►
From YouTube: Package Quad Planning meeting - 2021-09-14
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
Hello,
everybody
welcome.
This
is
the
quad
planning
for
the
package
team
and
we
are
going
to
start
today
with
tim.
B
B
So
the
first
are
there
any
issues
in
14
3
that
are
likely
to
slip
and
ugo
had
the
first
note
here
and
I
could
just
vocalize
for
him
since
he's
not
here,
he's
been
working
on
this
issue,
330475
related
to
the
create
push
package
events-
and
there
is
one,
mr
that's
close
to
merging,
but
there's
several
other
that
may
slip.
So
this
issue
will
need
to
move
back
to
14
4.
B
C
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
for
the
refactoring
of
the
authentication
tokens
that
we
use
on
our
package
manager
tests,
basically
since
doing
this
from
an
iteration
point
of
view,
so
for
each
package
manager
there
is
an
mr
and
we
don't
have
that
many
reviewers
in
in
quality.
This
was
not
possible
to
do
for
all
the
package
managers,
so
we
have
a
little
bit
of
a
review
review
and
merge
cycle
here.
C
So
it
was
done
just
for
the
higher
priority
and
by
hire
I
mean
the
most
used
package
managers,
so
maven
nugget
and
npm,
and
for
the
for
the
others.
I
would
just
basically
create
a
follow-up
issue
just
because
this
is
labeled
as
a
deliverable
and
yeah
and
we
just
were
able
to
deliver
the
higher
the
high
use
case.
D
B
Okay,
thanks
and
steve,
you
mentioned
ttl
policies
for
the
dependency
proxy
and
I
think
I've
already
moved
that
to
14
4.
B
cool,
okay,
cool
all
right,
so
yeah
143
is
looking
like
an
awesome,
milestone,
great
great
work,
everyone
we
got
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
things
in
which
are
yeah,
really
cool
great
job,
so
I
tried
to
get.
I
did
plan
for
14,
4
and
then
first
notice
here
any
questions
or
concerns
and
sophia.
You
had
the
first
item.
C
Yeah
so
basically
we
have
an
online
garbage
collection
tool
that
is
running
in
pre-prods,
and
I
was
just
under
the
impression
that
it's
just
going
to
stay
in
pre-prod
running
because
we
have
some
different
settings
and-
and
so
I
was
just
clarifying
if
we
would
need
to
have
it
running
in
staging,
but
jean
already
answered
shaun.
Do
you
want
to
vocalize.
E
E
C
B
I
was
just
wondering
if
we,
if
we'll
need
an
issue
for
that
or
if
it
and
then
we
could,
should
we
schedule
it
for
this
milestone.
B
Okay,
great
so
then
the
if
there's
no
other
questions
or
concerns,
and
we
could
go
through
the
milestone
if
we
have
time,
but
I
did
want
to
call
out
the
subject
of
things
that
we
didn't
prioritize,
which
always
hurts
a
little
bit
because
it'd
be
nice
to
work
on
everything,
but
looking
at
the
milestones
already
pretty
full
so
with
I
didn't
pull
in
any
work
for
debian
or
rubygems.
B
It
just
felt
like
with
the
focus
on
performance
and
reliability
and
tuning
some
of
the
existing
features
that
it
felt
not
right
to
bring
in
new
breadth
to
the
product
is
any
strong
disagreements
on
that.
I
know
david.
We
wanted
to
work
on
db
in
this
milestone,
but
I
I
was
I'll
try.
I
tried
to
push
it
back
to
next
milestone.
F
I
just
had
a
comment.
I
was
just
curious
if
any
of
those
should
be
considered
stretch
for
14.4
and
most
specifically
like
do
any
of
them,
take
higher
priority
than
the
stretch
goals
that
are
currently
listed
in
that
issue,
like
especially
ones
that
might
take
a
while,
where,
like
as
a
stretch,
we
can
get
started
on
it
or
something.
To
that
extent,.
B
Well,
last
milestone:
I
promised
that
I
wouldn't
add
more
than
like
three
stretch
items,
because
it
seemed
to
get
a
little
ridiculous
and
actually
what
ends
up
happening
is
those
items
end
up
slipping
and
I
have
to
end
up
moving
them
anyway,
and
so
it
it.
It's
not
helpful
for
the
community
to
put
things
into
a
stretch
goal
if
we
know
we're
not
going
to
have
space,
so
I
would
say
if
we
can
get
through
these
issues
and
there's
time
left
for
on
the
back
end
ruby
side
to
get
to
those.
B
B
Okay,
cool
so
yeah,
the
the
other
things
that
would
be
nice
to
get
to
that.
We
have
done
work
on,
but
we
aren't
ready
yet.
Is
that
updating
the
dependency
proxy
to
work
more
generically,
I
just
with
moving
it
to
workhorse
and
we're
adding
in
these
policies
so
that
the
generic
stuff
will
have
to
wait
until
we're
a
little
bit
further
along.
B
I
really
wanted
to
get
that
move
the
mpm
to
workhorse
in.
I
was
thinking
that
maybe
we
could
just
have
like
create
sort
of
a
layout
for
what
we
want
to
do
and
coordinate
with
the
create
team.
So
the
next
milestone
we're
ready
to
bring
it
in,
and
maybe
that's
like
a
that's
something
that
we
could
add
as
a
stretch
goal
kind
of
a
technical
investigation.
I
guess
and
then
yeah
extracting
and
present
at
least
extra.
B
E
Next
question
yeah,
so
it
seems
to
me
that
the
refactor
of
the
dependency
proxy
to
view
it's
a
blocker
for
some
other
issues.
I
don't
know
it
should,
should
we
schedule
it
sooner
than
later
or
or
whatnot.
B
I'd
love
to
schedule
that
one
I
I
thought
that
we
had
to
to
skip
to
get
through
the
moving
the
dependency
proxy
settings
under
packages
and
registry
settings
first.
B
B
E
Yeah,
I
just
dropped
a
last
minute
request
to
schedule
one
more
issue
for
the
container
registry
and
then
about
reliability
and
performance.
E
B
That'll
be
an
awesome
change
yeah.
Thank
you
I'll
schedule,
the
the
former
one
you
mentioned
and
then
we'll
see
if
we
can
get
the
poor
query
performance
for
5
or
14
6..
If
we
solve
that,
if
we
solve
use
that
solution,
will
we
still
want
to
do
the
breaking
change
for
15?
Now
we
still
want
to
break
it
into
two
separate
calls
yeah.
Definitely
so
we
probably
need
to
start
putting
that
into
the
release
post
and
plan
deprecations.
B
B
Okay,
yeah,
I
don't
see
any
other
items
on
the
agenda.
One
thing
that
comes
to
mind
when
I
was
just
speaking
about
deprecations.
I
just
wanted
to
remind
myself
out
loud
in
front
of
everyone.
We
have
to
add
a
service
build
bulletin
for
the
dependency
proxy
change
that
went
out
in
fourteen
two.
The
permissions
change
that
happened
so
I'll
just
make
sure
that
that
gets
done
as
part
of
the
deprecation
notice.
I
had
this
milestone.
B
Okay,
I
think
that
was
the
agenda.
I
think
we're
all
and
if
there's
nothing
else,
I
think
we're
all
good.