►
From YouTube: Geo Scheduling Call 2020-08-11
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).
B
A
All
right
all
right,
fix,
regenerate
schema.
This
was
me:
I
fixed
the
regenerate
schema
script
so
that
it
works
again
after
the
schema
migrations
migration,
so
that
it
gets
rid
of
stuff
in
schema,
migrations
and
that's
it
ooh
douglas.
A
C
B
Yes,
this
this
definitely
helps
having
having
all
these
yeah
just
having
all
these
broken
down
into
lots
of
mrs
helped,
the
numbers
quite
a
bit
yeah,
I
feel
like
we
need.
We
need,
like
sound
effects
for
our
scheduling,
calls,
because
this
would
be
the
time
right
now,
where
I
would
press
the
air
horn
and
be
like.
B
D
About
yeah,
I
believe
I
merged
it.
It
would
ended
up
being
a
very
small
bug,
fix
merge,
request
the
investigation
getting
there
was
kind
of
a
pain
but
yeah
valerie
fixed
it
and
I
merged
it.
So
that
should
be
working.
D
E
E
So
this
was
the
yeah
well
vulnerability
exposed
application
is
out.
The
migrations
are
out,
I
mean
out
of
our
code
base.
All
the
related
code
is
out
only
the
refactoring
that
is
useful
for
other
block
types
and
documentation
is
there,
so
this
is
done.
C
C
We
have
a
query
that
we
run
to
verify
projects
on
the
primary
node.
There
are
time
out
on
just
during
staging.
I
did
some
improvements
this
week
it
was
deployed
to
station
yesterday.
I
hope
that
the
numbers
of
central
errors
decrease
this
today
and
this
week,
so
we
can
confirm
that
them
are
fixed.
The
issue.
A
Awesome
cool,
add
terraform
state
replication,
so
I
think
this
is
probably
in
staging
now.
I
I
don't
know,
I'm
not
quite
I'm
not
quite
sure
what
to
do
with
it
in
workflow
verification,
because
it's
off,
I
pro
like.
A
B
Yeah
mike
did
you
want
to
say
something
I
yeah.
I
guess
I
wanted
to
at
least
put
it
there
to
see
if
it
made
sense
to
just
verify
that
that
it's
working
on
staging
I'm
not
sure
what
we've
done
for
the
for
the
other
data
types.
If
we
just
want
to
close
it,
that's
that's
fine
too,
but
just
wanted
to
put
it
there
mostly
to
ask
if
and
what
we
needed
to
do
for
verification.
D
A
A
All
right
go
team
all
right
in
review.
Add
external
mrdiff
replication.
A
I've
been
working
on
this
with
tone.
We
he
got
started
working
on
it
again
today.
I
think
mostly
he
was
doing
ketchup
yesterday,
but
it's
very
close.
There
are
a
few
more
tests
that
I
think
need
tweaking
working
on
so
but,
like
I
think,
once
the
tests
are
sorted
out,
this
should
be
done
so
very,
very
close.
B
Cool
yeah,
I
think
my
main
question
for
this
is
assuming
we
can
yeah
get
this
into
review
and
and
get
it
merged
in.
For
for
this
release,
are
we
planning
to
release
it
behind
a
disabled
feature
flag
or,
or
will
it
be
or
have
we
done
enough?
I
guess
on
the
performance
improvements
to
release
it,
as
enabled
I
mean.
D
But
also
also
a
note
about
that,
I
think
we
we've
kind
of
like
solidified
around
like.
If
you
have
a
feature
flag,
you
gotta
like
merge
it
disabled
by
default.
D
D
So
that's
the
way
we
should
assume
we're
gonna
do
things
yeah.
B
Got
it
so
yeah?
I
think
my
my
question
is
yeah.
Do
we
do
we
feel
like
we
can
have
it
in
an
enabled
state
for
the
release
sounds
like
with
with
metrics
still
still
still
outstanding?
That
probably
doesn't
seem
very
likely
right.
B
Okay,
yeah,
I
think,
just
in
terms
of
planning
for
the
release
post.
I
I
believe
we
only
announce
things
if
they,
if
the
fee
that
are
behind
a
feature
flag,
if
they're
enabled
so
we'll
likely
just
announce
this
in
the
in
the
next
release
post
in
the
next
release,
then
so
I'll
just
update
the
current
draft
release
post
to
to
reflect
that.
F
Cool
oops.
B
Yeah
she
didn't
provide
an
she
did
post
an
update
in
the
geo
lounge
channel,
but
it
didn't
include
this:
can
we
ping
her
on
it
and
ask
for
another.
