►
From YouTube: Quality Group Conversation
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
B
A
You
have
a
lot
of
books
and
we
need
to
burn.
We
need
to
burn
the
tail
down,
because
every
time
I
see
time
to
result
picks
up.
It
gives
me
like
a
heart
attack
or
guy
who's
sleep
at
night,
because
it
takes
more
than
300
days
to
resolve
an
issue,
and
it's
also
because
of
it
being
an
open
source
project.
I
think
we
would
never
get
it
down
at
like
10
or
20
days
for
all
bugs.
So
that's
something
that
I
have
accepted
I,
think
because
of
the
amount
of
issues
people
file
in
our
project.
A
A
C
C
A
C
So
I
think
the
way
I
was
explained
was
when
it
went
into
QA.
There
was
a
an
issue
created
with
the
items
that
were
found
during
that
automated
check
of
that
merge,
merge,
request
and
then,
when
those
were
addressed,
then
there
was
another
one
and
that
this
process
was
a
surprised
mine
to
my
team
member,
so
I'm
trying
to
work
out
whether
I
missed
something
in
their
onboarding
and
I
need
to
improve
that
or
whether
that's
something
we
don't
have
well
laid
out
for
people.
A
Thank
you
for
raising
it.
I
think
we
need
to
improve
here.
The
key
way
in
the
release
process
has
changed
evolved
somewhat
because
of
the
new
CD
way
of
doing
things.
We
have
documentation
in
the
release
project.
I
do
think
that
we
should
have
like
a
recording
to
explain
and
walk
through
what
the
process
is.
Let
me
take
it
up
with
my
department
too,
and
also
collaborate
with
with
Maron's
team.
A
Having
that
in
the
own,
boring
would
be
useful,
I
think
that's
the
first
location
you
would
one
engineer
to
know
and
create
on
it.
So
that's
a
great
feedback.
We
haven't
linked
the
two
together
and
in
this
period
of
boring
solution.
Let's
this
adds
to
the
onboarding
and
make
sure
that
it's
covered
versus
spinning
up
on
the
process.
A
D
Yeah,
just
I
just
have
a
quick
question,
not
100%
sure
if
it
falls
into
quality
or
not,
but
I've
seen,
I've
seen
features
kind
of
come
in.
You
know
at
the
NBC
level
and
it's
it's
awesome.
You
know
it's
its
innovative.
It's
something!
That's
new,
it's
not
quite
perfect,
but
that's
our
value
right
start
there,
but
but
the
process
to
kind
of
mature.
That
seems
to
you
know
the
time.
D
What's
the
timeline
to
drive
it,
you
know
all
the
way
through
our
maturity
level
to
to
lovable,
because
if
it
comes
in
an
NBC
I
mean
I,
don't
know.
Sometimes
it's
called
a
bug.
Sometimes
it's
called
you
know,
just
you
know
not
quite
complete,
but
it
sits
there
for
maybe
a
significantly
long
time
in
that
and
saying
well
yeah.
We
started
with
NBC,
we
have
to
iterate,
but
there's
no
timeline
associated
to
the
iteration.
That
I've
see
give
any
thoughts
on
that.
Yes,.
A
Thank
you
for
asking
that
so
scheduling
is
product
and
with
Scott
Jason
Eric,
Brinkman
and
Kenny
they're
doing
a
great
job
of
trying
to
make
that
process
scale
as
we
grow.
I
believe
there
are
talks
on
on
breadth
versus
depth.
Depth
coming
in
so
I
would
I
would
suggest
asking
this
also
in
the
product
meeting
on
Tuesdays,
but
I
know
that
they're
improvements
going
in
some
of
the
technical
details
that
I
will
I
will
open
up
here
is
that
we
are
trying
to
help
the
core
team
visualize
better.
A
Many
milestones
ahead
and
things
would
change
so
right
now
we're
working
to
reset
those
I
think
josh
has
an
issue
for
us
to
remove
deliverable
on
issues
that
are
scheduled
more
than
two
milestones
ahead,
because
they're
continuously
looking
at
the
priorities
from
customers
and
as
far
as
feedback
to
if
we
need
a
feature
and
matured
faster
I,
would
give
that
feedback
to
the
responsible
product
manager
for
that
area
and
I
call
it
as
no
snow.
No,
we
don't
have
a.
We
don't
control
the
scheduling
year
as
far
as
viability
and
livability.
D
For
me,
it's
it's
a
customer
and
you
know
feedback
that
bit.
You
know
hey.
This
looks
cool
really
glad
you
put
something
like
this
in
doesn't
work
quite
well
that
you
know
doesn't
work
awesome,
but
can't
wait
to
see
how
it
matures
right.
So
they
just
discard
it.
You
know
at
the
MVC
level,
and
so
it's
kind
of
that
fine
line
between.
Is
it
a
bug
in
MVC
or
is
it
just
not
a
mature
enough
product?
Okay,
okay,.
A
A
If
you
look
at
slide
number
12
so
before
the
trash
package
is
only
collecting
issues
that
are
stale
or
needs
a
priority
in
severity
version.
2
of
this
has
a
section
dedicated
for
customer
affecting
button
feature
proposals
and
what
we're
asking
every
engineering
manager
in
a
product
manager
in
that
area
is
to
hey.
A
Please
take
a
look
at
this
closer
and
evaluate
them
and
schedule
it
to
a
milestone
and
that's
how
we're
helping
surfacing
these
issues
closer
versus,
like
you,
need
to
go
and
search
for
issues
with
the
customer
label
and
that's
like
50
thumbs
up
whatnot.
