►
From YouTube: Compliance weekly - 2023-03-21
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
Right
welcome
to
the
compliance
weekly
sync
for
the
22nd
of
March.
If
you
live
in
the
future,
I
don't
know
what
the
date
is
elsewhere,
but.
B
With
that
all
right,
so
the
first
order
of
business
is
just
to
walk
the
Milestone
board.
Does
anyone
else
want
to
share
this
screen?
Otherwise,
I
can
do
it.
B
Only
normally
there
was
wages
down.
All
right
got
lots
to
celebrate
this
week.
The
first
one
is
displaying
the
external
status
check
ID
in
the
UI,
with
Jay.
C
So
sorry,
I
don't
have
a
demo
ready
for
this
I
should
have
had
on
but
yeah
it
was
just
a
quick
change
to
I
think
it
was
a
request
to
add
that
status
ID.
So
it's
easier
to
Ping
the
API
and
yeah
after
some
iteration
some
design
iteration
that
status
check.
Id
is
now
there
and
it's
live
and
yeah
I
think
there
is
some
screenshots
in
the
issue.
B
The
next
one
was
add,
a
group
level
setting
for
all
threads
must
be
resolved.
I,
don't
know
if
I
know,
that's
jihu
contribution,
I,
don't
know.
If
anyone
else
knows
about
that,
though
we'll
move
on
then
so
scopa
feature
flag
or
group
predicted
branches
to
groups.
B
D
D
Oh
sorry,
mate,
Internet,
Security
I
would
say
it
was
just
removing
all
of
that
code
to
so
we
could
start
fresh
so.
A
B
The
next
one
was
create
a
periodic
KRON
4
ticks
for
consistency
in
the
data
for
the
compliance
violation,
request
table
I,
don't
know
if
anyone
else
helped
verify
that
one
for
who's
over,
but
this
was
so
having
safe,
has
been
working
on
the
compliance
violation,
optimization-
and
this
was
a
periodicron
to
make
sure
that
the
data
in
the
two
tables
was
aligned
and
synced
just
to
catch
anything
that
was
out
of
order.
D
Yeah
this
was
a
customer
reported
bug,
so
it
kind
of
wasn't
really
a
bug.
It
just
was
never
it
Bloom,
and
but
when
you
invite
a
group
to
another
group
or
remove
or
edit
their
membership,
we
were
not
generating
audit
events
for
those
actions.
So
he
added
the
audit
events
for
adding
or
group
removing
a
group
modifying
their
group
permissions.
So
those
are
all
in
production.
B
Next
one
was
the
feature
flag,
roll
out
of
the
compliance
framework
report,
I
think
everyone
knows
what
this
is
so
yay
good
to
see
that
out.
Next
was
the
polling
for
stairs
cheeks
earlier.
B
A
E
Yeah
Paul,
it
was
like
a
very
trivial
check
so
about
implementing
a
proper
policy,
wow
well
pretty
self-describing
polling
for
the
status
check,
respecting
the
speech.
Visibility
typical
thing,
so
not
not
much
to
add
works
as
expected.
Great
work
by
Alvin
and
I
was
complaining
there
as
a
final
reviewer,
beat
and
I
hope.
We've
delivered
a
great
feature
together.
B
Right
and
the
last
one
was
into
in
tests
for
compliance
framework
report.
So
no
Mark
has
been
working
hard
on
this
as
one
of
our
new
features
out
the
door
and
has
got
that
across
the
line,
which
was
their
first
end-to-end
test
for
the
compliance
group,
which
is
a
solid
first
of
many.
Let's
put
it
that
way.
B
E
Wow
from
the
perspective
of
the
merge
request
it,
it
went
first
stage
of
review
I've
just
implementing
like
tiny
nitpicks
here
and
there
for
more
eye
candy,
and
you
know
the
biggest
paint
of
all
front-end
Engineers,
making
the
table
look
nice
of
all
on
all
screen
sizes,
but
also,
as
you
need
mentioned
in
the
weekly
this
magic
westeraced
me
a
bigger
question
on
how
we
are
going
to
handle
bulk
operations
in
our
graphql
API.
So
I
really
appreciate
everyone.
E
A
B
B
A
B
Final
column
is
the
design
and
Camellia
I.
Don't
know
if
you
want
to
give
us
an
update
on
how
things
are
going
with
that.
