►
From YouTube: Plan group weekly 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).
A
And
so
11.9
is
scoped
work
with
Sean
and
Andre
to
not
not.
You
know
in
sync,
Jessie
synchronously,
we've
traded
messages
and
every
can
see
those
in
slack.
But
if
you
click
on
that
link,
it
shows
the
priorities
that
that
we're
working
on,
and
so,
if
you
scroll
through
them
from
right
to
left,
there
should
be
really
no
surprises.
So
we
didn't
add
anything
radically
new
in
the
planting,
for
example.
So
it's
mostly
stuff
that
we've
always
been
working
on.
In
particular
a
couple
things
to
note:
security
things
are
still
always
highest.
A
Our
highest
priority
and
well
highest.
Priority
is
always
stuff
that
you're
actually
working
on
right.
So
you
shouldn't
you
shouldn't,
stop
something
then
jump
to
something
else,
and
how
that's
relevant
is
that
if
there's
spill
over,
you
should
finish
those
things
first
and
so
I
will
update
this
board
or
update
issues
and
move
them
to
eleven
point.
A
You
know
one
of
the
first
teams
that
have
said
like
we
will
just
use
child
Epic's
in
it
didn't
seem
like
a
process
or
anything.
It
seemed
like
somebody
was
just
started
doing
it
and
then
so
that's
good,
because
that
means
that
features
designed
well
and
there's
there's
usage
of
it
other
than
that
cocoa
headshot.
So.
B
I'm
just
gonna
say
on
the
security
thing,
I
think
I
mentioned
before
that
I've
got
a
task
at
the
end
of
this
month
to
go
through
and
look
at
like
when
the
security
issues
that
we're
fixing
were
introduced
right,
like
so
like,
are
we
introducing
new
issues
and
then
fixing
them
and
just
on
like
endless
hamster
wheel
or
our,
like?
You
know
mostly
fixing
issues
that
were
there
for
a
long
time.
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
C
C
B
A
C
D
C
B
A
No,
no
I
agree
on
that.
Just
like
a
forcing
function
to
make
us
be
a
little
bit
better
there,
so
I
mean
my
goal
is
just
to
get
rid
of
p2
bugs
well.
First
of
all,
we
don't
have
p1
bugs,
which
is
great
well
I
mean
if
there
are
p1
bug
the
it's
probably
a
security
bug
anyways,
but
we
don't
have
any
P
ones.
A
A
And
I
see:
okay,
maybe
these
are
new
or
haven't
been
pinged
on
the
web.
I
would
definitely
have
never
reviewed
this
recently.
So
like
a
goal,
I
have
is
to
like
clear
our
P
to
s
away
as
soon
as
we
can
reasonably
and
then
the
like,
our
P
twos
will
be
are
like
our
new
p1,
almost
like
the
moment,
a
p2
pops
them.
B
A
B
A
So
I'm
excited
that
we're
getting
the
security
things
under
control,
then
we
can
get
the
bugs
in
general
under
control,
and
so
if
we
can
get
rid
of
P
twos,
if
we
once
we
get
rid
of
the
security
things
and
get
them
under
control,
then
we'll
have
a
little
bit
more
capacity
to
to
control
the
the
peaked.
But
even
there
like
the
p2
is
like
how
per
my
scheduling
they'll
be
done
in
11:10
I
expect
stuff
to
pop
up.
So
maybe
we
won't
be
that
lucky.
A
But
if
we
get
like
rid
of
security
things
earlier,
then
maybe
we
can
move
a
little
bit
faster,
so
I'm
happy
about
that
so
other
than
that.
The
general
board,
as
I
mentioned
for
11
9,
is
about
epochs,
child
epochs
and
now
you're
in
relationships
on
them
and
then
so
traded
a
little
bit
of
back
and
forth
with
Annabelle
yesterday
on
slack.
So
folks
can
look
at
there,
but
basically
the
source
of
truth
is
in
the
issues
themselves.
A
So
please
feel
free
to
take
a
look
or
anybody
that
wants
to
collaborate
and
find
out
more
and
issue
boards.
We
have
some
small
improvements
that
we
want
to
keep
moving
on
and
then
the
rest
are,
you
know
like
bugs
technical
dead,
elasticsearch.
The
some
UX
fixes
the
start
discussion
or
none
discussion
comment.
That's
a
really
big
one.
