►
From YouTube: Plan - Tasks walkthrough with FE
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
All
right,
can
you
all
see
my
screen
excellent.
Thank
you.
So
I'm
just
gonna
kind
of
walk
through,
but
you're
welcome
to
ask
questions
at
any
point.
I
also
am
setting
up
some
or
have
started
the
process
of
setting
up
some
usability
testing
just
to
get
some
feedback
on
these,
as
well
as
evaluating
our
current
process.
So
some
of
these
designs
might
change
a
little
bit,
but
I
don't
anticipate
any
big
changes.
A
However,
gabe
is
here
as
well
so
dave
if
there's
anything
that
I
have
missed
or
have
misunderstood
in
terms
of
the
requirements,
please
let
me
know
so
this
is
just
a
standard
checklist
currently,
and
some
of
you
may
have
seen
some
of
the
designs
previously,
where
you
hover
over
one
of
these
and
I'll
just
zoom
really
quickly.
Just
you
kind
of
see
you
hover
over
one
of
these
and
you
get
a
little
ellipsis
menu,
and
that
has
more
options.
A
So
in
this
case
it
has
a
convert
to
task
option
and
when
you
select
that
I'm
just
going
with
a
modal
for
now,
I
still
prefer
going
with
a
side
panel
to
launch
tasks
in
the
future.
But
I
think
the
modal
will
be
the
best
approach,
because
we
already
have
the
sidebar,
obviously
an
issue,
so
as
issues
eventually
transition
over
to
more
of
a
work
item
format
and
we
lose
that
sidebar.
I
think
it
will
make
sense
at
that
point
to
offer
an
alternative
way
to
view
this
in
a
side
panel.
A
But
for
now
we'll
launch
it
in
a
modal,
especially
since
it's
pretty
simple
in
terms
of
layout
hovering
would
show
this
sort
of
bordered
outline
or
some
sort
of
feedback
to.
Let
them
know
that
this
is
an
editable
field
and
then
also
have
the
ability
and-
and
I
don't
think
this
is
for
nbc-
assignees,
correct,
gabe
or
wait
just
title
I
feel
like-
and
maybe
the
ability
to
delete
and
things
like
that.
B
Yeah,
but
we
can
do
we
basically
can
roll
into
any
of
the
widgets
in
whatever
order
we
want.
Once
we
have
the
basics
there.
A
Okay
and
I'm
also
doing
some
testing
with
these,
so
that's
another
reason
why
I
wanted
to
include
these
because
part
of
what
I
want
to
understand
in
terms
of
testing
is
the
value
of
this
for
users
and
one
of
the
most
valuable
parts
of
tasks
for
users.
Is
the
ability
to
apply
a
weight
to
to
break
down
an
issue
into
smaller
sections
and
then
apply
a
weight
and
an
assignee
to
each
of
those
smaller
sections?
A
So
that's
another
reason
why
this
is
included
as
part
of
this
design.
Also,
I
have
started
updating
using
design
management
as
of
yesterday
the
designs
in
some
of
these
issues.
However,
because
they're
prototypes,
you
may
not
necessarily
see
everything
you
might
have
to
like
go
into
prototype
mode
and
click
and
activate
to
see
some
of
these
panels,
so
I'm
trying
to
include
a
screenshot
as
well,
but
if
there
are
any
questions
with
that,
just
let
me
know
so,
let's
just
say
for
now:
I
just
went
ahead
and
created
the
task.
A
A
They
can
then
select
it
again
if
they
choose
to
and
have
the
ability
to
toggle
a
status
if
they
want-
and
let
me
see,
there's
one
other,
oh
and
then
the
ability
to
also
delete.
So
I
also
included
the
breadcrumbs
here
and
I
had
a
question
about
that
so
previously
for
work
items,
we
had
explored
having
this
ellipsis
menu
associated
with
the
work
item
layout
and
that
would
be
similar
to
what
we
have
currently
for
issues.
It's
kind
of
just
your
general
actions
that
can
be
applied
to
that
work
item.
A
I
could
put
it
here
to
the
right,
but
I
wanted
to
know
if
there's
anything
specific
about
how
that
piece
is
built,
because
I
am
trying
to
reuse
the
gitlab
ui
component
of
the
ellipsis
menu
and
is
it
tied
to
the
breadcrumbs
currently
can?
