►
From YouTube: CNCF TAG App-Delivery 2022-02-02
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
B
B
C
B
B
B
B
C
So
I'll
just
make
one
slight
modification
to
the
agenda
because
I
think
the
conveyor
feedback
might
take
longer
to
discuss.
I
just
want
us
to
hit
the
other
two
topics
which
most
likely
go
quicker
and
just
that's
why
I'm
just
moving
them
up,
not
to
not
speak
about
conveyor,
but
just
ensure
that
we
hit
the
ones
which
are
most
likely
rather
quick.
B
C
C
Okay,
as
usual,
it's
five
minutes
past
the
hour
so,
but
also
here
great
that
you're
here
for
those
who
want
to
watch
later
on
online,
they
can
do
it
as
well
and
yeah.
Sorry
here,
I
just
have
to
arrange
my
windows
over
here
feeling
a
bit
sick
today.
That's
why
I'm
a
bit
slower
than
usual,
so
first
up
a
chaos,
engineering,
working
group
setup,
so
big
kudos
to
the
team
and
kartik
and
everybody
involved,
so
they
are
now
ready
with
their
charter.
I
think
it
just
needs
some
cleanup
work.
C
Also
thanks
to
jen
who
worked
with
them
intensively.
The
plan
is
to
just
give
it
a
final
run.
The
only
thing
we
should
look
into
also
for
you.
We
will
add
the
link
here
shortly
and
we
have
a
couple
more
supporters.
I
think
right
now
for
chaos.
Engineering
there's
roughly
like
15
supporters,
also
listed.
C
I
think,
there's
more
people
most
likely
interested
in
chaos
engineering,
especially
as
it's
like,
even
for
tags
that
they're
better
involved
in
here,
but
after
some
cleanup
we
can
then
move
this
forward
towards
the
toc
so
that
we
can
get
the
working
group
approved.
So
does
anybody
have
the
link
available,
thomas
lx
and
we
can
just
throw
it
in
to
the.
B
C
So
give
it
a
final
read,
I
think
it's
in
a
pretty
good
shape
right
now.
The
idea
is
that
we
have
an
initial
set
of
chairs
that
just
help
bootstrap
everything
and
getting
it
up
and
running
and
then
have
an
official
boat
on
chairs.
C
Once
we
get
it
bootstrap
like
setting
up
the
meetings
like
all
the
usual
stuff
that
needs
to
happen,
setting
up
guitar
repo,
so
some
people
just
inherited
the
pleasure
of
doing
all
that
job
wouldn't
carry
water
work
here
initially
until
we
get
it
then
set
up
so
yeah
we
won't
go
over
it.
Take
your
time
read
through
it
provide
feedback.
C
Next
one
is,
you
might
have
seen
it
today.
We
shared
it
already
on
twitter,
but
also
here
in
this
round
as
part
of
cooperative
delivery,
a
topic
that
came
out
of
actually
a
couple
of
interviews
that
I
also
did
just
talking
to
people.
C
What's
what
what's
bothering
with
you
right
now
with
absolutely
it's
like,
usually
a
question
like
to
ask
people,
and
one
topic
that
really
came
up
was
how
do
we
handle
multi-tenancy
in
app
delivery
and
in
in
general,
like
if
you
want
to
build
multi-tenant
application
either
because
it
says
application
or
you're
running
in
a
big
enterprise
environment,
and
you
want
to
separate
individual
applications
from
each
other.
C
What
are
best
practices
on
setup,
on
management
and
and
handling
all
of
those,
and
the
idea
is
to
work
on
a
on
a
white
paper
where
we
just
collect
best
practices.
What
are
people
doing
also
have
a
roundup
of
projects
that
are
doing
something?
I
think
overall,
there's
like
three
major
approaches
that
people
are
using
today.
C
Another
example:
is
you
just
separate
it
by
name
spaces
and
hope
things
work
out
and
the
third
one
is
you
run
something
like
re-cluster
and
run
clusters
inside
of
clusters
and
every
all
of
them
come
with
their
advantages
and
disadvantages
and
just
to
make
it
more
interesting.
