►
From YouTube: 2022-05-31 Code Review UX 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).
C
Yeah
so
yeah,
I
wanted
to
to
bring
up
this
topic
about
the
priority
of
well.
In
this
case,
I
think
it's
everything
related
to
you
know
just
selecting
reviewers
and
approval
rules
and
also
now
suggested
reviewers
and
yeah.
C
I
because
you
know
priority
matters
and
we
have
few
resources,
so
you
have
to
make
you
know
great
priority
decisions
and
in
this
case,
more
on
the
ux
side
of
things,
because
there
will
still
be
some
some
time
here
until
engineering
picks
up
anything
any
of
this,
and
you
know,
caillou
brought
up
this
topic
or
this
issue
of
automatically
assigning
merge,
requests
based
on
illegible,
approvers
and
annabelle.
You
were
going
to
pick
this
up
as
well
and
and
so
yeah.
C
We
you
know
some
background
to
this-
is
that
we
did
some
exploration
some
years
ago
about
reconciling
reviewers
and
approval
rules
to
make
it.
You
know,
just
you
know,
join
the
two
together
because
today
they're
not
the
same
thing,
but
we
didn't
prioritize
any
design
work
as
part
of
that
we
actually
let
me
move
this
up
point
c,
because
it
makes
more
sense
this
way
in
the
issue
that
is
linked
there
at
the
top.
C
There
are
some
suggestions
for
some
boring
solutions
like
leveraging
the
code
owner's
file
to
suggest
and
assign
reviewers
and
yeah
for
those
of
you
who
are
not
aware.
We
had
features
similar
to
this
that
suggested
approvers,
and
it
only
worked
when
we
had
just
one
kind
of
approval
rule,
basically
where
you
said
where
you
basically
entered
in
the
settings.
The
default
approvers
for
all
merge
requests,
and
we
also
listed
below
that
field,
both
in
the
settings
and
or
in
this
case
in
the
merge
requests
creation
form.
C
We
listed
some
users
based
on
the
blame,
so
it
would
look
at
the
change
files
in
the
mr
and
you
could
click
on
people's
names
and
it
would
add
them
to
just
an
input
text.
Input
that
is
was
called
approvers,
but
it
this
broke
when
we
added
multiple
approval
rules
and-
and
we
removed
it
more
recently,
because
we
didn't
invest
time
in
you-
know
this
reconciliation
and
yeah.
It's
something
we
didn't
continue
going
forward,
because
we
had
to
understand
how
this
would
behave
with
multiple
approval
rules
and
yeah.
C
We
didn't
work
on
that,
basically
and
yeah,
and
finally,
my
last
point,
because
I
had
it
before
handing
it
over
to
kai
or
amy.
We
also
then
have
the
applied
machine
learning
group.
That
is,
you
know,
basically
prioritizing
the
suggested
reviewers,
which
in
a
way
well
it
basically
affects
our
the
ux
of
merge
requests
and
how
people
will
perceive
any
kind
of
suggestions
that
we
make
for
reviewer
selection.
C
So
it
kind
of
also
dictates
our
priority
in
terms
of
ux-
and
I
mentioned
in
the
product
design
funding
issue
that
we
we
need
ux
support
there,
then
we
should
keep
up
with
everything
that
is
happening
so
yeah.
I
just
wanted
to
have
a
more
unstructured
conversation
about
how
we
see
the
priority
of
this
and
what
we
can
postpone
or
not
and
yeah
how
quickly
we
need
to
jump
on
this
wagon
and
and
think
about
this
through.
B
B
C
B
As
far
as
like
important,
I
I
don't
know
the
only
reason
I
had
like
started
a
comment
on.
It
was
because
we
were
having
conversations
on
this
particular
he
automatically
assigned
merch
for
review,
based
on
algebra
we're
having
conversations
about.
B
This
in
combination
with,
like
automatically
assign
group
to
like
issue
to
like
a
merge,
request,
review
sort
of
get
frequent
comments
from
users,
and
so
I
I
think
about
them
a
lot
but
largely
what
the
users
are
asking
for
sort
of
at
odds
with
how
we
think
about
code
review,
and
so
my
comment,
like
you
know,
when
I
had
mentioned
annabelle,
was
sort
of
like
we're
looking
at
suggested,
reviewers
like
maybe
there's
a
like
a
middle
ground
here,
where
we
don't.
B
Actually,
we
don't
assign
every
single
person
who's
an
eligible
approver
to
review
a
merge
request,
but
we
leverage
some
version
of
whatever
we're
going
to
do
in
the
ui
for
suggestions
to
sort
of
like
prompt.