So
unfortunately
it
look
doesn't
look
like
we'll
finish
in
lemon
8,
but
it
looks
like
it's
a
big
one.
That's
gonna
be
done
in
11.9.
Go
ahead,
Sean
yeah.
B
There
is
is
something
behind
a
feature
flag:
that's
in
master
now,
but
from
what
I
understand
from
Wendy's
comment,
we
probably
shouldn't
enable
that
feature
flag
right
now,
because
it's
not
like
you
know
it's
not
in
a
position
where
we
would
be
comfortable
and
releasing
that
to
people
just
on
the
elasticsearch
thing
as
well,
because
Victor
and
I
had
to
chat
about
this
yesterday.
Elastic
search
or
just
search,
I
should
say,
because
elastic
search
is
a
technology
and
searches.
B
The
feature
is
moving
to
create,
but
we
didn't
touch
anything
on
11.9,
because
we
were
already
like
plans
that
essentially,
but
some
from
11.10.
We
that
will
probably
change
and
we'll
be
sort
of
working
on
that
over
the
next
month
to
figure
out
how
to
switch
that
over
to
create,
doesn't
really
affect
UX
or
front-end.
A
A
So
maybe
it
makes
sense
to
split
that
up
or
actually
rename
that
page
in
the
future.
But
so
we
essentially
have
what
like
four
layers
of
texana
me,
that
is
relevant
to
the
product
and
relevant,
to
teams
and
relevant
to
product
marketing
and
relevant
to
more
probably
more
things
but
since
different
perspective,
because
in
the
product
handbook,
so
I.
A
A
The
I
think
there's
nine
I
could
be
wrong
depending
on
how
you
count.
So
if
you
look
on
that
pages,
there
are
stages
and
there's
that
nice
infinity
symbol
which
the
industry
uses
and
then
we
we
keep
sort
of
adding
it
to
it
because,
as
there's
like
a
manage
up
top
and
a
secure
and
defend
not
at
the
bottom,
but
we
have
all
those
stages
like
plan,
create
verify
package,
release
on
and
so
forth,
but
multiple
of
those
stages
are
grouped
into
what
we
call
sub
departments
now.
A
So
if
you,
the
easiest
way,
is
to
look
at
the
legend
on
the
right.
If
you're
looking
at
a
computer
and
so
for
example,
the
Deb's
sub
department
includes
manage
plan,
create
I've,
been
asking
people
just
to
rename
that
to
the
manage
plan
create
sub
department,
because
that's
that's
just
confusing
and
then
so
you
see
the
rest.
You
have
verify
package
and
release
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
A
So
what
you'll
notice
is
we
don't
have
I'm
pretty
sure
we
don't
have
dev
and
ops
anymore,
which
there's
several
reasons
for
that
which
I
probably
don't
even
have
all
the
background
information,
but
the
M
are
there
that
I,
just
linked
actually
has
a
lot
of
information.
So
please
look
at
that
if
you're
interested,
but
so
you
have
different
sub
departments,
that
group
stages
together
and
right
now
those
sub
departments
have
common
people
that
are
director
level
leadership,
at
least
from
the
product
and
engineering
side.
A
So
if
you
look
at
the
dev
sub
department,
you'll
see
product
is
Eric
Brinkman,
which
is
one
of
our
two
current
product
directors.
We
have
Tommy
from
an
engineering
perspective
and
then
from
product
marketing,
content,
marketing
and
technical
writing
perspective.
I've
less
background
on
that,
but
you
know
John
feel
free
to
jump
in,
but
you'll
see
John's
names
multiple
times
in
our
product.
You
see
them
in
multiple
times.
A
So
if
you
look
at
the
verify
package
and
release
of
Department
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
you'll
see
something
similar.
So,
within
the
sub
departments,
you
have
stages.
So
that
brings
us
to
us.
So
that's
plan.
So
right
now
a
stage
has
a
single
product
manager
thing
typically
to
engineering
managers
back
in
front-end.
You
know
product
marketing,
folks,
technical
writing
so
on
and
so
forth.
So
this
is
the
words
confusing
is
like
for
technical
writing
and
product
marketing.
A
Those
same
people
like
John
Jeremiah,
for
example,
will
be
on
multiple
stages,
but
the
product
manager
will
be
in
a
single
stage.
This
will
get
even
more
confusing
later
when
we
keep
expanding
our
teams,
so
that
will
likely
have
the
cross-functional
product
development
team,
which
a
group
which
I
classify
as
a
one
product
manager,
maybe
two
EMS
engineers,
one
or
two
designers.
