►
Description
Weekly sync call of the Static Site Editor group focused on product and design efforts
A
All
right,
hello,
everyone!
This
is
the
static
site,
editor
design,
product
and
research
weekly
meeting
for
october
26th,
we'll
kick
it
off
with
our
new
consolidated
agenda.
A
I
won't
recap
exactly
what
I
talked
about
in
the
engineering
call,
but
I
did
want
to
just
call
out
and
and
share
my
my
point
that
I
made
earlier
with
michael,
which
was
that
I
was
really
impressed
with
the
whole
team
for
sharing
feedback
on
the
re-architecture
project
and
building
that
proposal
that
enrique
and
I
have
been
discussing
on
the
next
steps
and
how
to
like
communicate.
B
A
Outwardly
now
that
we've
made
a
decision
about
the
framework-
and
I
think
I
learned
a
lot
in
the
process
of
some
of
the
intricacies
in
the
back
end
and
and
how
the
technology
works
with
it
works
with
each
other
and
how
the
data
gets
passed
around,
and
so
it
was.
A
It
was
very
helpful
for
me
and
specifically
enrique's
communication
and
collaboration
with
the
ck
editor
team
over
the
past
couple
weeks
has
been
really
great
and
even
though
we
didn't
end
up
going
with
their
product,
it
was
a
very
enlightening
and
professional
discussion.
So
with
that,
I
really
just
have
spent
the
past
what
seems
like
two
weeks
trying
to
wrap
my
head
around
the
settings
and
nav
backlog.
A
To
recap
a
little
bit
about
what
we
talked
about
this
morning
or
yesterday
for
michael
settings
is
probably
the
most
immediately
accessible
area
of
work.
But
it's
also
one
that
I
think,
as
we
look
at
it.
More
in
depth,
has
probably
some
of
the
more
complex
and
time-consuming
issues
to
address,
but
also
potentially
the
most
value
to
the
user.
A
So
I'm
very
excited
about
that
and
then
the
navigation
backlog,
I
think,
is
daunting
when
you
look
at
it
as
a
whole,
but
as
soon
as
you
start
reframing
it
as
our
against
our
desire
to
to
work,
iteratively
and-
and
you
start
to
see
some
themes
and
areas
that
were
we're
looking
to
improve
starting
to
starting
to
get
a
sense
of
of
what
needs
to
be
done
there.
And
I.
A
Add
some
real
value
without
too
many
sweeping
changes
there
more
on
that
as
the
proposals
come
in,
but
that
was
kind
of
the
summary
of
our
or
my
takeaway
from
our
call
our
101
call
this
morning
and
as
I
sat
with
it
more
today,
it
kind
of
solidified.
So
I
think
we're
we're
actually
in
a
pretty
good
place
to
move
on
additional
research,
and
we
can
talk
about
that.
Catherine,
if
you
want
about
what
are
the
first
areas
to
research
and
and
you
know
getting
baseline
measurements
and
all
that
stuff.
B
Cool,
so
let's
take
this
moment
and
jump
into
the
design
topics,
so
the
first
one
we
have
is
from
derek.
Do
you
want
to
verbalize
that
yeah
definitely.
C
So
basically
your
question
one
is:
do
we
have
a
final
design
for
the
mr
template
ui?
I
know
in
the
issue.
You
shared
an
image,
and
obviously
I
had
some
kind
of
clarifying
questions
in
here,
because
basically,
we
are
because
we're
trying
to
abstract
away
the
git
terminology,
we're
basically
kind
of
duplicating
the
description
right
now
is
actually
ending
up
being
the
commit
message,
as
well
as
the
mr
description,
so
at
a
high
level.
C
I
just
wanted
to
not
do
any
duplicate
work
make
sure
we
have
kind
of
like
thought
this
through.
Basically,
so
we
don't
have
to
like
undo
and
waste
work.
Basically
so
so
you
had
a
high
level
michael,
do
you
have
a
like
a
final
ui,
or
I
saw
you,
I
see
that
you
actually
added
a
comment
too.
So
I
can
end
up
looking
at
that,
but
I
haven't
seen
that.
D
B
Yeah,
so
you
touched
so.
The
question
here
is
like
in
the
design,
because
we
have
like
a
description.
That's
fully
fledged.
That
description
is
also
like,
probably
going
to
be
too
large
for
a
commit
message
itself.
