►
From YouTube: Plan - Weekly Team 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).
B
Okay,
since
I
have
the
first
item
in
the
agenda,
then
we'll
just
kick
it
off.
I
have
linked
in
the
agenda,
an
issue
which
is
regarding
configurable
issue
boards,
which
is
for
creating
answer
and
ask
for
this
feature
as
part
of
the
enterprise
test
gaps
activity
that
the
the
quality
Department
is
taking
over
and
I
need
some
feedback
from
someone
that
is
involved
in
the
development
of
issue
boards,
because
I
have
described
three
different
scenarios
that
I
I'm
going
to
attach.
B
The
two
of
them
are
already
implemented,
and
the
third
one
would
involve
configuring,
an
issue
board
by
milestone
by
label
by
assignee
and
by
weight.
But
I
would
like
to
know
if
the.
If
the
logic
is
the
same,
for
this
different
kind
of
futures,
I
would
implement
only
one
of
them
and
because
entering
tasks
they
are
quite
time-consuming.
C
So
I
remember
that
Phillip
I
did
a
lot
of
work
on
this
I
think
he
is
not
on
the
call
right
now,
oh
and
I
think
that
the
logic
is
very
similar
for
all
of
them.
I'm,
not
sure
if
it's
actually
same
for
for
all
of
them.
But
the
point
is
always
say:
Merapi
removed
label
or
assignee
in
the
Coleman
and/or
assign
that
one
but
I
can.
B
A
I
think
it
is
similar,
I
haven't
developed
it,
but
the
logic
is
basically
exclusive.
So
every
additional
thing
that
you
configure
the
board
by
excludes
whatever
issues
just
like
the
filter
bar,
would
and
there's
not
any
conditional
and
or
not
logic.
It's
just
all
like
you
know,
additive
filters
that
makes
sense.
A
So
I
link
to
a
couple
issues
and
I
just
wanted
to
like
talk
about
how
we
can
do
it
in
a
way
that,
like
we,
either
identify
ahead
of
time
that
it's
gonna
be
a
blocker
or
what
they
are
or
like.
We
we
don't
like
we
don't
treat.
The
edition
pajamas
is
done
done
is
deliverable
like
because
I
I
found
like
I'm,
creating
these
issues
like
after
the
fact
that
oh,
oh,
like
it
just
got
implemented
in
our
design
system,
but
not
in
production.
A
So
let's
create
a
new
issue
for
that
and
then
we'll
like
deal
with
that
later.
So
then,
we
end
up
slipping
a
lot
on
various
things
that
I
don't
I
as
a
product
manager,
don't
understand
or
like
have
insight
into,
and
so
I
just
want
to
talk
about
like
how.
How
can
we,
as
a
team,
contribute
pajamas
but
also
like
delivering
features
to
our
customers
like
in
a
kind
of
consistent
way?
I,
don't
know
what
the
solution
is,
but
just
kind
of
wanted
to
open
the
floor
for
discussion.
D
So
there
was
an
effort.
There
is
an
epic
that
involves
kind
of
a
list
of
all
of
the
components
that
we
want
to
get
into
I,
get
lab,
UI
or
pajamas,
and
then
each
component
that
we
determined
we
need
to
create
a
a
component
in
collab
UI
for
has
four
separate
issues
around
designing
it:
styling
it
and
CSS
building
it
in
get
lab,
UI
and
I'm.
Finally,
implementing
it
I,
don't
think:
we've
gone
through
and
mapped
out
the
implementation
step
for
a
lot
of
those
I'm
an
Annabel.
D
You
probably
talk
through
a
little
bit
of
that,
a
little
bit
better
than
I
can
but
I
think
that's
since
we
don't
have
that
step
mapped
out.
That's
where
some
of
the
some
of
the
issues
as
far
as
like,
because
sometimes
we
have
issues
inside
of
get
lab
versus
other
times.
We
have
issues
inside
of
get
lab
UI,
just
creating
a
bit
of
a
confusion
on
some
of
those
things.
D
E
The
implementation
is,
is
what
I'm
still
unclear
on
too,
but
the
two
issues
that
you
link
to
Gaber
are
interesting
because
one
of
them
was
implemented
and
get
lab
UI
and
that's
the
scope,
labels
restyled.
So
that's
ready
to
go
soon.
As
I
mean
it's
been
implemented
fully,
it's
completed
all
the
steps
we
just
need
to
implement
it
and
then
the
first
one
I
just
moved
or
right.
Now
we
just
to
get
lab.
E
We're
only
going
to
put
it
and
get
lab
UI,
because
there's
no
point
in
duplicating
it
in
the
product
and
within
pajamas,
so
I'm
going
to
do
the
design
and
front-end
will
implement
it.
Only
at
lab
you
I,
the
only
blocker
I
see.
Is
they
when
implementation
is
happening
in
which
components
were
going
to
prioritize
their
and
I
thought
that
the
issue
filter
was
the
component
that
we're
thinking
of
implementing
in
the
product
first?
Is
that
right,
Donald.
D
A
Yeah
I
guess
that's
just
what
I'm
confusing
on
confused
on
a
little
bit,
because
the
one
the
first
issue
that
I
put
in
my
bullet
point
was:
you
know
the
interactive
popovers
and
there's
a
comment
like
let's
go
ahead
and
put
it
in
get
lab,
you
are
cuz,
we
don't
want
duplicate
to
work
and
I
completely
agree
with
that.
But
then
there's
not
this
is.