This
people
want
it
for
code
owners
too.
They
want
like
every
single
eligible
code
owner
to
automatically
be
assigned
as
a
reviewer.
They
want
it
for,
like
everyone,
an
xyz
team
to
be
on
baseline
as
a
reviewer,
and
I
don't
think
that's
the
right
choice.
B
B
I
don't
know
how
important
it
is.
I
think
if
we're
in
the
area,
because
the
applied
ml
stuff
is
like
sort
of
not
a
forcing
function
but
a
forcing
function
in
terms
of
like
suggested
reviewers
that
we
should
probably
be
cognizant
of
all
of
these
other
very
in
my
mind,
very
similar
and
related
things
that
make
sense.
But
I
don't
know
that
I
would
go
and
like
solve
these.
B
I
guess
like
I
think
that
my
question
is
probably
back
to
you
is.
I
know,
there's
been
some
recent
conversations
about
potentially
changing
the
way
the
applied
ml
suggested.
Reviewer
stuff
ends
up
in
the
ui.
B
I
think
the
question
is
is
like
I
think
mike.
My
question
would
be:
is
the
sort
of
interim
proposal
there
one
the
right
one?
I
think
I've
lost
some
feedback
there,
but
two
are
we
taking
into
account?
Maybe
all
of
these
other
ways
that,
like
suggesting
reviewers,
might
be
important
and
is
that
sort
is
that,
like
is
the
first
ui
treatment
that
apply
to
mel,
might
get
probably
the
right
one
that
we
want
to
use
for
everything,
or
should
we
be
looking?
A
B
Time
and
if
the
answer
is
no,
we
don't
need
to
take
into
account
these
other
ones
right
now,
we'd
like
get
the
applied
ml1
going,
get
feedback
and
go
on.
That's
fine.
If
it's
we,
it
may
make
sense
to
look
at
all
of
them.
Then,
like
let's
try
and
I
can
help
find
all
these
issues.
Where
sort
of
people
are
asking
for
this
functionality,
we
can
at
least
get
a
sense
of
what
that
looks
like
and
make
sure
we're
not
missing
anything.
C
Approval
rules
and
multiple
approval
rules,
because,
if
you're
not
using
that
in
which
is
you
know,
basically,
if
you
look
at
some
of
our
other
competitors,
you
just
have
you
know
a
default
either
default
lists
of
reviewers
that
are
suggested
or
automatically
assigned,
or
we
they
read
from
the
code
owner's
file
or
from
the
blame
and
suggest
based
on
that.
C
We
could
go
the
boring
solution,
route
and
suggests
reviewers
based
on
the
code
owners
or
the
blame,
or
both,
while
not
solving
that
problem
with
approval
rules,
but
that
would
mean
that
you
know
if,
if
you're,
using
approval
rules
and
you're
trying
to
make
things,
have
great
policies
and
things
are
organized
in
your
project.
C
Oh,
we
don't
suggest
anything
like
if
you
need
to
throw
out
of
the
window
approval
rules.
If
you
want
suggestions,
it
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense.
It
could
be
an
iterative
path
right
if
we
wanted
to
build
it.
That
way,
but
I
don't
think,
is
a
iterative
path
from
a
design,
standpoint
and
validation
standpoint
right.
I
think
it
would
be
more
helpful
for
us
to
know
what
is
the
ideal
future
state
with
all
of
those
things
into
account
and
then
slowly
build
from
there
and
gain
usage
feedback.
C
Because
that
that's
more
or
less,
what
happened
when
we
introduced
multiple
approval
rules
is
that
we
didn't
actually
design
the
multiple
approval
rules
feature
with
that
old
suggested,
approvers
feature
we
just
we
didn't
consider
it
so
it
broke,
and
we
didn't
know
how
to
reconcile
all
of
that,
and
like
oh
okay,
yeah,
forget
about
that,
so
we
we
didn't
properly
iterate
on
it,
so
yeah,
if
we're
basically
being
kind
of
forced
to
prioritize,
suggested
reviewers
from
the
applied
machine
learning
group.
C
It
kind
of
means
that
we
have
to
work
on
this
right
and
we
could
just
look
at
what
they're
doing
and
improve
the
experience
there.
So
have
a
great
experience
for
suggestions
that
come
out
of
this
machine
learning
thing,
but
in
reality,
we'd
have
to
look
at
everything,
because
the
only
thing
that's
changing
is
how
we
calculate
suggestions
in
the
back
end,
which
for
the
user,
it
really
doesn't
matter.
