►
From YouTube: 2021-07-01 Crossplane Community Meeting
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
All
right
recording
has
started,
and
this
is
the
july
1st
happy
july-
cross
plain
community
meeting.
I
don't
know
where
june
went,
but
it's
gone
now,
so
folks
are
adding
themselves
to
the
attendees
list.
Here,
appreciate
that
if
you
want
your
name
on,
there
feel
free
to
go
ahead
and
drop
it
on
there,
and
we
will
maybe
dan
can
help
as
well
too.
A
Accepting
all
these
additions
here
biggest
news
to
go
over
here
is
that
we
just
released
version
1.3
that
came
out.
I
thought
it
was
yesterday,
but
it
was
actually
two
days
ago
on
tuesday
so
right
on
schedule
that
we
had
planned
on
the
29th.
A
You
can
see
the
release
notes
here
in
the
link
that
is
in
the
agenda
document.
So
there
are
a
couple
a
couple
of
things
to
note
in
here
in
the
release
notes.
One
thing
that
I'm
still
quite
pleased
with
is
that
you
know
upgrading
is
very
smooth,
very
easy.
There's
not
really
like
a
lot
of
manual
steps
or
any
sort
of
migrations,
or
things
like
that.
So
you
know
home
upgrade
in
most
k
all
cases.
There
is
good
enough
to
get
you
from
1.2
to
1.3.
A
We
do
have
an
upgrading
guide
there
for
more
details
or
things
to
to
note,
but
I
really
do
appreciate
our
attention
to
you
know,
compatibility
and
you
know
semantic
versioning
and
making
sure
that
the
process
for
each
version
is
still
pretty
smooth.
A
Then
the
biggest
feature
that
we
had
talked
about-
and
we're
definitely
very
happy
to
have
in
here-
was
the
whole
ability
to
patch
from
multiple
sources
feature.
So
we
ended
up
calling
it
the
combine
from
composite
and
combined
two
composites
abilities
in
in
patching,
but
it's
a
really
nice
feature.
That
was
quite
quite
in
demand
for
the
ability
to
take
multiple
sources
out
of
a
composite
object
and
then
aggregate
them
into
a
single
output.
That
goes
to
your
your
your
resources
that
are
that
are
composing
that
object.
A
So
there
is
some
documentation
that
was
added
for
it.
You'll
be
able
to
see
the
link
and
it's
definitely
a
feature
that
was
it
was
in
high
demand.
So
I'm
glad
it's
officially
released
as
of
tuesday,
so
hopefully
folks
will
enjoy
that
there.
A
Let's
see
what
else
to
mention
here
yeah,
I
think
you
know
the
beta
package
and
api
extensions
groups
of
api
groups
of
the
the
package.crossman.io
they're
now
marked
as
deprecated
and
and
dan
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong,
but
that's
that's
because
they're
we
want
folks
to
be
using
v1
right,
we're
moving
towards
v1
and
that's
the
supported
api
group.
So
beta
is
deprecated
and
we'll
be
dropping
that
in
the
next
release.
B
A
Right,
perfect,
yep,
I'm
glad
we're
glad.
We
took
those
steps,
then
you
know,
and
then
a
number
of
bugs,
as
well
too
around
package
manager
and
dependencies
and
some,
like
other
other
fixes
as
well
too.
So
a
lot
of
people
made
contributions
into
the
release
there.
It
was
really
nice
to
get
that
out
and
keep
with
the
cadence
that
we
have
as
well
too
so
every
two
months
we've
got
a
fresh
release
going
out
and
keeping
things
up
to
date
and
features
flowing
through.
A
So
this
is
great
and
congratulations
to
the
whole
community
for
getting
another
successful
release
out
there
yep,
so
release
notes
are
available
here
on
the
agenda.
Doc
feel
free
to
peruse,
as
as
you
wish
later
on
as
well
too.
