►
From YouTube: 2020-12-09 Code Review Prod/Eng/UX Weekly Sync
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
First
up
was,
I
was
just
trying
to
figure
out
my
own
holiday
absence
in
the
context
of
everyone
else,
is
to
make
sure
that
not
that
I
think
I'll
change
that
what
I'll
take
off,
but
I'm
sort
of
gauging
how
much
I
might
check
in
versus
how
much
I
might
not
check
it.
A
So
my
plan
is
the
full
two
weeks,
which
is
a
little
crazy,
because
it's
the
start
of
a
milestone,
but
I
don't
know
I'm
curious
what
everyone
else
is
doing.
B
C
Yeah,
I
can
say
my
I'm
I'm
thinking
of
only
taking
24
25th
and
31st.
First,
that's
that's
kind
of
like
where
I'm
at
I'm
going
to
keep
like
three
days
a
week
playing
around
there's
a
there's
heavy
holidays
on
the
team,
so
expect
low
capacity
for
the
first
two
weeks,
but
I'll
I'll
have
the
updated
capacity
soon.
B
C
C
A
C
I
have
done
the
spreadsheet,
mostly
for
our
own,
for
my
own
planning.
So
if
I
see
that
both
ics
on
source
code,
for
example,
would
take
the
the
full
week-
and
I
was
taking
those
days
as
well-
would
probably
try
to
have
a
conversation.
C
Right,
that's
why
I
want
to
be
around.
I
don't
have
anything
like
any
plan.
It's
not
like
I'm
going
anywhere
and
I
my
christmas
holiday
parties
are
usually
very
minute
anyway.
So
I'm
going
to
be
three
days
a
week
lying
around
in
case
any
p1
s1
pops
up.
I
can
always
pull
in
the
right
people
so.
B
Okay,
reviewers,
oh
wait
are
we
done.
Can
I
move
on
reviewers?
I
talked
to
david
last
night
and
we
are
going
to
it's
already
been
enabled
now
we're
on
day
three.
B
So
far,
no
major
issues
have
come
up,
so
if
we
can
make
it
through
thursday,
friday
and
monday,
then
we'll
go
ahead
and
default
it
on
tuesday,
the
15th
with
documentation
there's
also
a
work
in
progress.
Mr
out
there
for
the
api,
I'm
less
concerned
about
that.
I
feel
like
that's
not
really
nbc,
but
also
david
thinks
that
that
will
merge
anyway
before
the
15th,
so
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
drawing
the
line.
So
that's
awesome.
B
D
Yeah,
I
was
wondering
so
far
what
we've
heard
feedback
from
others
and
yeah.
One
interesting
feedback
was
what
andre
shared
in
in
slack
about
not
knowing
how
to
best
use
the
feature,
and
that
seems
to
relate
to
people
not
having
a
first-class
way
of
yeah
handing
off
the
ball
to
someone
else,
and
so
it's
not
clear
who,
where
is
the
ball
in
the
court,
is?
Is
it
on
the
reviewer's
side
or
the
assignee
or
the
author's
side?
D
A
I
haven't
seen
anyone
say
anything
about
it,
yet
I
did
see
kenny
this
morning
saying
the
release
post
channel
like
we
could
get
rid
of
check
boxes
in
one
of
the
product
release
post
templates
because
you
could
be
a
reviewer
and
click
approve,
but
I
haven't
heard
anyone
say
like
internally.
I
haven't
heard
anyone
say
anything
and
I
don't
know
if
people
are
using
it
or
not
using
it.
I
guess
we
could
query
the
production
database
yeah.
B
D
C
Yeah,
the
one
thing
that
I
think
is
going
to
be
naturally
confusing
is
not
that
we
can't
figure
out
a
way
forward,
but
it's
something
that
how
does
gitlab
recommend
we
do
it
like?
How
are
all
the
teams
expecting
us
to
use
that
feature?
That's
why
I
think
that's
going
to
be
a
discussion
to
be
had
probably
on
the
development
side
of
things
just
to
ensure
that
we
have
a
consistent
way
of
using
it
and
not
one
team
uses
it
one
way.
C
Another
team
is
in
another
way,
so
I
wouldn't
put
that
on
a
blocker
perspective
of
enabling
it
it's
more
like
we
need
to
sort
it
out.
Anyways
and
each
team
will
have
to
figure
that
out
on
their
own.
So
I
wouldn't
put
that
in
a
blocker
on
a
feedback
for
blocking
the
enablement,
but
it's
something
that
we
have
to
figure
out
on
our
own.
B
Git
lab,
I
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
the
documentation
section
this
week
so
totally
unrelated
to
code
review,
but
get
lab
recommends
we're
actually
a
little
bit
opinionated
on
how
we
use
our
features
and
recommends
like
best
examples
on
how
to
use
things.
