►
From YouTube: WG Platforms Project Meeting - 2023-02-28
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
A
A
B
E
B
B
B
B
So
everybody
you
know
get
in
your
last
minute
fixes
and
things
I
mean
it's
not
like.
We
could
never
edit
it
again,
but
this
is
this.
Is
our
steak
in
the
sand,
we'll
close
up
those
issues,
I,
guess
tomorrow,
I
guess
the
agenda
for
today
is
make
sure
we're
all
on
the
same
page.
If
there's
any,
you
know
particularly
hot
topics
on
the
content,
we
could
discuss
them,
then
we
can
shift
into
talking
about
publication
Logistics.
B
What
we
need
to
think
about
Colin
has
done
a
really
cool
initial
stab
at
getting
a
site
up
which
he's
gonna
show
us.
B
That'll
be
awesome,
so
we'll
talk
about
that
then
I
want
I
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
as
we
go
out
to
publication,
how
we
might
get
more
feedback
and
iterate
and
then
a
few
other
topics
I
put
in
here
feel
free
to
add
in
if
you
want
to.
If
you
want
to
add
in
so
let's
jump
in,
are
there
topics
on
the
content
that
we
should
discuss
here?
Does
anyone
want
to
bring
anything
up.
F
So
Josh
on
the
murdering
the
success
of
the
platform
team,
like
I,
have
put
together
some
of
the
content
to
look
at
the
different
article,
visible
explore
and
do
the
research
on
the
different
people
have
put
together
thoughts
on
it.
But
the
idea
the
challenge
here
is
like
we
are.
Are
we
talking
about
the
team
cap
like
what
the
subject
is
measuring
the
success
of
the
platform
team?
F
Are
we
just
planning
to
put
the
content
for
just
how
platform
can
help
you
achieve
success
or
what
I
should
actually
the
requirement
for
the
team
to
have
those
capabilities
in?
So
we
see
there's
a
section
in
the
call
here,
but
how
do
we
actually
synchronize
this
stuff,
because
this
is
very
important
when
this
product
is
finished?
Finalizes
you
see
when,
but
somebody
is
rating
the
content
he
can
his
mind
can
be
synchronized
with
what
already
we
have
written
in.
B
B
You
know
know
that
your
thing
is
doing
delivering
the
values
that
we
said
it
will
so
that
I
guess
what's
in
there
now
is
like
three
categories,
with
some
specific
like
three
or
four
bullets
in
each
one
of
what
you
would
measure
to
to
verify
to
your
execs
to
yourself
that
you're
achieving
your
goal.
F
Yes,
like
I'm
thinking
on
this
point,
like
let's
say,
if
you're
talking
about
success,
so
some
articles
suggest,
like
you,
have
a
Direction,
you
have
a
connections.
You
have
adult
adoptability
attitude
and
performance,
these
basically
for
the
team,
not
for
the
platform.
These
attributes
belong
to
the
teams,
those
head.
Those
team
has
to
be
adoptable
with
the
how
things
evolve
in
the
space.
That
is
actually
the
team.
Thinking
then,
on
the
topic
topic
of
end-to-end
visibility,
we
had
PR
cycle
time
coding
time.
F
Review,
Time,
release
time,
deploy
time
late
time
for
changes,
change,
failure
rate
these
actually
give
us
another
level
of
spectrum
like
we
have
to
find
those
three
or
five
categories
that
can
be
related
together
and
then
we
can
build
the
foundation
on
that,
because
this
section
is
very
important
if
somebody
reading
the
content
of
the
paper,
because
he's
investing
a
lot
of
time,
understanding
if
I
am
actually
building
a
platform
or
actually
my
team
is
actually
managing
the
platform.
How
do
I,
Rate
My
Success,
because
that
platform
need
to
be
might
be?
F
Do
your
team
working
on
the
same
platform?
So
it's
a
very
important
section.
So
actually
I'm
investing
a
lot
of
time,
but
haven't
made
the
pull
request
into
it,
have
written
a
document
into
it,
but
definitely
I
think
my
plan
is
like
we
can
go
with
the
changes
we
already
have
now
and
all
these
changes
just
like
I'm
thinking
about.
If
we
doesn't
do
a
PR
pull
request
to
the
measuring
distance
of
the
platform
T
and
take
more
time,
and
then
we
do
it
again.
So
this
is
the
content
that
we're
externalizing.
B
I
was
gonna,
say
if
it's,
if
it's
a
significant
refactor,
which
is
fair
but
I,
would
that
was
actually
one
of
the
things
I
wanted
to
propose
is
that
we
released
this
first
one
as
V1
beta1,
so
I,
that's
kind
of
in
the
next,
so
we're
dipping
into
how
we're
going
to
publish
this
I
was
thinking
of
V1,
beta1
and
I
was
thinking
that
you
know
we'll
write
a
blog
post.
You
know
announcing
this
paper
and
giving
links
to
wherever
we
have
it,
but
we
could
take
advantage
of
the
opportunity.
B
I
was
actually
talking
this
over
with
a
couple
people
on
the
talk.
We
could
take
advantage
opportunity
to
run
a
pretty
big
survey
if
we
can
get
the
cncf
to
help
us
to
really
learn
about
platform.
Adoption
like
are
we
along
the
lines
of
what
people
are
doing
like
we?
Can
we
can
make
a
survey
which
aligns
with
the
stuff
in
our
paper
like?
Are
these
metrics?
How
do
we
have
to
think
about
it?
The
exact
you
know
Expressions,
but
are
these
metrics
relevant?
Are
we
on
Mark?
Are
the
attributes?
B
Are
these
things
that
people
are
finding
helpful?