Can
we
separate
those
out
as
part
of
this?
This
effort,
I
mean,
I
know
we
can,
but
I
don't
know
the
complexities
involved
and
what
all
is
impacted
by
it.
C
I
think
we
can
and
probably
should
I
don't
know,
do
you
all
know.
If
is
there
a
gitlab
ui
component
for
breadcrumbs?
Are
we
still
just
everywhere
using
the
hamel
version
of
it.
D
A
Cool
and
then
also
with
the
breadcrumbs-
I
partly
included
this
as
well
for
conversation
purposes,
so
this
is
just
showing
that
this
task
is
the
first
task
inside
of
this
issue,
and
I
intentionally
put
one
and
one
to
kind
of
show
that
this
is
a
child
element
of
the
first
issue,
and
it's
unlikely
that
many
people
would
see
this
particular
scenario.
But
is
this?
Would
this
be
an
accurate
representation
of
that
visualization?
A
If
we
were
to
include
breadcrumbs,
are
we
having
hashtags
for
tasks?
I
believe
that
we
had
decided
that
we
were,
and
so
in
which
case
it
would
kind
of
look
like
this,
which
I'm
curious
about
what
users
would
think
about
that.
If
that
would
be
confusing
to
see
two
hashtags,
I
think
the
the
arrows
help
to
reinforce
that
it's
a
hierarchical
structure
and
that
one
is
a
child
of
the
other.
But
again,
I'm
concerned
that
this
is
going
to
be
perceived
as
an
issue
inside
of
an
issue.
B
Yeah,
it
won't
be,
I
mean
because
the
other,
the
other
use
cases
like
from
a
path
perspective.
You
don't
navigate
to
the
issue
then
to
the
task,
because
the
task
it's
just
a
relationship,
and
so
it
would
just
be
one
hashtag,
which
would
be
the
id
of
the
task
if
that
makes
sense,
because
it's
also
going
to
show
up
in
the
issue
list.
And
then,
if
you
click
through
from
the
issue
list
to
the
task
detail
page
your
the
path
would
basically,
the
breadcrumb
would
be
different
than
from
what
it
would
be.
B
A
And
that
was
something
else
that
I
forgot
to
show
here
is
the
related.
So
I
included
just
for
part
of
the
prototype
testing,
this
tasks
icon.
This
is
an
existing
icon
for
tasks,
I'm
not
proposing
that.
A
We
use
that,
because
I
have
a
feeling
that
the
foundations
team
will
prefer
to
create
a
new
icon,
since
there
is
already
a
concept
of
tasks,
and
that
is
different
from
this,
so
that
icon
might
change,
but
I
wanted
to
just
have
it
there
for
testing
so
that
I
can
kind
of
walk
through
or
help
demonstrate
what
the
intention
is
behind
this
icon,
so
it's
just
showing
as
related
and
you're
right,
gabe,
I'm
sorry.
I
keep
forgetting
that
we're
not
necessarily
representing
this
as
a
child
element
for
nbc.
A
It
is
simply
a
related
thing,
so
that
makes
sense
that
the
breadcrumbs
would
not
be
reflected
that
way.
As
far
as
how
this
would
show,
though,
in
the
list
in
relation
to
other
issues,
so
I
would
expect
for
the
issues
icon
to
show
here
and
then
potentially
have
a
separate
icon
and
number
four
tasks.
A
B
Yeah-
and
I
would
probably
it's-
I
think,
it's
fine
to
put
the
type
icon
in
there
and
they'll
handle
it
all,
but
the
I
don't
know
if
we're
going
to
want
to
have
counters
for
every
type
of
thing
right,
because
then,
if
you
have,
let's
say
I
don't
know
10
different
types
of
work
items
you
know
we'll
have
like
it's
just
going
to
get
noisy
and
right
now
we
just
have
the
issue
icon,
which
is,
I
think,
will
evolve
to
be
the
work
item
icon
right.
B
So
we
just
want
to
show
the
account
of
work
items
but
for
the
mvc.
If
we
want
to
show
the
task
icon,
I
think
that's
a
good
visual
indicator
to
the
user,
but
that's
just
my
two
cents.
So.
B
E
So
sorry
for
the
first
for
mvc
are,
are
we
saying,
then
that
we
may
not
need.
