►
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
Hi
everyone
I'm
recording
to
this
video
to
explain
that
for
the
art
adherence
part,
we
are
talking
about
using
the
framework
label
at
the
intermediate
tools
to
help
user
organize.
The
adherence
report
I
think
it's
a
good
idea
because
we
can
centralize
the
management
and
the
only
thing
I
concern
I
have
with
this
one-to-one
relationship
and
I
want
to
be
clear.
That
I
know
that
the
one-to-one
religious
can
be
done.
There
are
a
lot
of
work
around
to
help
you
to
use
one-to-one
relationship
to
manage
it.
A
I'm
not
saying
it's
not
possible,
I'm
saying
that
it's
not
a
good
user
experience.
That's
like
we
definitely
want
to
improve
it
in
the
future
and
either
is
could
be
MVC
or
not.
We
need
to
validate
this
user,
but
I
do
want
to
show
that
this
one-to-one
relationship
via
Handover
framework
label
management
is
become
like
a
kind
of
difficult
thing
for
users
to
use.
So
I
want
to
like
be
clear
on
that
point.
So
I
create
some
mockups
to
help
us
to
understand
the
problem.
A
So,
first,
let's
just
see
like
it
works
perfectly
in
certain
scenarios.
Let's
say
that
I'm,
a
user
that
I
want
to
like
attach
some
standards
to
my
projects
and
I,
see
that
gitlab
like
introduced
some
already
a
standard
for
me
and
they
are
wrapping
around
in
this
default.
Other
hearing
check
framework
label
and
it
works
like
I
just
need
to
link
the
product
because
I
don't
have
current
one
I,
don't
need
to
edit
it.
So
what
I
did
I
click
here?
A
Let
go
of
this
flow,
ended
it
and
it's
done
and
then
like
later
on.
If
I
check
here,
I
will
have
like
my
things,
updated.
So
this
will
disappear
after
I
linked
it.
But
this
is
workflow
which
works
and
like,
but
that's
I,
don't
think
it's
like
everything
all
the
flows,
so
some
users
they
might
already
have
like
framework
label
kind
of
managed
and
they're
already
using
it.
I
think
it's
not
a
rare
case
and
also
that's
something.
We
want
to
encourage
users
to
use
not
only
like,
with
other
hearings
checks.
A
We
have
ambitious
goal
to
use
from
work
label
to
have
user
manager
at
manage
policy
and
a
group
there
projects
and
puts
like
more
adherence
check
to
it
and
have
customers
yaml
file
to
it
and
a
lot
of
different
things.
So
that's
the
power
part
of
framework
cable
so
probably
like
I,
think
mostly
in
the
future,
will
in
the
scenario
that
they
use
framework
so
like
there
could
be
several
things
happen.
A
So
the
first
things
is:
okay,
I
have
other
framework
label,
but
I
think
I
still
want
to
use
the
default
one,
because
it's
easy
I,
just
link
it
to
the
project
and,
let's
say
I,
didn't
read
carefully
that
this
is
like
a
one-to-one
relationship.
I
still
want
to
apply
to
it
and
I
apply
it
and
I
realized.
Oh
my
God.
This
changes
all
my
for
more
thing
and
luckily
I
roll
others
undo
I
can
undo
it
if
I
didn't
realize,
undo,
I
need
to
one
by
one
check
them.
This
is
only
five
projects.
A
Imagine
I
have
a
hundreds
and
if
we
can
undo
it,
it's
easy.
So
user
can
select
this
one
just
apply
one
framework
labeled
ways.
Instead
of
select
a
lot
of
them
to
it
and
what
else
they
can
do,
they
can
like
just
edit
their
current
one.
They
can
direct
them
to
like
on
the
settings
like
this
is
in
different
area.
A
So
we
can
move
the
settings
and
all
into
this
like
a
compliance
Center
and
it's
become
way
easier.
I
can
demonstrate
later,
but
this
is
perfectly
fix
the
problem,
so
what
user
need
to
do
still
they
need
to
like
if
they
have
five
framework
label
they
need
to
identify
of
them
and
if
five
of
them
attached
to
100
200
projects,
you
need
to
remember
it
when
they
added
that,
but
I
didn't
make
a
mistake
or
something
because
like
yeah,
it's
not
that
straightforward!
A
That's
hey!
I!
Just
think
this
is
the
product
you
need
to
attach
to
the
children's
report
of
this
one
and
then
select
them
attach
them.
I
need
to
remember
when
and
why
I
did
those
labels
and
attach
this
product
and
did
it
so
if
I'm,
the
only
one
who
edited
it's?
Okay,
if
it's
other
colleague
their
potential,
a
lot
of
discussion
there,
so
I
still
think
the
workflow
will
be
a
little
bit
complex
and
there
are
three
problems
that
I
think
cannot
be
solved
unless
we
move
to
one
to
one.
