►
From YouTube: 2021-08-31 Code Review UX Weekly
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
I
had
the
first
one,
which
is
the
create
pms,
are
working
on
vision
and
strategy
during
q3
and
also,
let
me
know
if
I
start
sounding
like
I'm
underwater.
If
I
thought.
Okay,
it's
bad,
but
so
the
great
pms
are
working
on
vision
and
strategy
for
q3.
A
It
is
driven
by
product,
but
we
would
like
input
from
everyone
and
so
there's
an
issue
that
outlines
sarah's
issue
at
the
top
level
of
create,
and
then
I've
created
an
issue
down
below
for
just
our
group
to
discuss,
and
so
I
thought
we
could
take
this
week
to
work
on
this
sort
of
async
by
ourselves
and
comment
in
the
issue
and
sort
of
answer
those
questions
and
come
up
with
thoughts.
A
And
then
next
week
we
can
have
a
sync
discussion
of
those
and
then
there's
a
like,
create
wide
meeting
or
as
many
people
as
are
available.
I
think
wednesday
of
next
week
and
so
and
that
sort
of
gives
us
enough
time
to
get
through
there
and
at
least
have
some
ideas
or
thoughts.
B
Yeah
yeah,
just
because
I
wasn't
here
for
the
last
two
weeks,
I
was
wondering
if
there's
like
what
is
the
back
story
for
this
initiative.
Is
this
something
that
only
create
is
doing?
Is
it
related
to
the
engineering
allocation
somehow
and
yeah?
What
what
do
we
exp?
What?
What
are
the
outputs
of
this?
What
what
is
the
end
result
that
we're
hoping.
A
Yeah,
I
think
it's
it's
a
couple
things.
One
is
because
of
engineering
allocations
and
many
teams
in
dev
being
sort
of
strapped
for
feature
work
because
of
all
of
the
engineering
allocations
or
realignments
or
other
things
that
has
freed
up
pms
and
when
I
say
free
up,
I
mean
it's
given
pm
sort
of
like
a
different
way
to
spend
their
time
than
maybe
they
would
more
tactically
for
milestones.
It's
there's
more
room
to
do
less
tactical
work
and
more
longer
term
work,
and
so
I
think,
that's
part
of
it.
A
The
other
piece
of
this
is
there's
a
strategy,
a
dev
section
strategy
review
in
november,
and
so
part
of
that
means
that,
like
all
of
the
like,
create
manage
and
plan
as
well
as
all
the
group
and
category
strategy
direction,
pages
below
those
need
to
be,
you
know
looked
at
and
re-evaluated
and
sort
of
rethought
through
for
what
the
next
year
looks
like
prior
to
that
meeting,
and
so
this
this
gives
us
the
time
to
do
that
so
yeah.
A
I
think
those
are
sort
of
the
two
reasons
and
as
far
as
I
know,
this
is
happening
in
dev.
I
think
sarah
called
it
the
quarter
of
discovery
is
what
we're
calling
that's.
What
the
dev
section
is
referring
to
q3s,
which
is
really
about
two
months
now,
but
yeah.
Does
that
answer
that
question.
B
Yeah
yeah,
I
don't
know
if
you
in
the
middle
of
that
I
don't
know.
If
you
answered
the,
I
mean
you
kind
of
did
about
the
expected
outcome,
so
it
looks
like
we
need
to
present
a
review
our
strategy
and
present
that
in
november.
B
So
so
I
assume
that
it
would
result
in
updating
our
direction
pages
and
our
roadmaps
to
align
with
what
we
come
up
with.
Is
that.
A
I
think
that's
tough
to
answer
today.
I
don't
have
a
good
answer
for
you.
I
think
direction.
Page
is
yes.
There
is
another
aspect
that
sarah's
asking
for
part
of
the
output
to
be
that
each
group
now
completes
two
opportunity
canvases
during
q3.
Oh,
I
see
the
deliverables.