Are
we
missing
things
capabilities
so
so
yeah
I
was
exactly
back
to
what
you
were
asking
same
like
if
we
go
out
with
the
V1
beta
and
we
say
like
we're
going
to
iterate
this,
maybe
Chicago
November
then
we'll
have
V1
that
you'll
have
plenty
of
time
to
like
in
the
summer
refactor
that
section
if
you
want
or
write
a
a
second
level
into
it.
Like
here's,
you
know
a
paper
just
on
measuring.
C
Yeah
I
I,
agree,
I
think
we
should.
You
know
at
this
point
I
feel
like
we're
ready
to
get
some
feedback
like
you
know,
that's
kind
of
tangible
and
if
we
need
to
you
know,
restructure,
do
different
things.
I
think
then
we'll
have
to
we'll
have
the
time
for
it
right.
So,
but
it's
like
one
of
those
things.
It's
like,
let's
get
something
out
there.
C
Let's
iterate,
and
you
know
we've
kind
of
worked
on
this
as
like
an
internal
group
so
far,
but
I
think
it's
now
important
to
kind
of
get
that
broader,
broader
perspective.
C
Maybe
another
thing
too,
as
well,
is
that
you
know
platform
con
is
happening
in
June,
which
you
know
plenty
of
platform
engineering
folks
who
will
be
there
right,
so
it
could
be
I,
don't
know
if
you
want
to
do
that,
since
you
know
it's
cncf
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff,
but
you
know
that
could
also
be
a
good
opportunity
for
us
to.
If
we
want
to,
you
know,
say
hey
like
give
us
feedback,
you
know
without
like
so
so
those
are
opportunities
there
as
well.
C
C
Yeah
I
I
think
definitely
I
mean
I.
Think
it's
one
of
those
things
where
it's
better
for
us
to
get
alignment
you
know,
or
or
at
least
have
a
conversation
right,
I
think
everybody's
gonna
kind
of
have
a
different
view
based
on
their
organizational's
needs.
I.
Think
we've
kind
of
recognized
that
a
little
bit
in
the
platform
engineering
community
right
there's
going
to
be
certain
hey.
This
is
how
I
see
my
business,
but
at
least
it
just
I
feel
like
in
this
paperwork.
We're
not
kind
of
saying
this
has
to
be
done.
C
This
way,
we're
kind
of
just
giving
a
sort
of
golden
path
on
how
to
think
about
the
problem
right
so
so
so
yeah
I
feel
like
it
should
be
a
pretty
neutral
point
of
view.
Overall.
F
Yes,
so
George
like
if
one
is
the
last
like
is
this:
is
it
still
time
to
have
simply
or
been
get
accepted
as
of
today
or
when?
Actually,
we
actually.
F
Yes,
so
I
will
try
to
make
it
a
very
small
chain,
not
a
bigger
one.
I
know
that's,
and
also
on
the
topic
of
with
the
colon
is
working
on
I
think
that
li-fi
the
cncf
using
a
lot
of
the
netlify
project,
even
in
the
cncf
glossary,
they
are
using
the
netlife
I
believe
for
the
cloud
native
maturity
website.
F
They
actually
are
using
the
same
netlify,
so
we're
actually
using
the
same
reference
like
is
hosting
on
the
website,
and
people
can
read
it
or
is
a
paper
where
people
can
download
as
a
PDF
and
run
it
through
or
read
it
via
offline.
So
I
think
initial
strategy
was
to
make
it
available
as
an
equilify
I
guess.
D
B
C
You
be
okay
if
I
ran
it
through
grammarly
once
well.
If
I
have
I
have
a
grammarly
like
subscription
so
like
I
could
just
kind
of
run
it
through
end
to
end
it
whatever
needs
fixing
right,
I'm
like
happy
to
do,
or
you
know,
but
I
can
you
know
we
can,
because
we
might
as
well
at
least
do
like
that
before,
where
you
do
the
kind
of
more
formal
edit.
G
B
C
Sorry
there
are
a
bunch
of
voices
that
came
in
that
once
like
what
what
should
I
do
it
or
no
okay,
cool
yeah,
so
I
can
I
can
take
a
look
into
that.
E
E
You
should
also
consider
making
some
kind
of
a
public
comment
period
for
the
white
people,
so.
E
But
a
broader,
a
broader
one,
so
not
only
in
the
working
group
for
for
the
operator
white
people,
we
did
the
same
thing
in
the
tech
delivery
itself
announced
where
the
meeting
is
and
also
we
we
published
it
on
the
PLC
mailing
list.
B
B
I
mean
we
definitely
want
more
feedback.
I,
don't
know
them
we're
gonna
refactor
I
mean
Chris,
anishik,
read
it
already
back
in,
like
December
and
stuff
I
talked
with
Alexis
Richardson
last
week,
so
they're
definitely
aware
of
it.
The
intent
was
these
past
two
months
was
the
was
the
review
period.
E
Translated
out
by
the
tech
Milling
list,
let
let
them
review
on
to
one
to
two
weeks.
B
I
wasn't
thinking
of
changing
the
timeline,
meaning
I,
don't
expect
major
refactors
from
the
talk
and
if
they
do
come
back
with
that,
then
we'll
have
to
revisit
it.
I
mean
I'd
like
to
just
say
we're
done
with
like
it's
content
complete
but
like
just
yeah.
Hopefully
they
sign
off
and
then
there's
nothing
major.
E
Only
a
problem:
it's
only
about
getting
everyone
in
the
boat
and
foreign.
The
changes
were
not
too
hard.
The
only
thing
the
only
Advantage
we
got
there
was
that
we
got
a
lot
of
more
editors
and
reviews,
but
the
content
didn't
change
very
much.
E
In
fact,
everything
we
are
doing
in
the
cncf
is
about
consensus
and
so
on.