Those
will
be
within
a
group,
and
so
what
I
mean
by
a
group
is
within
the
plan
stage.
A
You
have
team
planning,
Enterprise,
planning
and
certify
those
are
groups,
and
so
because
we
keep
extending
expanding
the
scope
and
breadth
of
our
offering.
We
need
more
people
to
work
on
things
so
likely.
Team
planning
will
have
its
own
engineering
folks,
own
product,
folks
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
and
that
makes
sense
to
scale
the
at
least
the
product
development
piece.
But
then
the
other
pieces,
I
imagine,
will
be
skilled
more
slowly.
For
example,
part
of
marketing
and
technical
writing
because
of
their
nature
will
probably
scale
a
little
bit
slower.
A
F
A
F
From
a
product
marketing
perspective,
we're
gonna
double
the
team
size
by
the
end
of
the
year
and
we're
growing
quickly
in
order
from
a
perspective
of
facing
off
on
on
who
the
audiences
are
that
buy
products
and
they're
buying
things,
and
so
I
can
give
a
talk
on
what
I
called
hidden
IT
groups
or
the
groups
of
people
that
represent
groups
of
buyers
so
set
for
conversation.
But
we
are
growing
as
well,
but
we're
not
exactly
aligned
to
be.
You
know
one-to-one
mapping
right.
A
F
Very
I,
don't
like
I,
don't
like
orthogonal
cuz,
it
means
we're
not
aligned.
I.
Think
we
are
accept.
Are
our
focus
and
catalyst
for
growth
is
about?
How
do
we
connect
out
outbound
right
to
the
audience's
that
are
interested
in
in
solving
problems
that
we
help
solve,
as
opposed
to
the
inward
facing
work
of
focusing
on
the
product?
Get
lab
is
how
do
we
eat
all
that.
A
F
Hiring
plan
right
now,
so
at
a
really
high
level,
like
I've,
been
having
PC,
probably
apologize
for
the
feedback
I
had
to
reboot,
but
the
hiring
plan
at
least
looks
at
cross
what
we
called
we've
defined
as
IT,
hidden
IT
groups,
an
IT
group
focused
on
project
management
and
planning
called
or
you
know,
we
call
organized
to
keep
things.
You
know
to
keep
things
from
being
confused
other
focused
on
build
or
development.
Another
group
focused
on
verification,
QA,
that
kind
of
activity
of
of
CI
and
verify
another
group
just
on
operations
running
monitoring.
F
Another
group
focused
on
securing
and
minimizing
risk,
and
and
as
we
look
at
that,
eventually
I
think
we're
gonna
have
a
product
marketing
manager,
at
least
one,
if
not
several
focused
on
each
of
those
those
groups,
and
we
also
looking
at
how
do
we
support
specific
verticals
or
specific
places
like
regulated
industries
in
federal
public
sector,
and
that
is
also
demand.
So
both
Dan
Gordon
I
initiation,
the
product
marketing
team
with
William
and
Cindy
we're
all
looking
at.
How
do
we
grow
this
team
to.
A
A
That's
really
cool,
so
you
mean
potentially
some
folks
will
be
aligned
again.
That's
the
wrong
word
will
be
part
of
these
groups
and
it'll
be
easy
to
put
names
here
and
but
then
it
will
have
like
different
text
armies
or
whatever,
like
you
said,
verticals.
So
that's
really
interesting.
That
they're
just
focused
on,
like
maybe
like
another
way
to
think
of
it.
A
So
like
comic-con
marketing,
there's
like
solution
pages
and
like
feature
pages
or
whatever,
and
then
solutions
are
not
aligned
to
product
development
teams,
but
you
might
have
like
a
product
marketing
person,
who's
uber
focused
on
one
or
multiple
solutions
that
cut
across
multiple
of
these
areas.
That.
F
A
F
F
E
B
Those
Romney
I
think
like
exactly
it's
really
close
to
the
Technical
Writer
scenario,
where
one
person
from
quality
might
apply
to
multiple
stages,
but
it's
it'd
be
great
to
have
that
documented
there,
because
honestly,
I,
don't
know
who
the
quality
person
for
like
create
is
I,
know
you're
for
plan
because,
like
you
know,
I
could
find
it
out.
But,
like
you
know,
if
it's
on
here
now,
yep.