Sometimes
you
have
also
shared
components
across
different
tenants
that
then
everybody
needs
to
have
some
sort
of
visibility
into,
so
it
is
very
early.
Please
provide
your
thoughts,
input
feedback
on
how
we
could
move
this
forward,
but
we
think
this
is
a
great
initiative.
C
If
you
get
a
proper
set
of
people
together,
just
sharing
their
ideas
again,
the
plan
is
to
again
compile
it
into
a
white
paper,
but
initially
this
is
just
gathering
ideas.
What
people
are
doing?
I
see
that
some
people
already
have
material
or
have
already
done
it.
C
F
Just
just
one
quick
thing,
so
in
terms
of
next
steps,
it
probably
makes
sense
to
keep
this
window
open
a
little
bit
and
to
sync
up
with
our
colleagues
who've
been
doing
this
as
part
of
the
sig
and
to
try
and
get
them
on
board.
B
So
I
was
not
there
when
the
operator
working
group
was
established,
but
I
think
you
started
the
the
working
group
and
afterwards
you
started
writing
the
right
people
right.
F
Okay,
so
in
this
situation
we
we're
so
just
for
broader
knowledge,
we're
thinking
of
just
leveraging
the
cooperative
delivery
group,
rather
than
petitioning
to
start
a
new
working
group,
because
it
seems
a
little
unnecessary.
So
would
that
be
the
case
that
we
could
find
some
time
on
the
agenda
for
those
meetings
to
do
an
initial
spawning
of
that
document?
Does
that
sound,
sensible.
B
E
F
I
can
lend
a
few
thoughts,
I'm
sure
I'll,
allow
some
some
might
have
some
ideas,
but
there
are
a
lot
of
opinions
and,
firstly,
I
think
the
thing
we
need
to
set
is
a
common
taxonomy
of
words
right.
What
is
a
tenant?
There's
a
tenant,
simply
a
workload
within
a
namespace.
Is
it
a
resource?
Isolation
is
the
resource.
Isolation
predicated
on
network
namespace,
compute
other
requirements.
So
these
are
all
the
things
that
I
would
love
to
know
what
the
industry
thinks
collate
those
in
we're,
not
we're
not
about.
F
You
know
the
traditional
saying
of
king
making
here,
but
to
understand
the
pathology
in
the
industry
of
what
are
people
doing.
For
example,
the
folks
at
v
cluster
are
doing
one
thing
with
credit
credit
said:
it's
standing
up
an
api
server.
The
folks
where
I
used
to
work
was
standing
up,
k,
threes
inside
of
cube
understanding
how
people
are
how
people
are
tackling
the
challenge
of
multi-tenancy
and
what
patterns
have
been
successful.
I
think,
similarly
to
the
operator
white
paper,
it's
not
about
saying,
which
is
best.
F
C
C
What
are
the
requirements
for
like
hard
versus
soft
multi-tenancy,
like
how
isolated
things
should
be,
and
also,
I
think,
there's
also
most
likely
regulatory
requirements
we
could
take
into
account
for
from
data
privacy
concerns,
depending
which
industry
that
you're
in
I'm
thinking
of
something?
What
would
it
mean
like
to
run
just
throwing
something
out
there
like
a
hyper-compliant
application
on
kubernetes
in
a
multi-tenant,
multi-source
environment?
I
think.
E
C
Just
collecting
information
that
might
already
be
there,
but
the
people
I
was
speaking
to
our
feedback
was
people's
kind
of
like
trying
to
reinvent
it
every
time
again
and
like
information
like
scattered
like
all
over
the
place,
and
they
a
lot
of
people,
obviously
build
sas
based
applications.
Like
that's
one
scenario,
others
are
inside
their
company
have
to
separate
different
applications.
To
give
you
an
example,
even
like
taking
our
data
phrase,
even
as
an
example,
we
separate
each
tenant
from
monitoring
from
from
each
other
to
some
extent.
