►
Description
Weekly sync call of the Static Site Editor group focused on product and design efforts
A
Hello:
everyone:
this
is
the
static
site,
editor
product
and
design,
weekly
call
for
august
31st
and
we'll
jump
right
into
the
agenda.
I
only
had
two
small
topics
to
discuss
and
then
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you,
michael,
but
the
first
as
I
was
giving
some
more
thought
recently
to
the
feedback
we've
been
getting
about,
putting
the
static
site
editor
in
the
handbook
and
how
some
of
our
marketing
pages
some
of
the
pages
that
live
on
the
marketing
site,
look
a
lot
like
handbook
pages
because
they
use
the
same
middleman
template
the
static
site.
A
Editor
is
not
configured
to
work
with
them.
So
there's
a
little
bit
of
confusion
down
the
road
the
marketing
site
will
evolve.
There
will
be
some
shared
design
language,
I'm
sure,
but
it
might
be
helpful
in
the
next
milestone
to
look
at
some
quick
wins
for
differentiating
on
the
handbook
pages
between
the
marketing
site
and
the
handbook.
You
don't
need
to
come
up
with
exact
solutions,
but
it
might
be
good
to
to
pick
that
one
up.
I
think
I
would
prioritize
that.
A
Just
slightly
different
color
treatments
or
how
we
handle
the
table
of
contents
or
you
know
whatever.
I
don't
need
a
solution
here,
but
I
think
that'll
probably
get
I'd
like
to
maybe
get
that
into
13.5.
So
over
the
next
couple
weeks
we
could
identify
some
quick
wins
on
the
front.
End
shouldn't
be
too
disruptive
to
our.
A
You
know
two
not
not
wide
sweeping
architectural
changes,
but
something
we
can
just
tweak
in
the
handbook.
Css
or
page
template
that'd.
C
A
B
There's
an
issue
that
we
created
for
this,
so
this
is
we
created
this
off
the
back
of
a
retro
meeting
once
and
we
looked
in
the
marketing
team
on
it
because
it
kind
of
like
some
of
the
illustrations.
Victor
one
of
the
designers
on
the
team
is
actually
working
on
a
lot
on
the
investigation,
so
we
thought
that
we
would
leverage
them
and
it
looks
like
they're
looking
to
tackle
in
for
by
the
11th
of
september.
That's
what
I'm,
assuming
that
a
little
milestone
thing
means.
B
Oh,
I
didn't
just
date,
someone
yeah
milestone
september
11th
there.
So
that's!
It
looks
like
it's
on
their
radar
to
look
at
yeah
we'll
see
from
there,
but
we
can
use
this
to
like.
If
you
have
any
other
ideas
to
like
visually
change,
it
then
yeah.
I
think
that
might
be
good
at
the
moment
right
now.
The
kind
of
play
that
everyone
seems
to
have
in
their
mind,
is
changing
that
purple
banner.
B
But
if
there's
something
else
like
the
table
of
contents
yeah,
I
think
that
might
be
an
interesting
area
to
play
around
with
too.
A
Yeah
I'll
give
it
some
more
thought
and
if
you
could
do
so
also
just
toss
out
ideas
over
the
next
week.
I
think
that
would
be
helpful.
B
A
Yeah
cool
and
the
last
topic
I
want
to
bring
up
is
for
13.5
I'd
love
to
prioritize,
adding
the
mr
title
and
description
options
when
you
submit
a
change
from
the
static
site.
Editor
we've
been
doing
that
solution,
validation
for
the
publishing
workflow,
and
this
is
feedback.
That's
come
up
repeatedly
about
just
best
practices
with
mrs
and
and
people's
desire
to
to
provide
the
context
when
they're
submitting
their
changes
rather
than
going
and
editing
the
mr
afterwards.
A
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
pair
that
solution,
validation
down,
if
possible,
to
provide
just
the
title
and
description
fields
when
submitting,
and
then
we
can
get
to
the
other
things
like
adding
an
assignee
and
putting
it
on
a
existing.
Mr
putting
the
change
on
an
existing
mr,
we
can
do
those
later
in
my
opinion.
So
that's
just
my
opinion,
though,
if
you
disagree
feel
free
to,
but
I
think
we
could
probably
get
to
this
in
13.5.
B
Yeah
from
the
last
round,
the
mr
titan
descriptions
were
like,
I
would
say
strongly
received
like
like
it
was
positive,
like
there
wasn't
much
to
iterate
on
that.
I
think
we
continued
that
with
having
that
model
pop
up
from
the
submit
changes
or
publish
changes
button,
whatever
the
main
primary
cta
will
be.