A
This
is
supposed
to
be
the
page
for
that
for
that
information,
so
Ronnie,
please
open.
It
are
there's
a
if
you
have
trouble
figure
out
where,
like
the
relevant
yeah
mo
files,
are
just
open.
It,
mr
and
start
pinging
people
that
you
can
ping
me
and
I
might
be
able
to
find
out
if
I
can
figure
it
out
in,
like
five
minutes,
I'll,
probably
like
bug
somebody
else
to
find
out,
but
it's
yeah
open
it.
Mr
don't
open
an
issue
because
then
I'll
never
get
this
open.
@Mr,
that's
blank!
A
If
you
can't
figure
it
out
in
like
five
minutes,
there's
a
data
dot
yeah
mo
at
the
really
root,
there's
a
stages:
dot
yeah
mo
there's
a
categories
dot
yeah
mo
and
you
can
probably
start
there
and
if
you
can't
figure
it
out
in
five
minutes,
like
I,
wouldn't
waste
your
time,
just
open
it.
I'm
on
ping
me.
D
A
Yeah,
that's
that's
good,
so
we
got
something
tangible
out
of
this
discussion.
I'm
excited
about
that.
So
so
that's
what
stages
gives
categories
and
sub
departments
are?
Oh,
oh,
so
I
linked
to
say
my
March
first
AHA
and
oh
just
one
tidbit
of
information
search
as
Shawn
mentioned
is
in
now
in
create
that's
already
been
merged
and
its
italicized
I
mean
that
just
means
that
category
will
not
show
up
on
product
marketing
pages,
because
the
data
is
that's
driving.
A
This
particular
page
is,
is
a
ya
know,
file
or
as
multiple
llamo
files
and
they're
driving
a
lot
of
different
things
throughout
gitlab.
The
website
metrics
I
wanted
to
mention
just
really
quickly.
Don't
you
can
just
click
on
those
links.
We've
been
doing,
we've
been
adding
a
lot
of
metrics
I've
been
behind
on
adding
these
to
looker,
so
definitely
I
still
have
to
figure
out
how
to
take
snowplow,
metrics
and
add
them
to
looker.
So
these
are.
A
These
are
issues
that
the
engineering
team
has
already
completed
and
it's
already
in
code-
and
these
are
eleven
point
eight
or
seven.
These
are
our
eleven
point,
seven
issues,
so
these
these
features
are
in
production.
So
for
the
usage
spring
things
they're
already,
data
is
being
already
sent
to
Virginia
live.com
for
snowplow
I
presume
that
it's
already
live
on
github.com
and
sending
to
somewhere
and
I've.
B
The
directors
who
are
listed
for
the
development
side
of
things
on
the
product
categories
page
will
be
changing
next
week
in
some
cases,
so
like
my
manager
to
change
your
Android's
manager
to
change
it's
going
to
be
announced
at
the
start
of
next
week.
It's
not
going
to
be
a
major
change
for
anybody
on
this
call
except
me
and
Android
potentially
like
for
our
teams.
It
shouldn't
really
make
much
of
a
difference
for
UX
quality
product
management.
B
A
B
The
one
exception
which
may
or
may
not
still
be
the
case
because
the
last
time
I
checked
was
two
days
ago.
So
that's
probably
out
of
date
that
the
growth
team
might
have
people
just
working
on
front
in
the
backend
simultaneously,
because
it's
going
to
be
a
smaller
team
and
it's
going
to
eat
it
straight.
B
A
B
A
B
C
A
A
A
A
What's
the
longest
end-to-end
chain
of
epics
that
people
are
using
so
we're
tracking
that
by
every
instance,
we're
recording
what's
the
longest
one.
So
we're
not
like
looking
at
all
epochs
we're
just
looking
at
all
epochs
in
a
given
instance
and
what's
the
longest
and
to
end
path.
There's
this
okay,
this
is
board
game.
Where
you
have
longest
path,
I
don't
know.
Was
this
Settlers
of
Catan?
Has
anybody
played
that
or
is
it
another
game
anyways?
This
is
long.
It
lies
path
like
a
bad
reference.
You.
A
Even
now,
so
we
are
getting
that
data,
so
I
merged
I
created
an
M
R
and
the
data
team
already
merged
and
Mars
so
that
that
is
in
looker
ish
so
or
it's
in
like
the
the
ETL
part
or
ELT
or
whatever
they
call
it
part
of
looker
and
then
I
have
to
put
another
mr
to
actually
create
the
looker
magic
and
so
that
it
can
show
up
in
our
dashboards.