A
All
right,
zach.
G
Hi,
so
this
one
is
in
the
second
round
of
maintainer
review
and
I
think
that
the
maintainer
decided
he
wants
to
just
open
up
follow-ups
for
his
notes.
So
I
should
hopefully
merge
today,
but
this
is
the
the
node
status
bars
like
generic
node
status
bar.
So
hopefully,
after
this,
we
won't
ever
have
to
manually
go
add
a
new
status
bar
to
the
nodes
view.
A
B
Yeah
for
italy,
cluster
yeah
jenny
wrote
a
update
here
so
first
she
said
that
she's
the
dri
for
test
pipelines
this
week.
B
So
I
think
that
that
often
means
that
that
always
takes
priority
and
and
so
usually
not
as
much
progress
is
made
on
other
quality
issues
when
someone's
the
the
dri
for
test
pipelines
and
then
for
this
giddily
cluster
with
geo
issue,
she's
run
the
geo
end-to-end
test
with
gili
clusters
on
both
sides
still
needs
to
do
giddily
cluster
specific
tests,
but
yeah
it
seems
like
that's
some
pretty
nice
progress
has
been
made
there
and
so
far
so
far
so
good.
So
it's
awesome.
B
Yeah
oh
looks
like
yeah.
We
can
probably
check
off
number
one
there
and
then
all
the
single
node
tests
were
are
verified
yeah.
So
I
was
able
to
yeah.
I
just
took
this
one
on
and
was
able
to
test
the
single
node
installation
with
postgres
12..
It's
not.
I.
I
think
we
in
our
preliminary
findings.
We
kind
of
knew
that
this
would
happen.
B
B
So
I
I'm
I
still
have
to
do
the
other
two
tests,
but
I
think
the
findings
will
generally
be
the
same,
and
so
we'll
need
a
couple
of
follow-ups,
one
just
to
document
any
some
of
this,
some
of
these
limitations
or
differences
and
then
probably
need
to-
or
we
will
need
to
make
a
an
update
to
the
omnibus
replicate
geodatabase
script
to
to
do
to
write
the
configuration
to
the
other
file.
If
we
detect
12.,
I
think
that's
possible.
I
guess
I
I
haven't.
B
I
don't
know
on
bus
well
enough
to
know
if
we
can
like
detect.
You
know
what
version
of
postgres
is
is
enabled
in
that
script,
but
yeah,
we'll
open
follow-up
issue
and
try
to
try
to
do
that.
And
then
I
think
in
14-0,
when
postgres
12
becomes
the
recommended
or
the
the
required
version.
Then
we
can
remove
that
code
that
checks
for
for
postgres12
and
remove
any
code
that,
like
writes
to
the
recovery
conf
file,.
A
Job,
thank
you.
Anybody
know
about
this,
so
this
is.
D
Yeah
valerie
been
talking
to
valerie
about
this.
We
ended
up
actually
opening
a
separate
issue
called
like
spike
synthetic
replication.
D
Well,
I
guess
it's
create,
update
and
delete
events,
so
this
is
still
assigned
to
him
because
it
is
going
to
be
like
something
that
he's
working
on
in
that
spike,
but
yeah.
So
he's
he's
actively
working
on
that.
B
Cool
yeah,
I
think
you
yeah
in
the
spike
issue
you
mentioned
using
these
other
issues
as
like
a
checklist
once
that's
all
in
place.
So
would
this
be
one
of
those
items
as
well
like?
Does
it
make
sense
to?
I
guess,
move
that
issue
out
of
out
of
the
column
and
just
just
use
the
the
spike
issue.
D
Yeah
well
yeah,
I
don't
know,
I
guess
so
I
would
say
most
of
the
epic
is
not.
It
is
not
going
to
be
like
addressed
by
the
first
bike,
so
I
think
it's
okay
to
just
leave
it.
D
The
first
it
was
the
first
issue
in
it:
okay,
yeah
that
the
epic
we
can
take
a
look
at
it
right.
D
D
Yeah,
there's
the
spike
one
and
then
he's
probably
going
to
cover
the
publish
events,
part
of
it,
and
then
you
know
maybe
some
pieces
of
other
things.
I'm
not
really
sure,
but
I
think
it
makes
sense
to
just
you
know:
do
a
spike
to
see
where
we
can
get
to
just
really
quickly,
because
it's
all
kind
of
just
new
under
feature
flag,
stuff,
cool.