A
This
is
blocking
like
another
thing
that
removing
the
question
mark
from
the
labels
that
somebody
like
open
an
issue
for
yesterday
and
so
I,
just
that's
kind
of
why's
top
of
mind
for
me,
but
like
there's,
no
follow-through
of
like
yes,
I
agree,
let's
put
it
in
get
lab
UI
and
then
yes,
let's
take
the
next
step
like
right
away,
is
part
of
it
being
a
deliverable
like
or
a
done
done
thing
to
implement
it,
and
so
that
way
we
unblock
other
things
that
are
like
blocked.
By
not
doing
this
does
that
make
sense.
Yeah.
D
E
A
I'll
go
look
through
some
of
that
stuff.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
like
we
are
prioritizing
those
things
like
and
it
just
like
the
more
issues
that
you
create
for
the
different
things
the
more
stuff
gets
like,
sometimes
buried,
and
so
that's,
where
I
like
I,
want
to
have
like
a
normal
process
to
where
we
do
fall
through
the
implementation
step
and
I'd
like
that's
a
priority
and
something
that
we
talk
about,
that
we
like
playing
for
and
each
release
or
the
you
know
milestone
that
we
do
so.
A
D
And
we
did
that
for
the
for
the
first
three
steps
a
bit
ago
with
Tori,
but
we
haven't
done
the
implementation
step
which
we
need
to
do.
I
actually
was
just
working
off
of
an
issue
to
get
level
of
estimates
on
all
37
of
the
gitlab
components
that
we
love
UI
components
that
we
committed
to
doing
I'm,
trying
to
fight
it
now,
but
I
think
that's
a
good
starting
point
and
then
what
will
go?
D
What
we'll
do
is
I
think
what
the
plan
is
is
to
eventually
do
what
we
did
with
the
first
three
stages,
so
each
different
stage
will
commit
to
taking
a
handful
of
the
implementation
steps
up
components
into
our
product.
I'm.
Sorry
that
point
then
we're
going
to
definitely
have
to
have
that
have
those
issues
as
part
of
our
backlog
or
schedule
in
our
in
our
releases.
D
A
E
I
just
opened
my
request
yesterday
to
finish
them
up,
so
they
are
done
and
merged
and
ready,
and
then
that
can
free
up
resources
to
do
the
popover
is
next
which,
by
the
way,
do
we
need
a
amounts
term
for
it's
in
the
backlog,
I'm
still
trying
to
finish
up
12.4
stuff
and
things
that
are
already
scheduled,
but
the
popovers
don't
have
a
milestone.
Yet.
E
D
A
Cool
thanks
the
other
thing.
My
last
point
there
head
is:
if
anybody
sees
an
issue
in
a
current
milestone
that
doesn't
have
a
workflow
label
like
add
one
and
if
you're
not
sure
which
one
to
add
then
ping
me
just
because
I
stumble
across
a
couple
and
they're
not
like
unless
they
have
a
workflow
label,
I
I,
don't
track
them
for
the
current
milestone,
if
that
makes
sense,
just
cuz
like
they
treat
boards
what
we
use
they're
all
configured
for
workflow
labels.
A
D
No,
that
kind
of
brings
up
like
weights
also
we're
still
having
a
few
issues
that
probably
get
added
after
the
fact
that
don't
have
weights
added
to
them.
It's
just
helpful
too,
because
on
the
planning
side,
we
use
weights
to
determine
what
our
capacity
is
going
to
be
for
the
upcoming
releases.
I
think
it's
just
helpful.
A
I
gave
I'll
take
that
on
they'll
add
to
handbook
the
other
thing.
I
was
gonna
suggest
to
at
some
point,
I,
don't
know
if
it
makes
sense,
but
getting
in
a
more
continuous
flow
for
doing
waiting,
because
right
now,
I
think
we
just
assigned
a
couple
folks
for
like
a
short
period
for
each
release,
but
trying
to
get
more
into
a
continuous
flow
I'd
like
things
like
when
we
do.
A
The
planning
breakdown,
like
we
don't
move
things
into
ready
for
scheduling
until
it
has
a
weight,
but
to
do
that
like
it
feels
like
it's
not
natural
to
wait
until
the
day
before
a
couple
days
before
you
kick
off
a
new
release
to
to
do
that,
because
then
it's
hard
to
prioritize
so
I
didn't
I,
don't
know
if
there's
like
a
way
to
do
it
more
fluently
and
getting
more
people
involved
to
do
it
kind
of
like
ad
hoc,
as
there
are
items
that
need
to
be
weighted.
Do
you
have
any
input
on
that
anybody.
D
A
F
Those
poems
did
yeah.
This
might
just
be
me
because
I
came
in
right,
as
were
close,
were
kind
of
being
put
in
some
clear
definitions
on
when
we
change
work
or
labels
or
how
we
want
to
like
one
of
the
criteria
for
each
like.
When
do
we
move
it
from
a
solution?
Validation,
those
scheduling
just
that
we
can
have
that
clear.
F
A
There's
a
mr
that
I
think
fabian
and
geo
is
working
on
with
Josh
Lambert
to
update
the
product
workflow
with
more
clarity
around
labels
and
how
they're
used.
But
if
it's
not
explicit
enough
there
I
will
either
open
the
follow-on
mr2
update
it
in
that
point,
or
maybe
just
add
it
to
our
our
team's
handbook
page.
If
it's
not
like
something
that
the
rest
of
the
company
wants
to
deal
with
right
now,
so.