►
From YouTube: 2022-02-23 Workspace meeting
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).
C
B
Okay,
we
can
start
with
the
agenda.
I
can
start
with
like
one
announcement
that
I
post
a
little
slack,
but
I
will
tell
here
as
well,
because
I
know
if
everyone
is
aware,
we
have
a
slight
change
at
him.
Manoj
from
our
team
is
joining
workspace
team
permanently
and
he
will
be
supporting
this
engineering
location.
B
Moving
on
from
like
monday
he's
like
needs
to
like
crop.
One
thing
up
and
friday
is
coming
friday,
and
this
means
we
cannot
like
keep
two
people
from
out
in
our
team.
So
this
means
that
imran
will
be
going
back
to
out
but
fear
not
he
will
be
stay.
He
will
be
staying
as
like
stable
counterpart,
like
as
a
maintainer
technical
advisor
technical
consult.
So
we'll
still
have
opportunity
to
ask
him
all
the
questions
and
use
his
knowledge.
B
Yet
the
yet
the
person
who'll
be
contributing
from
from
monday
would
be
managed.
So
I
hope
you
will
help
him
on
board
quickly
on
the
project,
but
with
his
great
experience
in
access
area.
So
what
was
outfit
workspace
before?
I
bet
he
will
be
great
addition
to
the
team
because
of
his
like
fast
knowledge
about
about
certain
topics.
So
this
was
like
my
super
quick
announcement.
I
will
post
post
this
in
agenda
as
well.
Sorry
for
jumping
in
alexandra
back
to
you.
C
Yeah
not
much
in
my
side,
a
slight
update
on
the
on
the
locking
issue:
we've
uncovered
a
an
edge
case.
It
was
not
caught
on
development
war
staging.
It
was
only
caught
in
production,
it's
a
very
specific
one,
but
we
still
cannot
move
on
with
the
back
filling
until
we
kind
of
fix
this
thing
as
well.
Hopefully,
that
should
wrap
up
the
locking
issues
and
and
allow
us
to
move
on
with
the
back
feeling.
C
The
sort
of
this
the
good
news
on
that
is
that
should
not
block
the
back
feeling
within
this
release.
So
we
could
move
forward
with
the
big
feeling
once
the
issue
is
fixed,
so
we
would
not
have
to
wait
like
another
release
to
start
the
backfilling,
but
yeah.
That's
that's
where
we
are
right
now.
The
marzin
is
in
review.
So
as
soon
as
we
get
that
ian,
we
should
be
yeah.
I
mean
not
not
the
moment
that
we
measured.
C
We
should
we
can
backfill,
but
we'll
need
some
time
to
to
again
observe
it
and
and
then
once
that's
done,
we
can
move
on
with
the
backfilling.
C
As
you
know,
that's
that's
the
blocker.
There's
the
single
blocker
that
I'm
now
off
for
the
backfilling
to
move
on.
B
And
the
solution
is
like
changing
some:
what
kind
of
like
locking.
C
They're
using
I've
described
in
in
slack,
but
I
can
go
over
more
details,
if
need
be
where
we
can
catch
afterwards.
C
The
problem
is
that
the
within
the
same
transaction
there
is
a
for
update,
lock.
That
is
waiting
on
a
for
share
lock.
So
so
the
foreign
like
when
a
project
is
is
created,
it
references
the
namespace
id
and
when
that
reference
happens
because
it's
a
foreign
key,
the
foreign
key
needs
to
obtain
a
for
share
for
key
share
lock.
So,
basically,
once
you
reference
something
in
the
transaction,
you
can
no
longer
modify
the
id
of
that
reference
record.
C
So
that's
why
you
get
the
share
key
lock
and
then
the
update
key
is
very
exclusivistic,
so
to
say
so
you
cannot.
It
cannot
obtain
the
lock
because
the
for
shaky
is
already
keeping
the
lock
so
changing.
Basically,
the
locking
mechanism
should
should
solve
this
thing,
and
I've
walked
it
with
the
with
adam.
C
B
Yes,
we
are
talking
last
week
about
the
migration
plan
and
that
we
should
like
involve
a
surrey
as
soon
as
possible,
like
let
him
know
that
we'll
be
doing
it's
like
a
huge
backfield,
even
this
batch,
just
like
it
can
have
like
some
consequences.
So
we
just
like
I
talk
to
michelle
and
there
are
two
names
that
we
can
like.
We
can
mention
those
people
in
the
issue
and,
of
course,
like
post
on
the
production
channel.
So
everyone
is
aware
that
there
are
some
things
going
on.
C
B
The
one
with
the
plan
for
backfilling
so
before
we
start
back
feeling
we
should.
I
think
we
should
like
warn
people
that
this
will
be
going
on.
So,
if
there's
anything.
C
Should
they
mention,
should
I
mention
both
of
them
or
what's
the
I
can
mention
both
of
them,
and
it's
not
a
problem
for
me,
but.
B
Yeah,
I
don't
know-
maybe
it's
just
like
that.
I
think
it's
just
like
to
make
sure
that,
like
necessary,
are
aware
that
we
are
doing
this
like
bigger,
bigger
thing
before
we
start
the
backfilling
process.
B
B
I
will
verbalize
for
some.
The
product
stage
has
started
work
to
move
some
functionality
over
to
project
namespace.
