►
From YouTube: 2022-11-08 Code Review Weekly 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).
A
Okay,
all
right
welcome
to
the
November
8th,
ux
thing
if
you're
in
the
US
and
you
watch
this
today
go
vote
and
then
otherwise.
First
item
up
is
I.
Just
wanted
to
open
this
because
I
know
Anna,
you
and
I
have
like
pinged
a
little
bit
about
it.
We've
been
on
a
few
issues.
A
I
feel
like
we're
we're
getting
to
a
point
where
I'm
a
little
concerned
about,
like
all
of
the
different
things
that
are
happening
in
the
emergency
or
that
groups
are
proposing
or
that
are
changing
in
the
merge
request
around
like
the
way
the
flow
works
today
and
potential
future
states
that
could
exist.
A
Approvals
that
are
like
also
dependent
on
pipelines
existing,
which
is
like
different
than
the
way
all
other
approvals,
work
and
I.
Think
that's
a
complication
that
has
not
been
thought
of
in,
like
terms
of
how
does
that
flow
work
with
everything
else
in
the
merge
request
like
how
does
that
work
with
merge
trains
or
merge?
A
One
pipeline
succeeds
and
all
those
things
and
then
on
the
compliance
side,
like
out
of
that
group,
they're
also
working
on
external
status
checks,
which
similarly
can
control
merge
ability
based
on
delayed
events
so
like
they
pull
out
to
third-party
apis
and
then
look
for
like
pass
fail
status
on
third-party
apis
So.
In
theory,
you
could
have
like
an
external
status
check,
complicated
way
to
do
this,
that,
like
talks
to
another
CI
system
that
has
to
go
and
run
pipelines
and
waits
for
that.
A
To
finish
before
that,
external
status
check
comes
back
and
tells
you
whether
or
not
something
is
like
pass
or
fail,
and
that
controls
whether
or
not
you
can
click
the
merge
button
so
like.
Who
knows
that
those
things
could
take
from
seconds
like
pinging,
a
system,
API
response,
milliseconds
to
infinite
and
like
what
does
that
state
in
between
and
so
from
my
side
like
I,
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
one
we're
aware
and
then
two
like
how
do
we
I
think
animals
sort
of
like
your
like?
A
What
I
would
say
is
the
core
Persona
of
developers
who
are
like
trying
to
like
move
through
these
things
efficiently
and
I
did
not
link
to
things.
I
should
do
that.
So
you
have
the
context
of
all
these
discussions,
but
I
will
do
that.
B
Okay,
so
I,
we
briefly
talked
about
this
before
you
joined
Amy
said
what
about
a
setting
and
I
said:
I
suggested
that
now
the
prevent
approval
before
pipeline
is
finished.
That
could
I
mean
you
already
wrote
it
right
here
automatically
merging
when
ready,
Auto
merge,
including
pipelines,
and
all
checks,
would
technically
solve
everything
in
in
a
way.
Wouldn't
it
any
external
CI
Services
would
need
to
succeed.
B
Your
security
approvals
would
need
to
wait
on
the
pipeline.
Well
that
wouldn't
solve
that.
Actually,
would
it
because
you
need
the
security
approvals
to
approve
after
the
pipeline
is
finished
right.
B
A
I,
don't
I,
don't
know,
I,
think
I.
Think
more
generally,.
A
A
A
One
is
in
flight,
and
so,
if
we
want
to
do
something,
we've
sort
of
got
to
be
rapid,
I
would
say
in
a
response,
but
I
think,
like
that's
I'd,
say
that's,
maybe
the
more
I
don't
necessarily
want
a
solution
on
all
the
things
in
the
secure
one,
because
I
think
it's
there's
a
lot
going
on
and
it's
very
hard
to
follow
for
me.
A
But
should
we
try
and
like
spend
more
time
on
this,
or
do
we
want
to
I
mean
our
other
option
would
be
like
address
it
in
post?
Let
them
go
how
they
want
to
go
on
this
and
then
get
things
shipped
into
the
product
and
then
sort
of
have
to
go
back
and
deal
with
whatever
the
Fallout
is.
B
Well,
when
you
say
like
that,
it
doesn't
sound
very
good,
but
I
haven't
actually
seen
the
final
proposal
from
them
yet
and
like.
Ideally,
it
would
continue
to
be
this
sort
of
way
where
they're
driving
everything
and
then
pinging
us
for
just
checking
and
and
advice
and
that
kind
of
stuff
or
making
sure
that
it's
still
going
to
work.