We
have
an
issue
there
to
like
provide
an
optional
message
on
commits.
This
is
something
that's
been
like
requested
or
like
discussed
by
people.
You
know
making
it
a
descriptive
like
comment
about
the
changes
that
they
make.
B
As
for
our
final
design,
I
think
haven't
really
like
refined
the
ui,
along
with
like
a
description
and
a
comment
yet,
but
that's
something
that
we
can
work
together
on.
I
think
at
a
high
level,
it's
like
a
text
area
and
an
input
box,
but
like
how
it's
laid
out
is
probably
like
just
a
real
question
there,
but.
B
E
B
C
C
Still
like
maybe.
B
That's,
I
think,
that's
it
once
we
handle
multiple
commits
to
the
same
change
made
from
the
static
site
editor.
So
if
we
go
ahead
and
move
forward,
you
know
in
the
next
milestone,
with
like
kind
of
other
flows
like
right
now.
It's
only
hamburg,
the
static
site
editor
to
merge
requests
page.
If
we
explore
okay
for
merge
request
page
because
you
know
you
made
a
suggestion
for
a
page,
and
I
want
to
make
an
update
and
change.
There's
no
way
for
me
to
go
back
to
this
text.
B
I
edit
it
if
we
want
to
expose
that
path.
This
will
be
necessary.
So
so
there's
two.
I
see
two
paths
here.
One
way
now
is
like
do
like
a
mvc
of
this
thing.
Now.
Another
way
is
to
like
auto
like
commit,
like.
I
have
auto
message
from
like
the
static
site.
Editor
saying
like
this.
This
is
a
commitment
made
from
the
stacks
editor
and
the
description
has
everything,
but
I
I
wanted
to
say
input
like
this
extra
message
for
the
commit
message,
but
yeah.
A
A
I
mean,
I
think
the
the
real
problem
to
solve
is
one
where
people
are
saving
drafts
or
saving
multiple
changes
on
a
single,
mr
or
potentially
editing
multiple
pages.
On
a
single,
mr
or
something
like
that,
so
right
now
yeah
it
seems
repetitive
and
unnecessary
because
you
don't
have
to
describe
your
changes
twice,
but
as
soon
as
we
start,
you
know
having
the
ability
to
jump
in
and
out
of
pages
a
little
more
easily.
Whenever
that
is
you.
B
A
Be
editing
a
page
and
want
to
add
the
context
just
about
that
one
specific
change
so
yeah,
I
don't
have
a
good
answer,
but
just
coming
from
you
know,
reframing,
where
the
root
of
that
functionality
lies.
A
C
Okay,
cool,
basically
the
context
of
I
just
wanted
it.
It
seemed
repetitive,
but
there
is
a
plan
that
makes
it
not
repetitive.
So
that's
fine,
that's
basically
all
I
wanted
to
know
so
it's
not
repetitive.
It
may
look
like
it
in
the
short
term,
but
so
that
makes
sense.
So
what's
kind
of
nice
is
the
way
it's
already.
The
code
is
basically
already
set
up
wherever
pat
we're
just
forwarding
on,
like
I
said
the
description
to
both
of
those
so
everything's
wired.
C
We
just
have
to
do
a
small
change
of
like
what
do
we
want
to
actually
pass
in
what
area,
which
is
like
one
liners
like
very
small
amount
of
code
change,
which
is
really
cool,
so
cool?
That's
that's
helpful
and
just
one
idea
which
what
we
could
possibly
do.
I
don't
know
if
this
is
confusing
or
not,
but
if,
if
it
does
seem
repetitive
on
the,
if
there's
not
a
merge
request,
yet
you
wouldn't
you
could
not
show
the
the
comment
thing
and
then
only
once
there's
an
existing
merge
request.
C
B
And
then
cool
I'll
chime
in
on
that,
like
issue
later
about
how
you
want
to
handle
the
commit
message
on
that
initial
one.
D
D
C
It's
already
wired
so
that
helps
us
a
lot
cool
and
then
are
we
ready
to
move
on
to
the
second
one?
Does
anyone
have
anything
else?
C
The
second
one
is
with
respect
to
the
edit
handbook
pages
generated
from
data
files
doable
just
like
anything's
doable,
but
it's
more
complicated
than
we'd
like,
and
so
the
issue
is
actually
just
for
me
to
figure
out
the
path
forward
for
it
not
actually
to
implement
it
anyway,
but
I'm
just
basically
sharing
that.