C
We
also
separate,
obviously
on
a
whole
different
level
or
a
deployment
and
customer
backend
systems
for
exactly
different
reasons,
because
there
you
have
other
compliance
requirements
again
and
just
coming
up
with
basic
guidance.
If
this
is
what
you
want
to
achieve,
what
you
can
do,
and
maybe
just
specifying
to
to
alexis
for
the
toxology,
what
they
actually
mean
by
multi-tenancy
and
by
isolation.
What
kind
of
isolation
do
you
really
want?
C
In
some
cases
it
might
just
be
resource
isolation
and
then
individual
billing
also
something
that
that's
that
seems
to
be
coming
up
and
then
invite
projects
to
say:
okay,
how
they
are
supporting
several
of
those
use
cases
again,
not
king
making
or
like
fully
restricting
it
to
okay.
We
only
accept
like
one
or
two
projects
that
might
already
be
part
of
the
cncf,
but
really
bringing
it
out
in
a
well
what
people
are
usually
running
into.
I
think
most
a
lot
of
companies
are
running
sales-based
platforms
on
kubernetes
that
exactly
have
to
solve
this
problem.
C
Yeah
people
also
bring
up
specific
questions
that
they
might
be
having
in
that
area,
like
even
delivery
itself
is
an
issue
very
often,
you
deliver
applications,
even
the
same
applications
and
independently
per
tenant.
C
How
do
you
handle
updates
how
to
handle
things
like
downtime
uptime
management?
I
think
people
bring
up
a
lot
of
issues.
I
think
the
basic
one
is
okay.
I
want
to
have
this
multi-tenancy
describe
what
we
mean,
which
level?
Maybe
we
come
up
with
levels?
I
don't
know
yet,
and
I
don't
want
to
like
say
this
is
what
the
outcome
must
be.
C
F
C
But
I
would
not
go
into
it
like
this
is
exactly
what
it's
supposed
to
look
like:
I'd
rather
collect
people's
opinions,
what
they're
looking
into
what
they
care
about
and
then
mold
it
into
a
structure
for
opera.
If
we
operate
the
white
paper,
we
did
this
as
well.
That
process
took
a
bit
longer
than
it
ideally
would
take
like
getting
everybody
just
speaking
the
same
language,
getting
the
same
understanding
and
they're.
There.
C
So
I
would
keep
it
rather
open,
really
invite
and
it's
obviously
up
to
cooperative
delivery
chairs
invite
people
talk
what
they
need
to
know
what
they
have
done,
what
they
care
about,
what
their
questions
are
and
then
get
this
infrastructure
and
then
further
discuss
it
then,
rather
than
restricting.
This
is
only
what
we
want
to
do
in
here,
keeping
it
open
right
now
and
then
people
might
also
say
well.
This
is
interesting,
but
we
have
no
idea
how
to
do
it.
So,
let's
leave
it
out
of
the
first
version
of
the
white
paper.
E
B
B
Okay,
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
can
be
that
can
be
discussed
there
and
there's
a
lot
of
different
like
there
there's.
No
one
solution
fits
all
so
yeah
when
it
comes
to
certain
governmental,
you
know
or
just
local
restrictions
that
you
have
or
or
like
how
we're
going
to
separate
so
it
it's
probably
gonna,
be
a
really
like,
like
a
hefty
white
paper.
It's
probably
gonna
have
a
lot
of
contents,
but
I
don't
think
that's
a
bad
thing
that
can
just
be
helpful.
B
I
I
struggle
every
every
time
I
talk
to
a
customer
about
multi-tenancy
and
stuff.
Like
that,
it's
like
all
right.
I
I
I
change
my
mind
every
time
I
talk
to
someone
about
it,
like
I
don't
know,
do
this
instead,
so
yeah,
it's
just
good
having
all
those
different
angles
somewhere-
and
you
know
you
can
collectively
think
it
over
and
try
to
try
to
put
that
into
words.
That
would
be
cool.
C
Good
yeah,
then
it's
in
good
hands
now
with
the
cooperative
delivery
working
group.
Next,
one
just
a
brief
fyi.
This
is
just
getting
started.