So
basically
I
have
to
do
that
for
all
of
these
tracking
thingies.
A
C
Sure
I
just
wanted
to
give
a
quick
update
and
you
talked
about
it
a
couple
of
weeks
ago.
The
ethic
relationship
status
so
I
think
it's
got
all
four
the
next
milestone.
So
in
like
two
days.
Hopefully
I
talked
about
this
on
slack
with
Victor,
like
here
you
mentioned,
but
there
isn't
a
final
design,
but
it
is
ready
to
be
implemented.
D
C
Back-End
in
front
end,
we're
just
gonna
put
everything
in
tabs.
I'm
gonna
update
the
description
later
today
and
then
I
linked
to
the
only
real
question.
Still
is
the
business
redesign
I
linked
to
a
work
in
progress.
We
were
talking
about
how
to
get
the
difference
between
epics
and
issues
in
that
into
an
obvious
day
where
you
know
the
difference.
I
wanted
to
ask
for
anyone's
opinion.
If
you
want
to
chime
in,
is
that
obvious
to
you?
C
B
B
I
think
to
me
at
first
it
looks
like
the
Blues
are
different
to
the
Greens
like
I,
see
that
you
know
I'm,
not
colorblind,
so
obviously
different
people
who
are
but
I
see
the
colors
first
and
then
the
icons
like
as
my
initial
reaction
to
that
so
I.
You
know
that's
what
immediately
draws
my
eye.
I,
don't
know
if
there's
a
way
to
solve
that,
though,
so.
A
C
C
A
C
A
B
A
See:
okay,
yeah,
so
yeah,
there's
there's
a
couple
of
dimensions
there
that
we
can
figure
out
or
iterate
on.
Okay,
that's
fine,
so
I
think
I
see
we're
saying
those
icons
have
never
been
used
in.
These
views
have
been
like
the
list
and
table
views.
These
icons
are
used
in
like
say
the
the
navigation
and
probably
somewhere
else,
thirty's.
A
Quick
comment
is
our
suggestion.
I
guess
is
that
we
can
use
the
same
icons
for
open
and
closed
and
I
actually
don't
think
it
matters
that
much,
whether
it's
an
epic
or
issue,
and
we
can
use
the
pound
sign
or
the
ampersand
sign,
that's
already
differentiating,
but
I
don't
think
like.
Why
do
you
care
actually
why,
whether
it's
an
issue
and
epic?
Does
it
actually
matter
that
much
in
this
particular
scenario,
where
you're
looking
at
a
work,
breakdown,
structure,
right,
I,.
C
Wasn't
sure
but
I
kind
of
thought
you
would
care
I
mean
if
you've
got
like
50
issues
under
an
epic,
that's
good
to
know
versus.
If
you
have
one
issue
under
each
epic,
it's
you,
your
structure,
probably
isn't
the
way
you
want
it
to
be.
I,
don't
know,
I
think
it
might
be
good
for
planning
and
organizing.
B
No
I
don't
want
it
to
be
necessarily
the
most
prominent
thing
about
it,
but
I
definitely
want
to
know
which
of
these
are
issues
which
are.
These
are
ethics,
because
they
do
behave
differently
in
some
ways
and,
like
the
obvious
one
is
say,
I'm
going
to
assign
somebody
to
an
issue
I'm
not
going
to
assign
somebody
to
an
ethics
and.
F
Shaun,
the
other.
The
other
scenario
is
that
epics
are
probably
the
kind
of
work
or
kind
of
thing
that
an
organization
is
gonna,
do
work
around
prioritizing
and
making
decisions,
or
we
gonna
do
this
or
not
doing
this
once
I've
committed
to
doing
it,
then
it
breaks
down
into
sub
epics
and
issues
so
I
think
they're,
different
I
think
you
do
want
to
see
the
difference.
A
Yeah,
so
so
my
point
is
that
if
you
want
to
know
the
difference,
you
can
scan
through
the
ampersands
and
a
pound
signs,
and
maybe
you're
saying
or
the
folks
are
saying
that
that's
not
enough,
but
I
was
making
the
observation
that
if,
if
the
purpose
of
viewing
this
as
a
work,
breakdown
structure
is
that
you
can
see
everything
you
know
in
a
tree
view,
and
you
can
see
things
are
being
subdivided,
then
that's.