What
matters
is
here,
are
the
suggestions
and
do
they
make
sense
to
you
and
can
you
use
them
well?
C
Can
you
apply
them
well?
Are
they
presented
in
a
way
that
is
intuitive
and
so
yeah?
That
is
why
I
wanted
to
bring
this
up
because
from
everything
that
I'm
seeing
it
feels
like
we're
yeah
we're
basically
being
forced
to
prioritize
this
from
a
ux
standpoint
and
we'd
have
to
look
at
all
of
this
and
make
sense
of
it
and-
and
even
you
know,
take
into
account
those
boring
solutions
that
are
actually
really.
C
You
know
nice
first
steps.
You
know
just
look
at
code
owner's
file.
Okay.
How
can
we
make
that
work
with
what
we
have
today?
Look
at
blame?
Okay?
How
can
we
make
that
work
today,
but
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
all
of
those
pieces
together
so
that
we
also
don't
trip
up
the
work
that
the
applied
ml
group
is
doing.
C
They're
just
saying
we
don't
want
machine
learning,
we
just
want
that
basic
thing
that
competitors
give
us.
So
how
do
we
make
all
of
this
work
right?
So
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
this
whole
spectrum,
not
just
look
at
one
end
or
the
other,
but
look
at
everything
together
so
that
we
have
a
coherent
direction
to
move
forward
with.
A
Yeah,
I
was
kind
of
wondering
why
we
were
we
were
kind
of
talking
about
this
so
much
now.
I
understand
that
it's
kind
of
being
not
necessarily
forced
on
us,
but
we
do
need
to
address
it
for
the
other
team.
A
Yeah
again,
I
don't
have
anything
to
add,
because
I
agree
with
all
the
points
that
have
been
made.
We
can't
really
does
approvals
override
the
suggestions.
I
don't
necessarily
want
to
add
code
owner
suggestions.
A
So,
okay,
what
what
is
the
problem
right
now,
like
the
current
status
of
the
design
that
was
proposed
months
ago,
has
been
kind
of
put
on
hold,
and
I
haven't
looked
at
it
since
last
thursday,
so
I
need
to
check
on
that,
but
we're
going
to
potentially
only
add
these
suggestions
into
the
reviewer
drop
down.
Hopefully
just
now,
while
we
work
through
all
this,
so
we
don't
have.
You
know
a
huge
chunk
of
ui
that
doesn't
really
help
anyone.
A
B
I
I
would
say
we
don't
need
to.
I
think
the
question
is,
is
the
is
the
maybe
let's
rephrase
it
ml
or
no
ml?
What
your?
What
what
is
being
proposed
in
design
is
how
we
would
suggest
reviewers
the
criteria
for
what,
how
we
suggest
those
there's
a
bunch
of
different
things
that
we
could
start
using
right.
There's
the
ml
one.
We
could
do
approval
rules,
we
could
do
code
owner
rules,
we
could
do
blame
data,
we
could
do
all
kinds
of
things
to
like
manipulate
the
criteria.
B
I
think
the
question
is
is
like:
is
that
the
right
ui
for
suggested
reviewers
in
general,
regardless
of
sort
of
whether.
B
Go
see,
mom,
sorry,
there's
a
kid
crying
where
I've
related
them
in
my
head
is
there
there
are
people
like
this
issue
is
not
actually
about
suggest.
The
one
that
got
linked
is
not
actually
about
suggested
reviewers.
B
What
these
people
want
is
or
what
has
been,
what
is
being
proposed?
Not
what
these,
what
is
being
proposed
and
what
some
users
have
asked
for
is
actually
like.
B
A
So
but-
and
I
still
think,
I'm
missing
something
so
I
apologize,
but
how
let's
say
in
that
example,
we
did
implement
it
so
that
if
you
have
a
special
or
a
specific
approval
rule
that
says
one
of
these
seven
people
need
to
approve
it.
If
they
did
show
up
in
the
drop
down
as
the
main
suggested,
approvers
or
sorry
suggested
reviewers.
A
B
I
think
potentially,
yes,
I
think
the
question
is
like
do
we
want
to
look
at
all
of
those
kinds
of
cases
and
make
sure
that
that
that
ui
proposal
would
meet
sort
of
all
of
those
cases
right
like?
Would
they
meet
the
cases
of
code
owners?
Would
they
meet
the
cases
of
approval
rules?