C
We
had
this
discussion
for
a
while
with
an
app
delivery
day
at
cubecom
like
a
pre-kubecon
type
of
event,
like
many
others
have
as
well.
There
was
a
bit
of
miscommunication
on
how
this
actually
gets
gets
registered.
I
think
we
now
sorted
it
out.
We
again
get
help
from
amazing
people
from
tech
security.
It
almost
feels
whenever
you
have
a
question
on
how
to
do
anything
in
the
cncf
ecosystem.
You
just
ask
tech
security
because
they
already
know
so
I'm
not
reaching
out.
C
G
Seems
a
lot
more
likely,
as
I
swoop
on
in
simply
because,
like
space
is
kind
of
limited
to
valencia,
yeah.
G
G
Yeah,
so
one
other
option
that
you
can
consider
is
being
able
to
maybe
do
like
a
smaller
kind
of
like
project
meeting
there.
If,
for
whatever
reason
like
you
know,
cannot
actually
pull
everything
together
for
a
full
delivery
day
being
able
to
at
least
do
some
meetings,
there
might
also
work.
C
G
Fair
yeah,
yeah,
totally
fair
reach
out
to
the
events
team
events.
Cncfio
is
the
one
that
handles
all
of
that.
But
that's
why
I
was
dropping
into
debut
because,
like
I
was
reasonably
certain
that
we
needed
to
be
able
to
like
we
should
we
should
plan
like
detroit
like
detroit.
Yes,
valencia,
we'll
see.
C
G
C
C
G
B
G
G
G
C
I've
been
there
in
two
years,
yeah
last
topic:
conveyor
feedback.
Is
anybody
from
the
conveyor
team
here.
F
C
Yeah
karina,
so,
let's,
let's
talk
a
bit
about
the
conveyor
feedback.
We
had
it
yesterday
in
tech
delivery
and
now
that
it
took
us
a
bit
longer.
One
of
the
reasons
was
christmas
was
in
between
and
there
was
actually
a
lot
to
look
at
and
I
need
to
to
go
over
the
feedback
again
from
from
from
tomorrow.
It
feels
like
so
when
we
look
at
it.
C
There
are
some
things
are
a
lot
of
things
in
conveyor,
a
lot
of
smaller
projects,
repositories
that
contain
different
kind
of
things
like
some
grafana
dashboards,
for
example,
for
them
for
devops
metrics,
some
that
feel
kind
of
like
say
only
temporary,
relevant
like
migration
from
openshift
three
to
openshift
four.
So
I
wouldn't
really
see
this
moving
into
a
a
cncf
project
for
others
like
ukraine,
just
to
keep
everybody
here
this
at
the
same
picture
for
for
crane.
It's
really!
Why
isn't
this
part
of
kubrick?
I
mean
if
it's
moving
vms
to
cube
word.
C
I
think
that
would
be
the
natural
place
where
it's
supposed
to
be,
and
for
some
other
I
think
these
are
just
more
or
less
they're
the
structural
things
they're
like
different
licenses
for
it
different
projects
to
make
it
a
bit
hard
to
understand
to
some
it's
mit,
some
are
apache
too
deployment
mechanisms
are
different
across
the
projects
which
some
for
a
lot
of
like
some
of
them.
I
think
even
have
to
use
maven
to
run
it.
C
There
are
no
container
images
available
out
of
the
box,
so
it
feels
like
a
collection
of
useful
tools,
but
from
a
project
perspective.
I
don't
see
the
project
like
doing
this
one
thing
very
specifically
and
really
focusing
on
it.
I
think
that
this
is
what
really
what
we
were
like
struggling
with.
Somehow.
A
Well,
let's
walk
through
this
really
fast.
So,
yes,
it
is
a
collection
of
tools
and
it's
a
different
type
of
project
right
than
all
the
other
projects.
That
do
one
thing
and
that's
why
it
was
brought
forward
here
so
that
it
could
be
discussed
and
collaborated
and
does
it
make
sense
on
moving
a
tool
into
the
kubvert
project,
or
does
it
make
more
sense
having
a
collection
where
you
can
standardize
and
so
that
people
can
stand
within
that
standardize
and
bring
their
workloads
into
kubernetes
and
moving
things
that
say
open
shift
out?