So,
therefore,
when
we
publish
something
this
should
be
as
brothers
pause,
the
consensus
ship
is
brawl
as
possible.
B
I
think
that's
a
little.
What
I'm
reacting
I
think
we
have
tried
to
tried
to
share
this
very
very,
very
broadly,
but
but
we
can
do
it
again.
The.
G
Only
reason
why
I'm
bringing
it
up
is,
if
we
bring
it
to
a
bigger
group
and
if
there
are
more
concerns
and
ideas
and
then
we
will
need
more
time
to
you
know,
reach
another
consensus.
You
know
people
might
be
disagreeing
with
something
and
then
the
timeline
will
move
back.
So
my
only
concern
is
like.
Would
we
be
okay
to
move
back
to
timeline
for
a
month
or
so,
because
I
think
the
intention
was
to
get
it
done
by
kubecon,
so
we
just
have
to
kind
of
agree.
G
Maybe
amongst
us
for
now
that
you
know
like
let's
say
end
of
March
is
the
final
final
Final
deadline
and
any
other
things
that
are
have
been
brought
up
but
have
not
been
discussed
and
agreed
upon.
We
just
don't
we
just
don't
put
in
like
that.
That
needs
to
be
then
beta,
2
or
whatever.
B
Exactly
that
we're
not
going
to
make
like
this
is
the
final
version.
You
know
if
you
have
an
editorial
comment
or
two
good.
C
B
E
That,
because
it's
when
it's
only
a
pizza
one,
it's
not
finished.
G
B
A
B
D
A
D
B
And
we
have
run
concentric
circles
like
the
first
paper
was
Pub.
The
first
edition
of
this
was
November.
Our
original
deadline
for
comments
was
end
of
December
and
we
got
you
know
that
was
in
the
Google
Doc
and
we
got
a
lot
of
reviews
there.
Then
we
brought
it
in
here
and
we
said,
let's
delay
for
another,
we'll
shoot
for
kubecon
EU
and
that's
been
our
timeline.
E
B
I
I,
don't
think
it's
about
Brave
I
think
it's
about
being
humble.
In
other
words,
we
need
to
realize
that
I
mean,
of
course,
I
work
with
customers
every
day
you
all
work
with
customers,
but
we
need
more
feedback
like
that's.
That's
why
it's
a
beta
like
kubernetes,
doesn't
only
release
something
when
it's
V1.
You
need
feedback.
Yes,.
E
But
you
can
for,
for
instance,
if
someone
writes
a
book
and
he's
not
totally
convinced
of
of
that,
that
this
is
that
these
are
things
which
are
the
underwired.
E
He
also
doesn't
write
on
the
first
page.
This
is
a
bit
of
one.
B
So
like
maybe
there
are-
and
there
are
early
releases
like
to
your
point
like
that:
Manning
has
the
whole.
You
know
Early
Access
program,
so
I,
don't
know
I
I
kind
of
lean
to
view
on
beta.
One
is
actually
a
good
signaling
mechanism
to
the
community
that
that
we
aren't
like
stating
this
absolutely
that
we
want
feedback,
but
I
also
don't
want
to
like
make
it
like.
This
is
not
ready
for
you
to
read
like
that.
Would
well.
C
Yeah,
that's
that's
what
the
the
if
any
product
beta
right,
a
product
beta
you
would,
you
would
say,
hey
this
is
this
is
a
working
version,
we've
gotten
some
input,
things
can
change
a
little
bit
and
that's
and
that's
fine
that
I
feel
like
that's
kind
of
the
balance
we'll
have
to
we'll
have
to
straddle,
because
the
thing
is,
if
we
don't
make
this
a
little
bit
sort
of
official
saying
like
hey,
this
is
a
formalized
first
version
of
it.
What's
going
to
happen,
is
it's
like
it?
C
C
F
Yes,
I
think
Josh.
What's
your
point
like
if
you,
if
you,
if
you
look
at
the
I,
think
our
community
is
already
being
aware
of
this
world
called
V1
beta
one,
so
they
are
being
aware
of
this
word
and
that's
a
good
point.
If
let's
say
we,
if
we
can
call
it
other
thing,
let's
say
Early
Access
program,
then
people
try
to
think
about
this
as
a
book,
because
those
were
used
by
the
Manning
publication
and
the
book
publication
as
well.
So
I
think
we
are
aware
of
the
V1
beta.
F
E
E
E
Therefore,
we
have
to
find
out
if,
if
this
is
something
we
could
make
or-
and
if
if
this
is
wished
by
the
cncf,
because
we
are
bringing
out
an
official
document-
don't
forget
about
this
entire.
On
the
first
on
the
first
page,
cases
in
safe
logo.
G
G
G
B
D
D
B
I'm
I
I,
guess
I'm
kind
of
coming
to
the
conclusion
here
that
we
should
call
it
V1
that
will
the
Optics
will
be
better
and
we
can
still
iterate
forward
and
we
could
just
say
we're
going
to
iterate.
E
A
B
A
B
C
C
B
C
Yeah,
no,
that
that's
that's,
that's
totally
good
and
then
yeah
like
each
year,
like
you
know,
going
forward.
I'm
sure
you
know
would
be.
We
could
kind
of
have
say:
hey
like
you
know,
things
have
changed
in
XYZ
in
the
landscape
and
you
know:
we've
addressed
these
specific
points
or
added
these
new
metrics
or
you
know
all
that
kind
of
stuff,
so
yeah
I
think
that's
Thomas
I
think
that's
a
great
idea.
E
B
C
Yeah,
it
gives
us
more
Credence
and
credibility
to
the
what
we're
working
on
right.
The
fact
that
we're
saying
hey
this
is
a
you
know:
we're
iterating
on
this.
