for
the
reasons.
Why
would
dan
said
it,
but
that
aside,
we
just
need
to
figure
out
what
that
looks
like
right,
so
we
we
definitely
see
that
need
we
just
need
to
figure
out
like
we
need
to
figure
out
the
what
right
we
know
the.
Why?
But
now
we
need
to
do
now.
We
need
to
figure
out
how
it
looks
like.
So
that's
all.
A
Exactly
so,
we
have
one
minute
left
for
anyone
who
feels
like
saving
the
chat.
I
just
linked
directly
to
the
interested
parties
document
inside
of
the
github
working
group,
repo
that
came
directly
from
the
interested
parties
section
of
the
original
get
ups
working
group
charter,
google,
doc,
that's
now
actually
in
git,
but
but
one
thing
we
could
do
is
just
reach
out
to
these
people
and
say:
hey
any
objection
to
putting
your
company
logo
on
here
and
let
them
resolve
that
internally.
A
You
know
we
could
just
make
separate
prs
for
them
and
leave
them
open
until
the
person
approves
it,
and
then
we
say
cool
merge
done
something
like
that.
Anyway,
that's
my
suggestion.
I
know
we
got
to
get
on
to
the
principal's
meeting.
I
will
open
it
and
I
will
wait
a
few
minutes
in
case.
Anyone
here
needs
to
take
a
break
in
between
I'm.
Okay,
so
I'll
see
you
there,
okay
see
you
there
thanks
bye.
This
was
awesome.