B
So
as
far
as
an
mvc
and
shipping
this
is
concerned,
I
feel
like
these
are
like
here's
the
recommended
way
that
we
suggest
to
use
it,
or
this
is
a
reviewers
feature,
for
example,
if
you
wanted
to
do
this,
this
this
and
kind
of
nudge
towards
a
workflow,
but
I
haven't
heard
any
blocking
feedback,
and
so
that's
kind
of
my
focus
this
week.
D
Yeah
yeah,
I
agree,
are
our:
is
our
engineers
in
co
review
using
it.
D
Yeah,
I
think
if,
if
we're
not
using
it,
I
would
I
don't
know
if
others.
D
I'll
push
them
for
sure,
yeah
and
yeah.
I
actually
don't
think
we
have
so
so
what
you
shared
in
slack-
and
I
I
don't
think
I
I
wrote
it
down,
but
I
think
so
kai
had
also
brought
that
up
in
one
of
our
ux
calls
that
we
don't
have
a
first-class
way
of
doing
it.
Of
of
saying
like
I
want
this
person
to
be
pinged
again
because
they
need
to
do
something
here
right
so
do
we
have
an
issue
for
that
sky?
Did
you
look
into
that
or
or
no.
A
I
didn't
look
to
see
if
there
are
issues
I
think
we
talked
about.
Okay,
we
talked
about
the
flow
and
how
like
that's
going
to
be
the
big
question,
we
sort
of
also
talked
about
how
teams
are
already
solving
that
with
the
assignee
field,
like
the
way
they
deal
with
handoff
right,
because
they've
already
had
to
deal
with
that
sort
of
pain
of
of
handoff,
and
so
I
think
we
talked
about.
C
C
I
just
added
a
link
to
the
list
of
mrs
that
are
using
reviewers
or
have
used
reviewers,
because
it
has
at
least
one
reviewer
set.
It's
not.
It
could
have
been
removed
so
now
they
won't
have
it
there
anymore,
but
at
least
we
have
at
least
a
set
of
mrs,
that
we
can
take
a
look
at
how
they're
using
it,
but
there
are
some
valid
ways
of
using
it.
C
I
was
just
looking
at
the
system
note
that
we
add
and
the
system
that
says
request
review
from
then
when
you
remove
somebody,
it
says,
removed,
review
request,
for
so
it
feels
like
by
sending
a
reviewer
we're
asking
them
to
do
a
review
once
the
review
is
complete,
it
should
be
removed.
So
I
feel
like
that's
one
of
the
ways
of
using
this,
but
it's
not
strongly
enforced.
So.
D
That's
good,
okay,
yeah
sounds
good
to
me.
I
I
greatly
appreciate
that
you
will
try
to
encourage
engineers
and
encourage
you
to
use
it.
I
don't
know
if
we've
made
that
clear
enough
in
the
announcement
in
slack
that
we
want
people
to
use
it
or
if
it
was
just
hey.
We
have
this
but
yeah.
If
nothing
comes
up.
I
agree.
C
C
B
B
B
Okay,
I'm
going
to
move
on
to
my
dress.
Does
anyone
have
anything
yeah?
Okay,
mertrus
has
two
problems
that
I'm
aware
of
the
first
is
version
comparison
generates
like
a
seemingly
random
diff,
and
the
second
is
we're
concerned
that
we're
not
batching
dips
for
the
second
one.
I
think
we
are
batching
diffs,
I'm
pretty
confident
phil
is
the
one
who
brought
it
up
so
andre.
I
wanted
to
see
if
you
could
ping
him.
I
added
a
comment
yesterday
because
I
was
like
I
don't
think
that's
right.
B
I
think
we're
doing
it
so
that
and
then
for
the
versions.
I
think
hopefully,
we've
identified
a
quick
fix
for
that.
I
kind
of
talked
about
it
yesterday
yesterday
I
was
very
hopeful.
If
we
can
get
an
mr
today
or
tomorrow,
then
that
can
we
can
enable
it
friday,
monday
and
tuesday.
That's
three
days
yesterday
I
was
like
super
hopeful
that
that's
still
possible
to
enable
it,
but
now
I'm
not
so
much
so
I'm
less
hopeful
that
this
one
yeah,
but
I
think
we
have
a
good
path
forward.
C
On
the
batching
part,
I
did
check
it,
I'm
seeing
the
requests,
so
I'm
with
you.
I
think
we
are
batching
them.
What
I
wasn't
able
to
confirm,
though,
is
whether
the
pages
are
properly
filled
with
the
course
or
for
the
next
page
at
the
end
of
the
of
the
response,
but
it
does
say
the
total
pages,
so
I'm
I'm
leaning,
like
75
percent,
confident
that
it
is
paginating
that
is
batching,
so
should
be.
Okay,.
C
A
Cool,
I
don't
yeah,
I
don't
have
anything
else
on
on
mergers.
We
talked
about
it,
I'm
less
optimistic
I'll
say
that
that
one's
going
to
make
it
than
michelle
is.
But
progress
is
progress
so
hopefully
we'll
get
it
done
early
in
13
8.,
which
brings
us
to
thirteen
eight.