Whatever
minor
major,
we
we
recognize
that
this
is
going
to
be
like
a
guiding
dock
for
the
platform
engineering
community
stuff,
so
yeah
yeah.
B
H
Yep
had
to
figure
that
out
yeah,
so
essentially
what
I
did
so
for
me,
I'm
I'm,
a
bit
of
a
more
visual
learner.
We
can
work
in
markdown
stuff
all
day,
but
I
need
to
see
something
on
paper
and
publish
and
so
I.
It's
to
some
of
the
other
comments
you
know:
cartographers
was
in
a
state
of
being
unpublished
or
unwebified
or
whatever
you
want
to
call
it
for
I,
don't
know
a
year.
H
It
was
a
really
long
time
or
it
seemed,
and
they
just
now
got
around
to
doing
that.
But
essentially
what
I
did
is
I
duplicated
the
website
structure
that
they
use
so
just
copied
over
the
styling
everything
else.
You
know,
like
their
blessing,
followed
the
same
structure
and
built
a
site
for
the
platforms
group.
There's
a
couple
of
questions
to
answer,
because
platforms
is
kind
of
it's
a
little
weird.
H
How
cartographers
is
its
own
thing
right,
it's
like
its
own
group
and
it's
the
maturity
model
and
it's
kind
of
one-to-one,
whereas
here
Cloud
native
platforms
is
kind
of
a
group
underneath
app
delivery
and
we're
trying
to
figure
that
out
so
a
little
bit
of
Grace
there.
But
I've
got
a
published
site
I'm
just
buying
time
to
try
to
figure
out
how
to
share
my
screen
because
I
use
zoom
a
quarter
of
the
time.
B
H
Yeah,
so
this
this,
for
example,
is
the
cloud
native
maturity
model
site.
It's
fairly
simple,
it's
all
markdown
based
right,
so
it
enforces
good,
formatting
and
stuff
in
your
markdown
files,
they've
got
several
high-level
sections
like
level
one
level,
two
level
three
and
they're
trying
to
work
people
through
the
maturity.
Obviously,
our
structure
is
a
little
different
where
we're
focusing
on
major
sections,
but
with
proper
formatting
the
site
takes
care
of
the
rest.
The
standard,
markdown
site
it'll
give
us
on
the
right
hand,
side.
H
You
know,
content
our
sub
content,
sections
on
the
left,
hand,
side
or
the
major
Pages
or
the
major
sections
and
information
about
how
to
contribute.
H
H
This
is
just
on
a
fork
that
I
have
it's
in
a
public
repo
I
haven't
done
a
PR
against
it,
because
this
content
is
not
updated
and
we've
been
waiting
for
Content
changes
to
get
merged
and
I
know
that
there
are
a
couple
of
remaining
PRS
out
there.
So
I'll
update
the
content
when
we
merge
those
PR's
as
well,
but
I've
broken
this
out
into
the
major
different
platform
or
sections
on
the
left-hand
side.
H
Here
you
know
why
platforms,
what
is
a
platform
attributes
platform
teams,
capabilities
and
platforms
challenges
of
Platforms
in
order
to
webify
it
or
make
it
make
sense
outside
of
a
paper's
context,
to
kind
of
changed
a
couple
of
things
or
added
some
tag
lines
and
things
there,
such
as
our
table
of
contents,
but
hopefully
referencing
something
visual
like
this
will
help
people
provide
some
feedback
as
well.
Everything
else
is
functional
on
this
page.
H
Obviously,
we
need
a
different
logo
instead
of
the
cloud
native
maturity
model
in
the
top
left,
but
contribution
links
back
to
has
a
section
about
contributing
back
to
tag
app
delivery,
I
pulled
all
that
information
from
the
app
delivery
pages
right.
How
to
contribute
to
the
websites?
How
can
you
pull
this
thing
and
actually
work
on
the
paper
via
the
website?
H
You
know
all
the
links
and
everything
works.
So
if
you
want
to
hit
that
on
your
own
and
poke
through
it,
it's
just
platforms.desmedies.com.
H
H
So
you
know:
we've
got
resource
sections
glossary.
One
of
the
asks
that
I
would
have
is,
as
we're
formatting
the
different
paper
sections.
We
aren't
breaking
things
out
into
subsections
at
all.
So
there's
a
little
bit
of
clarity.
We
can
probably
gain
from
creating
some
little
subsections
in
the
papers
to
break
them
out
a
little
bit,
but
you
know:
go
ahead
poke
through
the
plot.
H
The
information
doesn't
one-to-one
match
what
has
been
pulled
in
the
recent
or
merged
in
the
recent
pull
requests
and
all
that,
but
I
hope
this
format
helps
some
people
provide
some
feedback
or
see
some
things,
and
this
should
be
set
up
for
us
to
be
able
to
say,
hey
cncf.
This
is
ready
to
go
when
you're
ready
to
put
this
on.
You
know
the
primary
website.
C
Yeah
absolutely
I
think
one
thing
I'm
just
looking
at
from
left
here:
do
we
I
guess
it's
fine?
If
we're
repeating
like
capabilities
of
platforms,
challenges
with
platforms
like
do
we
do
it,
like
very
small,
did
that
do
we
want
to
just
say
capabilities
challenges,
or
do
we
do?
We
want
to
be
explicit
in
the
section
that.
H
Was
that
was
something
I
took
a
little
bit
of
Liberty
on
when
I
was
going
through
it
when
I
had
when
I
kind
of
self-reviewed
or
read
back
through
it
tried
to
take
a
fresh
take
on
it?
It
didn't
really
feel
like
challenges
and
capabilities
should
go
together.
Where
capabilities
is
talking
about
the
the
things
that
the
platform
does
and
then
challenges
is
almost
like.