A
All
right
add
terraform
state
metrics.
I
got
started
on
this.
It's
I
got.
I
got
stuck
for
a
little
bit
on
friday
because
my
gdk
was
in
a
weird
state,
but
I
think
everything
is
good
now,
so
I'm
hoping
to
have
that
out
for
review
today.
B
Yeah
I
can
give
an
update
on
that.
Yeah
gabriel
is
working
on
it
again.
Now
that
he's
he's
back
from
vacation,
I
think
he's
yeah
still
still
trying
to
get
patrony
set
up
on
the
primary
and
just
documenting
challenges
along
the
way
it's
looking
like
yeah,
just
as
we
go
along.
B
There
will
probably
be
some
some
improvements
that
we
can
help
contribute
to
omnibus,
even
just
in
the
current
petroni
implementation
and
so
yeah,
I
think,
still
still
working
on
getting
getting
that
set
up
and
then
and
then
he'll
be
able
to
move
on
to
the
secondary
and
try
to
set
up
the
standby
cluster.
A
Nice
all
right
mike.
D
Yeah,
I
kind
of
been
backed
up
a
little
bit
with
reviews
somehow
recently,
but
this
is
kind
of
close
there's
a
feeling
spec
that
I
need
to
fix,
but
I
think
that
will
be
it
and
then,
oh,
I'm
sorry!
Actually
it's
in
review.
We
could
move
that
it's
been
reviewed
by
by
oh
yeah,
back
end
yeah,
so
yeah,
it's
in
review,
because
the
terraform
piece
we've
removed
now,
because
the
table's
small,
we
don't
really
need
it
so
yeah
that
should
be
moving
along
soon.
A
Well
done
repository
strategy
for
snippets,
so
this
was
more
of
that
epic
that
we
were.
E
Yeah,
so
I'm
working
on
this,
it's
been
a
little
bit
confusing
what
fabian
was
expecting
from
the
format.
E
So
he
says
it's
quite
jumpy
what
we
have
right
now,
from
which
I
assume
it
just
means
like
jumping
from
one
link
to
another,
and
he
wanted
it
more
like
a
run
book
in
one
place,
so
I'm
working
on
just
creating
a
whole
different
page.
For
this
specific
use
case,
I
will
open
an
mr
soon,
I'm
thinking,
if
it's
not
very
urgent,
to
get
it
through
in
this
milestone.
E
We
could
keep
it
open
for
fabian
to
review
as
well
for
merging
it,
because
otherwise,
when
this
goes
back
and
forth
with
the
documentation
review,
then
people
kind
of
lose
context.
So
I
will
open
the
mr
soon,
but
would
be
nice
to
just
wait
for
fabian
to
do
it
next
week.
I
think
he
comes
back
on
monday.
Maybe
it
can
even
be
merged
before
the
release
also
yeah.
So
it's
in
development.
B
Yeah
that
that
sounds
good.
I
don't
think
this.
This
needs
to
be
like
this
isn't
definitely
isn't
tied
to
a
specific
milestone.
Just
the
fact
that
that
we're
working
on
it
and
making
some
progress
is
great
and
makes
sense
to
wait
for
fabian
to
come
back
and
review
since,
since
we're
yeah
since
I'll
be
back
next
week
yeah.
B
I
do
think
that,
even
if
we,
because
the
docs
would
still
like
they
might
like
not
be
in
the
dock
specific
for
that
release,
but
they
would
still
be
in
the
current
documentation
right
so
that
yeah,
you
don't
necessarily
hit
the
cut
off
for
that
yeah
cool.
That's
a
sounds
like
a
good
approach
to
have
a
separate
page
for
that
right
now,.
A
Wait
on
the
bus
douglas.
C
This
is
just
to
track
the
files
that
need
to
remove
the
furniture
code
in
the
omnibus.
Today
I
confirmed
with
tj
how
the
heck
approach
that
we
need
to
follow
there.
We
just
need
to
remove
the
code
and
just
duplicate
the
configuration
settings
so
that'd
be
easier
that
I
thought
in
the
beginning.
G
B
Nicholas
sounds
I
don't
hear
that
one
often
it
is
my
full
name
though
so
it's
it
is,
it
is
valid,
it
is.
It
is
a
valid
thing
to
call
me.
Let
me
share
my.
B
B
All
right
so
ready
for
development
column
yeah,
not
too
many
changes
from
last
week.
B
At
the
we
have
had
a
couple
things
move
over
and
so
now
enabling
usage
ping
on
geosecondary
is
at
the
top.