A
F
Just
to
add
a
little
bit
from
some
of
the
feedback
that
I
was
discussing
internally,
you
know
the
litmus
test
for
projects,
regardless
of
their
status
in
the
life
cycle
of
their
graduation
process.
Is,
you
know,
really
going
to
be?
What
is
the
value
to
end
users,
and
I
think
it's
an
astonishing
collection
of
tools
that
you've
definitely
built
backwards
from
field
engineering
and
from
requirements
from
particular
customers.
F
But
I
can't
see
the
direct
correlation
to
how
a
graduate
from
a
university
could
get
stuck
into
this
or
how
somebody
at
a
small
startup
might
necessarily.
It
feels
like
an
extremely
situational
set
of
tools
and
that's
not
to
say
that
without
value
they're
tremendous,
what
we're
suggesting
is
that
they're
they're,
more
strategically
targeted
to
the
right
projects
you
know
helm,
has
an
enormous
ecosystem
for
the
plug-ins
and
add-ons
equally
to
what
bellows
was
saying
around
cuba.
This
could
potentially
be
the
thing
that
elevates
that
project
to
the
next
level.
A
Well,
I
guess
we
have
to
define
what
the
everyday
person
is
are.
Is
it,
like?
You
just
said,
a
university
graduate?
Is
it
somebody
in
corporate
that
wants
to
stand
up
a
test
environment
just
using
diy,
kubernetes
absolutely
and
bring
in
their
workloads
and
testing?
A
I
mean
I
can
absolutely
see
somebody
using
that
collection
of
tools
so
or
is
it
a
you
know
smaller
business
that
doesn't
have
corporate
funds
right
and
wants
to
they're,
so
I'm
trying
to
wrap
my
head
around
okay.
How
are
we
defining
the
user?
Who
is
for
this
group?
You
know
what
else
are
your
blockers
for
you
know
being
useful
to
the
entire
community,
because
I
guess
that's
what
I'm
still
not
quite
understanding.
A
C
B
A
C
Let's
just
go
through,
I
mean
sorry,
I
mixed
that
by
the
way
for
clifton
and
crane
like
forklift,
I
think
for
cupert.
I
think
it
would
maybe
really
reside
well
within
the
keyboard
project
for
for
tackle.
It
feels
like
this
an
analytics
tool.
Is
it's
a
very
analytics
heavy
tool,
so
it's
very
unlikely
different
to
all
the
other
tools
that
are
available.
It's
smallest.
It
had
serves
like
one
purpose.
G
This
so
that
seems
a
little
out
of
scope
as
far
as
like
a
full
review,
and
it's
not
to
say
that
you
cannot
consider
it,
but
in
large
part
the
toc
comes
by
and
says
app
delivery.
We
want
you
to
be
able
to
look
at
this
and
evaluate
this
in
ways
that
we
cannot
give
us
feedback
around
this.
G
So
what
I
hear
in
this
actually
most
strongly
is
to
be
able
to
consider
breaking
out
the
open
shift
components
like
kind
of
moving
some
robust
pieces
over
into
comfort
and
then
being
able
to
then
maybe
reapply
as
like
a
conveyor
project
that
has
like,
like
a
more
narrowly
scoped,
which
I
think
would
actually
then
resolve
the
problem
of
like
well.
Who
is
this
good
for,
because
then
you
have
much
more
scope
to
focus
around
how
this
connects
into
the
ecosystem
without
trying
to
be
like
this
vast
collection
of
tools.
A
A
That
seems
more
a
due
diligence
thing
for
incubation
versus
sandbox.
So
that's
why
I
I'm
trying
to
understand
what
the
next
steps
here
are:
okay,
licensing,
okay,
let's
investigate
if
it
makes
sense
moving
cupert
out.
I
still
think
that
you
know
standardizing
and
making
sure
all
the
migration
tools
kind
of,
but
that's
just
that's
my
opinion,
not
the
projects.