F
I
think
this
one
we
can
move
to
next
steps.
The
design
is
already
finished.
All
the
design
review
commands
are
resolved
and
yeah
I,
don't
know
how,
like
usually
there
is
epic
I
can
put
the
deep
down
on
so
for
planning
breakdown
or
like
oh
that'll
work,
because
it's
design
issue,
so
we
should
move
it
to
somewhere
or
like.
A
B
B
It's
been
that
way
for
the
last
month
after
a
couple
of
little
dips,
so
I'm
making
great
progress
there,
email
type
so
we're
at
43
for
features
40
for
maintenance,
41
for
maintenance
and
16
for
bugs-
and
that's
roughly
around
about
right
with
a
lot
of
the
other
stuff
that
we've
got
on
the
moment,
but
I
think
features
will
take
over
in
this
Milestone.
Quite
a
lot,
I
think
with
all
of
the
ordered
events
stuff.
That's
contributed
to
the
maintenance
work.
B
No,
when
I
called
this
out
and
the
Retro,
but
the
we've
seen
a
27
increase
in
the
Mr
rate,
which
is
awesome,
and
there
is
only
two
old
feature.
Flags
in
here
and
I
know
the
one
that
we're
going
to
roll
out
this
week
is
the
group
protector
branches,
but
I
don't
know
if
anyone
else
knows
about
the
support
group
level,
merge
check
settings
and
that
feature
flag
and
whether
we
need
to
investigate
that.
D
A
B
Open
susbergs
we've
got
one
with
no
severity,
the
apply
compliance
framework
earlier
I,
don't
know.
If
you
want
to
talk
to
that
one
about
what
severity
it
should
be.
E
Actually
I
believe
it
is
a
board
is
not
just
refreshed,
you've
suggested
or
maybe
I
missed
and
didn't
apply
this
severity.
You
propose
a
disability
as
free
major,
and
it
feels
like
for
me
because
before
this
feature
lands,
the
workaround
is
inconvenient
and
causing
major
trouble
for
customers
assigning
compliant
Frameworks
in
bulk.
B
A
B
Pass
due
severity
bug,
which
is
the
compliance
violation,
query.
B
Whose
A4
is
already
all
over
that,
otherwise
the
others
lower
severity
than
we
and
the
final
one
was
the
open
MS.
B
One
Community
contribution
there,
which
is
fix
the
license
available
from
group
Echo.
That's
the
group,
predictor
branches
from
jihu
I.
Guess
we're
just
looking
through
this
list
to
see
if
there's
any
that
we
need
to
call
out
from
a
community
perspective
and
try
help
out
and
any
that
are
past
60
days.
So
that's
all
from
that.
B
In
the
next
order,
businesses,
okay
hours,
updates
and
progress,
so
my
first
one
was
the
book
Gap
analysis
all
of
the
work
or
that
we
had
identified
out
of
that
has
been
scheduled
for
the
next
two
Milestones.
So,
let's
all
in
order
Aaron.
H
H
We
plan
for
doing
looking
at
this
okr,
a
lot
of
different
people
have
been
helping
with
that
and
I
appreciate
it
right
now,
mainly
looking
at
four
issues
that
are
currently
in
the
we
have
a
couple
more
that
have
been
verification
right
now,
so
I
wanted
to
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
anyone
in
this
meeting
is
currently
assigned
to
those
but
I'm
going
to
be
reaching
out
to
see
kind
of
what
the
status
are,
because
we
have
a
couple
that
are
in
Dev
that
I,
don't
see
in
Mr
on
I,
know
I'm
going
to
be
talking
to
a
couple
people
with
copy
chats
this
week
as
well.
H
Only
thing,
that's
kind
of
slowed
us
down
a
little
bit
more
than
expected.
I
think
is
the
the
issue
of
local
testing.
We
have
we've
seen
some
inconsistent
test
coverage
when
it
comes
to
our
audit
events
and
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
the
audit
event.
Implementations
have
been
varied
lately
and
we've
talked
about
this
before,
but
when
it
comes
to
making
sure
that
the
the
log
audit
events
and
the
stream
audit
events
are
basically
remaining
the
same
from
before
the
refactor
into
after
is
something
that
we're
I'm.