A
So
then
that
brings
us
to
the
next
release
in
the
the
cycle.
Here
is
our
1.4.
A
We
have
barely
gotten
started
on
that
one
since
we
just
released
1.3
two
days
ago,
but
you
can
always
keep
up
to
date
with
the
release
schedule
on
the
main
cross.
Plane
crosstalk
is
playing
at
repo.
A
We
have
a
table
there
for
what
the
release
cadence
is
when
the
end
of
life,
all
that
sort
of
stuff.
So
now
that
1.3
is
out
the
door,
the
1.4
will
be
the
next
release.
That's
coming
out
and
then
end
of
august
is
when
we
will
be
planning
to
release
that
we
hit
it
exactly
for
the
last
couple
releases,
so
the
cadence
is
getting
fairly
regular
and
fairly
consistent.
So
you
should
be
able
to
expect
that
1.4
release
pretty
much
on
that
day.
A
What's
we
want
to
focus
on
in
1.4,
and
so
I'm
seeing
some
additions
to
the
dock
here,
which
is
fantastic,
where
we're
getting
some
feedback
and
getting
some
guidance
on
what
people
want
to
see,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
bring
up
the
1.4
project
board,
so
we
can
kind
of
see
get
a
glimpse
of
you
know
the
current
status
of
things
muafik
is,
he
is
out
for
about
a
month
or
so,
and
he
will
not
have
any
online
access
either
for
during
that
time,
while
he's
offline,
but
he's
got
a
number
of
things
in
progress
that
are
carrying
over
from
1.3
to
1.4,
including
the
cross
resource
references
design
and
then
taking
that
beyond
to
an
implementation
as
well
too.
A
We
talked
a
little
bit
about
that
in
the
last
community
meeting,
but
I
think
that's
still
something
we
want
to
keep
pushing
for
in
1.4,
because
I
think
it
solves
a
lot
of
interesting
problems
and
it
makes
the
story
around
the
crossing
model,
all
the
more
strong
as
well
too.
So
I
I
definitely
think
that's
something
we
should
continue
on
with
with
1.4
dan.
Can
you
give
me
a
quick
date
update
or
refresher
on
the
integration
testing
stuff,
because
I
know
rahul
with
you
know.
A
The
lfx
mentorship
program
got
some
of
the
integration
testing
in
place
for
like
core
composition,
engine
sort
of
stuff.
What's
the
big
things
left
on
there,
we
want
to
keep
investing
on
in
your
minds.
B
B
Obviously,
packages
and
conformance
tests
and
sorry
composition
tests
are
the
main
parts
of
core
crossplane
that
we
want
implemented.
A
big
thing
to
me
in
terms
of
something
I'd
like
to
get
to
doing
that's
a
pretty
pretty
big
thing,
but
we
should
be
able
to
do
effectively
but
requires
you
know
someone
to
kind
of
own.
It
is
running
our
conformance
tests
on
providers
either
like
nightly
or
weekly.
B
You
know,
whatever
cadence
we
find
is
appropriate
so
that
we
don't
get
to
the
end
of
a
release
cycle
for
a
provider,
and
you
know
this
time
for
our
first
conformance
testing.
We
realized
we
had.
You
know
a
bunch
of
examples
that
didn't
work
properly
and
that
sort
of
thing
we
should
be
testing
that
more
frequently,
so
that
would
be
top
priority
in
my
mind
in
this
effort.
A
Nice
yeah
and
I
think
that
that
yeah,
that
that
effort
to
get
the
conformance
tests
up
and
running
and
then
results
of
those
conformance
tests
against
all
the
the
major
providers
was
definitely
a
worthwhile
effort.
They
uncovered
some
things
got
some
of
the
documentation
up
to
date
fix
some
of
the
patterns
to
be.
You
know
more
compliance
with
what
we
expect
the
cross-brain
provider
to
be
behaving
as,
and
so
yeah.
That
does.