A
So
thank
you
for
that
feedback.
Amy
yeah.
G
What
I
think
I'm
hearing
as
well
is
like
the
project
now
gets
a
chance
to
be
able
to
decide
what
things
here
are
relevant
like
you've,
gotten
feedback
of
like
man.
This
is
like
kind
of
a
really
broad
set
of
like
end
user
pieces
and,
and
the
answer
may
just
be
putting
more
narrative
in
the
documentation
around
how
you
anticipate
this
being
used,
which
is
fine,
and
I
see
josh
nodding
as
well
as
coming
off
mute.
So
josh
I'll
pass
to
you.
B
G
G
A
great
opportunity
to
be
able
to
bring
more
narrative
in
here
because
of
course,
in
that
tiny
little
box
and
I've
got
like
all
the
project
descriptions
up
in
here.
It's
really
hard
to
be
able
to
articulate
all
of
the
value
of
the
project.
So
I
I
understand
the
frustration,
but
I
think
I
think
we
have
some
interesting
project
choices
to
make
here.
E
C
E
C
As
part
of
their
incubation
due
diligence-
and
we
had
this
discussion-
what
we
wanted
them
to
be
clearly
defined,
what
is
out
of
scope
for
a
number
of
reasons,
but
even
I
saw
them
a
bit
narrow
in
scope.
I
mean
this
is
again
our
proposal
to
the
tlc
and
eventually
it's
at
uc
to
decide.
Just
really
take
this
as
input
like
thomas,
and
I
think
we
spent
and
also
alex
and
other
members.
C
We
like
looked
at
over
all
the
projects
and
but
trying
to
create
like
this
uniform
picture
and
and
we
couldn't
get
there.
So
what?
If
the
reason
why
it
took
us
longer
was
because
it
was
not
that
that
obvious,
so
maybe
for
the
team
just
take
to
to
other
aim
this
point.
They
take
our
feedback
as
input
as
it
is,
and
we
also
open
for
the
discussions
additional
feedback.
A
G
Is
fine
one
thing
that
I
am
noticing
and
I'm
gonna
kind
of
like
I
don't
actually
see
issues
getting
opened
for
being
able
to
do
like
asynchronous
feedback
for
like
projects
coming
in
talk
to
me
about
that.
C
No,
I
think
there
was
not.
I
think
one
of
the
issues
was
that
for
from
the
feedback
here
on
the
project
that
hey,
we
really
took
needed
the
time
and
we
were
like
to
be
fair,
all
super
busy
by
the
end
of
the
year.
That's
why
it
really
took
longer-
and
I
understand
it's
an
inconvenience,
but
sometimes
this
just
happens,
and
it
wasn't
that
easy
for
us
to
wrap
our
heads
around
it.
So,
yes,
we
can
be
faster,
but
also
give
us
some
slack
till
the
end
of
the
year.
Now
you
have
oh.
G
C
G
G
I
want
to
be
able
to
have
like
an
issue
that
I
can,
because
legitimately
I
thought
you
all
were
not
meeting
today
when
I
checked
like
at
the
end
of
the
day,
like
my
dad
my
time
yesterday,
there
was
there
was
no
agenda
for
this.
So
like
how
do
I
know-
and
I
love
you
all
very-
very
much
do
not
look
at
this
as
me
being
like,
but.
F
I
think
that's
the
first
point
both
of
our
both
of
our
co-chairs,
hong
chow
and
jen,
who
are
very
good
at
putting
it
together.
Our
agenda
have
been
off,
and
so
I
think
we
we
need
to
take
more
of
a
totally
happy
active
role.
Yeah
I
mean
jen's
in
brazil
right
now
on
holiday,
so
yeah.
We
will
we'll
take
that
out.
We'll
take
that
up
on
ourselves,
just
to
be
more
proactive
until
they're
back.
G
I
think
no-
and
this
is
something
that
I
want
to
be
able
to
work
with
all
the
tags
as
well
is
like,
as,
like
the
toc
says,
hey
this
project
gets
reviewed
for
like
something.