The
troubleshooting
debugging
section
like
well
well,
if
you're
having
trouble
doing
something.
H
C
H
I
Folder
structure
a
little
bit
here,
actually,
maybe
that
would
be
helpful.
B
I
Let's
see
I
believe
this
is
on
my
oh
I.
Don't
have
this
push,
so
it's
not
going
to
be
at
my
repo.
H
But
essentially,
each
file
is
now
a
separate
markdown
file,
as
opposed
to
one
big
markdown
file
and
that's
the
major
change
there,
and
so,
if
we
want
to
use
this
as
a
mechanism
for
managing
and
editing
the
content,
we
can
that's
going
to
influence
how
we
you
know
how
I
do
the
poll
request
right
how
we
merge
this
back
in
with
the
paper.
Is
this
a
separate
instance
of
the
paper?
Is
it
the
paper?
You
know?
How
does
that
kind
of
look
now
for
cartographers?
It
is
a
separate
area.
B
H
And
you
have
to
do
it
a
little
bit
manually
at
this
point,
but
this
is
cartographers
today
and
they
have
a
separate
folder
for
website
and
then
website
has
a
folder
for
content
right,
which
contains
the
different
markdown
files.
And
it's
easy
enough
to
just
copy
the
content
over
or
follow
some
version.
A
or
I'm
sure
you
could
automate
things
to
the
ends
of
the
Earth.
But
in.
C
C
Yeah
I
was
thinking
from
the
just
like
one
one
like
my
two
cents
is
that
from
like
the
editing
perspective,
at
least
what
I
found
is
that
short
of
the
paper
is,
like
you
know,
there's
a
bunch
of
sections
and
you're
kind
of
like
having
to
work
in
a
little
bit.
One
I
do
feel
where
that's
really
helped,
though,
is
that
like
making
sure
we're
not
like
repeating
ourselves
or
making
like
Josh
and
I,
have
talked
about
this
like
it's
like
hey?
This
was
already
addressed
in
the
specific
sections.
H
H
B
F
A
golden
just
one
question
from
my
side
is
like:
let's
say
in
in
future:
we
want
to
make
some
graph
diagrams
or
light
animations
or
graphs.
So
are
these
actually
in
that
embedded
can
be
embedded
in
the
in
this
website?
I
haven't
seen
any
of
the
website
and
the
CNC
like,
especially
in
the
lately,
if
I
ever
seen,
somebody
matching
the
graph
but
I
think
like
what
I
seek.
We
might.
H
H
Where
I
got
the
diagrams
image
from
I
got
the
diagrams
image
from
the
file
uploaded
to
GitHub,
that's
embedded
in
the
markdown
and
then
just
moved
that
into
the
static
content
folder
of
the
website.
So
that's
how
cartographers
does
it
as
well?
Right,
like
these
images
are
actually
in
the
site
and
then
we
just
reference
those
in
the
markdown,
so
here
in
the
markdown
I
believe
I,
don't
know
the
exact
page
here
yeah
here
in
the
markdown,
you
can
see
it's
embedded
with
a
a
local
file
reference
here.
H
H
Do
you
know
add
your
image:
do
a
pull
request,
put
the
image
into
the
content
same
way.
You
would
just
manage
any
other
site.
F
Yes,
that's
that's
totally
makes
sense
and
another
last
question
from
my
side
like
let's
say
if,
as
we
go
and
as
we
evolve,
what
the
next
step
like,
if
I
made
let's
say,
pull
request
into
this
GitHub
repository.
So
are
these
changes
automatically
push
into
the
website,
or
this
is
approval
from
you
or
the
GitHub
action
running
behind
the
scene?
How
is
actually
day
to
they
do
responsibilities,
works,
yeah,.
H
So
right
now,
I
have
it
set
up
to
just
to
build
and
deploy
a
Docker
image
from
the
main
branch,
which
is
you
know
pretty
typical
workflow.
It
would
be
easy
to
have
PR,
BR
branches
right
and
maybe
launch
a
self-domain
of
the
subdomain
so
that
you
can
have
a
public
reference
for
review.
That's
the
way
that
that
we
do
our
applications
internally,
so
that
developers
don't
have
to
self-host
and
use
engrock
or
something
like
that.
H
So
yeah
I
think
there's
a
ton
of
ways
and
honestly
this
is
fun
because
it
feeds
back
into
the
platform
or
how
we've
published
the
paper.
You
know,
however,
cheesy
that
sounds
so
yeah
I'm,
I'm,
totally
on
board
and
I
think
we
can
all
work
together
to
steer
how
we
want
that
to
be
accomplished
and
then
use
that
as
kind
of
our
own
standard,
because
every
platform
is
different
right
and
for
this
one
it's
like
kind
of
marked
down
or
a
jam
stack
whatever.
H
F
B
H
B
I
think
that
we
agree
and
I
just
to
answer
Science
question
like
going
forward
we'll
submit
edits
against
paper.md
for
now
at
least,
and
then
we
would
sync
it.
You
know
we'll
all
review
and
talk
about
it
there
and
then
once
it's
merged,
then
somebody
will
have
we'll
have
to
go
in
and
I
guess
you
could
have
it
in
the
same
PR,
but
the
focus
is
to
get
it
to
the
paper
MD
and
then
get
it
into
the
website.
After
second
step.
H
I
think
you'd
want
to
be
deliberate
about
when
these
get
published.
I
think
you
publishing
version
the
website
to
match
the
publication
of
the
PDF.
It's
like
latest
versus
nightly
right
latest
should
match
the
PDF
and
go
out
and
get
published
at
the
same
time.