A
So
the
first
one
is
it's
easy
to
make
mistake.
As
I
said
before
that
we
need
to
rely
on
user
to
remember
it's
a
one-to-one
relationship.
We
need
to
rely
on
the
user
that
read
the
carefully
if
they
didn't
do
any
of
this
and
they
need
to
relay
on
them
the
seed
and
do
button
there,
and
otherwise
we
count
them
quite
some
like
tedious
work.
A
A
Imagine
that
we
want
the
user
to
use
those
framework
label
to
enrage
their
management,
to
like
group
things
together,
for
example,
I,
have
this
intensive
I
want
to
group
like
a
lot
of
policy
execution
policy,
approval
policy,
I
mean
maybe
filter
other
policy
type
and
also
adherence
report
or
tester
yaml
for
all
those
things
together,
so
I
group
them
and
I
have
different
levels
and
I
group
them
and
I
let
users
to
use
it
and
then
what
happens
is
like
this
default.
A
One
is
non-editable
and
then,
like
gitlab,
just
keep
updating
it
each
time
they
have
a
new
standards
introduced.
So
if
I
apply
this,
that
means
those
products
can
only
have.
This
cannot
have.
Policies
is
yeah.
It's
not
much
my
expectation
like
if
I
remove
it
then
I
use
my
own
I
still
need
to
edit
everything.
So
this
become
useless.
A
If
we
make
it
editable,
then
it's
also
potential
problem
that
each
time
you
introduce
a
new
standard
or
something
we
need
to
create
a
new
available
and
the
new
level
will
become
like
user
edited
again
and
then
I,
don't
think
use
around
to
add
three
defaults
like
adherence
checks,
each
time
and
then
like
probably,
they
will
replace
by
one
is
still
the
default
one
become
useless,
so
we
introduce
something
that
is
not
very
useful
for
you
there.
It's
probably
one
time
thing
and
I
think
the
first
problem,
the
combination
load
is
the
biggest
one.
A
I
also
talked
with
our
researcher,
Michael,
Oliver
and
I.
Think
from
his
like
research.
We
know
that
users
probably
want
to
use
framework
like
very
intensively.
They
want
to
group
a
lot
of
things,
it's
quite
possible,
so
they
have
those
type
of
framework.
Let's
say
the
Intensive
one.
They
have
two
approval
policy
attached
to
it
and
maybe
like
a
six
Excursion
policies
because
they
want
to
do
testoster
funding
and
all
others.
A
I
have
like
three
labels
or
form
labels,
and
all
of
them
have
different
configuration
and
each
time
I
edit
them
like
I,
need
to
have
fully
race
through
this
page
and
like
yeah
I
need
to
remember
this
label
contains
so
many
things,
and
it's
become
very
heavy,
like
for
the
user
to
remember
all
those
things
so,
basically,
with
the
one-to-one
relationship
with
all
the
problems,
we
really
require
a
lot
of
user
effort.
They
need
to
use
it
daily.
Then
you
have
a
memory
they
probably
like
is
one
person
manage
it,
not
too
many.
A
So
that's
not
really
like
coherent,
I.
Think
with
our
research
funding.
We
have
like
move
on
to
like
make
it
easy
for
user
and
I
want
to
show
you
like
why,
with
one
too
many
is
not
a
problem.
First,
like
the
complex
flow,
if
we
don't
fix,
there's
still
a
problem,
I
can
like
show
or
fix
it
later
and
first
like
easy
to
make
mistake.
A
I
think
this
can
be
improved
quite
easily,
because
there's
one
too
many
relationship,
like
user,
can
just
link
the
project,
the
one
tool
from
the
start
and
apply
to
it,
and
it's
done
and
if
they
go
to
like
the
management
they
will
see,
are
the
new
labels
attached
to
it.
Their
old
label
are
still
there,
and
things
like
this
is
or
one
too
many
like
the
default
ones.
You
don't
need
to
edit
it
and
it's
not
useless.
A
If
you
use
a
tricycle
up
and
let's
say
that
I
just
use
your
standard
adherence
standard
checks
and
this
each
time
you
update
it,
it's
automatically
updated
I
know
which
project
to
prove
to
it.
I
have
my
additional
one.
Next
to
it,
it's
all
good
and
also
cognition
load,
because
before
remember,
like
user
need
to
remember
one
level
of
the
other
things
and
now,
if
you
allow
them
to
group
like
one
big
thing
into
several
subgroups
like
approval
policy,
daily
exclusion
policy
and
default
tracks,
They
will
buy
one
Loop.
A
They
will
say:
okay,
this
have
this
policy
and
daily
check
and
other
Heroes
things,
and
this
only
have
weekly
checks,
and
this
have
approval
and
weekly
checks.
So
it's
way
easier
for
user
to
manage
and
remember
all
those
things
so
I
only
give
example
like
for
five
projects.