Maybe
that
means
that
I
come
in
and
open
up
an
issue
when
you
repost
that
you
know
that
this
is
on
your
radar
and
also
something
for
me
to
come
by
be
like
knock
knock
with
love.
Where
are
we
on
this
one?
C
I
think
yeah,
it
probably
fell
off
the
train
and
to
be
fair,
we
were
like
really
done
by
the
end
of
the
year.
Yes,
I
mean
that's,
that's
just
human.
G
The
pandemic
is
still
ongoing.
I
fully
I
fully
like
acknowledge
that
and.
C
We
understand,
though,
that
that
this
for
a
project
is
that
you
always
want
to
have
things
move
fast
and
quickly,
and
we
try
to
do
it
and
the.
G
C
Point
is
well
taken.
We
actually
had
a
discussion
to
be
better
on
the
agenda
to
work
on
a
road
map
together
with
the
the
working
groups
and
so
forth.
So
I
mean.
G
I
was,
I
was
pretty
sure
that
you
all
were
going
to
be,
which
is
why
I
dropped
in,
and
you
know
I
I
I
really
see
that
there
will
be
a
lot
more
availability
to
get
more
people
involved
in
just
12
here,
like
kind
of
listed.
If
we
start
moving
towards
being
able
to
use
the
issue
cues
and
using
just
like
slightly
more
over
in
github,
is
really
all
I'm
pointing
at.
B
G
I
am
perfectly
happy
to
take
the
action
item
of
like
when
a
project
comes
through
toc
review
and
they
say:
hey
go
back
into
like
a
a
tag
that
I
run
around
and
give
you
all
directly
which
project
it
is
rather
than
trying
to
be
able
to
put
it
on
the
project.
I
think
that's
a
process
improvement
that
would
definitely
have
helped
things
move
along
here.
E
B
G
That
is
that
that's
on
me
that
one
that
one
is
definitely
on
me
as
far
as
like
the
toc
says:
hey
tag,
take
out
delivery.
Can
you
come
by
and
review
this?
We
want.
We
want
to
know
a
little
bit
more
in
depth
and-
and
I
thus
far
have
kind
of
left
it
up
to
the
projects
to
be
able
to
say
hey
projects
like
if
you're
interested
go,
hunt
the
tags
down
and
that
might
not
actually
be
like
the
the
correct
and
welcoming
path.
If
you
will.
B
G
B
Case
it
would,
it
would
have
been
nice
if
we
would,
if
we
would
have
got
a
concrete
task
or
what
we
should
fulfill
for
that.
So
in
this
case
we
we
made
more
or
less
a
full
review
of
the
project
and
tried
to
build
our
own
opinion
upon
that,
and
it
would
have
been
nice
if
we
would
get
some
kind
of
issue
for
such
things.
C
G
Okay,
so
let's
do
this
because
we're
gonna
have
like
a
kind
of
a
reshuffling
of
like
toc,
liaisons
and
things
I
can
definitely
say
at
the
like
the
process.
Note
for
it.
Like
the
end
of
the
sandbox
review
meetings,
we
get
more
of
like
a
sense
of
what
it
is
that
the
doc
wants
to
see
from
the
tag,
and
I
will
put
that
into
the
issue
so
that
you
know
what
the
checklist
that
you
need
to
be
able
to
go
through,
okay,
good
see,
then
we
don't
have
to
go
back
to
like
that.
G
Will
this
project
graduate
that
actually
is
not
an
issue
to
be
able
to
be
considered
for
sandbox?
There
are
plenty
of
sandbox
things
right
now
that
will
never
reach
graduation,
which
I
recognize
as
a
challenging
thing
for
like
do
we?
How
do
we
evaluate
what?
What
should
we
look
for
so
we'll
work
on
this
one?
Okay,.
B
B
G
C
B
B
D
D
Hey
sorry,
I
missed
that
I
was
typing
somebody
else.
What
was
the
question.
F
Just
asking
if
you
could
elaborate
on
the
the
get
ops
working
group
open,
get
ops
transition.