C
B
B
Right,
but
that
can
be
like
you
can
edit
the
markdown
and
remove
the
get
loud
flavor
markdown
reference
to
the
issue
right
and
if
you
do
that,
or
if
you
add
things
I
think
we
do
want
to
show,
we
basically
don't
want
to
change
any
existing
behavior
of
how
linked
items
work.
So
once
you
do
related,
it
will
also
show
up
in
the
linked
items
widget
right,
because
that's
where
you
manage
the
relationship
be
like
for
whatever
it
is.
B
So
the
reason
why
we're
converting
the
markdown
task
to
a
work
item
is
so
that
we
can
then
have
the
new
work
item,
create
view
and
work
on
that
iterated
on
it
side
by
side,
with
the
work
item,
detail
view
without
having
to
interrupt
our
existing
issue
creation
flow.
That
is
legacy,
so
that
makes
sense
yeah.
So.
C
If
someone
goes
in
and
deletes
the
the
markdown
reference
to
a
task,
it
will
stay
as
a
related
item
task
within
that
issue.
A
How
soon
do
you
need
the
designs
for
that
related
aspect
in
order
to
be
able
to
move
forward,
so
I
think
alexis
is
out
maybe
through
next
week,
so
I
don't
know
if
I
need
to
chat
with
kristen
gabe
and.
B
I
mean
honestly,
like
we
don't
have
if,
if,
when
we
have
the
create
work
out
of
mutation,
if
there's
some
way
to
specify
the
type
of
relationship
when
creating
it
right
so
just
like
you
might
eventually
want
to
be
able
to
create
a
new
issue.
That's
blocking
from
the
relationship
widget,
it's
gonna
be
the
same
sort
of
thing.
Where
you
select
the
relationship
type,
then
you
create
the
work
item
just
like
eventually
create
create
a
new
child
task
or
new
child
work
item
from
the
epic
view.
A
Okay,
one
other
thing
I
wanted
to
note
is
when
they
go
into
edit,
if
they
choose
to
delete
my
expectation.
A
I'm
sorry,
my
prototype's
weird,
my
expectation
if
they
chose
to
delete
like
this,
for
example,
would
be
that
refined
mock-ups
for
form
would
simply
revert
back
to
a
text
line
because
the
object
would
be
deleted,
but
I
don't
want
to
assume
that
they
want
to
delete
the
checklist
item
and
I'm
curious
about
the
complexity
of
that
or
if
anybody
has
any
thoughts
on
on
that
approach.
Because,
again
to
me,
delete
is
deleting
the
object,
but
that
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
they
want
to
delete
it
from
the
checklist.
A
B
B
A
That
approach,
though,
that
feels
like,
if
you
don't
know
that
it's
been
deleted,
is
does
it
change
and
I'll
need
to
test
this
myself.
That's
a
good
idea
to
do
that.
Does
it
change
the
view
of
the
text
at
all
like
I
know
when
something's
been
closed,
it
says
closed
in
parentheses,
it
doesn't
show
deleted.
A
Word:
okay,
yeah!
I
actually
I
want
to
create
an
issue
about
that,
because
I
I
don't
love
that
experience
I
feel
like
if
you
don't
know
that
it's
been
deleted
and
you
click
on
it.
You
may
just
believe
that
the
product
is
broken.
Somehow
I
would
prefer
that
they
get
some
sort
of
notification
that
it's
been
removed,
but
that
being
said
for
nbc,
I
want
to
be
mindful
of
our
timelines.
B
B
To
then
convert
it
from
the
reference
to
plain
text
or
something
like
that
which
gets
sort
of
even
more
confusing,
because
what
you're
storing
right
here
when
you
show
the
refine
mockups
for
form
you're,
not
in
the
code
or
in
the
markdown,
it's
going
to
be
a
a
link
to
the
issue.
It's
not
actual
text
right.
B
It's
a
reference,
so
we'd
have
to
figure
out
how
to
handle
that
when
you
do
remove
the
reference
like
do
you
do
you
just
put
in
the
what
was
the
former
title
there
as
plain
text,
or
I
mean
there's
a
lot
of
sort
of
nuances
about
it,
but
I'm
open
to
explore
how
to
make
it
a
better
experience
which
is
non-trivial.
In
my
opinion,
I'd.
C
Sorry
I
was
distracted,
but
I
feel
like
that
is
I
I
think
we're
gonna
have
to
get
back
on
input
on
that
and
how
they
want
to
handle
referencing
on
there.