I
don't
know
how
pri
how
have
a
priority.
This
is,
and
we
kind
of
discussed,
maybe
doing
it-
maybe
not,
but
it
might
not
be
worth
doing
for
how
much
effort
it's
gonna
take
we'll
see.
D
B
Yeah,
I
think,
to
reiterate
john's
point
inside
the
issue
is
like
the
issue
is
only
to
research
right
now.
I
think
if
we
take
out
the
scope
of
trying
to
implement
it
as
well,
hopefully
that
never
ease
it,
but
I
think
making
an
informed
decision
so
that
you
know
derek
in
the
future,
comes
back
and
says:
hey
now.
B
I
know
how
to
map
things
or
whatever
can
solve
that
or
anyone
else
in
the
future
can
come
in
and
tackle
it,
maybe
in
a
different
way,
or
maybe
there's
some
new
thing
out
there
that
helps
with
this
but
yeah.
I
think
it's
worthwhile
just
to
like
reveal
or
make
a
decision
yes
or
no
cool
thanks.
Thanks
for
letting
us
know,
yeah.
D
A
A
I
I
assumed
that
this
would
be
more
difficult
under
the
surface
like
it
sounds
like
it
sounds
deceptively
straightforward
until
you
realize
that,
like
we
need
to
solve
for
any
number
of
files
linked
from
any
number
of
helpers,
that
we
have
no
idea
how
they're
structured
so
yeah,
like
michael
said,
we
can,
we
can
document
what
our
approach
would
be
and
then
take
it
from
there.
C
Another
thing
I
just
realized
too,
is
and
it'll
probably
come
out
of
the
meeting
tomorrow,
anyways
like
if,
depending
on
what
we
could
basically
have
a
half
solution,
essentially
like
like
I
could,
for
example,
the
hard
part
is
like
when
you're
actually
writing
a
function
and
a
helper
function,
then
we
have
to
actually
know
in
memory
like
we
have
to
essentially
pre-record
what
happens
at
runtime
and
then
cache
some
file
that
you
know.
C
So
that's
where
it
gets
kind
of
gnarly,
if,
like
a
kind
of
a
simple
solution,
could
be
for
partials,
for
example,
like
that's
a
a
keyword
that
we
could
look
for
partial
and
then
there's
a
path,
and
so
then
that's
a
real
kind
of
you
know,
boring
solution,
basically
to
say
that's
related.
But
again
I
don't
know
if
people
would
want
to
edit
those
partials.
I
have
no
idea,
so
we
could
probably
find
some
medium
ground
thing,
but
in
terms
of
a
full
scalable
solution
for
everything.
That's
the
part.
A
I
in
the
in
the
spirit
of
boring
solutions,
as
you
talk
with
chad
tomorrow,
maybe
just
putting
this
out
there
there
right
now.
The
problem
is
related
to
our
handbook
and
obviously
we
want
to
get
to
the
point
where
we
have
a
solution.
That's
scalable
reusable
and
flexible,
but
we
have
a
finite
number
of
helpers
in
our
handbook.
A
Is
there
something
we
can
write
in
the
ruby
helper
itself
that
passes
the
information
to
the
static
site
editor
and
allows
us
to
do
something
really
like
lo-fi,
really
dumb
and
just
get
that
in
and
display
it?
And
then
we
just
manually
go
back
and
rewrite
these
helpers
in
a
like
a
piecemeal
manner,
one
by
one
and
then
as
those
get
updated,
and
we
can
document
them
in
like
a
helper
template
or
something
like
that.
A
So
people
know
how
to
like
implement
this
in
the
future,
but
if
we
can
actually
just
send
the
data
from
the
data
and
not
have
to
like,
do
all
the
mapping
on
our
own
that
that
might
be
already
what
you're
thinking
but
just
putting
it
out
there
like.
We
have
control
over
both
sides
of
this
equation.
For
now-
and
we
can
probably
take
advantage
of
that.
C
That's
a
good
point
I'll
make
a
note
of
that
yeah.
Basically,
the
denoting
piece
is
like
scalable
or
not,
which
is
fine
like
so
that's
totally
like,
especially
if
it's
small
enough,
I
just
don't
know
like
it,
was
just
partial
keywords
and
cert
a
certain
set
of
helpers,
because
I
actually
remember
the
helper
file.
Being
I
don't
know,
100.