B
The
way
that
they're
expecting
it
to,
which
is
what
I
would
rather
do
I
just
don't
I
find
it
really
hard
to
to
follow
too
and
I'm
wondering
if
we
need
to
talk
with
them
as
well.
Just
because
I
don't
know
anymore
what
the
proposal
is.
There
are
three
different
problems
and
then
there's
this
overarching
theme
and
I.
Everyone
like
we've
got
10
people
contributing
on
this
and
I'm,
not
sure.
B
What's
happening
anymore,
so
in
a
perfect
world
I
guess
it
would
be
continuing
to
be
on
their
responsibility
to
keep
on
suggesting
proposals.
I,
don't
know
if
they
have
the
problem
in
the
solution
validated
or
decided
on,
but
that
would
also
fall
under
them
and
then
we
would
just
be
the
what's
the
word
I'm
looking
for
they'd
be
the
DIY
we'd,
be
the
I've
seen
this
before
in
gitlab
like
we
would
be
informed.
Is
it
or
whatever.
B
That's
the
one
because
I
don't
really
I
think
we
should
drop
what
we're
doing
right
now
to
pick
this
up.
B
A
A
A
And
Andy
has
mentioned,
like
you
know,
more
research
should
be
done,
but
I
don't
know
what
research
has
been
done
today
on
either.
One
of
these
I
couldn't
answer
that.
C
So
I
know
that's
it's
secure,
I
know
secure.
Has
a
researcher
I,
don't
I
assume
compliance
is
under
the
same
kind
of
at
least
track
of
where
everybody
sits,
but
these
should
not
make
it
into
the
product
without
being
validated
in
some
way
right.
These
are
significant
user-facing
actions,
and
so
my
personal
point
of
view
would
be:
they
need
to
get
it
if
they
have
a
researcher.
That
researcher
should
be
responsible
for
helping
with
solution,
validation.
C
And
I
think
we
should
feel
free
to
sort
of
tell
them
to
hold
up
on
it
until
that's
done.
But
that's
just
my.
B
So
for
next
steps,
because
I
don't
know
what
to
do
right
now
and
could
we
ask
for
a
breakdown
of
the
actual
problem
proposal
from
both
teams-
I
guess,
I
guess
I'm
only
thinking
of
secure,
because
I
haven't
looked
at
the
compliance
one
since
you
paid
me
yesterday,
so
I
I
haven't
focused
that
much
on
this,
because
I
have
other
things
to
do
and
even
responding
takes
so
much
time
and
reading.
All
of
the
all
the
comments
yeah,
the.
A
A
Like
like,
how
much
involved
do
we
want
to
be
and
how
much
bandwidth
do
we
have
to
like?
Be
that
involved
or
not
involved,
which
fall
and
I
think
that
falls
a
lot
on?
A
Unfortunately,
you
and
potentially
Ben
and
myself,
given
Pedro's
absence
and
ourselves
sort
of
also
scope
has
like
grown,
and
we
don't
have
extra
support
out
of
him
necessarily
either.
B
C
Mean
maybe
we
can
sort
of
like
fling
it
back
at
them?
Like
you
know,
we
can't
like
accept
or
spend
bandwidth
on
this
proposal
until
it's
validated
with
users
and
your
response
that,
because
you're
proposing
so
thank
you
I,
don't
know.
A
B
C
A
In
order
for
us
to
be
able
to
support
I,
think
like
to
to
both
your
and
Ben's
points,
in
order
for
us
to
be
able
to
help
support
one,
it
would
be
nice
to
sort
of
have
the
problems
without
Solutions,
but
just
the
problems
and
the
research
that,
like
validated
those
problems
so
that
we
can
like
process
that
and
then
we
would
still
expect
you
to
like
lead
a
solution.
But
we
we
don't
have
enough
context.
A
I
guess
to
like
understand
where
we're
at
is
part
of
the
issue
it
feels
like
in
this,
and
so
we
need
that
from
them
and
then
so
I
think
the
first
step
is
like
we
can
just
ping
all
of
these
folks
and
ask
for
that
on
the
compliance
side.
That
might
be
more
challenging.
A
What
I
asked
for
from
compliance
was
I
asked
for
because
they're
already
in
Dev
I
asked
for
like
a
working
prototype,
so
we
could
like
review
that
functionality
in
terms
of
like
what
does
this
look
like
in
in
your
prototype
and
we'll
see
if
we
get
anything
back,
I
haven't
seen
any
emails
come
back
from
them.