So
I
think
we
should
table
that
question
until
we
have
back
end
engineers
with
us.
A
I
knew
I
should
have
invited
them.
I
almost
did
and
I
thought
well,
I
don't
know
how
much
they
need
to
know
when
it's
looking
at
the
front
end.
I
knew
I
should
have
included
them.
So
I'll
definitely
share
this
with
jake
and
and
get
his
thoughts,
and
there
is
also
separately
the
issue
for
deleting
a
task.
So
maybe
we
can
continue
the
conversation
there
and
I'll
just
tag
jake
in
that
also.
A
But
that
being
said
for
deleted
and
I'll
mention
this
also
in
that
issue,
I
would
also
expect
for
the
icon
and
the
label
to
be
removed
too.
So
it
sounds
like
maybe
there's
just
more
discussion
that
needs
to
happen
there
from
a
mobile
perspective.
Oh
actually,
let
me
open
this
back
up
the
design
for
these.
Let
me
actually
restart
this.
A
I
am
right
now
for
nbc,
expecting
it
to
be
very
similar
to
the
experience
that
people
have
when
they
go
to
edit
a
board,
so
you
just
have
the
kind
of
drop
down
when
you
edit
a
board.
Obviously
you
have
a
modal
that
pops
up
and
then
you've
got
drop-downs
inside
of
the
modal
so
again
to
keep
it
lean.
I'm
going
with
existing
get
lab,
ui
components
to
be
able
to
just
go
in
and
edit
weight
and
assignees
using
those
existing
existing
experiences
for
mobile.
A
B
I
was
gonna
say
before
I
forget
the
assignee
or
not
the
assignee,
but
the
weight
input.
It's
just
an
input
field,
not
a
drop
down
because
there's
not
a
predefined
set
of
options.
If
that
makes
sense.
B
A
valid
positive
integer.
B
It
is
odd,
it's
I
guess,
making
it
so
that
it's
easy
to
pick
from
a
list
of
options
and
down
the
road.
We
want
to
provide
a
few
different
preset,
like
set
of
options
like
the
fibonacci
sequence
and
some
other
things
like
that,
but
we're
not
there
right
now,
and
so
if
we
were
to
enforce
a
type
I've
seen
even
at
gitlab
a
team
that
uses
like
hundreds
and
thousands
as
weights,
because
I
think
they
do
some
weird
time
conversion
or
something
like
that.
B
A
Glad
you
said
that
so
I
I
definitely
agree
with
you.
I
prefer
that
we
go
with
an
input
as
opposed
to
a
drop
down,
especially
for
that
reason,
so
you
don't
have
to
try
to
scroll
through
a
ridiculous
number
to
get
to
your
weight,
so
is.
Is
that
going
to
add
to
scope
at
all,
or
is
that
something
that
we
can
pull
from
existing
components
and
still.
C
So
I
mean
I,
I
think,
there's
two
different
use
cases
and
this
weight
is
similar
to
the
option
we
have
in
the
issue
sidebar
now
the
reason
it's
the
drop
down
in
filtered
search
and
board
scope
is
because
we
needed
a
way
to
have
the
none
in
any
options
we
could
have
probably
auto
completed
to
that,
but
we
chose
to
do
the
drop
down.
C
So
I
think
in
this
case
it
will
not
add
any
scope
if
we
just
allow
free
text
and
that's
what
we
want
to
do,
because
we
don't
want
to
there's
no
option,
there
shouldn't
be
an
option
for
any
or
none.
A
Excellent
then
I'll
update
my
designs
to
just
be
an
input
field.
For
that
and
again,
this
is
the
older
design
from
the
original
work
items
that
I
do
have
a
view
in
figma,
and
I
think
I
shared
this
in
the
meeting
invite
just
in
case.
Anybody
wants
to
look
at
the
figma
file.
You're
welcome
to
just
dive
in
and
post
comments,
questions
at
any
point,
but
the
mobile
view
would
be
very
similar
to
the
work
item
view
from
before
and
that
we
would
still
have
the
ellipsis
menu
up
here
with
the
ability
to
delete.