It
serves
that
use
case
already,
so
that
that's
really
good
and
then
the
next
level
is
they're.
A
More
specific
use
cases
like
for
scheduling
issues.
You
can't
schedule
epochs
right
now,
for
example,
or
if
doing
assignments,
and
furthermore,
there's
like
the
metadata
for
issues
and
epics
will
look
different
at
least
in
the
beginning.
So
it
would
actually
be
easier
to
to
pick
out
the
issues
from
the
epics
as
well,
in
addition
to
the
pound
sign
in
there
%.
A
C
A
Yes,
are
you
because
we
haven't
designed
for
related
issues
and
also
issues
in
epics?
Where
and
those
are
the
same
designs
I
believe
we're
like,
then
that
was
recently
implemented
right,
I
think
constants
at
that.
So
so
my
question
is
what
those
metadata
attributes
be
the
same.
This
view
that
you've
designed
probably.
C
Fewer
I
haven't
figured
out
which
ones
yeah
I,
don't
think
you
need
to
see
everything
and
it
gets
cluttered
and
the
the
nesting
we're
gonna
get
less
and
less
room
each
level.
We
go,
there's
just
not
enough
room
for
all
that
metadata.
I
know
we
have
collapsed
versions,
but
I
I'm,
not
sure
that
it's
all
necessary
like
a
milestone
and
due
date,
probably
aren't
as
necessary.
Maybe
a
semi
is
helpful,
but
right
now
I'm
just
working
with
a
blank
one.
Okay,.
A
Yeah
I
would
be
concerned
just
like
just
more
working
in
consistency
but
again
suppose
advocating
opposite
opinion
with
like,
for
example
like
when
you
see
related
issues
in
an
issue.
You
have
all
that
information
there
or
you
have
issues
and
even
issues
an
epic
right
now
people
might
complain.
Oh,
why
did
you
take
away
my
mouth
stones
or
assignees
that
are
inside
an
issue?
Because
we
already
have
issue
view
inside
an
epic
and
then
now
we're
moving
it
to
this
view,
and
potentially
we
would
be
removing
some
information.
That's.
C
A
If
we
keep
everything
that
that
would
be
the
the
minimal
iteration
right
in
that
sense,
and
then
we
can
take
away
stuff
if
we
or
collapse
or
whatever
but
anyways
I,
like
how
animal
you're
saying
like.
Are
you
pushing
back
on
the
ends
like
trying
to
define
everything
right
away
and
you're,
just
leaving
some
room
for
you
and
whoever
engineer
works
on
this
to
to
work
together
to
figure
it
out.
So
I
do
like
that.
I.
F
Apologize
I'm
asking
a
question:
without
reading
the
whole
mr.and
whole
issue
and
I
should
but
I
have.
How
does
it,
how
do
they
or
how's
the
order
set?
Is
the
order
established
consistently
everywhere,
like
we
deal
with
boards,
where,
if
you
change
the
order
of
two,
you
have
two
issues
on
a
board:
it
changes
in
other
places.
It's
similar
kind
of
logic
that
we're
thinking
about
here,
the
order,
the
sequence
yeah.
C
F
No
no
I,
but
with
that
with
that
order
of
so
if
I
were
to
say
that
you
know
if
I,
if
I
had
created,
let's
say:
we'd
created
five
issues,
one
two,
three,
four
five
and
I
realized.
Oh
shoot
I
need
to
have
another
issue.
That
kind
of
has
to
happen
between
one
and
two
sequentially.
It
I
want
it
to
live
between
one
and
two
so
I
add
issue.
Six
and
I
want
to
sit
in
the
sequence.
One
beat
one
six,
two
three,
four
five
is
the
order.
I
want
it
to
be
in.
C
F
A
E
A
Will
be
instance
wide,
so
what
we're
saying
is
that
right
now
right
now
we
already
have
a
real.
We
have
issues
and
we
have
issues
with
in
an
epoch
and
we
have
related
issues
right.
So
related
issues
cannot
be
reordered.
Currently,
issues
within
an
epoch
can
be
reordered.
Issues
within
an
issue
board
can
be
reordered.
So
if
you
recall
we
had
this
conversation
in
the
demo
thing
you
write
John,
and
so
that
is
already
in
production
and
working,
and
so,
if
you
change
an
ordering
inside
an
issue
board,
it
will
reflect
anywhere.
A
Those
issues
appear,
including
inside
ethics.