Actually
so
yeah
I
think
that
gives
us
the
next
and
I
think
for
secure.
We
I
think
I
think
for
both.
Yes,
it
sounds
like
maybe
project.
It
sounds
like
we're
all.
A
Concerned
at
varying
levels
does
at
least
want
to
be
more
informed,
like
we
at
least
want
to
be
more
informed,
because
maybe
where
I'll
say
that
and
then
we'll
and
the
place
to
start
for
us
is
like.
Can
you
help
us
with
the
research
and
like
understanding
on
where
we're
at
with
these?
That
makes
sense
and.
A
B
Okay,
the
compliance
one
that's
already
in
Dev
is
to
disable
the
merge
button
when
status
checks
are
required
to
pass
and
checks
are
failing
or
pending
right.
A
B
A
Yeah
I,
don't
I,
think
I
think
that's
part
of
the
reason
why
I
want
to
make
sure
we
have
well
I
had
asked
about
like
should
we
do?
We
need
to
address
this
like
at
a
higher
level
right
and
I
I
had
sent
the
secure
team,
we
have
been
development
docs,
we
have
the
concept
of
what
we
consider
a
merged
check
and
what
we
consider
approvals
right.
A
We
have
the
concept
of
checks
being
automated
systems
that
users,
like
don't
interact
with,
and
we
have
approvals,
which
are
people,
click
the
approve
button
and
those
are
the
two
ways
that,
like
you,
can
control,
merging,
I.
Think
I.
Think
the
external
status
check
follows
sort
of
the
regular
I
would
say
it's
equivalent
to
like
all
discussions
are
resolved
right.
That's
those
are
checks
like
all.
All
threads
must
be
resolved,
I
think
it.
A
It
is
similar,
I
think
the
question
is
going
to
be
that
UI
and
that
experience
is
a
little
bit
confusing
because
you're
you're
waiting
on
something
to
come
back,
which
is
I,
think
different
than
any
other
status
check.
We
have
today
where
status
checks
today
respond
in
real
time
and
happen
within
our
system.
Right,
like
they're,
either
threads
or
resolved
the
pipeline
is,
must
pass
the.
A
A
I,
don't
know
what
you
do
like:
how
do
you?
How
do
you
deal
with
that
as
a
user
and
like
how
do
you
communicate
that,
like
the
reason
you
can't
merge,
one
pipeline,
like
you,
can't
even
click
merge
when
pipeline
succeeds,
as
this
other
thing
is
happening
and
that's
on
them,
but
the
question
is
like
if,
if
this
is
a
thing
that's
in
the
product,
and
we
want
secure
to
leverage
this
like,
how
do
we.
A
How
do
we
make
sure
that
experience
is
like
consistent
and
not
like
across
every
group?
That
sort
of
like
wants
to
do
something
similar
like
I,
think
that's
where
I'm
concerned,
like
you
know,
compliance
I,
don't
necessarily
disagree
with
what
they're
doing
I
think
it
it's
there's
a
potential
for,
like
a
very
weird
state,
I
think
how
do
we
communicate
that
and
then
how
do
we
make
sure
other
things
like
no?
This
is
how
you
deal
with
that
as
we
move
forward
and
I.
A
B
Right,
yeah
I
think
it
will
be
interesting
to
see
the
Prototype
of
compliance
is
implementation.
We
have
you
know
the
merge,
widget
and
there's
room
underneath
that
gives
you.
You
know
the
merge
summary.
This
is
going
to
be
emerged
into
this
Branch.
The
branch
will
be
deleted
that
kind
of
stuff.
So
that
seems
like
the
place
to
say
still
waiting
on
this
external
service
to
do
something
and
link
to
it,
because
then
the
merge
button
is
going
to
be
disabled
and
it's
right
below
that
right.
B
I
think
Camellia
also
posted
a
design
that
was
kind
of
similar
to
that.
That
was
like
you
can't
merge
because
of
all
of
these
reasons-
or
you
can't
approve
I
forget
what
it
was,
but
it
seemed
kind
of
similar.
So
if
we
see
compliance,
we
can
look
at
secure
one
again
and
see
I,
don't
remember
which
problem
that
was
solving.
So
we
still
need
to
ask
for
the
problem,
but
it
did
sound
like
they
were
kind
of
going
in
the
same
direction
as
each
other.
So
that's
useful.