Let's
coordinate
releases
on
that,
but
somebody
could
still
maybe
go
see
the
the
nightly
latest
and
greatest
on
the
website
if
they
want
it
to
or
on
a
separate
nightly
site.
However,
you
guys
want
to
do
Canary
or
whatever.
B
Yeah,
that's
what
I'll
just
think
so
like
I
guess.
First
paper.md
will,
after
we
publish
V1,
we'll
bump
to
like
V
Next,
or
you
know
something
like
that,
and
the
paper.md
will,
because
we
won't
publish,
we
don't
publish
every
last
little
change,
we'll
just
publish
I,
don't
know
when,
when
at
least
of
a
cubecon
I
guess,
if
there's
changes
right.
H
You're
already
managing
this
current
version
of
the
paper
on
a
trunk
in
the
repo,
so
it's
not
even
merged
right
as
the
the
latest
branch
in
Tag
app
delivery.
So
we're
already
following
that
flow
I
think
that's
perfectly
acceptable.
B
H
H
Just
for
anyone
else,
it's
just
there
at
platforms.deadies.com.
If
you
need
to
reference
it
later
and
again,
the
content
is
not
totally
up
to
date
and
I
expect
that
there
definitely
will
be
some
formatting
changes
or
addition
of
links
or
whatever
that
needs.
B
H
Yeah
and
I
think
that'll
come
from
cncf
right.
They.
E
Also,
not
sure
if
we
can,
if
we
could
add
or
do
this,
this
website
on
a
separate
Repository.
E
H
A
separate
repository
might
make
some
of
this
a
little
easier
just
for
the
fact
if
I
look
at
so,
if
we
look
at
the
base
tree
here
for
cartographers
right,
it's
it's
fairly
straightforward
and
we've
got
a
folder
for
website
because
the
whole,
the
cloud
native
maturity
model
is
cartographers.
But
if
we
go
to
Tag
app
delivery,
then
we've
got
all
these
separate
ones
and
so
to
personally,
it
would
make
sense
to
me
if
the
platform's
white
paper
itself
got
its
own
repo
as
a
part
of
publication.
H
To
avoid
all
the
other
issue,
confusion
and
all
that
other
monorepo
nonsense,
but
then
also
just
like
put
the
website
in
the
folder
or
yeah.
Maybe
we
just
make
it
a
separate
repo
for
the
website
or.
I
E
I,
try
I'm
not
sure
if
we
will
get
the
second
repo,
because
I
had
a
similar
issue
with
operator
white
paper
and
I
didn't
get
one.
But
let's
see.
B
Okay,
I'm
trying
to
write
down
here
what
what
steps
we
have
pending.
So
we
need
a
domain
and
we
we
need
to
consider
a
separate
git,
repo
and
Colin
you're
gonna
make
the
pr.
H
Yeah
or
if,
if
you
create
the
repo-
and
you
give
me
contributors
and
I,
could
just
you
know,
push
it
direct
which
is
fairly
straightforward
or
you
create
the
new
repo
and
then
I'll
do
a
PR
against
that
I
suppose.
So
it's
an
easy.
B
I
guess
we
got
to
determine
if
we're
going
to
have
a
new
repo
yeah,
so
Thomas
I
guess
we'll
work
on
that
in
the
next
few
days
and
see
if
that
seems
promising,
and
if
so,
we'll
go
that
route.
If
not,
then
we'll
just
do
it
within
this
repo.
Somehow
is
that
okay,
Colin
yeah.
H
That's
cool
and
just
for
my
feedback,
because
I'm
gonna
have
to
update
the
content,
maybe
and
maybe
I'm
jumping
ahead.
But
where
do
we
stand
on
the
open
PRS?
B
Not
yeah
today
is
the
last
day,
so
you
know
today,
let's
merge
in
whatever
we
can
the
next.
You
know
today,
I
mean
if
it's
tomorrow,
maybe
that's
not
the
end
of
the
world,
but
listen,
let's
say
they're
too
loud,
and
then
you
know
we're
we're
about
we're
about
done.
I
mean
it's
still
still
six
weeks
till
we're
publishing
but
like
yeah
we're
trying
to
get
this
done
now
and
you
should
be
able
to
publish
I,
mean
I,
guess,
maybe
publish
one
more
time.
You
know
in
a
couple
weeks,
but.
H
Yeah
I
think
that
sounds
good.
If
you
get
started
on
getting
that
URL,
if
that
takes
a
few
weeks,
you
know
I'm
happy
to
hop
on
with
whoever
I
need
to
or
go
talk
to,
Chris
and
and
see
what
the
requirements
were
for
them
to
publish
from
cartographers.
But
we
can
get
this
thing
published
and
just
don't
announce
it
in
a
way
earlier
than
the
six
weeks,
which
would
be
nice.
B
Mean
it's
it's
not
like.
They
couldn't
read
paper.md
already
and
like
it's
been
this
whole
time,
but
yeah,
it's
cool.
Okay,
so
we
need
to
check
into
getting
us
a
really
foe
me
and
Thomas
got
a
domain
and
column
you'll
submit
the
pr.
There
was
one
other
question
I
had,
which
is
like
second
level.
That's,
not
it
doesn't
matter
so
much
right
now,
don't
block
anything
on
it,
but
just
think
about
where,
like
let's
say,
we
write
a
paper
on
treating
your
platform
as
a
product.
B
I
know
Taurus
or
Secrets
there's
another
one.
I
wanted
to
just
mention
that
it
started
to
pursue
like.
Where
would
that
go
in
here?
Don't.
H
Think
about
yeah.
That
was
something
that
so
right
now
in
the
current
state,
the
sections
kind
of
broke
out
nicely
to
having
separate
pages,
but
I
I
do
think
at
some
point.
