►
From YouTube: Product Group Conversation (Public Livestream)
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
B
A
A
great
question
I
think
this
is
a
function
of
Mark
was
looking
ahead
at
2023.
We
have
this
goal
of
50%
of
our
categories
being
lovable
by
2023,
so
we
pulled
all
the
directors
about
essentially
which
ones
must
or
which
ones.
What
do
we
really
want
to
invest
to
make
sure,
and
so
we
have
this
moment
in
2023,
where
a
ton
of
them
become
a
lovable
and
there
isn't
really
a
path
to
that.
So
perhaps
we
shouldn't
peg
this
chart
that
far
in
advance,
but
I
think
that's
what
created
that
long
term
bump
that.
B
C
B
B
A
A
They
typically
have
their
own
dashboarding
systems
in
their
own
data
warehouse
and
they
want
to
consolidate
the
data
from
our
system
with
many
of
the
other
systems
that
are
running-
and
this
was
one
of
the
primary
solutions
that
was
recommended
was
hey,
just
make
the
events
available
to
us
will
we'll
harvest
them
and
pull
them
into
our
own
system.
So
we
might
give
you
getting
ahead
of
ourselves
a
little
bit
on
how
we
might
do
that,
but
that's
the
gist
behind
the
line.
Yeah.
B
I
think
it's
really
important
not
to
not
to
have
that
technical
solution
in
there
right
now.
Older
rc4
is
hey.
We
have
audit
logs
they're
great,
but
your
API
is
not
complete
and
we
can't
we
can't
filter
properly.
So
think.
Let's
take
that
step
in
well,
we'll
learn
more
after
that
yeah
we
will
have
learned
yep.
A
D
If
you
click
in
the
epoch,
it
should
be
less
prescriptive
as
far
as
the
solution,
and
then
we
plan
to
talk
to
a
number
of
the
cab
customers
in
more
detail
on
in
December
coming
up
here
or
not
next
week
but
week
after
and
then
we'll
continue
to
do.
Some
more
customer
interviews
from
that
point
forward
can
just
get
a
better
handle
on
what
people
want
and
in
the
cab,
meaning
it
was
sort
of
all
of
the
board
whip
hooks
for
everything.
B
We
do
anything
yeah
and
they
I
think
I.
Think
there
were
a
whole
lot
of
underlying
customer
needs
that
old,
that
Ulka
bundled
up
in
the
same
thing,
but
it's
very
important
to
disentangle
them
and
I
I
think
they
want.
They
want
to
take
reporting
into
their
own
hands,
because
the
reporting
in
github
isn't
good
enough.
It's
not
just
that.
There's
a
section
of
customers
that
say
get
up
is
only
part
of
the
solution,
but
there's
also
a
section
of
customer
says:
collab
is
my
one,
and
only
solution
and
you're
reporting
isn't
good
enough.
B
D
Yeah
I
think
we
definitely
don't
want
to
lose
sight
of
that,
which
is
part
of
the
benefit
of
of
having
this
in
the
existing
group,
in
the
sense
that
the
analytics
team
is
still
fully
funded
and
still
fully
able
to
proceed
on
their
own
on
their
own
vision
and
delivery
stream.
If
that
makes
sense.
So
by
doing
this,
we
aren't
slowing
that
effort
down
because
that's
provide
different
groups,
charter
and
I
and
I
totally
agree.
D
We
just
you
know
trying
to
figure
out
here
what
the,
how
much
investment
do
we
have
to
make
based
on
what
people
actually
need,
and
you
know
whether
having
a
polling
based
system
on
the
audit
log
API
is
good
or
whether
we
should
maybe
have
that
next
iteration
to
do
some
kind
of
like
WebSocket
type,
push
the
vacation
service
on
that.
But
yeah
do
some
more
digging
here
on
the
both
the
problems
that
people
want
to
use
us
to
solve,
as
well
as
how
we
should
solve
it.
A
boring
iterative
way
and.
B
E
May
add
to
this
so
how
did
talk,
for
example,
in
admin
area?
It
didn't
have
filters
by
date
up
until
a
month
ago
and
in
general,
our
admin
area
is
pretty
behind
in
a
way
of
features
and
tools,
and
as
soon
as
that's
also,
you
have
a
statement
as
a
part
of
the
problem,
I
mean
what
is
the
sense?
What
is
the
use
of
get
lab
UI
for
audit
logs
if
you
can't
filter
it
by
any
quick,
just
at
least
with
I,
don't
know
10,000
to
20,000
pages.
F
And
kudos
to
you,
Scott
I,
think
since
you've
joined
and
the
slide
shows
we've
had
a
major
ramp
up
in
our
hiring
of
the
PM
team.
We
seem
to
have
caught
up
I
know,
there's
a
no
PR
around
hiring
for
q3,
we're
I
think
on
track
to
catch
up
through
the
course
of
this
year.
