►
From YouTube: 2023-03-21 Frontend Create:Source Code Weekly
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
C
A
That
one
that
one
right,
we
have
some
points
in
the
agenda:
let's
have
a
discussion
Dennis,
take
it
away,
yeah.
D
Thank
you,
so
I
have
played
with
with
a
Blog
viewer
page
and
I've,
figured
out
an
interesting
thing
that
we
are
using
the
duplicated
component
when
the
Fisher
flag
is
on,
while
using
non-deprecated
component.
When
the
feature
flag
is
off,
it
seems
to
be
to
be
correct
from
the
code
standpoint,
but
the
naming
is
super
confusing
and
but
I
would
like
to
know
what?
D
What
is
the
story
behind
this,
because
it's
super
confusing
to
dive
into
the
code
there,
and
if,
if
this
is
correct,
the
way
it
behaves
now,
then
I
think
we
have
to
discuss
strategy
for
similar
things
in
the
future.
Because
to
avoid
this
confusion,
because
it's
it's
a
bit
a
bit
weird.
E
Yeah,
so
that
the
deprecated
component,
we
actually
plan
on
removing
in
1511
it's
using
the
old
way.
Well,
the
current
way
of
of
highlighting,
which
is
giving
problems
which
is
highlighting
in
chunks
as
the
user
Scrolls.
E
D
Okay,
could
you
could
you
please
update
the
link
to
the
issue
because
it
doesn't
work
at
the
moment,
returns
404.,
but
but
but
to
make
sure
that
I
understand.
So
when
we
deprecate
The
Source
here
or
deprecated,
we're
going
to
stay
with
Source
your
Dot
View
component
right
yeah
correct,
but
that
one
is
available
now
when
the
flag
is
off
so
technically
whatever
we
do
to
that
component
is
going
to
production
right
away
at
the
moment.
Actually.
E
We
shouldn't
be
using
the
The
Source
viewer
component
anywhere
I'm,
not
actually
sure
we.
D
Do
actually
okay,
it
is
yes,
so
when
the
flag
this
this
is.
This
is
the
confusion.
So
when
the
flag
is
on,
we
show
the
deprecated
component
and
when
the
flag
is
off,
we
show
sourceviewer
Dot
View
component,
so.
D
I
think
Chuck
can
tell
more,
but
I
can
I
can
look
it
up.
It's.
E
C
C
B
D
D
Because
I'm
just
I'm
just
a
bit
a
bit
confused
like,
why
would
we
put
the
so
even
if
we
so
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
Jacques,
but
from
what
I
understand
the
the
way
of
work
was
that
okay,
we
enable
the
flag
and
we
create
this
new
source
viewer
behind
the
flag,
with
the
chunks
right,
yeah
and
then,
while
working
in
that
mode,
we
figured
out
that
this
component
doesn't
satisfy
our
needs
and
we
have
to
to
to
do
it
differently
right.
That's
when
we've
renamed
it
to
duplicate
it.
E
So
I
actually
renamed
it
to
deprecated
recently
when
we
discovered
that
highlighting
in
chunks
is
a
bit
unstable.
So
at
that
point
it
made
sense
to
rename
it
and
start
working
on
a
new
source
here
component,
because
the
old
one
wouldn't
work
anymore.
So
slowly
but
surely
we
want
to
move
away
from
it
and
start
introducing
a
new
one.
So.
C
E
New
source
viewer
component,
the
one
that's
not
prefixed,
with
deprecated,
that
is
actually
the
new
one
that
shouldn't
be
used
anywhere,
I'm
trying
I've
looked
in
the
code
base
and
I'm,
actually
not
seeing
it
used
anywhere,
so
I'm,
not
too
sure
where
we
are
rendering
it.
If.
D
E
D
E
D
I'm
not
sure,
but
the
this
is.
This
is
the
question.
So
if
we
are,
if
we
were
behind
a
feature
flag,
when
we
discovered
that
the
current
strategy
doesn't
work,
why
not
to
just
continue
with
that
same
component
and
discard
now?