A
The
primary
difference,
though,
would
be,
and
that's
why
I'm
pulling
up
the
prototype
from
this
sort
of
a
swiping
effect
so
rather
than
having
the
pop-up
that
just
kind
of
overlays
having
sort
of
a
page
that
like
replaces
with
that
panel
and
I'm
curious
if
there
are
any
questions
or
concerns
about
that
from
a
build
perspective,
because
it
would
be
more
of
a
screen
replacement
or
an
overlay
experience
rather
than
just
like
a
pop-over
kind
of
thing.
A
I
would
expect
it
to
just
be
front-end
in
css,
but
I
know
just
enough
coding
to
be
dangerous.
In
that
regard,
so
I
don't
want
to
make
that
assumption.
A
And
let
me
know
if
I
can
explain
that
better,
like
this
has
the
animation.
I
don't
know
why
the
animation
is
missing
from
here,
but
it
would
just
be
some
sort
of
you
know.
Maybe
quick
animating
experience
that
just
shows
the
panel
slide
in
with
the
edit
options
for
assignees
or
whatever
the
widget
may
be.
A
C
On
the
animation
part
or
the
animation
side,
do
we
have
any
other
places
where
we
use
like
it's
not
hard
to
implement
it's
just
hard
to
tweak
to
get
the
right,
because
you
don't
want
to
have
one
animation
on
one
page
be
like
super.
The
transition
be
super
quick
and
then
on
another
page,
it'd
be
slow
or
just
gonna,
be
jarring.
As
a
on
the
ux
side
of
things.
A
I
agree
I
would
expect
it
to
be
similar
to
I
feel,
like
we've
got
those
four
requirements:
it's
not
really
those
it
just
kind
of
pops
out
yeah
we've
got
a
little
bit
of
an
animation
where
it
just
kind
of
pops
in
and
pops
out.
That's
what
I
would
expect
is
similar
to
that
is
that
helpful.
C
A
G
I
need
to
disagree
with
donald
a
bit:
we're
not
we're
not
using
it
currently
a
lot
within
github,
but
there
is
a
component
in
github
ui
called
gl
drawer,
which
was
supposed
to
be
the
sidebar
implementation,
but
it
didn't
happen,
and
I
can
see
that
it
has
a
transition
within
it.
So
we
can
reuse
it
because
it
should
be
pajamas
compliant
because
it's
gitlab
ui
component.
G
F
F
G
I
think
it
would
be
good
addition
to
the
gitlab
ui
itself.
It's
not
only
for
for
our
case,
it's
just
generally
better
for
the
units.
A
I
know
we've
only
got
about
two
minutes
left.
So
what
questions
do
you
all
have?
What
details
can
I
flush
out
because
I
feel
like
as
I'm
walking
through
this,
I
feel
like
there's
still
some
unknowns
that
I
have
simply
because
I
need
to
get
feedback
from
users
as
to
a
couple
of
these
things.
What
unknowns
do
you
all
have?
What
questions
can
I
answer?
A
G
From
my
side,
I
have
questions
mostly
for
the
back
end,
especially
for
like
we
delete
just
the
text
from
the
markdown.
What
is
going
to
happen?
I
am
sure
that
they
can
implement
this
like
right
now,
if
you
edit
a
description
of
the
issue
and
you
remove
the
related
issue,
it
relates
to
they
remove
it
from
the
relationship,
but
this
is
something
to
be
defined
by
the
back
and
from
the
design
standpoint.
I
don't
think
they
have
any
specific
questions.
Everything
is
clear
so
far.
Thank
you
paul.
It
was
a
really
nice
presentation.
C
Well,
we'll
con.
If
there
are
any
other
questions,
we
can
continue
in
in
the
separate
issues,
but
yeah.
This
is
great
as
kind
of
a
kickoff
to
see
the
designs
I
can
tell
you
said.
I
think
the
next
step
is
to
get
back
in
input
on
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
these
things,
but
from
a
design
perspective.
I
think
we're
at
a
good
place.
A
C
A
I'll
share
it
in
there
as
well,
and
then
also
tag
jake
and
a
couple
of
the
deleted
questions
that
we
had
and
that
deleted
issue.
That
is,
and
if
there's
anything
else
that
you
all
need
for
me
at
any
point,
please
feel
free
to
ping
me.
I
feel
like
I'm
kind
of
drowning
in
issues
these
days,
so
I
have
a
tendency
to
find
myself
feeling
scattered
trying
to
just
stay
on
top
of
it
all
and
never
ever
intend
to
neglect
conversations
with
you
all.