Would
they
meet
the
cases
of
teams
where
people
want
to
sort
of
like
specify
teams
that
have
to
review
everything
so
are.
A
B
A
Well,
hopefully,
we
just
pick
one
like
round
robin
style,
but
so
when
I
was
doing
the
competitor
analysis,
you
could
choose
these.
So
is
this
question.
Like
I
mean
there
are
so
many
ways
we
could
go
with
this.
This
is
a
huge
ux
issue,
that
is
that
that's
okay,
just
checking.
I
wasn't
sure
if
this
was
like
a
hey.
Let's
do
something
right
now,
let's
discuss
it
now
and
come
to
a
conclusion.
B
E
A
Okay,
that
that's
that's
yes,
I
love
the
idea.
A
Approvals
and
reviewers,
I
find
that
concept
already
very
confusing.
I
hope
that
we
wouldn't
show
30
options
like
I
think.
Some
of
the
cool
things
I
saw
from
competitors
were
like
choose
based
on
workload,
use
based
on
work
balance.
What
do
you
want
to
override?
What
do
you
want
approvals
to
override
cone
owners,
hopefully
to
override
blame
data,
and
then
I
mean
ml
can
come
in
and
do
their
fancy
stuff
where
you
can
like
pick
the
person,
that's
the
most
useful,
but
but
even
if
we
didn't
have
any
ml
like
it
would
okay
yeah.
C
Yeah,
I
think
I
think
that
the
what
do
you
said
in
that
other
issue?
Okay,
let's
pause,
you
know
that
very,
not
very
big,
but
that
a
sidebar
design
where
you
had
the
plus
buttons
and
just
show
the
suggestions
drop
down.
I
think
that
is
a
useful
iteration.
It
doesn't
corner
us
necessarily
we're
using
an
existing
pattern,
so
I
think
that
that's
fair
for
the
short
term.
C
C
Is
that
something
that
we're
like
the
ml
group
is
going
to
do
somehow
or
or
not?
When
are
they
going
to
do
it?
So
I
think
we
need
to
start
there
and
talk
with
the
people
that
are,
you
know,
actively
working
on
something
to
suggest
reviewers,
so
that
we
can
then
make
sense
of
the
work
that
we
need
to
do,
because
you
know
the
people
in
that
issue.
C
So
I
think
we
need
to
start
there
and
then
deconstruct
the
problem
and
understand,
as
I
said,
if
this
intersects,
with
approvers
or
with
code
owners
or
with
with
blame,
and
maybe
what
we
can
then
do,
is
design
a
solution
that
works
for
the
most
sophisticated
case,
which
is
you
know,
using
machine
learning
and
lots
of
inputs
and
data,
but
can
also
then
be
trimmed
down
to
work
very
well
with
just
code
owners
or
with
blame.
I
don't
know,
does
that
make
sense.
A
Still
don't
know
what
the
next
step
is
or
if
we're
just
discussing
this
to
I
mean
you
said
that
yeah
we'll
talk
to
the
to
the
machine
learning
group,
I'm
still
finding
it
difficult
to
figure
out
what
we're
talking
about
like
is.
Are
we
still
going
through
with
the
proposal?
A
A
Spending
time
just
us
going
back
and
and
trying
to
try
to
map
all
this
out
and
figure
out
how
to
make
it
all
work.
Long
term.
C
I
think
the
what
I
would
suggest,
as
the
most
reasonable
first
step
here,
is
to
get
up-to-date
on
everything
that
the
ml
group
is
doing.
Talk
with
them
understand
their
vision,
if
they've
done
any
research
at
all.
If
we
need
to
do
research
on
that,
so
that
we
can
then
plan
out,
what
we're
going
to
do
you
know
is,
is
this
like?
C
Is
this
the
long,
a
long
game
for
them
or
do
do
they
just
want
to
ship
like
one
first
iteration
of
or
a
couple
of
iterations
of
suggested,
reviewers
and
then
they're
going
to
pivot?
To
something
else?
Are
they
going
to
do?
They
want
to
own
everything
that
has
to
do
with
suggesting
reviewers
or
just
things
that
are
related
to
machine
learning?
C
So
I
think
we
need
to
make
sense
of
that,
and
I
think,
acting
on
that
issue
of
automatically
assigning
based
on
electrical
approvers,
doing
anything
right
now,
as
a
reaction
might
be,
might
put
a
set
at
risk
from
an
iterative
standpoint.
A
Me
yeah
yep,
that
makes
sense.
I
just
yeah.