A
I
agree
with
that
does
seem
that
an
effort
around
integration,
testing
on
a
regular
cadence
would
be
much
more
possible
now
that
all
that
is
you
know
that
how
kind
of
house
cleaning
has
been
done
there.
So
I
do
like
that
idea
a
lot
if
we
want
to
open
more
specific
issues.
For
that
that
sounds
reasonable
to
me
as
well,
too.
You
know
I
do
like
a
lot
that
we
gots
the
core
composition
sort
of
integration
foundation
in
for
1.3,
which
was
nice.
A
So
if
we
want
to
clean
this
up
and
kind
of
track
provider,
specific
conformance,
regular
testing,
that
sounds
that
sounds
pretty
reasonable.
A
And
then
I
think,
maybe
one
of
the
major
things
that
we
want
to
be
investigating
or
maybe
putting
some
effort
into
for
1.4
as
well
too,
would
be
the
comp,
the
concept
of
revisions
for
composition,
so
that
you'd
be
basically
able
to
update
compositions
over
time,
and
you
know
roll
them
back
if,
if
a
new
version
isn't
isn't
good,
so
you
know
being
able
to
iterate
over
compositions,
you
know
and
have
the
version
control,
and
things
like
that
is-
is
a
a
demanded
feature
as
well
too.
A
That
kind
of
helps
take
the
the
foundation
of
composition
and
you
know,
have
it
be
applicable
in
more
real-world
scenarios
as
well
too,
of
you
know
more
of
a
life
cycle
of
them
as
well
too.
I
think
we
can
take
a
look
at
the
doc
here
for
some
of
the
stuff
that
folks
writing
josh.
I
think
you
are
sorry,
let's
go
to
order.
Sorry
performance
improvements.
Dan.
Do
you
want
to
talk
about
that?
One
we'll
go
in
order
here
for
stuff
that
people
added
to
the
agenda.
B
Yeah
sure
so
the
these
are
two
different
issues.
One
of
them
is
pretty
much
already
ratified
and
is
in
process
of
implementation,
and
that's
exposing
the
poll
interval
or
the
the
drift
detection
interval.
You
might
say,
for
all
providers,
which
basically
means
that
you
know
when
your
provider
is
running.
You
can
say
I
want
you
to
check
for
address
every
10
minutes
every
30
seconds
every
two
days.
Whatever
you
want,
and
so
that's
already
been
implemented
in
provider.
B
Aws
hasn't
been
released
yet,
but
that's
going
into
other
providers
as
well.
So
this
should
help
with
some
of
the
things
that
folks
have
been
running
into
with
long
reconcile
times
where
we've
hit
back
off.
Basically,
you
know
just
reducing
the
number
of
reconciles
that
are
attributing
back
off
to
the
aggregate
rate
limiter,
which
is
you
know,
basically
controlling
how
often
you
hit
the
external
api
from
all
controllers.
B
The
other
one
which
is
the
one
jared
has
up
here,
is
one
I
opened
the
other
day
and
it
was
actually
the
yeah
the
one
you
had
up
right
there.
It
is
a
bit
bigger
of
a
thing
and
would
require
some
design
and
that
sort
of
thing,
but
the
idea
here
is
both
around
performance
and
some
authentication
components,
and
this
would
basically
allow
you
to
have
multiple
instances
of
a
provider
running
at
a
time
and
what
we
would
basically
do.
B
There
is
use
a
predicate
on
all
the
controllers
that
say
only
reconcile
manage
resources
that
reference
this
provider
config,
which
would
essentially
allow
you
to.
You
know
partition
based
on
the
provider
config,
which
could
be
useful
for
both.
You
know
you
can.
The
provider
config
is
a
is
a
nice
isolation
boundary
because
you
could
use
the
same
account
for
two
different
provider.