I
think
that's
a
good
one
to
be
at
the
top.
We
do
want
to
start
making
some
some
progress
on
being
able
to
implement
this,
this
usage
ping
on
on
secondaries
and
start
getting
some
user
metrics
on
secondaries.
So
this
is
the
the
first
step
in
that
next
here
is
just
items
for
terraform
state
and
external,
mr
diffs.
B
Those
are
those
are
definitely
moving
along,
so
just
kind
of
an
indicator
here
that
these
are
continue
to
be
high
priorities.
Here
is
a
documentation,
follow-up,
and
I
did
have
a
question
about
this.
One
looks
like
we
want
to
doc.
Have
some
version
specific
documentation
about
the
feature
flag?
Is
this
something
that
we
need
to?
B
E
I
can
talk
about
it,
so
we
introduced
a
new
feature
flag
right
and
we
removed
this
one
to
your
self-service
framework
replication.
So
we
would
have
to
create
make
this
change
in
13
point
in
the
13.2
release,
but
not
in
13.3
and
upwards,
because.
E
Then
it
would
be,
is
it
clear
what
I
mean
we
need
to
talk
in
13.2
in
the
documentation
that
we
have
this
feature
flag
and
from
13.3
onward?
We've
already
documented
the
fact
that
we
have
a
new
feature
flag.
E
So
that
I
don't
it's
not
like,
there's
a
deadline
on
when
they
should
go
in,
but
obviously
they
should
go
in
closer
to
13.2,
then
to
more
like
14,
and
it
will
be
a
small
documentation
change.
E
I
can
pick
this
up
once
I'm
done
with
the
documentation,
but
if
whoever
else
also
wants
to
pick
it
up,
that's
also
fine,
because
I'm
going
on
vacation
day
after
tomorrow,
that's
all.
B
Cool
yeah
thanks
for
that
explanation,
yeah,
so
I
think
it
makes
sense
to
keep
it
up
relatively
high,
since
it's
in
the
ready
for
development
column
since
it'd
be
good
to
to
not
lose
track
of
it
and
then
down
here
still
have
this
backup
investigation
issue
and
then
a
couple
of
these
bug
fixes
and
then
I've
moved
the
bug
fixes
above
adding
the
final
confirmation
of
the
promotion
script.
I
feel
a
little
bad
for
continue.
B
I
think
we
keep
moving
stuff
above
this,
but
I
also
don't
necessarily
want
to
lose
track
of
this,
so
we
can
still
still
leave
this
here
in
the
ready
ready
for
development
column.
For
now.
Looking
ahead,
there
will
definitely
be
ready
to
get
started
on
a
couple
of
other
epics
that
will
the
ready
for
development
call
we'll
probably
start
seeing
some
some
new
stuff
in
the
next
couple
weeks.
B
B
Please
provide
any
feedback
and-
or
let
me
know
if
there's
anything
missing,
but
we
want
to
wrap
up
replication
for
the
additional
blob
types,
so
external,
mr
diffs,
I
think
there's
still
a
post
deployment
migration
to
enforce
this
non-null
constraint
and
then
adding
metrics
and
then
enabling
the
feature
flag.
I
didn't
include
those
steps
for
terraform
state,
but
I
think
yeah
we
we'll
see
if
metrics
metrics
might
already
be
there
and
so
yeah.
B
I
guess
I'm
not
sure
there
might
be
some
other
stuff
that
we
need
to
do
for
terraform
state,
but
I
I
just
put
it
there
since
it
seems
like
where
we
may
have
some
some
of
these
items
done
in
13
3..
B
It
does
seem
like
we'll
need
to
support
to
this
new
tip.
Versioned
terraform
state.
B
And
I
didn't
add
that
yet
going
to
try
and
talk
with
the
configure
team
and
see
if
we
can
ask
them
to
to
pick
that
up
with
our
help.
Of
course,
I
think
that
would
be
a
good
good
test
of
the
framework,
but
yeah
curious.
If
anyone
has
has
opinions
on
how
that
should
be
handled.
D
B
Cool
yeah
so
still
still
working
on
that,
but
I
think
yeah
we're.
We've
made
some
really
nice
progress
and
looking
pretty
good
to
to
be
able
to
announce
these
in
13
4.
B
With
the
self-service
framework
for
snippet
replication
yeah,
we
had
a
lot
of
issues
listed
split
between
this
one
and
between
13
3
and
13
4,
and,
I
think,
like
we've,
definitely
started
on.