They're
gonna
we're
gonna
have
convergence
and
we
might
need
to
pull
some
of
those
sections
together
like
the
again.
The
capabilities
of
platforms
versus
the
challenges
today
is
one
section
in
the
paper
and
I
happen
to
break
it
out
as
to
for
the
clarity
and
the
and
the
the
not
the
glossary
whatever
the
contents.
I
H
For
that,
and
then
on
that
right
hand,
side,
since
these
papers
are
so
short,
we
don't
have
any
subsections
and
the
right
hand.
Side
of
the
site
will
automatically
pick
up
those.
You
know
header,
twos
and
header
threes
as
the
subsections,
and
so
if
we
just
properly
format
our
markdown
and
then
the
rest
should
just
take
care
of
itself.
So
anything
that's
like
a
header,
one
would
would
be
its
own
page
and
then
header,
twos
and
threes,
right
and
fours
would
be
like
subsections.
B
I'm
hoping
that
you
know
if
we
get
it
up
there
and
then
we'll
get
some
graphic
designers
come
along
and
add
some
pictures
and
diagrams
for
us
over
time.
That's.
B
Didn't
that
happen
with
cartographers
some
people
made
those
pictures
and
I
seen
that
okay
I
wanna
I'm
gonna
move
to
the
next
thing,
because,
because
we're
running
low
on
time,
so
this
survey
idea
I
I,
wanted
to
bring
it
up,
but
I
need
to
First.
Well,
I,
don't
know!
There's
we
want
to
get
feedback.
We've
talked
about
an
interview
framework
I
was
talking
with
Alexis
Richardson
last
week
and
he
was
like
you
guys.
B
When
you
publish
this
paper,
you
have
a
great
opportunity
to
find
out
what
really
people
want
from
platforms
and
make
sure
we're
on
the
right
stage.
Why
don't
you
get
a
survey
out
there
at
the
same
time,
I
like
that?
It's
a
little
easier
than
trying
to
find
lots
of
interviews
not
say
we
shouldn't
do
that
too.
B
So
I
was
thinking
like
let's
work
on
that
I
I
mean
I'll
work,
I'll
I'm,
happy
to
help
like,
let's
put
together
a
list
of
five
to
ten
questions,
kind
of
correlated
with
the
paper
you
know,
but
also
explaining
the
things
that
we
want
to
learn,
yeah,
I'm
being
pretty
broad,
just
trying
to
give
an
idea
of
what
the
survey
will
look
like
if
we
wanted
to
do
that.
I
was
thinking
of
going
and
asking
you
know
talking
with
the
Alexis
recommended
asking
Chris
anashik
about
this.
B
So
I
was
thinking
of
ask
him
and
getting
him
to
like
go
in
on
that
and
have
the
cncf
really
support
us.
There.
C
So
one
recommendation
I
have
before
we
start
to
put
questions
together
and
this
this
just
kind
of
my
you
know,
kind
of
on
the
product
side
and
have
like
having
to
do
Services
before
it's
like.
Let's,
if
we
can
kind
of
look
at
other
surveys
that
have
been
done
as
well
like
there
is
a
state
of
platform
engineering
report,
that's
out
there.
C
If
that's,
okay,
with
folks,
like
it's
like
I,
think,
there's
a
few
platform
engineering
reports
that
are
out
there
that
we
can
probably
start
to
leverage
and
and
kind
of
work.
Our
way
from
there.
B
B
C
That's
that's
a
really
good
point
too
right,
like
in
in
these
vendor
surveys
or
whatever.
If
you
see
something,
that's
like
hey
like,
is
this
biased
towards
this,
or
if
this
is
like
kind
of
like
you
know,
we
need
to
grab
more
information.
You
know
that
can
also
prompt
us
to
do
it
in
that
way
as
well,
so
so
I
think
yeah.
It
could
be
a
really
good
opportunity
for
us.
J
J
Gonna
love
the
market
with
service
about
platform
engineering
anytime
soon,
so
I
think
it's
a
good
idea
to
do
that
with
the
white
paper
as
an
actual
unbiased
alternative
to
the
others.
F
Yes,
and
and
like
Josh
I,
think
what
we
need
to
plan
is
going
forward
like
that
some
of
the
surveys
done
by
cncf.
If
you
look
at
that
cncf
annual
survey
report,
if
you
can
look
at
the
cncf
that
actually
conducted
some
not
specifically
related
to
the
platform,
but
some
of
the
stuff
that
can
help
us
out.
So
what
I
do
is
like
I
will
I
will
see
how
many
surveys
that
we
can
Leverage
for
the
platform
thing,
because
CNC
have
good
list
of
report
available
on
there.
F
That
is
part
one
of
the
strategies,
and
then
we
can
fine
tune
some
other
surveys
that
can
be
that
has
come
from
vendor
neutral
things
in
there
we
can
coordinate
as
well,
and
what
is
missing
is
actually
a
debatable
like
what
is
what
need
to
be
surveyed
is
actually
that's
the
plan.
That's
we
actually
able
to
understand
when
we
look
at
the
service
report
from
the
cncf,
and
then
we
figure
out
out
a
way
to
do
it.
B
Makes
sense
to
me
I'm
kind
of
thinking.
The
next
step
is
to
open
an
issue
start
a
doc
with
some
of
this
brainstorms
and
and
ask
in
the
issue
if
people
will
share
existing
surveys
and
stuff
for
us
to
learn
from
I'm
thinking,
let's,
let's
start
by
iterating
in
the
dock,
but
by
the
next
meeting.
So
two
weeks
from
today.
Actually
it's
actually
next
week.
No
no
two
weeks
from
today
the
14th
of
March.
We
can.
We
can
discuss
that
in
our
next
meeting
and
you
get
close
to
something
final.