D
A
C
A
Yeah
I
think
I
think
from
your
side,
and
it's
been
a
while,
since
this
page
was
originally
written,
I'd
love.
If
you
take
a
look
and
like
think,
if
there's
ways
to
improve
it,
I
will
say
that
it
has
been.
A
Not
successful,
I
think
in
driving
what
we
would
like
to
see
historically
I
think
I.
Think
the
and
I
think
part
of
that
is
like
it's.
A
lofty
ask
I
think
code
review
has
a
I,
don't
want
to
say
a
higher
bar
I.
Don't
think!
That's
fair
I
think
code
review.
A
A
Whereas,
like
you,
don't
see
that
in
issues
or
you
don't
see
that
in
other
places,
right
like
the
Mr
is
sort
of
where
every
group
goes
to
contribute,
and
so
we
see
this
at
a
scale
that
like
makes
it
so
there's
more
information
needed
and
more
understanding
needed
on
our
side
to
know
what's
happening
because
we're
trying
to
coordinate
our
own
group
and
potentially
two
or
three
other
groups
that
are
like
trying
to
do
very
similar
things.
A
And
so
that's
why
I
think
the
asks
in
this
tend
to
be
loftier,
because
if
someone
wants
to
add
a
new
style
check
like
this
external
status
check
that
could
block
anymore
like
we
want
to
know.
Why
have
a
good
reason?
So,
when
the
next
group
comes
along
and
says,
we
want
to
do
we're
going
to
do
this,
but
slightly
differently.
A
We
don't
end
up,
you
know
in
those
States
and
we
want
to
make
sure
we
have
like
answers
for
like
here's,
how
you
saw
sort
of
similar
sounding
or
similar
feeling
problems,
and
so,
but
that's
a
lot
of
that's
a
lot
of
effort
to
push
off
on
other
teams.
That's
a
it's
a
lot
for
them
to
also
take
on,
and
so
I
think.
That's
why
we've
had
a
hard
time
getting
people
on
board
with
this,
so
I
think
I
would
say
from
reviewing
it.
It
would
be
helpful
to
know
like.
A
A
See
I
hear
both
I,
don't
know
what
Annabelle's
experience
is
I
hear
both
I
also
tend
to
like,
because
I
subscribe
to
labels,
which
is
like
a
bad
habit,
I
get
notified
if
somebody
labels
a
merge
request
with
the
merge
request
label,
which
often
happens
if
they're
touching
the
merge
request,
and
so
it's
easier
for
me
to
like
catch
and
go
something's
happening
in
Dev,
whether
or
not
we
knew
about
it
in
advance.
A
So
that's
one
way,
I
think,
like
compliance
I
would
say
like
with
the
the
external
status
checks
we
started
talking
to
them
well
before
they.
They
took
that
on
like
well
before
it
became
in
engineering
like
we
had
had
conversations
about
it
and
walked
through
like
some
of
the
initial
iterations,
so
that's
happening
and
I'd
say
insecure.
This
is
the
same
thing.
A
They're
well
they're,
well
before
engineering
effort
right
now,
right,
like
they're
in
we're
talking
to
designers,
we're
not
talking
to
like
Engineers
about
what's
going
on
so
I
think
we're
ahead
of
implementation
in
most
cases,
but,
as
we
all
know
like,
as
you
get
closer
and
closer
to
implementation,
things
start
to
like
shift
from
where
you
thought
they
were
six
months
ago,
or
you
know
a
year
ago,
I
think
it's
been
a
year
plus
since
we
talked
to
compliance
about
something.
C
Okay,
maybe
what
I'll
do
in
my
copious
amounts
of
spare
time
is
write
a
document
that
proposes
a
new
process,
that's
a
little
bit
more
lightweight
and
and
would
act
as
an
maybe
at
least
an
iteration.
If
not
a
replacement
for
that
page
that
you
looked
at
because
I
just
looked
at
it
and
it's
a
little
complex
to
follow.
A
A
A
So
Annabelle
you're
gonna.
Do
you
want
to
take
the
next
steps
in
on
the
secure
side
to
follow
up
with
them
and
ask
about
problems
in
research
and
then
I
can
ping
Derek
and
Sam
and
see
if
we
can
get
figure
out
who
the
designer
is
in
compliance.
A
A
B
A
Thanks
Ben
thanks
Annabelle
and
Ben
I
feel
better
than
I
did
earlier
in
late
last
week
about
about
this.
So,
like
that's
a
step
in
the
right
direction,.