So
these
our
projects
on
the
side
I
will
help
move
that
forward
and
then
hopefully
we
get
better
at
prioritizing
them
and
ain't
no
product
managers,
the
multitask
a
lot,
so
is
that
I
also
help
great
yes,.
A
Have
some
working
in
in
the
design
phase
for
say,
I
attention
is
working
on
a
notch
automation
where
we
detect
Salesforce
or
send
us
things,
apply
a
custom
label
automatically.
That's
still
in
the
works.
I
did
not
put
it
in
this
update,
because
this
there's
no
solid
updates
to
show
you,
but
that's
going
to
come
in
if
you're
interested
it's
in
our
roadmap.
So
if
you
look
at
our
roadmap,
everything
is
linked
now
cross
linked
in
epics
and
it
sits
there.
I
would
like
to
go
to
Amanda's
question
now,
verbalize
it
for
her.
A
We've
had
a
user
report.
The
way
our
Bernard
chart
works,
prohibits
them
from
having
an
end
to
wear
workflow,
which
includes
QA,
okay,
I,
believe
the
way
we
work
here,
I
get
lab
is
close
to
is
to
close
the
issue
when
the
dev
work
is
complete,
so
we're
not
charts
are
true,
then
create
a
related
issue
for
Q
activities.
If
this
is
correct,
how
do
you
find
this
process
if
it's
work
well
for
the
team?
Do
you
like
to
see
it's
functionally
different,
I
hope
that
makes
sense?
A
Okay,
so
we
do
not
have
a
separate
QA
issue
just
for
wash
requests.
I
believe
we
are
evolving
the
workflow
labels
now,
where
we
have
workflow
ready
for
development
in
review
in
development
and
also
verification,
so
work
for
workflow
verification
is
now
such
for,
like
the
validation
phase
for
everything
in
NMR,
they,
the
burndown
chart
I,
think
we're
using
it
correctly.
At
this
point,
we
are
aiming
to
close
the
milestone
right
after
it
expires.
So
it's
it's
now
velocity.
It
tells
us
where
we
were
headed.
A
The
QA
issue
in
the
release
process
is
different.
It's
more
like
this
is
the
manifest
of
what's
going
into
the
deployment
and
engineers
need
to
be
there
and
to
be
ready
in
case
something
happens
in
production,
or
they
need
to
do
a
last
minute
check
on
staging
on
canary.
So
it's
it's,
it's
a
different
QA
dimension
per
se,
hopefully
that
the
answer
is
a
question.
A
A
A
Tests
without
having
to
like
food,
our
CEO
EE
and
run
tests
against
against
that
so
short
answer.
Yes,
we
have
found.
Customers
use
this,
but
it's
not
at
the
the
scale
of
like
a
relief
self-managed
customers
is
using
it
there's
also
the
maturity
fast
enough.
We
need
to
make
sure
that
it's
easier
to
use
for
customers
as
well,
so
it's
probably
in
in
the
early
stage
at
this
point.
Okay,
thank
you.
My
pleasure
Fabian
I
really
enjoy
using
the
QA
tools
and
they
helped
me
a
lot
as
a
new
p.m.
thank
you
for
that.
A
F
That's
right,
yeah,
it
looks
mean
what
I
mean
with
this.
Is
that,
like
I,
think
what
I've
observed
is
that
in
a
we,
we
sometimes
apply
those
labels
with
like
priority
and
security
to
bugs
and
I
think
there
is
sometimes
a
customer
expectation
that,
when
that
label
actually
applies-
and
it
contains,
we
will
get
to
this
within
90
days
or
within
longer
that
you
know
one
once
we
miss
that
deadline
right
then,
you
know
like
we
are
behind
and
send
people
I
think
start
asking
it's
like
okay.
What
happened
right
nothing!
F
Maybe
all
of
this
is
for
very
good
reasons,
but
I
think
we
can
be
better
also
from
the
product
explaining
why
that
is
the
case
right
and
what
we
will
do
to
to
reduce
that.
No,
that's,
maybe
a
follow-on
question.
I,
don't
know,
and
that's
just
my
own
ignorance.
If
we
have
actually
statistics
on
how
many
bugs
with
cific
Mabel
actually
like
past
their
SFA's.
A
D
A
Troy
right,
no,
no
one,
you
would
are
just
trying
to
communicate
out
the
reason
why
we
shame
to
name
but
is
now
as
a
lows,
and
we
do
have
some
charts.
Let
me
just
briefly
show
this
real,
quick
and
it's
already
in
the
product
per
se
credit
to
the
engineering
productivity
team.
So
if
you
go
to
level
or
you
click
on
insights,
a
rough
data
on
bugs
path-
SLO
is
already
there.
So
this
this
gives
us
the
distribution
on
the
priority
priority.
So
I'm
like
these
are
open
box
that
has
gone
past
there.
A
A
F
F
Looks
great,
and
maybe
if
that
is
not
an
issue,
I
can
actually
create
that,
because
I
would
love
to
see
this,
for,
let's
say
my
product
segment
or
for
you
know
like
whatever,
just
to
be
able
to
said
okay,
this
is
where
we
are
at.
Can
we
like
make
this
a
target
to
actually
improve,
or
maybe
we're
doing,
fine
obviously
also
possibility?
Please.
A
A
A
A
I
see
Emily
from
the
day
a
team
is
on
a
college
ball
when
I
give
a
big
kudos
on
the
day
they
import
into
periscope.
I
know
there
may
be
some
overlap
there,
but
I
assure
you
this
note
that
would
work
at
this
point
for
the
things
that
we
don't
have
in
insights.
We
will
build
directly
in
periscoping
and
lean
on
other
work
that
I
have
you
been
doing.
So.
Thank
you
for
all
your
contributions.
There.