B
All
right
I'm
putting
that
on
me
yeah
one
of
the
things
I
want
to
ask
them,
did
I
put
it
in
the
notes
here,
but
is
that
there
is
a
user
research
group
at
cncf.
But
apparently
it's
been
relatively
inactive,
but
there
might
be
an
opportunity
to
bootstrap
something
there
too.
So
I'll
ask
about
that.
C
A
C
Like
how
yeah
exactly
or
maybe
I
was
just
gonna
say
like
like
I
think
it
would
be
good
for
us
to
kind
of
drive
like
what
questions
we
want
to
ask,
but
maybe
they
can
help
us
package
the
questions
in
a
way
which
is
palatable
to
anybody.
You
know
doing
the
survey
and
the
format
you
know,
I
think
there
will
be
certain
things
where
we
want
to
do:
multiple
toys
or
open
response
or
whatever
it
is
I.
Don't
know
that
yet,
but
we
can.
We
can
ask
them
that
kind
of
feedback
as
well.
B
Cool
yeah
so,
as
usual,
we're
getting
to
the
end
of
the
time.
There's
a
few
more
items
in
this
in
the
dock,
but
I
don't
think
it's
really
anything.
We
have
to
discuss
here
right
now.
B
I
did
put
down
kubecon
EU
just
because
and
Thomas
is
here,
he's
been
coordinating
the
work
for
the
tag.
There
will
be
a
tag
after
Liberty
Meetup
on
Tuesday
afternoon
I
mean
that's
for
the
whole
tag.
So
it's
not
just
platforms,
Thomas
I
know
you're.
You
want
me
to
say
that,
but
we
definitely
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
platforms
there.
We
can
talk
about
our
work.
If
we
want,
you
know
the
paper.
We
could
talk
about
that.
B
One
of
the
ideas
we've
been
batting
around
is
having
some
lightning
talks
to
highlight.
You
know
something
really
Innovative
about
your
domain
because
we
all
know
the
basics,
but
you
know
if
you
want
to
spend
five
or
ten
minutes,
something
really
unique
that
you
want
everyone
to
know
about.
Maybe
we'll
do
something
like
that.
B
So
I
just
wanted
to
put
that
on
your
radar.
Think
about
it.
Come
to
the
tag
meeting
tomorrow,
we'll
probably
discuss
this.
Some
there.
E
And
if
you
have
some
cool
use
cases
regarding
platforms
and
so
on,
which
you
want
to
present
on
the
pools,
you
can
also
do
so,
but
it
doesn't
it,
it
shouldn't
be
any
product
page
or
something
marketing
related
stuff.
So
it
should
be
only
about
technology
and
only
about
open
source.
B
I
guess
like
participating,
I
I
should
have
listened
a
little
more
carefully
participating.
You
don't
need
to
sign
up
just
come,
we'll
we'll
send
it
we'll
put
up
a
post
with
the
exact
details
of
where
it
is
and
stuff
but
like
if
you
want
to
present
or
something
like
that,
we'll
we'll
figure
out
how
to
I
guess
write
to
me
if
you
specifically
want
to,
but
we'll
get
some
sort
of
form
up.
B
Yeah,
the
other
stuff,
that's
on
the
list
is
so
I
wanted
to
call
out
the
secret
stuff
which
I
I'm
gonna
Post
in
our
Channel
soon,
but
I
just
I've
been
sharing
that
with
a
few
people
that
are
working
on
Secrets
related
stuff
because
of
the
Sops
suggestion
to
sandbox.
So
that
seemed
like
a
time
to
start
talking
about
it.
B
So
I
put
that
in
there
I
called
out
I
put
a
note
to
Eloise
rightbauer
from
the
tag
also
is
starting
to
talk
about
like
an
application
spec
whether
that
applies
to
platform
it
might
for
something.
So
you
know
take
a
look
at
that
portals.
I
I!
That's
come
up
so
much
for
me
the
past
couple
months,
backstage
and
portal.
So
I
was
you
know,
maybe
we
we
start
digging
into
that
a
level
deeper
I
think
backstage
is
really
hot.
B
F
B
That's
why
I
keep
bringing
it
up
so
we're
getting
a
little
momentum
and
we'll
keep
going.
F
Yes,
and
just
just
the
final
thoughts
on
my
like
for
the
next
community
meeting
call
do
we
have
a
five
or
ten
minute
for
the
perilous
demo
that
we
need
to
show
with
the
people,
because
we
see
because
perilous
is
actually
land.
We
see
a
lot
of
the
projects
being
listing
in
the
paper,
but
we
definitely
need
opinion
from
the
this
working
group
to
know
like
what
their
thoughts,
what
they're
valuable
about
it.
So
we
need
some
five
to
ten
minutes.
Is
it
possible
for
the
next
Community
goal?
B
That's
a
good
question.
It's
a
fair
question.
My
my
tendency
at
this
point
is
to
say
that
we're
mostly
focused
on
our
project
work
and
the
tag
meeting
is
maybe
where
that
I
mean
that
definitely
fits
the
tag
meeting
because
I'm
a
little
wondering
if
we
start
doing
that.
Other
people
might
want
to
present
here
which
isn't
bad
like
we
want
them
to
present
yeah
I
I
guess
what
does
everyone
think
I?
Guess,
let's
get
everyone's
thoughts
like?
E
And
Charles
also
announced
it
on
the
platforms,
Channel
and
all
the
platform
people
want
to
attend.
Should
it
and
the
app
delivery
thing.
C
B
A
A
B
All
right,
it's
been
great
talking
to
everybody,
good
work,
we're
moving
forward.
This
is
amazing.
Thank
you
all
for
your
help
and
see
you
online
talk
to
you
in
a
couple
weeks.