Now,
what
we're
saying
is
that
there's
more
complications?
For
example,
we
can
have
epics
of
epics
right
now
and
epics
of
epics
do
not
have
an
ordering
right.
Now
we
have
an
open,
mr
that
does
enforce
an
ordering.
So
right
now,
if
you
add
epics
of
epics
and
use
that
plus
thing
they
just
show
of
anything
at
the
top,
but
we
have
an
open,
mr
that
was
scoped
to
eleven
point.
A
Probably
won't
make
it
it's
fine
that
would
allow
you
to
move
those
around
and
now,
with
this
new
tree
view,
it
becomes
a
little
bit
more
complicated,
because
how
do
you
move
things
around
in
a
tree?
So
I
would
be
fine
if
we
can't
move
things
around
and
tree
right
off
the
bat,
but
we
probably
have
to
be
a
little
bit
careful
when
we
scope
out
this
issue.
So
we
don't
yeah.
F
It's
the
complexity
of
being
in
a
tree,
and
it's
the
behavior
that,
if
I
change
the
order
of
you
know
in
this
example
and
I'm
knocking
if
I,
if
I
change
the
relationship
between
to
two
between
several
of
these
entities,
whether
sub
epochs
or
whether
they're
sub
issues
in
this
kind
of
view,
at
least
as
a
user.
My
expectation
would
be
that
order.
That
sequence
would
be
carried
throughout
the
instance
that
I'm
just
rates
again,
as
we
think
about
this
I,
don't
think
it's
essentially
doing
on
day.
A
I
totally
agree:
John
I've
had
several
Eastern
conversations.
I
will
follow
you
and
other
stuff
other
folks,
and
my
contention
is
that
that
needs
to
be
the
case
versus
making
it
per
se
like
bored
or
per
epic
or
per
whatever
you
and
I
agree
yep
and
then
I
think.
That's
that's
important,
because
the
moment
we
make
it
we
relax
that
constraint
as
a
word.
A
Then
it
becomes
really
messy
and
we're
not
opinionated
and
I'm
of
the
opinion
that
given
any
two
issues,
or
in
this
case,
given
any
two
epics,
we
need
to
have
the
opinion
and
say
like
this
is
higher
priority
than
this
one
or
not
the
word
priority,
or
this
has
an
ordering
over
this
one.
First
of
all,
because
it
makes
our
product
easier
and
simpler
to
implement,
but
as
a
best
practice
issue.
A
A
is
more
important
issue,
B
that
should
be
carried
over
throughout
your
whole
organization,
because,
ultimately,
you
have
one
product
development
team
that
decides
the
order
of
implementation.
Now,
if
you
have
multiple
stakeholders
that
decide
on
different
like
importance
to
them,
then
they
can
use
different
features
of
Gill
lab
to
represent
that.
A
But
we
should
reserve
one
specific
feature
in
gitlab,
namely
ordering
feature
for
product
development
teams
to
you
specifically
for
the
case
of
indicating
order,
whether
that's
you
know
priority
order
of
shipping,
something
or
whatever
we
just
want
to
reserve
that
feature
for
product
development
teams
ultimately
and
make
that
first
class,
so
that
that
that's
that's
important.
So
thanks
for
bringing
it
up,
yeah.
F
A
And
I
mean
kudos
to
Sean
and
DA
way
for
inventing
the
algorithm
and
who
did
it.
This
is
like
two
years
ago
when
we
keep
forgetting
Valerie
yeah.
We
invented
this.
This
is
like
one
of
the
first
things,
I
mean
when
I
came
to
get
that
long.
Long,
long
story
from
history
and
I
came
to
kid
labs
like.
Why
can
you
reorder
issues,
an
issue
point
and
I
was
really
annoyed
and
nobody
believed
that
you
need
that
and
I'm
like.
A
B
Right
yeah,
just
a
quick
one
got
someone
new
starting
on
Monday.
I
won't
mention
their
name.
This
is
being
recorded,
but,
like
you
know,
they're
in
slack,
you
can
say
hi
to
them
and
I'm
out
next
week.
So
Liam
from
the
manage
team
will
be
helping
them
get
on
board
in
that
first
week,
and
then
we
also
have
someone
else
who
is
hopefully
going
to
accept
their
offer.
We
just
made
they
accepted
the
verbal
offer,
but
they
do
have
a
three
month
notice
periods.
They
would
be
starting
for
a
while.