What
is
there
and
just
start
start
again,
so
we
are
still
behind
the
feature
flag.
Why
would
we
need
to
deprecate
something
which
is
behind
the
feature
flag
and
then
start
something
new
behind
the
same
feature
flag?
What
is
the
reason
for
that
yeah.
E
We
are
Beyond
a
feature
flag,
but
it's
the
feature
flag
is
defaulted
to
on
at
the
moment.
Way
of
highlighting
will
be
like
a
complete,
a
completely
different
way,
a
completely
different
architecture,
basically
completely
different
way
of
highlighting
the
content.
E
D
Another
another
idea:
don't
don't
get
me
wrong,
I'm,
not
trying
to
to
to
find
like
to
find
problems.
I'm,
just
brainstorming,
because
I
was
I,
was
completely
confused
with
the
with
this
naming
and
when
that
or
another
component
is
rendered.
So
even
I.
D
Let's
assume
you,
you
say
that
this
flag
is
owned
by
default
in
the
get
Lab
at
the
moment,
right
yeah
so
have
we
have
we
evaluated
just
enabling,
since
it
is
enabled,
by
default,
just
removing
this
flag
completely
saying
that
this
is
default
component
now
and
then,
with
removing
that
flag.
We
introduced
a
new
flag
to
deprecate
this
this
this
approach,
instead
of
just
deprecating,
something
behind
the
feature
flag
to
do
the
new
thing,
because
technically
now
we
are
not.
D
We
it's
it's
kind
of
hard
to
be
protected
by
the
future
flag.
At
the
moment,
with
the
with
the
restructuring
of
The
Blob
viewer.
E
So
whether
the
feature
flag
is
all
for
on
it
wouldn't
make
a
difference,
because
we
would
still
be
using
the
old,
the
the
deprecated
component,
so
I
think
the
confusion
is
Maybe.
You
say
in
your
comment
that
we're
rendering
the
we
are
rendering
the
old
component
if
the
feature
flag
is
is
off.
I
think
is
what
you
said.
E
But
as
far
as
I'm
concerned,
that
is
actually
not
the
case.
The
the
new
source
viewer
component
shouldn't
be
rendered
anywhere
because
it's
it's
code
that
we're
still
working
on
that
hasn't.
It's
actually
not.
It's.
D
It's
not
rendered
on
gitlab
because
we,
as
you
said
the
flag,
is
on
by
default.
But
if
you
do
this
locally
and
you
turn
off
the
flag,
you
get
the
the
components
which,
like
I
I,
wasn't
aware
that
we
have
the
flag
on
on
gitlab.
D
But
when
you
do
this
locally
and
you
get
in
your
GDK
and
you
turn
off
the
flag,
you
get
the
component,
which
is
supposed
to
be
the
work
in
progress
and
the
the
pattern
is
actually
to
protect
the
work
in
progress
with
the
feature
flag,
not
sort
of
not
protect
the
deprecated
approach.
That's
that's
the
confusing
part
here.
E
D
B
D
If,
if
the
flag
is
on
for
everybody
on
gitlab,
it's
not
there,
the
point
was
not
in
in
the
the
exposure
of
the
file.
The
point
was
that
the
path
we
we
are
actually
reversing
the
pattern
otherwise
accepted
in
the
product
and
that's
that's
the
confusing
part.
B
E
I
guess
so
I
think
I
would
like
to
know
where
the
component
is
being
rendered
when
the
feature
flag
is
off.
That's
the
thing
that
concerns
me
a
bit
yeah.
D
E
A
A
You
know
we
had
some
feedback
that
we
had
to
fall
back
with
Rouge
render
so
there's
like
hiccups
here,
and
there
kind
of
delayed
a
little
bit
of
our
cleaning
on
the
feature
flag,
but
I
think
I
think
that's
a
very
fair
point
that
we
should
have
cleaned
the
feature
flag
already
like
it's.