In
case
you
didn't
know
today's.
A
The
ninth
kickoff
is
happening
a
day
earlier
this
year
because
of
this
release
because
of
friends
and
family
day,
which
means
planning
needs
to
probably
be
done
earlier,
and
then
the
18th
begins
mine
and
michelle's
two
weeks
of
not
not
working
either,
which
means
that
if
things
are
not
figured
out
prior
to
the
17th,
then
a
lot
more
complicated.
I
guess
for
the
first
two
weeks
of
the
milestone
anyway.
A
So
that
being
said,
I'm
going
to
make
it
a
priority
today
and
tomorrow
so
to
get
through
planing,
which
means,
I
think,
probably
everyone
needs
to
make
it
a
priority
to
get
through
planning
today
tomorrow.
So
we
can
sort
of
lock
it
up
by
monday,
which
monday
puts
us
at
the
14th,
and
I
imagine
kickoff
is
due
14th
or
15th.
I
was
trying
to
find
that
issue.
A
So
really
we've
got
to
be
sort
of
locked
in
by
monday,
and
I
think
we
know
some
of
what
these
things
are,
and
I
know
we've
got
prioritization
tomorrow.
So,
like
that'll
help
sort
of
finish
out.
I
think
some
other
things,
but
I
would
say
if
you've
got
cycles
to
think
about
it,
planning
is
planning,
should
be
top
of
mind.
C
Yeah
monday
sounds
good.
I
aim
for
that.
My
question
is:
do
we
have
a
single
and
saw
the
message
on
slack?
Are
we
having
a
session
on
transient
bugs?
Are
we
doing
good
as
a
sync.
A
C
D
You
meant
adding
only
transient,
bugs
or
adding
anything
else,
other
than
transition
bucks.
A
C
A
I'll
do
a
heading
section
in
the
planning
issue
and
we'll
just
call
it
transient
bugs
and
we
can
link
to
the
epic
and
then
we
can
sort
of
talk
about,
because
some
of
them
are
already
listed
for
thirteen
eight,
so
I'll
I'll.
Put
that
together
I'll
make
it
up.
C
A
D
D
So
sorry,
just
one
one
little
thing:
if
anyone
wants
to
bring
any
of
the
transient
bugs
to
the
prioritization
session
tomorrow,
I
think
that's
also
good,
because,
ideally
we
will
be
talking
in
terms
of
the
impact
that
it
has,
how
many
people
do,
we
think
are
affected
by
it
and
how
bad
it
is,
how
severe
and
and
and
then
we
have
to
balance
everything
in
our
plates
with
that.
So
I
think
it's
still
useful.
If
anyone
feels
we
have
something
an
issue
that
is
actionable
right.
That's
that's
the
the
point.
C
Yeah,
I
agree-
I
just
wouldn't
limit
it
to
those,
but
you
can
totally
bring
the
some
yeah
absolutely
right.
Moving
on.
For
the
sake
of
time,
just
a
heads
up
I
was
having.
I
was
having
an
update
today,
and
I
saw
that
this
particular
issue
is
at
risk
of
slipping,
and
I
noticed
that
the
front
end
work
is
pretty
much
ready
waiting
on
the
backend
implementation,
but
I
see
that
I
think
gary
is
on
that
issue
and
gary
has
been
pulled
up
to
the
merge
draft.
C
So
I
think
this
is
a
side
effect
of
the
merger
focus,
not
sure
michelle.
You
might
have
some
more
details
on
that,
but
it
just
feels
like
it's
definitely
at
risk,
because
the
front
end
is
going
on
parents
leave
tomorrow.
So
if
we
do
require
some
integration,
I
can
find
some
backup
capacity
a
last
minute.
If
you
need
to.
B
B
C
B
I
will
take
a
look
at
this,
but
that's
why
I
assigned
gary
murdref
it's
because
this
one
I
thought,
dropped
off
of
his
plate
and
so
I'll
check
and
see
where,
where
beckham
is
needed,
but
yeah
this
will
probably
slip.
C
Right
good,
the
good
news
is
that
the
front-end
effort
is
very
light
because
it's
basically
just
making
sure
that
the
end
point
matches.
So,
if
it's
just
like
a
wrap-up,
I
can
find
someone
on
the
front
end
last
minute
to
wrap
it
up
if
it's
ready
on
time,
but
it
definitely
felt
like
it
needed
a
bit
of
a
pair
of
eyes.
So
I'm
glad
that
you're
taking
a
look
thanks.
C
I
didn't
see
that
discussion
though
I
just
linked
it.
Were
you,
oh
at
the
other
tab.
Sorry,
all
right,
but
we'll
start
it
out
after
outside.
We
don't
have
to
discuss
it
right
now,
regardless.
I
feel
like.
C
A
A
Your
your
wednesday,
especially
your
week,
we'll
talk
again
later
and
tomorrow
and
a
lot
I'm
sure
over
the
next
few
days.
Yep
absolutely.