Yes,.
D
So
I
mean
github's
working
group
is
a
short-lived
thing
right,
like
all
working
groups
are
and
open
get.
Ups
is
the
thing
that
sprung
out
of
the
get
out
working
group,
if
that
makes
sense
right.
So
if
you're
going
to
get
up
scom
that's
put
on
by
the
open,
get
ups
group.
If
you're
going
to
you
know,
start
your
journey
down
get
ups,
you
might
come
to
a
thing
that
we
build
at
some
point
right,
so
yeah,
that's
kind
of
the
transition
there
and
then
we
had
a
chair
step
down
leonardo
stepped
down.
D
I
think
three
weeks
ago
I
was
the
only
person
that
nominated
themselves
and
then
there
was
supposed
to
be
a
voting
period,
but
we
forgot
to
announce
hey,
please
vote,
so
we
announced
that
after
the
fact
and
we're
just
waiting
on
the
results
now.
B
F
You
just
for
clarity,
sorry,
the
get
ups
working
group.
When
will
that
be
sunset,
then,
when
is
that
what
I'm.
D
G
D
D
G
D
G
D
G
Large
part,
I
I
don't
see
anyone
kind
of
sunsetting
things
in
like
q1
right
now,
just
because,
like
yeah,
no
yeah
but
like
definitely
by
like
q3.
G
G
G
Like
if
it
is
fully
deprecated,
then
being
able
to
like
just
just
redirect
into
like
the
proper
place
where
things
are
supposed
to
be,
because
then
that
gives
people
if,
for
whatever
reason,
they
stumbled
across
an
artifact
a
way
to
be
able
to
kind
of
still
participate
like
that,
actually
is
a
valid
request.
No
dead
ends.
F
This
would
be
a
really
nice
success
story
to
share
at
the
n
a
maintainers
track.
I
think
that'd
be
really
cool
to
talk
about
how
you've
worked
through
get
up.
I
tell
you:
they've
worked
through
the
working
group
and
you've
had
this
whole
new
thing
spring
out
of
it.
F
G
C
Yeah
I
mean
maybe
if
we
have
you
here,
hey
amy
in
a
maybe
by
march
we
will
hear
back
from
projects
that
are
currently
in
toc
review,
whether
they
will
be
ready
to
be
accepted
in
either
incubation
or
graduation
for
kubecon.
The
kubecon
is
usually
when
products
want
to
move
to
the
next.
Oh
yeah.
C
I
think
I'm
thinking
that
you
see
reshuffling
or
like
getting
new
people
in
might
not
necessarily
help
there.
G
Previously,
before
the
election
closed
yesterday,
I
would
have
said
that
it
was
concerned
given
as
both
justin
and
ricardo,
who
are
the
two
that
currently
have
outstanding
reviews
were
re-elected,
probably
not
that
big
of
an
issue.
The
challenge
is
just
being
able
to
find
time.
What
I
will
say
is
march
8th
is
going
to
be
our
next
sandbox
review
meeting.
So
that's
the
one
where
we
can
start
putting
the
process
into
place
for
being
able
to
say:
okay,
here's
an
issue.
G
If
the
project
doesn't
want
to
I'll,
they
can
close
the
issue
on
their
own.
If,
for
whatever
reason,
they're
like
man,
cncf
is
not
a
fit
for
us
time,
they
can
close
the
issue.
I
think
I'm
more
focused
on
being
able
to
get
the
sandbox
pieces
together.
The
incubation
and
graduation
stuff
is
really
driven
by
toc
sponsors.
Now.
C
Yeah,
I
mean
liz
actually
today
submitted
backstage
the
due
diligence,
so
that
was
on
time
like
perfectly
on
time,
for
her.
G
Good,
yes,
that
one's
also
on
my
radar
as
well,
simply
because
liz
is
stepping
down
her
chairman's
friday
and
the
the
hope
is
to
be
able
to
get
backstage
into
public
comment
before
she
steps
away,
if
not
we'll,
do
a
handoff
to
another
toc
member
and
kind
of
drive
forward
from
there.
I.