►
From YouTube: 2021-08-30 Multi Large Working Group 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
Okay,
good
morning,
everyone
today
is
august
30th.
This
is
the
multi-large
working
group
bi-weekly
meeting.
Let's
get
started
from
the
agenda
items
first
of
all,
amy
is
on
holiday,
so
she
cannot
join
today.
There
are
a
few
updates
from
her,
so
I'm
going
to
read
through
what
has
been
done.
The
wreck
lead
has
been
fully
migrated.
A
That's
a
great
progress.
We
still
need
to
monitor
for
a
few
more
days,
then
complete
the
resource
tunes,
but
not
expecting
to
see
any
major
issues
at
this
stage.
So
that's
a
great
move.
Any
questions
about
the
web
fleet.
A
Okay,
then,
moving
on
to
what's
happening
next,
so
next
item
to
move
over
or
the
the
fleece
to
move
over
is
the
the
pages
currently
investigating
the
environment,
setup
and
planning
the
work.
The
epic
is
here,
as
called
out
by
amy
in
the
agenda
and
at
the
time
at
the
time
of
writing.
There
are
two
blogger
issues
here.
A
You
know
there
they
will
block
the
actual
migration,
but
not
blocked,
not
blocked
on
any
work
at
the
moment.
So
we
want
to
see
in
next
two
to
three
weeks
we
got
these
two
blockers
removed
from
our
road.
First
one
is
a
gitlab.
Logger
misses
the
start,
startup
of
pages,
so
jason.
You
want
to
verbalize
your
comment
here.
B
Sure,
john,
I
actually
added
a
bunch
of
detail
on
the
investigation
earlier
today.
Effectively.
What
we're
seeing
is
that,
for
whatever
reason,
the
first
couple
of
lines
out
of
the
log
file
aren't
being
picked
up
by
the
logger
truth
is
that
pages
already
emits
too
standard
now
with
json
logging
by
default,
so
we're
considering
just
moving
the
lab
logger
out
of
the
container
all
together.
B
C
B
Right
now,
it's
a
matter
of
discussion
and
investigation,
john
dove
right
into
it
and
wanted
to
dig
into
it.
We
distribution
haven't
done
any
scheduling
of
it.
At
this
point,
good.
A
Job,
so
can
we
just
follow
up
to
see
if
we
want
to
schedule
this
for
14.3
and
collaborate
with
john
on
this.
A
I
mean
yeah,
I'm
asking
either
jason
or
or
stephen.
B
C
A
That
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Please
follow
up
if
john
is
going
to
you
know
to
handle
that
end
to
end
or
distribution
is
to
step
in.
I
think
it's
similar
for
the
next
issue
here
as
support
for
missing
pages
options,
I
have
seen
john
had
imr
up
and
is
going
through
actively
but
similar
situation.
A
B
A
Okay
cool,
so
both
issues
are,
we
have
a
plan,
sounds
good
yeah.
If
no
more
questions.
Moving
on
to
discussion
item
the
first
one
amy
had
mentioned
that
this
issue
actually
is
no
longer
blocker,
but
we
do
still
want
a
resolution
for
the
update
dependency
proxy.
A
So
my
comment
here
it
is
an
infradeb
issue
and
will
be
prioritized
over
other
issues
and
we
want
to
fall
back
to
the
infrared
issue
tracking
process.
A
Since
this
is
not
a
blocker,
we'll
just
see
how
that
gets
prioritized
following
the
infradab
process,
but
once
it
becomes
an
urgency,
then
I
will
help
to
raise
to
the
infra
drive
and
the
engineer
allocation
meeting
so
that
get
attention
to
resolve
as
soon
as
possible.
So
that's
that's
the
plan
for
this
issue.
A
A
But
it's
not
a
blocker.
We
have
a
local
round
in
place
so
but
just
need
a
resolution.
D
A
Yeah,
thank
you.
Eric.
E
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
ask
the
question
like
this:
this
working
group's
been
going
on
a
long
time,
like
I
recall
back
when
jerry
was
involved.
This
was
about
doing
something
that
ended
up
kind
of
becoming
dedicated.
So
a
bunch
of
things
have
happened
over
the
more
than
year
that
this
working
group's
been
in
place.
E
A
Exactly
as
you
said,
I
discussed
with
mary
a
few
months
ago,
this
working
group
actually
essentially
is
just
moving
the
dot
com
to
kubernetes
or
to
cloud
native.
So
marin
still
wanted
a
forum
or
place
to
as
a
central
place
to
raise
attention
of
the
blocker
issues,
but
but
this
is
essentially
just
moving
the
dot
com
to
kubernetes
yeah.
We
I
thought
we
could
move
all
the
issues
to
infradive,
but
that
may
lose
focus
of
this
that
subject
itself.
A
So
maybe
we
can
rename
this
working
group
like
a
moving.
You
know
a
moving
service
to
to
kubernetes,
but
this
is
not
no
law.
My
take
is
no
longer
multi-large
thing,
probably.
A
Yeah,
I
will
do
and
we'll
update
the
page,
the
working
world
page
as
well.
B
If
I
can
interject,
while
most
of
the
things
that
we
have
been
discussing
in
this
working
group,
are
specifically
related
to
the
infradev
of
moving
gitlab.com
entirely
to
cloud
native,
that's
not
the
only
impact
of
this,
so
we-
yes,
we
have
spun
out
dedicated
gets
in
particular,
has
come
out
of
some
input
from
this
group.
Some
output
from
the
reference
architecture,
isn't
all
the
ones
that's
been
done
there.
B
There
have
been
a
lot
of
outputs,
but
we
continue
to
see
things
with
gitlab.com
that
we
will
then
be
implementing
and
ensuring
into
dedicated.
So
we
actually
have
the
ability
to
handle
larger
distributed
gitlabs.
So
I'm
not
sure
saying
that
this
is
just
sas
related
is
actually
accurate.
E
Well,
nothing
is
over
100
of
anything.
So
you
know
if
you
have
a
if
you
have
a
name
that
covers
you,
know
80
of
what's
going
on
here.
That's
that's
good
enough.
It
just
feels
like
multi-large
is
kind
of
like
and
it's
overloaded
at
this
point
or
something
so
nearing
the
focus
yeah.
I
think.
B
A
Okay,
I'll
update
the
handbook
page
anything
else.