H
Taking
the
time
to
do
that
correctly,
because
that's
that's
fairly
important,
so
it's
been
a
little
bit
of
a
Time
scene.
H
Too
and
I
I
mentioned
this
to
rsmr
on
a
review
since
audit
events
are
covering
a
lot
of
the
code
when
we
want
to
verify
these
things
locally.
Some
things
require
some
very
specific
setups
I'm.
Just
thinking
specifically
about
the
group
saml
audit
events,
there
is
a
way
to
set
up
group
saml
in
a
local
instance.
It's
I
had
to
dig
around
slack
to
find
the
GDK
page
on
how
to
do
that.
So
there
is
some
documentation,
it's
still
very
involved
process.
H
So
there's
we
run
into
things
like
that,
as
well,
so
I'm
I'm
going
to
reach
out
to
other
devs
and
see
if
they
they
have
a
clear
path
forward
on
on
testing
that,
but
that's
that's
kind
of
only
been
kind
of
unexpected
kind
of
slog
point
for
this,
but
I
still
feel
pretty
good.
That,
with
four
issues
left
that
this
is
this
is
gonna,
get
get
done
and
verified
by
this
Milestone.
H
So
I
just
wanted
to
reach
out
and
say
if
any
anyone
had
any
any
blockers
on
that
to
just
mention
that,
but
again
I
think
I
think
that's
going
to
be
on
me
to
just
reach
out
to
those
people.
So,
but
that's
where
we're
at
right
now
in
that
okay.
B
He
has
added
a
proposal
in
conclusion
to
the
issue
posted
there
and
I
believe
that's
around
the
performance
of
the
ordered
events
limits
and
so
he's
asked
everyone
to
please
review
that
proposal
and
provide
feedback,
or
at
least
a
tick
or
whatever,
so
that
you're
we're
aligned
and
can
move
on
to
the
next
steps.
A
B
The
okay
for
creating
a
single
source
of
Truth
for
audit
events
is
at
70
complete,
which
is
based
off
the
back
of
the
work
that
Aaron
was
talking
about
and
is
on
track
to
be
completed
in
in
the
quarter.
Subscribe
next
is
fys
and
questions
mark
has
put
their
just
in
case
you're,
not
aware
you
can
use
the
staging
riff
as
a
Sandbox
environment.
If
you
need
to
test
a
change
that
isn't
behind
a
feature
flag
or
the
flag
is
enabled
globally
or
anything
else
that
might
be
disruptive
as
tested.
A
B
So
thanks
Mark
for
that
and
the
final
point
was
yeah,
there's
been
an
update
to
the
verification
process,
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
everyone's
aware
of
it
previously
when
moving
to
verification,
you
unassigned
yourself
and
the
bot
would
automatically
assign
it
to
another
engineer,
you
now
no
longer
need
to
unassign
yourself.
You
just
add
it
to
verification,
and
if
this
one
engineer
or
add
another
engineer
to
verify
it
and
then
they
can
just
close
it
and
unassign
once
they're
verified
so
yeah.
There's
a
link
to
the
handbook
update
there.
D
Are
I
guess
I
was
gonna
say
for
the
new
verification
process.
D
Do
we
plan
on?
You
know
revisiting
that
in
a
few
after
a
few
Milestones
so
like
see,
if
it
has
done
any
good,
just
I'm
just
wondering
just
because
my
experience
of
going
through
it,
the
you
know,
we've
only
just
have
it.
So
it's
only
been
a
little
while,
but
it
just
doesn't
seem.
D
D
There
was
a
lot
of
stuff
that
came
out
of
the
issue
that
spurred
the
new
verification
process
and
to
me
it
just
seems
like
that's
way
more
time
and
friction
like,
and
it's
a
more
velocity
than
the
actual
harm
that
was
caused
by
the
issue
is
trying
to
correct
for
so
but,
like
I
said,
it's
only
been
not
even
like
full
Milestone
with
it,
so
I'm
willing
to
give
it
more
time,
but
it's
just
something:
I
wanted
to
flag
to
have
people
keep
in
mind
that
think
about
just
in
case
we
decide
to
revisit
it.
G
No
I
I
actually
have
not
really
looked
at
it.
I've
been
since
coming
back
from
PTO
I
haven't
had
time
to
look
through.
All
of
that,
so
I
can
look
through
it
and
let
you
know
what
I
think.