B
Configs
every
manage
resource
has
to
reference
one,
so
you
could
create
kind
of
an
arbitrary
number
of
them,
and
the
idea
is
this:
would
work
sort
of
how
the
composition
engine
works
when
you
create
an
xrd,
it
spins
up
controllers
for
those
those
types
and
watches
for
instances
of
them.
So
what
we
would
do
here
is
it
would
watch
for
provider
config
a
provider
would
declare
the
type
of
its
provider
config.
It
would
then
watch
for
provider.
B
Configs
and
then
start
up
kind
of
a
controller
to
create
a
deployment
for
each
of
them,
and
it
would
require
providers.
You
know
allowing
you
to
set
which
provider
config
they're
watching
and
would
also
be
opt-in,
of
course.
So
anyway,
I
think
this
could
be
useful
to
the
community,
but,
like
I
said,
this
was
just
kind
of
my
musings,
but
it's
something
I
think
would
be
useful
to
pursue
in
the
near
term.
C
B
Yeah,
so
that's
one
of
the
things
that
came
up
in
one
of
the
responses
to
this
is
the
ability
to
basically
only
have
a
con,
a
provider
reconciling
you
know
a
certain
you
know,
or
just
rds
instances
for
a
certain
provider
config
or
something
like
that.
Our
providers
are
not
currently
architected
super
well
to
do
that.
That
being
said,
there's
not
like
a
ton
of
overhead
from
what
I
can
tell
of
them
watching
arbitrary
resources.
B
Typically,
we
control
who
can
create
what
via
composition,
but
that's
definitely
something
to
take
into
consideration
with
this
design.
Here.
A
B
Yeah,
you
could
drop
that
in
in
progress.
Okay,.
A
B
A
A
Okay
and
then
so
good
going
down
the
list
here
further
for
asks
from
the
community
here
josh.
I
think
you
added
these
to
the
agenda.
Is
that
right.
C
Yeah,
I
just
added
them
now.
I
figured
I'd,
bring
them
up.
It's
kind
of
telling
you
about
our
scenario
at
discover,
so
we
have
a
we've
decided
that
we
want
to
use
things
from
all
clouds.
You
know
relatively
generically,
and
so
my
main
use
case
for
crossplane
is
to
provide
databases
or
buckets
or
whatever,
from
several
clouds
in
a
relatively
generic
way,
and
I
was
pretty
surprised-
I've
worked
on
this
for
the
past
week
or
so
not
to
find
many
good
examples.
I
I
feel
like
that.
C
I
see
a
lot
of
compositions
used
to
just
provision,
let's
say
a
collection
of
provider
resources
underneath
like
say
an
azure
resource
group
and
a
storage
account
in
a
container
or
like
a
iem
user
and
a
bucket
I
didn't
see.
So
I
didn't
really
find
much.
That
said
here,
if
I
specify
aws,
send
me
here
gcp
here
I
mean
ultimately
we're
going
to
want
to
like
push
that
even
further
in
the
platform.
C
If
we
find
that
you're
running,
you
know
in
kubernetes
somewhere
in
gcp
we're
going
to
choose
this
one,
but
I
didn't
find
that
many
examples
and
it's
a
was
a
pretty
tricky
thing
to
figure
out.
So
that's
what
I
just
wanted
to
suggest.
I
mean
it's
not
an
issue
in
the
core,
but
maybe
a
few
more
examples
for
people
with
scenarios
like
like
ours
for
multi-cloud.
A
D
Yeah,
I
was
just
your
wording.
There
sounded
like
you
did
actually
figure
out
some
of
it
in
the
end.
So
I
was
I.
I
totally
agree
that
we
should
have
more
examples
and-
and
I
think
it's
something
that
we
have
on
our
someone's
roadmap-
maybe
stevens
not
sure
at
some
point,
but
if
you
have
something
that
could
be
easily
translated
into
an
example
if
you
wanted
to
like
throw
those
into
an
issue
or
something
or
just
whatever
you
know.