A
Missed
that
yeah,
which
is
also
an
interesting
ask,
given
that
like
opportunity,
canvas,
has
typically
explored
new
work
and
if
we
can't
even
get
to
the
work
that
we
would
already
be
doing,
having
having
more
work
validated
to
be
done
is
sometimes
doesn't
help
the
situation
but
yeah
that
is
sort
of
the
other
output.
A
As
part
of
this,
which
is,
I
think,
what
the
questions
go
to
in
terms
of
in
the
issue
asking
in
the
like
the
stage
specific,
you
know
issue
the
prompts
that
are
there
for
expansive
thinking.
I
think
those
are
sort
of
like
the
questions
that
we
should
be
thinking
about,
while
we're
looking
at
what
exists
today.
A
B
A
Cool
and
if
anyone
there
is
a
meeting,
the
meeting
is
next
wednesday
for
the
create
wide
one,
I'm
gonna
double
check.
A
It
is,
if
anyone's
not
on
the
invite
and
wants
to
be
on
the
invite.
Let
me
know
I
think
she,
I
think
sarah
invited
like
all
product
designers
and
all
engineering
managers
in
create,
but
if
anyone
else
wants
in
feel
free
amy
if
you're
interested
or
not.
I
know
this
is
like
all
of
your
all
of
your
groups,
but
go
ahead.
C
B
Cool,
let.
B
We
would
we
change
our
focus,
a
lot,
what
what
yeah,
what
ex?
What
do
you
expect.
A
A
Not
feature
focused,
I
think,
as
a
group
right
now
we're
very
much
usability
and
performance
focused,
and
so
I
think
maybe
we'll
make
that
clearer
in
the
direction
that
sort
of
sets
the
tone
for
the
next
year
or
you
know
continuing
through
this
year.
So
I
think
for
for
code
review
is
like
in
the
gitlab
product.
That's
where
I
think
I
think.
A
For
the
editor
extension,
which
would
be
in
scope
of
this,
so
like
the
work
that
we
do
in
vs
code
or
potentially
the
work
that
we
would
do
if
we
were
to
branch
out
from
vs
code.
A
A
We
do
have
more
flexibility
and
part
of
the
features
that
we
want
to
do
in
vs
code.
We
can't
do
because
we're
sort
of
dependent
on
other
groups
and
teams
at
this
point
that
are
now
also
not
able
to
deliver
endpoints
and
apis
that
we
would
need
to
sort
of
build
those
features,
and
so
it
might
be
like
an
opportune
time
to
go
and
explore
and
do
more
validation
and
probably
an
opportunity
canvas
around
either
jetbrains
or
a
cli,
or
something
like
that.
B
Okay
yeah,
it
sounds
like
for
us.
It
will
be
mostly
a
mostly
a
clean
up,
not
nothing
like
completely
new.
A
B
Yeah
yeah,
I
think,
yeah
two
things
that
came
to
mind
while
you
were
talking
one
of
them
today
I
was
talking
with
annabelle
about,
is
that.
B
B
I
I
think
that
we
could
be
clearer
about
what
we're
not
going
to
do.
I
mean
we
have
a
section
that
says
we're
not
planning
to
work
on
like
this
thing,
but
I
think
it
would
be
interesting
to
not
only
list
more
things
that
we're
not
going
to
work
on
as
as
small
as
they
could
be,
but
also
have
a
like
a.
B
I
don't
know
a
catch-all
summary
like
a
principle,
something
that
we
would
say
things
that
tick.
These
points
we
will
not
follow
and
the
inverse
for
things
that
we
will
follow.
B
B
A
C
A
Agree,
I
think,
there's
also
being
an
idea
floated
around
about
group
level
direction
pages,
which
would
be
much
more
explicit
about
what
the
group
is
doing
even
above
a
category
level
that
may
come
into
play
as
an
opportunity
there
as
well.
So
I
think
I
think
that
feedback
makes
sense.
I
think
we're.