I
need
to
gather
more
information
because
I'm
not
sure
what
what
the
status
is
of
anything
right
now.
So
I'm
looking
at
that
issue,
so
the
reaction
that
you
mentioned
about
this
issue
specifically,
what
actually
were
you
talking
about
like
having
an
action
as
as
a
reaction
to
this
specific
issue
like
what
did
you
mean
by
that
I
mean.
C
It
could
be
you
know,
saying
or
or
immediately,
jumping
into
design
and
designing
something
that
would
work
for
this
or
picking
up
on
those
boring
solutions
and
putting
together
something
that
we
could
easily
ship
or
not.
That's
the
kind
of
reaction
that
I
was
talking
about.
A
Yeah,
I
I
said
it
to
myself
after
we
talked
about
this,
I
think
I
talked
with
marcel,
but
I
wrote
I'm
just
going
to
look
into
it
so
yeah,
I
don't
think
anyone's
expecting
a
design
out
of
this.
C
B
Yeah,
I
think,
that's
fine.
I
yeah.
I
had
no
no
expectations
that
we
would
actually
do
anything
with
this
issue
other
than
I
I
just
it's
worth
thinking
about,
as
we
think
through
things,
I
think,
talking
with
the
apply
developer
group
thinks
makes
sense
like
let's
figure
out
what
they're
going
to
do,
what
else
we
need
to
take
into
account
and
just
sort
of
make
sure
we've
got
those
things
in
mind
as
we're
looking
through
solutions,
there.
C
Yeah,
I
I
think
yeah
synchronous
asynchronous
whatever
you
prefer,
or
you
know
I
think,
whatever
works
best
for
for
everyone
yeah,
but
but
this
milestone
yeah,
I
think,
as
soon
as
possible,
basically
because
they're
actively
working
on
it
and
we're
already
getting
feedback
from
internal
usage
of
that
comments.
The
reviewer
suggestion
commenting,
mrs
so
the
sooner
we
get
our
foot
in
and
help
you
know
them.
You
know
have
a
great
experience.
E
B
B
We
are
over
two
were
skipping,
then
you
got
three.
E
A
B
And
the
ask
is
that
we
I
just
want
to
be
clear.
The
ask
is
that
of
these,
like
four
issues
we
would
create,
we
would
make
sure
they're
ready
for
a
community
contributor
to
pick
up.
E
Yes,
not
necessarily
just
those
four,
those
are
ones
that
that
pedro
found,
but
if
there
are
other
ones
that
relate
to
the
benchmarking
work
that
we
did,
then
those
are
applicable
too.
But
what
they
ask
is
that
when
this
blog
post
comes
out
that
we
have
five-ish
issues
that
are
ready
for
community
contribution.
E
A
E
A
C
Cool
thanks
van
I'll
take
a
look
at
the
and
see
which
ones,
I
think
are
ready.
I
hope
that
we
don't
need
a
lot
of
design
work
to
get
some
of
these
ready.
That's
my
what
I'm
hoping
but
yeah,
those
four
at
a
glance
seem
to
be
the
ones
that
are
closest
or
that
are
already
ready.
C
E
Okay,
yeah,
I
mean,
let
me
know
you
know
if
it's
too
taller
than
ask,
I
know
you
guys
are
very
busy,
so
I
can
we
can
pick.
We
can
cherry
pick
ones
that
are
like
pretty
much
almost
ready
or
are
ready,
and
I
will
be
asking
the
other
groups
in
create
as
well.
So,
even
if
there's
two
or
three
that
would
be
great.
C
And
to
your
point
about
you
know
this
being
a
kr.
Is
the
kr
to
have
to
publish
the
blog
post
by
the
end
of
the
quarter?
What
what
is
the
goal
at
the
end
of
the
quarter?
E
Kr
is
just
that
we
have
the
process.
This
is
something
we
want
to
do
from
from
ux
research
like
on
a
more
consistent
basis,
so
we're
like
piloting
the
process
with
this
particular.
The
idea
is
we.
We
have
like
a
research
project
that
results
in
some
kind
of
actionable
insight
issues,
and
we
want
to
throw
some
of
those
back
to
the
community.
E
That's
just
like
a
regular
process
that
we
do,
and
so
we
haven't
done
that
before
getting
a
blog
post,
published
is
kind
of
a
process
at
the
moment,
there's
there's
a
lot
of
hurdles,
and
so
we
just
want
to
like
streamline
that.
Basically.
A
B
That's
it
for
me,
awesome
thanks.
Everyone
enjoy
the
rest
of
your
week.