D
C
Yeah,
I
dropped
something
in
there
but
I'll
I'll
see.
If
I
can
that's
the
where
I'm
working
on
some
stuff
now
so
I
got
I've
got
like
an
xrd,
that's
right
now,
just
aws,
and
it's
also
I'm
working
on
the
azure
in
the
background,
but
yeah
sure.
D
C
Yeah,
it
doesn't
feel
like
an
engineering
issue,
but
I
just
wanted
to
bring
it
up.
The
second
one
is
also
this
comes
from
our
requirements.
We
have
to
publish
they.
Don't
like
kubernetes
secrets.
We
have
to
publish
stuff
into
vault,
in
fact
our
operators,
so
I'm
hoping
crosspin,
will
replace
some
of
our
bespoke
operators.
C
They
configure
a
secrets
engine
involved
which
is
kind
of
questionable.
I
think,
but
they
go.
They
go
that
far
so
that
I
mean
we
won't
be
they're
gonna.
I
wouldn't
be
able
to
adopt
it
if
I
couldn't
publish
somewhere
else.
So
I
know.
A
C
Issue-
and
I
think
it
came
up
in
the
slack
yesterday,
but
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
that's
important
to
us.
D
Your
documents,
but
nothing,
that's
not
written
in
the
issue
already.
I
I
do
think
it's
a
good
idea
to
do
the
challenging
thing
about
it
is
that
it
is
almost
I
mean
the
the
issue,
as
it's
proposed
today
is
a
breaking
change
to
every
managed
resource
api.
A
D
So,
there's
an
interesting
sort
of
decision
to
be
made
there
about
whether
we
want
to
do
that,
although
we're
gonna
try
and
do
it
as
a
compatible
way,
etc,
etc.
It's
kind
of
just
stuck
on
design
and
having
the
time
to
work
through
that
design.
C
D
Yeah,
thank
you
that
would
that
would
definitely
be
appreciated.
My
hunch
is
that,
if
you're,
if
you
all,
have
got
operators
the
right
default,
you
probably
have
some
some
good
expertise
that
you
could
share
there.
My
hunch
is
that
the
engineering
here
is
going
to
be
relatively
straightforward.
Once
we
once
we
just
figure
out
what
we
want
to
do
with
our
apis.
D
We
kind
of
the
background
context
here
is
that
we're
building
up
a
small
amount
of
small
amount
of
changes
that
would
be
breaking
changes
to
the
managed
resource
schema
in
general.
So
there's
a
decision
to
be
made
about
whether
we
stick
with
calling
the
v
one
beta,
one
and
just
sort
of
bolt
on
in
a
sub-optimal
way,
support
for
fault
or
whether
we
sort
of
refactor
the
api
to
have
what
we
would
consider
to
be
better
support
for
volt
and
perhaps
one
bit
some
other
breaker
changes.
A
Yeah
great
ideas,
josh
and
then
I
don't
know
if
you
noticed
it
too,
while
we're
talking
about
the
the
second
issue
there,
we
added
a
couple
links
the
for
your
first
issue
around
examples.
One
of
them
is
like
the
show
and
tell
section
of
the
github
discussions
on
the
main
crossplane
repo.
That's
where
some
people
have
been
posting
some
examples.
A
I
don't
know
how
discoverable
it
is
yet,
but
it
is
kind
of
a
nice
area
where
some
of
those
examples
from
the
community
are
being
collected
and
then
also
we
had
a
a
reference
platform
for
multi-cloud
kubernetes,
which
does
show
you
know
kind
of
a
higher
level
abstraction
for
kubernetes
cluster
and
then
how
different
cloud
implementations
of
compositions
underneath
it
could
be
implemented
to
that
same
genericized,
abstraction
of
a
cluster
at
the
top
level.