But
I
did
want
to
get
your
thoughts
on
hiring
a
PM's
relative
to
next
year's
investment.
Should
we
try
to
hire
those
early
earlier
than
we
did
that
this
year,
as
kind
of
new
teams
begin
to
form
in
the
development?
A
My
take
is,
we
probably
want
to
be
about
a
quarter
ahead
and
hiring
the
PM
I.
Think
we've
seen
a
couple
of
examples
where
were
further
ahead
of
that,
not
very
many.
In
most
cases
we
were
way
behind,
but
in
some
cases
we
were
further
ahead
and
the
PM
I
think
III.
Don't
I
just
feel
like
about
a
quarters
enough
time
for
the
PM
to
ramp
up
start
to
get
a
point
of
view
on
what
to
do.
A
G
Sorry,
do
you
want
to
voice
it
over
hey
sorry,
I
was.
H
F
Victor
is
on
the
call
he's
our
product
major,
covering
I,
see
I'm
thinking
through
a
couple
of
case
studies
that
I've
seen
where
we've
highlighted
examples
of
infrastructure
as
code
use
cases
by
our
customers.
One
was
a
blog
that
we
wrote
about
ansible
they're,
a
couple
that
I
can
send
you.
What
you
described
I'm,
not
sure,
would
necessarily
be
our
recommended
approach.
Typically,
we
see
like
one
way
you
could
do
it
is.
You
could
share
CI
templates
that
could
be
included
in
each
project
and.
C
H
I
said
that
is
what
I
was
okay.
My
idea
was
to
create
these
templates
at
the
group
level
and
whoever
starts
a
new
project
within
that
group
can
just
include
them
to
get
their
infrastructure
provision
as
long
as
they
pass
in
the
right
variables.
So
that's
gonna,
be
my
approach.
I
just
wanted
that
checked
with
somebody
yeah
yeah.
H
I
F
C
The
previous
question
already
answer
some
of
my
questions:
I'm
used
to
work
with
the
enterprise
where
we
have
to
write
specific
scripts
to
provision
a
stack,
BP,
CVP
and
and
database
stack.
It's
like
a
it's.
An
orchestra
steps
to
set
up
the
infrastructure,
environment
and
they'll
have
to
set
a
bunch
of
lower
environments
like
the
testing
pre-production,
it's
a
quite
tedious
and
difficult
to
maintain
and
some
steps
difficult
to
roll
back.
C
If
there
is
a
problem,
for
example,
in
Amazon,
if
there's
an
s3
bucket
problem,
you
have
to
go
physically
go
in
delete,
so
it's
something
like
the
our
product
can
support
that
through,
like
a
project
and
the
create
steps
in
CS
CD,
but
there
is
no
defined
a
recommend
flow
approach
we
could
use.
Oh
is
our
plan
to
you
know
out
of
the
out
of
the
box,
there's
something
we
can
leverage
to
set
up
the
infrastructure
easily
I'm
little
bit
all
over
the
map.
I'm
just
try
to
digest
what.
F
Yeah
and
I
think
it's
important
to
remember
from
our
products
perspective.
Our
first-class
citizen
is
deploying
to
kubernetes,
and
so
we
have
lots
of
tools
to
attach
a
kubernetes
cluster
and
deploy
your
applications
directly
to
that
kubernetes
cluster.
To
share
that
cluster
across
multiple
projects.
But
we
don't
have
as
much
like
kind
of
base
primitives
other
than
the
standard
infrastructure
as
code
practices
for
non
kubernetes
deployments.
C
F
Adding
some
examples
from
blog
posts
and
case
studies
where
users
have
used
our
source
control
NCI
to
perform
infrastructure
as
code
asks,
I
think
those
will
give
you
some
examples
of
how
you
can
use
our
current
tools,
but
we're
also
investing
in
new
product
capabilities
to
make
that
flow
easier.
Okay,.
J
Not
really
a
question
just
just
the
comments
on
slide:
17
you're
mentioning
getting
everything
Mattie
or
ET
and
there's
a
link
to
the
maturity
page.
But
when
we
browse
that
page
there
is
no
link
to
epics
or
issue.
So
it's
actually
hard
to
figure
out
what
does
mean
to
move
from
valuable
to
minimum
to
viable,
for
example,
and
I
think
that
we
have
epics
for
every
single
one
of
them.
So
there
where
we
can
lean
that.
A
K
A
J
Me
just
show
you
a
quick
to
explain
what
I
mean,
so
this
is
the
maturity
for
secure,
and
we
see
here-
that's
last
these
conveniences
to
mean
to
move
from
minimal
here
with
it
with
minimal
here
to
variable
here.
So
I
wanted
to
understand
exactly
what
we're
going
to
achieve
here
to
consider
that
variable,
and
actually
we
have
any
for
that-
which
is
it's
right
there
and
it's.