It
started
on
snippet
replication,
this
milestone
with
the
spike,
but
like
we've,
we've
discussed
it's
not
quite
as
as
cut
and
dry
as
like
going
through
these
individual
issues.
So
I
I've
just
I've
just
put
the
epic
here
in
the
planning
issue
and
with
the
goal
of
releasing
the
implementation
for
snippet
replication.
B
However,
that
ends
up
getting
done.
Do
we
think
that
is
a?
I
guess,
a
reasonable
goal
for
13
fours
to
release
it
behind
a
feature
flag.
D
B
Okay,
yeah
yeah
and
I
think
yeah.
We
probably
want
to
be
a
little
ambitious
here.
So
as
long
as
it's
yeah
as
yeah
as
long
as
it's
not
totally
unrealistic,
I
think
yeah
I
can
add
to
here.
The
goal
is:
is
behind
a
disabled
feature,
flag.
B
And
then
I
have
some
just
continuing
to
test
postgres
12,
doing
any
follow-ups
from
the
installation,
testing
that
I've
been
doing
and
then
verifying
the
upgrade
as
well,
because
I
think
there'll
be
some
like.
I
think
the
follow-up
to
the
installation
testing
will
definitely
help
with
the
upgrade,
but
I
think
we'll
still
want
to
yeah.
We
still
need
to
verify
this.
There
may
be
some
additional
things
that
we
need
to
add
to
the
documentation
there.
B
Documentation
improvements
for
planned
failover,
so
I
think
yeah
akriti
is
working
on
one
of
these
already
and
so
we'll
also
want
to
do
the
docs
improve
docs
improvements
for
a
two-sided,
multi-node
geo
installation
as
well
continuing
testing,
petronium
getaway,
so
yeah
we
may
be
done
with
getaway,
or
at
least
pretty
close
to
it.
So
it
seems
like
it
would.
B
If
it's
not
done
in
13-3,
it
should
be
wrapped
up
pretty
early
in
13-4,
so
just
continuing
to
work
on
setting
up
patrony
trying
to
get
a
standby
cluster
working
and
making
any
improvements
to
to
omnibus
and
to
the
docs.
As
as
we
go
through
that
process,.
B
I
added
these
upgrade
testing
and
downtime
investigation
issues
that
came
up
from
the
testing
that
alex
and
jenny
did
last
month.
So
if
we
can
get
to
those,
I
think
that
would
be
great.
I
don't
think
I'll
necessarily
mark
them
as
deliverable,
but
I
think
they'd
be
a
good,
a
good
stretch
goal
if
we
can
get
through
some
of
the
other
testing
verification
work.
B
I
also
just
put
a
placeholder
in
here.
It
looks
like
we're
pretty
close
with
all
the
foreign
data
wrapper
removal
work,
but
douglas.
If
you
wanted
to
just
chime
in
here
and
and
let
us
know
what
might
carry
over
to
thirteen
four,
if
anything
that
would
be
helpful.
B
Well,
yeah
so
may
not
really
be
anything
for
13
4
but
yeah,
maybe
just
some
really
small
stuff.
F
B
Great
and
then
yeah
and
then
we
can
yeah.
I
think
we
can
also
start
get
started
on
the
maintenance
mode
epic.
So
all
these
issues
are
here
and
and
then
also
the
proof
of
concept
for
a
single
command
to
promote
a
secondary
to
primary.
B
B
So
I'm
not
sure
exactly
how
long
that's
going
to
take,
but,
but
I
still
put
it
here-
hopefully
we
might
be
able
to
get
started
on
that
sometime
started
on
those
designs
sometime
in
the
milestone
and
then
as
a
stretch,
goal
I'll.
Keep
this
here
package
file
verification.
B
It
is
seeming
like
with
some
of
the
work
that
we've
had
to
carry
over
for
additional
blob
types
and
where
we're
at
with
snippets
that
might
be
beyond
a
stretch
goal,
but
we'll
just
leave
it
here.
Anyways.
If
that
works
for
everybody
yeah.
Is
there
anything
I've,
yeah
I've
missed
or
any
any
comments
on
the
13-4
plan.
B
Looks
looks
okay
to
everyone
sounds
reasonable
to
me:
cool
yeah,
it's
it's!
Actually.
I
was
very
pleased
to
go
through
this
and
see
that
like
because
fabian
had
kind
of
had
drafted
this
after
13
3
and
I
think,
even
though
some
things
have
have
been
pushed
over
into
like
things
that
we
thought
we'd
wrap
up
in
13-3
have
been
pushed
over.