A
A
A
B
There's
a
there's
a
few
issues,
particularly
the
ones
around
using
self-signed
certificates
for
for
pulling
images
from
a
registry,
as
well
as
providing
package
pull
secrets
that
came
up
as
something
we'd,
seen
kind
of
abstractly
folks
wanting,
but
I'd
love
to.
If
anyone
has
that
as
a
real
use
case,
I'd
love
to
get
some
feedback
on
that
that
technical
implementation
is
pretty
straightforward.
B
But
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
you
know
for
folks
that
are
going
to
be
consuming
it,
that
we're
accomplishing
what
we
need
there.
So,
if
you,
if
you
have
interest
in
that,
that
sounds
like
something
that
would
be
useful
within
your
organization
or
even
required,
potentially
feel
free
to
comment
on
those
issues,
and
we
can
also
set
up
a
call
or
something
if
it
needs
to
be
more
in
depth
than.
A
That
well
dan.
Thank
you
for
that
note,
awesome!
So
yeah!
The
you
know
floor
is
always
open
here
and
in
slack
as
well
too,
to
kind
of
for
folks
to
weigh
in
on
issues
that
are
important
to
them.
You
know
feel
free
to
always
open
an
issue.
A
If
you
don't
have
one
for
a
feature
or
you
know
a
scenario
that
you
would
like
to
see
covered
always
happy
to
have
issues
opened
and
then
always
happy
to
have
people
comment
on
other
ones
that
exist,
or
you
know
add
reactions
like
up
votes
and
stuff.
Like
that,
you
know.
We
always
continue
that
discussion
outside
of
this
community
meeting
as
well
too.
A
I
did
add
a
new
section
here
for
this
this
time
in
this
community
meeting,
for
because
most
of
the
time,
we're
kind
of
talking
a
lot
about
core
crossplane
and
the
release
schedule
for
that
providers
can
be
they
have
their
own
release,
cadence
they're
kind
of
released
more
on
an
on-demand
fashion,
but
you
know
any
they
can
be
released
at
any
time
as
well
too,
when
there's
something
substantial
to
to
put
out.
A
So
I,
if
folks,
wanted
to
add
links
to
some
things
that
they
thought
were
important
for
the
providers
as
well
too
then
they're
more
than
welcome
to
add
those
here
to
the
agenda
doc.
Also
one
one
thing
that
I've
been
hearing,
I
think,
maybe
from
four
different
people
recently
in
the
past
couple
weeks,
was
around
support
for
aks
clusters
to
have
the
microsoft
calls
them
agent,
pools
and
node
pools
interchangeably.
It
sounds
like
in
different
documentation
calls
of
different
things,
but
basically
having
no
tools
for
aks
clusters.
A
I
heard
that
maybe
four
four
times
recently
now,
so
that
seems
to
be
kind
of
a
hot
issue
that
continues
to
folks
be
requesting,
if
there's
anything
else
on
other
people's
minds
that
they
want
to
bring
up
here,
then
then
the
floor
is
open
for
that
too.
A
When
we
can
always
have
those
discussions
on
github
in
slack
as
well
too
okay,
so
I
think
we
can
keep
on
moving
here
to
the
community
topics
section,
so
upcoming
live
streams
and
talks
and
programs
etc.
I
was
just
quickly
adding
a
link
to
this
beforehand.
I
think
there's
actually
a
lot
more
upcoming
talks
and
presentations
and
streams
and
stuff
like
that
that
we
can
continue
adding
to
the
list
here
feel
free,
feel
free
to
or
anybody
to
drop
a
link
there,
but
one
at
the
upcoming
community.
A
The
kubernetes
community
today
is
going
to
be
a
talk
on
how
to
provision
infrastructure
with
crossplane
there's
a
link
to
it
in
the
twitter
link
there,
where
it's
announcing
and
kind
of
having
a
link
to
it,
and
then
there's
also
an
upcoming
stream
tomorrow
that
I
think
victor
and
dan
as
well,
are
both
getting
involved
in.
Do
you
guys
want
to
talk
about
that
for
a
quick
second.