B
I
think
that
will
still
hold
true
and
then,
if
I
was
going
to
segue
to
the
solution,
validation
iteration
from
the
last
round
is
more
around
like
linking
to
existing
mr
kind
of
tightening
up
the
flows
between
whatever
drafts
means
to
publish
or
like
whether
we
have
that,
and
that's
probably
the
areas
that
the
solution
validation
really
needs.
But
I
think
title
descriptions
were
pretty
well
received.
A
Cool,
so
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
make
sure
that
there's
an
issue
that
gets
on
the
the
the
planning
issue?
That
is
clearly
just
this
iteration
of
the
mr
and
and
exactly
what
we're
looking
for
as
far
as
acceptance
criteria,
and
then,
if
there's
any
design
work,
you
think
needs
to
be
adjusted
to
accommodate
just
those
things
or
if
you
want
to
treat
it
differently
in
this
iteration
on
the
front
end,
you
can
attach
the
designs
on
there
and
we
can
just
kind
of
take
it
in.
B
A
Want
to
do
a
quick
round
of
solution,
validation
on
slack
or
like
a.
If
you
have
any
uncertainty,
you
know
we
can.
We
can
figure
something
out,
hopefully
not
hold
up
thirteen
five,
but
I
think
yeah
just
keep
it
small.
I
think
it'd
be
a
great
addition
to
the
to
the
future.
B
Yeah
yep
so
on
the
research
efforts
we're
doing
asynchronous
like
unmoderated
testing
for
editing,
front
manager.
I
I
think
people
are
up
for
it,
helping
out
doing
research,
but
the
platform
choice
that
we're
using
right
now
is
like
not
ideal.
So
if
some
people
who
are
like
really
keen
on
helping
out,
I
have
found
workarounds
to
use
it.
B
So
I'm
going
to
feed
back
that
feedback
back
to
the
ux
research
team,
but
some
of
these,
if
it
becomes
too
problematic,
I
might
just
run
them
as
like,
moderated
calls
because
it
might
be
easier.
So
that's
that
category
maturity
I
did
two
last
week
is
really
good.
Some
people
haven't
even
made
any
handbook
changes
since
they
joined
gitlab,
so
it
was
actually
a
first
user
experience.
B
So
we
got
to
see
some
of
that
there's
six
more
scheduled
for
this
week
and
a
few
more
over
the
following
two
weeks.
So
I
think
the
category
maturity
thing
is
going
to
be
done
in
time
for
by
the
end
of
this
milestone,
and
then
yeah
on
my
plate
is,
like
I
talked
to
earlier,
was
just
kind
of
refining
the
solution
to
merge
like
using
existing
mr
and
save
drafts
and
those
kind
of
flows
that
and
he
needed
a
lot
more
clarification
from
the
last
round.
B
So
that's
what
my
solution
validation
is
around,
but
we
can.
We
can
see
how
that
goes
down.
So
with
my
bandwidth
for
this
week,
I
suspect
that
the
first
half
will
be
just
like
cleaning
a
bit
of
that
flow
up
and
then
sharing
that
around
and
then
towards
the
end
of
this
week
or
early
next
week
is
probably
when
we'll
start
recruiting
again
for
solution
validation
for
put
in
for
for
that
iteration.
A
Really,
I'm
really
excited
to
hear
that
you
found
people
that
hadn't
made
a
handbook
change
at
all
and
that's
that's
great
context
and
hopefully
exactly
who
we're
trying
to
reach
with
our
feature.
So
it's
really
good
to
hear.
C
One
funny
user
experience
I
had
this
morning
and
I
I
don't
think,
there's
anything
that
could
be
done
about
it.
I
just
thought
it
was
funny
I
needed
to
make
a
quick
handbook
update,
so
I
said
all
right,
I'll
use
it
and
I
went
into
the
wizard
wig
by
default
and
I
typed
my
link
as
mark
down
in
the
whizzy
wig
editor
and
clicked
submit
mr
and
then
I
had
to
go
back
and
which,
of
course
made
that,
like
an
embedded
link
with
the
brackets
and
stuff,
no,
it
was
just
force
of
habit.
B
Yeah
yeah
that
goes
to
shortcuts
and
even
like
in
the
category
maturity
test
where
I'm
asking
people
to
add
in
a
bulleted
list.
What
people
are
doing
is
like
cut
and
pasting
the
dashes
into
the
ham
into
the
page
itself,
but
without
shortcuts
they
don't
render
as
bullet
points,
but
they
look
legit,
because
they're
dashes
anyways
and
with
our
new
kind
of
formatting
rules
dashes
are
will
be
converted
to
bullets.
B
Technically,
it's
right,
but
it's
like
it's
a
gray
area,
so
yeah
it
could
open
the
doors
to
look
into
adding
shortcuts,
but
I
know
that's
dependent
on
the
editor
choice
that
we're
gonna
go
with.
So
I
know
that's
on
kind
of
pause,
but
it's
it's
in
front
of
mine.