We
are
developing
this
by
enabling
the
future
flag
in
our
local
dev
environments
and
and
that's
like
because
they
want
to
start
start
developing
it
and
I
said
like
they
can
do
it
like
behind
feature
flag
and
then
once
we
provide
the
backfilling,
they
can
use
the
use
it
right
away.
B
B
Yes,
at
the
same
time,
if
they
want
to
like
attach
to
the
namespace
but
yet
get
it
on
the
project
level,
they
need
to
have
like
this,
like
project
namespace
feature
linked
somewhere.
So
definitely
if
someone
from
engineering
can
look
at
their
implementation
plan,
that
would
be
great.
I
said
like
like
behind
the
feature
flag
is
okay,
because
then
they
can
switch
it
on,
as
in
the
moment,
when
the
the
moment
that
backfield
backfield
first
names
process
will
be
available.
B
Unfortunately,
it's
not
unexpected
because
they
are
thinking
me
for
a
long
time
and
I
was
like
delivering
bad
news
after
bad
news
feelings
very,
very
bad
about
it,
but
but
yeah
we're
like
if
it's
all
goals
well,
that
this
will
be
like
a
first
consumer
of
the
of
the
project.
Namespace.
C
Yeah
from
technical
perspective,
I
don't
know
how
they
are
going
to
do
like.
I
don't
know
how
they
whatever
they
implementing
works
right,
because
if,
if
it's
the
same,
if
it's
the
same
thing
at
the
project
level
and
at
the
group
level,
then
it
kind
of
makes
sense
to
have
that
code
in
the
name
space
right
away,
yeah,
I
I
don't
know
if
there
are
differences
in
the
future,
the
group
level
and
the
project
level,
then
there
is
some
friction
behind
them
to
be
discussed
and
see
how
that
code
needs
to
be
managed.
C
But,
like
again,
I
I'm
not
exactly
sure
what
what
the
feature
is.
C
B
That's
definitely
a
new
feature.
I
know
it's
a
new
feature
that
I'm
sure
this
is
the.
I
think
some
just
posted
the
link
to
the
implementation
plan.
I
haven't
got
the
chance
to
look
at
fruit,
but
if
I
I
will
go
through
it
and
if
I
have
any
questions
I
will
I
will
just
like
mention
you,
so
you
can
have
your
eyes
on
it
as
well.
C
E
I
missed
any
discussion
just
now,
so
if
you
had
a
question
for
me,
I
missed
it.
D
Yeah
we're
wondering,
if
is
this
an
existing
feature,
that
you're
moving
to
be
tied
to
a
project.
It
is
okay
and
there's
not
a
group
version
of
this
feature.
E
Correct
this
is
our
security
policy
feature
it's
in
the
security
and
compliance
menu
under
policies,
and
we
just
barely
in
14
8,
moved
vulnerability
check
over
there
so
like.
If
you
want
to
set
up
a
merge
request,
approval
that
requires
the
security
team
to
approve
it.
If
certain
vulnerabilities
are
found,
you
would
set
that
up
in
here
also,
if
you
want
to
require
that
scans
are
executed
as
part
of
the
pipeline
or
on
a
schedule.
You
would
set
that
up
in
here
as
well,
but
yeah
it's
at
the
project
level.
E
B
E
C
E
E
Hopefully,
it's
big
enough:
you
can
see
it
anyway,
so
you
see
we're
planning
to
add
in
this
source
column
here
and
like
this
policy
would
have
been
created
at
this
group,
whereas
this
policy
was
inherited
from
the
workspace
or
you
know.
Maybe
this
is
a
subgroup
right
now
and
this
policy
was
inherited
from
a
parent
group
and
the
same
thing
would
be
visible
at
the
project
level
like
it
would
show
that
inheritance
in
this
source,
column.
C
Yeah
from
from
technical
engineering
perspective,
there
is
like
once
it's
implemented
at
the
group
level.
You
are
going
to
basically
have
it
at
the
project
level.
That's
the
whole
idea,
because
every
project
will
have
sort
of
a
associated
group.
That
is
a
wrapper
around
the
project,
so
you
only
need
to
implement
it
at
the
group
level
and
the
project
gets
the
same
functionality
basically,
but
it's
always
harder
to
implement
it
at
the
group
level,
because
you
need
to
think
about
all
of
these
inheritance
and
and
draw
down
things
right.
C
E
So
yeah,
I
know
I
put
in
the
notes.
I
said
I
don't
think
we
need
anything
from
the
engineering
side,
but
I
guess
it
actually
would.
It
would
be
helpful
if
someone
from
workspace
could
just
review
our
implementation
plan
and
that
openmr
that
I
linked
to
in
the
agenda.
That
would
be
helpful
just
to
make
sure
we're
doing
this
in
the
right
way.
B
I
will
post
it
in
our
channel
and
ask
for
the
team's
feedback
on
those
two.
Those
two
links.
A
Cool,
I
think
I
have
the
last
point.
I
just
wanted
to
say:
I'm
rolling
off
with
a
group
grocery
is
going
to
be
taking
over
for
front
end
and
so
you'll
be
in
the
good
hands
of,
of
course,
scotia
who's
been
managing
this
whole
thing
and
then
peter
as
well.
Who
will
be
ready
when
phase
three
is
ready
to
commence,
but
I
know
we
weren't
able
to
get
the
party
started
in
phase
three,
but
I
know
there's
been
a
lot
of
challenges
and
work
being
done
to
get
up
to
this
point.
A
So
I'll
still
be
around
I'll,
be
playing
in
compliance
land,
and
you
know
I'll
see
you
around.