B
B
I
was
just
gonna
say:
well,
everyone
welcomed
victor
victor,
just
joined
our
team
at
upbound
and
is
here
to
do
a
much
better
job
of
develop
developer
advocacy
than
I
have
attempted
to
do
in
some
respects
in
the
community.
So
y'all
are
about
to
get
a
big
upgrade
there,
but
with
victor
coming
in
and
kind
of
onboarding,
we
thought
you
know,
as
as
we
like,
to
be
transparent
and
open
source
that
we'd
live
stream
kind
of
some
of
the
onboarding
there
and
using
upbound
cloud.
B
So
we're
just
gonna
walk
through
some
stuff,
it'll
be
informal,
but
I
know
victor's
already
got
a
better
stream
set
up
than
I
do.
So.
I'm
excited
to
see
that
and
also
excited
to
see
the
awesome
new
content
he
makes.
A
Yeah,
that
will
definitely
be
a
cool
stream.
I'm
excited
to
see
that
as
well
too
yep
and
anybody
else
can
drop
a
link
in
there
for
upcoming
talks
and
in
streams
and
stuff
as
well
too.
I
think
and
they're
always
happy
to
retweet
them
from
the
crossplane
account
as
well
too,
for
more
visibility:
sweet,
okay,
the
so
not
too
much
up
to
update
everybody.
On
with
the
incubation
proposal,
all
the
interview,
images
or
interviews
are
done.
A
Thanks
for
everybody
who
participated
in
those
again
and
then
the
toc,
the
technical
oversight
committee
is
about
to
take
the
steps
to
open
the
public
comment
period.
I
don't
have
a
ton
of
transparency
into
when
that
will
happen,
but
there
isn't
anything
on
our
side
still
before
that
happens.
So
all
the
relevant
links
for
the
proposal
are
there
in
the
agenda
document
here
and
when
they
do
open
the
public
comment
period.
A
We
will
be
asking
folks
and
poking
folks
to
go
ahead
and
add
some
support
to
it
there,
so
that
next
step
will.
Let
folks
know
when
that
does
happen.
No
no
negative
feedback
or
anything
that
hasn't
been
dealt
with
already.
So
I
believe
this
is
still
on
track
and
looking
solid
from
everything.
That's
within
our
control
here
and
then
performance
certification.
I
don't
think,
there's
an
update
on
this
one
as
well
either
once
we
got
it
up
to
date.
A
Sorry,
we've
got
it
off
the
ground
and
a
bunch
of
pull
requests
are
open
from
folks
out
in
the
community
there
from
aws
and
from
equinix
and
ibm
cloud.
So
we
got
a
bunch
of
those
initial
conformance.
Results
are
open
for
multiple
providers
now
and
then
you
know
that
program
has
still
not
been.
A
You
know
voted
on
and
ratified
by
the
cncf,
so
we've
got
everything
in
place
there
as
well
too,
and
we're
hoping
that
with
incubation
that
the
you
know
when
that
makes
the
final
progress
and
conclusion
that
the
performance
program
will
be
able
to
move
forward
as
well
too,
but
thanks
after
everybody
doing
the
effort
to
get
that
off
the
ground
and
get
the
results
run
for
all
the
providers
as
well
too.
It's
been
really
nice
to
have
that.
A
Okay,
does
it
look
like
we
had
any
other
prs
to
bring
up?
Are
there
any
topics
that
folks
wanted
to
bring
up?
That
did
not
make
it
into
the
agenda.
A
All
right,
if
there's
not
any
other
items
for
folks
to
bring
up
here,
then
tune
in
tomorrow
for
victor's
first
day,
onboarding
stream
and
right
along
for
some
of
the
lessons
that
he's
going
to
share
with
us.
There
that'll
be
really
cool
and
then
otherwise.
We
can
adjourn
here
and
talk
slack
all
right
thanks.
Everybody.