Not
it's
default
on
for
quite
a
while
now
and
I.
Think.
A
That's
mostly
on
me
that
I
should
have
scheduled
that
clean
up
a
little
bit
earlier
of
the
feature
flag
itself
and
if,
if
that
was
out,
then
now
that
we
are
introducing
a
new
way
of
doing
the
chunks,
we'll
probably
use
a
new
feature
flag
for
that
particular
Behavior
right,
because
it
would
be
allowing
us
to
have
the
granular
control.
That's
my
takeaway
right
away,
because
it
would
help
avoid
some
of
this
confusion.
A
A
The
only
thing
that
we're
always
mindful
is,
if
we
remove
it
too
soon,
then
users
of
customers
on
self-hosted
don't
have
the
possibility
of
controlling
that
in
case
they
don't
want
the
feature,
but
eight
months
I
feel
like
it's
it's
fair
game
that
we
should
have
removed
it.
That's
my
takeaway!
So
just
so
much
confusion,
I'll
call
this
out
on
the
agenda.
So
thanks.
A
A
Might
be
a
bug
that
we
have
in,
if
that's
the
case,
so
okay,
okay,
cool
moving
on
to
the
next?
Yes,.
D
Yes,
I've
been
to
the
to
the
backhand
backend
weekly,
just
before
the
school,
together
with
torsion
so
and
I
raised
the
question
about
the
the
code,
the
linking
to
the
code
owners
file.
So
we
have
two
issues
for
this
Milestone
one
is
assigned
to
me.
D
One
is
assigned
to
Natalia,
so
I've
I've
asked
backhand
team
to
provide
some
guidelines
on
how
we
we
approach
this,
because
code
owners
can
be
placed
in
different
locations
in
the
in
in
a
product
in
a
project,
and
we
have
to
have
a
single
source
of
Truth
when
identifying
the
the
correct
path
to
the
code
numbers.
So
the
consensus
so
far
is
that
I
will
ping
Sean
and
Joe
in
in
the
issue,
and
we
will.
We
will
get
the
support
from
Beckham
team
in
in
this
effort.
D
Be
I'm
sorry.
A
D
Well,
there
is
no
solution
in
place.
We
will,
but
apparently
we
will
fall
back
to
the
router
to
which
will
return
us.
So
technically
we
will
abstract
everything
in
the
back
end
and
there
will
be
one
entry
point
for
for
the
front
end
to
get
this
information
from
how
it
will
be
implemented
in
the
back
end.
That's
another
story,
that's
the
black
box
for
us,
and
we
should
not
really
think
a
lot
about
this.
D
But
then
the
only
thing
that
we
have
to
we
we
can
be
we
can
be
busy
with,
is
how
we
actually
get
that
information
like
whether
it
will
be
gone,
whether
it
will
be
data
data
attribute
like,
but
those
are
details
of
the
implementation.
A
Cool
I
I
wanted
to
take
the
opportunity
that
we're
all
here
to
see
if
we
had
any
consensus
on
the
preference
on
the
front-end
side
of
things,
because
the
way
I
see
it
there's
two
ways
of
getting
this
one
is
either
a
graphql
query
that
would
give
us
the
path
of
the
code
owners
for
project
and
the
other
is
having
a
new
endpoint
that
anybody
can
point
to
and
it
redirects
with
a
301
to
the
normal
location
in
the
you
know
blog
view
of
the
page.
C
I
would
opt
for
the
first
one
because
we
may
be
in
the
future
adding
the
functionality
to
have
multiple
code
on
the
files,
so
I'll
have
a
hierarchy
of
code
on
the
files,
and
in
that
case
it
probably
is
easier.
If
you
get
an
array
of
links
or
whatever,
rather
than
you
know,
the
full
content.
A
You
mean
like
having
multiple
files
that
merge
together
and
then
produce
the
knowledge,
so.
C
That's
not
interesting
for
like
mono,
repos
or
different
parts
of
the
organization
that
share
one
repo
can
manage
their
the
ownership
of
their
parts
separately.