B
Yeah
yeah,
I
think
I
was
wondering
why
we're
doing
this
with
the
all
of
the
pms
in
create-
and
I
was
thinking
that
like
is
this
an
opportunity
to
align
everyone's
roadmap
and
instead
of
I
don't
know,
editor
going
after
rich.
A
A
I
think
some
of
what's,
I
think,
yes
to
some
of
that,
based
on
conversations
that
I've
had
or
the
way
that
I
think
we
think
about
things
or
sarah
has
thought
about
things
because
create-
and
it's
I
would
say,
create
probably
exclusively
has
not
historically
worked
that
way,
because
the
groups
are
very
creates,
like
a
catch-all
for
anything
source
code
e
and
while
we
work
in
similar
things
and
have
you
know,
overlap
in
terms
of
knowledge
and
skill
sets
and
things.
A
We
don't
really
have
a
cohesive
stage
vision
compared
to
a
stage
like
secure
right
where,
like
there's,
a
sort
of
a
single
persona
and
they've
got
like
defined
things
that
they
want
to
do
or
like
across
all
of
those
groups.
They're
all
trying
to
accomplish
very
similar
things
with
different.
You
know.
Technologies,
I
think,
is
maybe
the
difference.
The
op
sections
are
also
much
tighter
in
focus.
A
A
A
It
hasn't
historically
been
a
thing.
I
don't
think
that
means
it
shouldn't
be
a
thing
I
think.
That's
part
of
what
this
might
be
trying
to
do
is
to
make
you
know,
give
us
opportunities
to
look
at
what
other
groups
are
doing
and
see
if
there's
a
way
to
align
the
stage
to
some
themes
that
make
more
sense
for
the
stage
and
what
the
stage
collectively
does,
but.
B
Time
it's
what
she
said
like
we.
We
can't
perfectly
align
the
directions
of
all
of
the
groups
because,
for
example,
source
code,
they
have
a
lot
of
different
things
that
they
still
need
to
maintain
or
someone.
As
you
say,
it's
a
catch-all.
So
someone
needs
to
maintain
those
things.
The
same
thing
for
editor
that
inherited
some
things
from
knowledge,
and
so
it's
it's
yeah.
It
sounds
like
we.
B
We
we
would
need
to
split
up
even
more
the
groups
and
have
yeah
in
the
same
way
that
secure
has,
I
don't
know,
I
think,
four
or
five
groups
or
more.
We
only
have
three,
which
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense
for
the
number
of
problems
that
we're
solving,
but
that's
another.
Another
whole
series
of
conversations.
A
Know
how
tactical
any
of
these
conversations
will
be
like
about
specific
work,
but
it
is,
it
could
be
a
venue,
and
I
think
this
is
trying
to
be
more
vision
level
than
more
tactical.
That's
fine!
That's
fine!.
C
A
Okay,
anything
else
on
this
one.
I
know
we're
we're
bumping
up
against
time,
so
I'll
just
quickly
do
the
last
the
read-only
that
I've
got
in
I'm
just
highlighting
again
annabelle
and
pedro
you're,
both
tagged
in
the
issue.
It
is
a
customer
and
a
large,
invisible
customer,
and
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
responsive
to
them.
A
Even
if
that
response
is
like
we
need
more
time
or
we
need
to
do
more,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
at
least
sort
of
stay
on
top
of
that
they've
been
contributing
actually
from
what
I
know
this.
The
the
organization
actually
hired
someone
explicitly
or
moved
someone
to
explicitly
sort
of
contribute
to
gitlab
as
their
job
and
so
there's
a
lot
of
mrs
open
from
from
the
person.
A
I
think
we've
been
tagged.
I've
I've
been
involved
in
several
over
the
last
few
days,
looking
at
things,
and
then
this
is
an
outstanding
one.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
stay
responsive.
We
don't
have
to
say
yes
to
everything
the
group
wants
to
do,
but
we
do
have
to.
We
do
have
to
at
least
be
responsive
and
sort
of
come
back
with
with
reasons
why
or
why
not
and
alternative
workflows
or
whatever
the
case
may
be,.