I
think,
for
the
most
part,
we're
still
on
track
for
this
plan.
B
So
that's
that's
pretty
cool
to
see
and-
and
we
haven't
actually
had
to-
I
think
like
push
anything
really
far
back
so
so
in
terms
of
of
planning.
This,
I
think,
we're,
even
though
things
have
shifted
around
a
bit.
We're
still
like
from
a
big
picture
perspective
still
sticking
to
to
the
plan
pretty
well.
B
So
that's
yeah
that
was
really
cool
to
see
and
thing
I'll
go
over
is
just
talk
about
since
we're
at
the
end
of
a
milestone,
just
talk
about
where
we
are
with
release
post
items,
we
don't
have
too
much
this
milestone.
I
think
we're
definitely
going
to
be
able
to
announce
the
the
backfill
improvements
and
foreign
data
wrapper
removal,
so
that
that
post
item
is
almost
ready
to
go,
and
then
I
think,
there's
some
question
about.
It
looks
like
we'll.
B
We
won't
be
announcing
external,
mr
diffs,
I
guess
there's
still
some
question
about
whether
terraform
state
will
be
able
to
be
announced
or
not
alex.
Do
you
have
a
good
sense
of
whether
you
feel
like
we'll
be
able
to
announce
it
or
if
it's
just
better
to
just
be
on
the
safe
side
and
and
delay
that
release.
A
I
think
I
think
we're
not
gonna.
I
think
I
I
don't.
I
am
I'm
skeptical
that
that
will
make
it,
even
if
I
enable
the
flag
to
true
in
the
metrics
merge
request,
which
I
think
is
probably
what
I
should
do
I
it
is.
It
is
too
close
to
call,
I
suspect,
they'll
cut
the
release
friday
or
monday
right,
and
I
I
am
not
knowing
which
and
not
knowing,
if
I'm
actually
going
to
have
this
thing
up
today,
right
like
if
I
get
an
emerge
request
today,
maybe
but.
B
D
I
agree:
there's
also
the
consideration
for
like
we
know
that
the
other
version
part
is
coming,
so
it's
like.
If
we
say
we
support,
terraform
state
replication,
then
it
has
to
work
from
here.
You
know
through
the
next
two
releases,
which
are
going
to
be
maybe
a
little
hairy.
I
don't
know
right
agreed.
B
Yeah
that
that
makes
a
lot
of
sense,
so
we'll
just
push
that
entire
release
post
item
to
13
4,
and
we
can
see
where
things
are
at
with
with
terraform
state
and
the
new
version,
and
and
figure
out
how
to
how
to
best
communicate
what
we
support
so
yeah.
Thanks
for
that
yeah,
I
think
everything
else
yeah
everything
else
will
will
be
pushed
to
at
least
13,
for
some
some
of
this
might
might
have
to
be
13
5
or
maybe
be
split.
B
Depending
on
on
the
progress
made
like
I
could
see,
postgres
high
availability
maybe
being
announced
a
little
more
incrementally,
depending
on
what
we
find
as
we
go
through
this
setup.
A
If
we're
pushing
that
release
post
item
to
13
4,
I
think
it
probably
makes
sense
for
me
to
not
enable
it
true
with
the
metrics.
I
think
I
should
wait
until
there's
something
that
shows
up
in
the
ui
so
that
people
can
actually
see
if
stuff
is
working
or
not.
I
mean
there,
you
can
get
metrics
through
the
like
checks
and
stuff
like
that,
but
I
don't.
B
Yeah,
that
sounds
good.
I
think,
in
the
spirit
of
not
trying
to
you
know,
tie
our
workflow
so
closely
to
the
to
the
release
cycle
and
and
get
things
you
know,
try
to
try
to
push
ourselves
just
to
get
things
in
the
release.
You
know,
I
think
my
question
would
be.
B
How
would
we
do
it
if
this
were
two
weeks
ago
and
and
if
you
know,
if
we're
doing
something,
just
because
it's
you
know,
we
want
to
try
to
make
the
release,
but
it's
not
how
we
would
necessarily
do
things
independent
of
the
release.
Then
that's
probably
not
not
a
great
reason
to
do
it
if
it
doesn't
absolutely
need
to
need
to
be
in
a
release.
If
that
makes.
B
Sense
cool!
That's
it
for.
B
The
ready
for
development
column
and
the
13-4
plan,
I
will
stop
the
recording
now.