Without
you
know
having
a
huge
file,
it's
messy.
A
A
Okay,
all
right
thanks
for
that
Dennis
I
yeah,
that.
C
A
Actually,
how
we
mentors
in
the
discussed
scheduling
these
issues,
we're
exactly
getting
one
issue
with
two
points
away:
to
figure
that
out
what
the
implementation
would
be
and
then
the
other
one
that
uses
that
information
is
just
a
white
one
which
what
this
one
in
Natalia
has.
But
that
is
blocked
by
what
Dennis
is
working
on.
So
yeah.
C
D
I'll
I'll
I'll
I'll
stay
in
this
stay
in
contact
with
Joe
and
Sean
to,
and
hopefully
we
will
find
the
solution
rather
sooner
than
later,.
A
A
Can
you
see
me
my
computer
just
froze
for
a
second
I'm
back,
so
I
wanted
to
one
of
the
options
would
have
been
to
make
it
in
this
call.
But
I
did
these
assignments
yesterday,
I
didn't
want
to
put
it
too
close
to
give
you
time
to
actually
think
through
the
issue
that
you
got
assigned,
so
you
can
have
a
proper
discussion
in
order
to
hear
your
thoughts.
A
Should
we
schedule
something
for
Thursday
get
something
in
the
agenda
potentially
this
time
around
I
run
this
at
this
time
Thursday,
or
should
we
try
to
schedule
something
next
week?
What
are
you?
What
are
your
thoughts.
E
A
A
Don't
have
to
do
it
here,
but
after
the
call
I'll
just
go
to
the
calendar
and
find
a
slot
that
were
all
available
and
punch
it
in
then
we'll
have
a
chat
on
Thursdays
so
prepare
to
present
your
plans
and
do
the
Retro
review
on
Thursday
I'm
guessing
you
all
have
been
pinged
on
the
retrospective
review.
Although
sorry,
the
retrospective
issue.
A
D
One
retrospective
issue
won't
hold
everything.
I
have.
A
We'll
write
a
book
point
to
a
PDF,
so
thank
you.
So
much
I'll
put
the
link
to
the
retrospective
here.
Just
for
the
convenience
of
you
all
and
I'll
send
the
the
invite
for
the
kickoffs
Metro
here
cool.
D
A
If
not,
is
a
couple
more
minutes
for
you
to
brainstorm,
AI
use
cases
that
this
could
be
meaningful
for
us
to
build.
On
that
note,
I've
been
chatting
with
some
folks
we're
waiting
to
kind
of
like
have
more
clarity
on
how
we
can
start
building
prototypes.
Once
we
have
that
Clarity
I'll
share
with
you
all
some
guidance
and
we'll
organize
something.
So
we
can
all
play
with
the
new
shiny
toys.
A
So
I
can
show
you
here
what
I'm
thinking
is
to
kind
of
like
carve
some
time
out
of
our
agendas
and
have
a
day
like
AI
source
code
day
or
something
and
then
we'll
just
all
together,
hang
out
on
zoom
and
just
play
around
with
prototypes
and
build
it,
of
course,
that
will
impact
capacity
and
all
that
stuff.
A
So
all
that
would
be
excited
for
so
no
worries
but
I
think
it'd
be
a
nice
nice
day
of
fun
for
us
to
to
put
on
with
you
guys
to
get
started
on
that
on
that
and
that
thread,
but
for
now,
just
for
instance,
like
person
asked
on
the
on
the
thread.
So
that
was
good.
Please
share
there,
like
you,
have
been
doing
so
thanks
for
that
questions.
D
Just
just
a
note:
I
have
I
have
added
the
screenshots
for
the
very
first
point
in.
D
A
Already
good
job
as
soon
as
Slayer
after
that,
so
thanks
Dennis
thanks
everybody
and
have
a
wonderful
Tuesday
I'll,
see
you
around
see
you
tomorrow.