►
From YouTube: CDEvents Working Group (EMEA/APAC) - Feb 27, 2023
Description
For more Continuous Delivery Foundation content, check out our blog: https://cd.foundation/blog/
A
B
C
B
C
C
A
D
C
C
A
C
B
C
B
B
A
A
C
A
B
B
B
B
Just
a
paragraph
of
use
cases,
I
believe
and
yes
and
yeah,
and
then
we
discussed
this
hybrid
thing
that
Ben
thinks
would
be
a
good
way
forward,
some
kind
of
hybrid
approach.
So
we
didn't
discuss
that
too
much,
but
that's
something
we
would
like
at
least
to
evaluate,
if
that
would
be
an
option
for
us
so
having
like
both
some
kind
of
global
ID
and
also
the
possibility
for
third
links
and
when
we
discuss
globularly.
B
B
B
B
B
C
B
C
B
If
we
would
have
both
I'm
a
little
bit
concerned
to
have
two
ways
to
represent
the
same
thing,
bonus
yeah,
so
I
would
like
us
to
to
really
understand
it.
If
we
really
need
a
hybrid
way
or
it's
one
of
the
other
Alternatives
could
fulfill
all
use
cases,
then
it
might
be
better
to
just
one
way
to
do
it.
B
A
D
B
B
C
B
Thinking
about
the
also
something
we
talked
about
today,
the
difference
between
the
workflow
idea
and
the
context
ID
or
the
Global
ID,
or
what
we
should
use
the
term
the
trace
context
and
how
they
differ,
really
I
think
that
should
be
expanded
a
bit.
So
we
understand
it
a
bit
more
because
we
couldn't
really
describe
it
to
Robert
and
fatty
we're
in
a
meeting.
B
E
E
B
B
B
Yeah
we
talked
about
that
a
bit
as
well,
so
jalander
has
updated
the
RFC
or
is
it
rxc
RC
yeah
to
their
to
what
was
needed?
What
was
requested
and
then
Ben
said
it
was
an
action
on
him
and
the
other
ones
on
the
Spinnaker
thing
to
to
review
it.
So
he
hoped
that
he
could
do
it
if
I
understood
correctly
last
week,
even
and
I
guess
that
the
procedure
then
is
when
that
is
accepted.
B
B
A
B
A
E
A
E
A
A
B
Haven't
documented
that
either,
of
course,
yeah
and
of
course,
a
end
user
system
or
something
I
mean
they
of
course,
doesn't
need
to
send
on
the
events,
if
it's
just
a
cons,
some
consumer
and
the
other
way
around
for
just
something
that
just
produces.
So
that's,
of
course
it
shouldn't
consume
them
as
well,
but
I
guess
being
like
it
could
be.
Remember
those
that
will
do
both
I
think
it
doesn't
make
sense
to
me
at
least
yeah.
A
A
D
B
B
C
B
B
B
B
A
B
A
B
A
B
A
D
A
A
A
I
haven't
either
I
guess
if
we
get
to
to
a
point
where
we
start
looking
start
studying
a
process
to
Implement
CD
events
for
for
Persia,
and
we
we
might
be
able
to
get
some
same
contribution
for
the
team
there
or
maybe,
as
there
will
be
already
knowledgeable
about
trust.
So
maybe
they
they
might
be
interested
in
contributing
the
SDK
I
mean
at
the
beginning
of
Learning
rust
as
well.
But.
C
B
B
B
C
B
A
D
A
C
B
And
I
don't
know
if
we
should
expect
over
the
place
until
today.
I
know
he
is
located
in
Stockholm,
I
believe
and
Stockholm
has
the
winter
occasions
in
schools
this
week.
Oh
okay,
so
he
might
be
off
all
this
week,
but
it
wasn't
the
in
any
meetings
last
week
either
so
I'm
not
sure.
Maybe
he
had
a
vacation.
Last
week
you
can
say.
A
C
B
C
B
A
B
A
A
B
Yeah
and
it
might,
we
might
need
to
discuss
how
we
want
it
to
be,
and
then,
if
it's
possible
to
do
because
we
want
it
to
be
as
well
I'm,
not
sure
if
this
would
be.
You
need
to
back
up
on
the
solution
for
the
state
events
that
they're
due
to
this,
because
whenever
we
want
to
schemas
publish
there
somehow
but
I
don't
know,
because
today
we
don't
have
them
there.
B
B
A
We
say
we:
basically,
we
showed
that
we
can
collect
the
data,
but
we're
not
making
the
calculation
yet
so
I
think
it
still
makes
sense
to
do
at
the
incident
events
and
say
well.
We
can
provide
the
data
to
calculate
that
parametrics
and
even
if
they're
not
displayed
through
the
Four
Keys
dashboard
I
mean
we
can
have
some
other
way
of
explaining
them
at.
B
A
C
C
A
Like
we
discussed
already,
I
think
it's
probably
good
to
to
reduce
the
scope,
but
I
don't
know
that
we
need
to
necessarily
do
it
up
front
I
mean
we
I
would
say
if
we
like
close
the
box
and
implement
the
incident.
Events
I
think
that's
an
upward
release
that
there
would
be
enough
for
a
release
right.