A
I
mean
ideally
we
pick,
we
pick
a
solution
for
the
new
editor
that
already
has
the
shortcuts,
because
I
know
that
they
exist
and
some
of
them
are
mature
editors.
But
what's
interesting
about
that,
I
didn't
mean
to
cut
you
off
chad
and
I
won't
get
back
to
you,
but
you
pinged
me
on
that
comment,
michael
in
dovetail
and
what's
interesting
to
check
the
mr,
unless
you
fixed
it
or
the
other,
the
person
fixed
it,
it
did
still
render
correctly
on
the
final
output.
A
So
even
though
they
didn't
use
the
wysiwyg
editor
quote
correctly
and
the
formatting
wasn't
interpreted
correctly
by
the
wysiwyg
editor,
the
resulting
mr,
was
properly
formatted
as
a
unordered
list.
So
at
least
you
know
thumbs
up
to
to
toast
ui
to
get
that
right,
even
if
it
wasn't
rendering
correctly.
C
A
C
A
A
Same
thing
goes:
I
was
working
with
someone
on
the
on
on
another
project
and
getting
some
feedback
and
they
were
continually
still
typing
the
pound
signs
into
headings
in
the
wysiwyg
editor,
and
that's
the
perfect
use
case
for
that.
It's
like
two
pound
signs
in
space.
You
should
be
formatting
this
as
an
h2
instead
of
having
to
go
up
and
click
h2,
but
yeah
it's
dependent
on
a
decision
on
the
editor
platform.
I
hope
we
can
get
there
soon,
because
that's
how
I
like
to
work.
A
One
last
thing,
actually
that
I
forgot
to
add
the
agenda
was:
I
had
an
interesting
call
after
our
morning,
engineering
weekly
meeting
with
some
folks
from
sales
who
one
of
them
was
in
the
group
conversation
a
couple
weeks
ago,
and
I
followed
up
asking
you
know:
why
were
you
curious
about
this
and
what
customers
do
you
have?
That
would
be
interested
in
using
this?
Are
there
any
using
pages
now
and
are
they
having
trouble
collaborating
on
content?
A
I
got
two
or
three
potential
leads
for
larger.
You
know
paying
customers
that
are
using
pages
to
host
various
types
of
sites
and
one
in
particular
that
sounds
really
interesting
and
I
might
be
joining
a
monthly
check-in
call
with
in
a
couple
weeks
so
I'll
keep
you
all
informed.
As
I
learn
more
about
the
needs
of
those,
you
know
larger
companies
that
are
collaborating
content.
A
There
was
one
particular
use
case
that
I
thought
was
relevant
to
what
we
were
talking
about
last
week
around
personas,
and
it
was
this
is
a
company
that
is
fairly
large,
has
multiple
organizations
within
the
company.
A
They
have
a
big
install
of
gitlab
that
they
all
use,
but
there's
only
one
engineering
team
and
there's
two
other
teams.
Two
other
groups
that
use
gitlab,
mostly
just
for
like
the
plan,
features
like
issues
and
and
things
like
that,
but
they
host
a
page.
They
post
a
website
on
pages
and
the
folks
from
sales
felt
like
they
would
be
very,
very
interested
in
the
static
site
editor.
A
So
I
offered
up
my
time
and
hopefully
we'll
follow
up
with
more
information,
more
specific
use
cases
and
and
persona.
You
know
information
that
we
can
use
to
build
our
personas.
C
A
Yeah,
it's
been
hard
for
me
to
pin
down
exactly
how
to
get
in
front
of
customers
that
are
already
paying
like
there's
a
lot
of
you
know,
anecdotal
or
well,
internal,
of
course,
but
the
external
data
sources
are
mostly
anecdotal
or
based
off
of
you
know
what
people
generally
are
doing
in
this
space
and
not
necessarily
like
who
is
actually
buying
gitlab
or
actually
using
gitlab
and
what
they
need.
A
So
obviously,
it'd
be
great
to
bring
in
everybody
and
get
a
whole
bunch
of
new
people
to
join
the
platform
just
for
the
static
site
editor.
But
I
do
think
our
path
to
adoption
in
the
near
term
is
getting.
People
who
are
already
using
pages
are
already
using
gitlab
to
define
the
feature
useful,
and
so
this
would
be
a
great
way
to
do
that,
and
I
hope
that
it's
the
beginning
of
many
calls
that
I
can
have
with
customers
to
understand
their
challenges
with.
A
You
know,
collaborating
on
content
on
static
sites
and
why
they
may
have
chosen
pages
or
why
they
may
have
not
chosen
pages
to
host
their
content.
Those
would
probably
be
really.
A
And
with
that,
I'm
I'm
all
set
for
today.
Anybody
else
have
anything
chad,
catherine,
you
want
to
add
anything
to
the
agenda.