A
I
mean
at
this
point
my
take
is:
if
it's
something
we
can
ship
in
the
next
milestone,
then
it
doesn't
need
to
be
scalable.
If
it's
something
that
we
can,
that
that
is
gonna.
Take
us
three
or
four
milestones
we
might
as
well
just
fix
it
the
right
way.
You
know
next
year,
when
we
revisit
the
idea
of
partials
in
general,.
D
B
All
right
cool,
so
I
think
that
covers
the
design
part
of
this
call
moving
over
to
the
ux
research
side.
So
I'm
just
going
to
quickly
go
through
my
items,
because
I
think
catherine
will
comment
on
my
points
in
much
more
detail
but
yeah
off
the
back
of
just
like,
since
checking
with
eric
yesterday,
you.
D
B
At
the
moment,
it
feels
like
with
settings
there's
like
a
need
to
like
kind
of
centralize
the
format
and
then
explore
kind
of
different
navigation
patterns
of
how
to
get
potentially
from,
like
a
in
context,
settings
kind
of
flow.
That's
like
potential
one
solution,
validation
with
navigation,
there's
a
big
concept
around
like
groups
and
projects
and
making
that
easier
to
discover
and
find
and
navigate
and
then
from
a
problem,
validation,
standpoint.
B
One
of
our
priorities
is
this
idea
of
bookmarking
or
stars
as
a
way
to
save
save
contacts
or
pages
so
that
you
can
revisit.
I
think
that
one
needs
a
little
bit
more
deeper
research
before
we
can
come
up
with
solutions
because
there's
probably
a
million
one
ways
to
do
it
so
trying
to
find
the
root
cause.
There
is
interesting.
B
E
Yeah
yeah,
so
basically
I
guess
for
point
b,
it's
kind
of
like,
since
I
know,
there's
a
heavy
emphasis
on
the
kind
of
defining
success
and
measuring
success
for
each
of
these,
for
example,
the
study,
if
you're,
if
you're
kind
of
doing
solution,
validation
and
you're
testing,
whether
something's
an
improvement
of
the
existing
experience.
E
I
think
what
they'll
want
is
kind
of
a
test
of
the
existing
experience
as
well,
so
those
could
either
be
done
in
parallel,
maybe
you're
doing
you're
testing
one
group
on
the
proposed
solution,
one
group
on
the
existing
or
it
could
be
done
like
you
test
existing
and
then
you
test
the
proposed,
but
so
they're
kind
of
too
there's
there's
another
side
to
that.
Basically,
so
I
think
we
should
kind
of
outline
when
each
of
these
need
to
be
done,
since
they
can't
really
all
be
done
at
once.
E
B
Cool,
so
that's
definitely
something
that
us,
as
a
group
will
be
measured
against,
is
like
the
success
of
our
changes
and
that
will
help
inform
our
product
decisions,
whether
we
go
with
the
big
bang,
or
at
least
it
will
help
guide
us
making
those
iterative
improvements,
yeah,
definitely
yeah,
even
from
a
design
standpoint,
it's
silly
to
design
something
if
you
don't
really
know
what
you're
really
really
trying
to
optimize
for,
but
I
think
this
is
more
gearing
towards
like
13.7,
and
so
what
we'll
probably
kind
of
do
is
yeah
just
start
planning
and
starting
putting
together
a
case
for
certain
things,
there's
already
common
themes
around
some
of
the
improvements
and
suggestions,
and
I
think
some
of
the
research
work
that's
ongoing
right
now,
with
yourself,
catherine
and
jeff,
and
whoever
or
adam
around
setting
that
baseline
might
kind
of
dovetail
nicely
with
some
of
this
stuff.
B
E
E
Yes,
yeah.
Basically,
I
don't
know
if
you
already
have
issues
for
these
these
studies,
but
just
feel
free
to
loop
me
into
them,
so
that
we
can
talk
about
like
when
you
would
like
to
conduct
each
one
of
them
or
which
one
is
kind
of
like
highest
priority
and
which
one
might
need
a
benchmarking
study
as
well.
Just
so
we
can
iron
that
out,
so
it
doesn't
like
creep
up
all
at
the
same
time.
E
But
yes,
so,
but
also
for
point
a
so.
This
one
was
just
more
about
auditing
the
different
settings.
E
I
think
that
does
actually
will
hopefully
tie
into
the
solution
validation,
because
just
what
I'm
seeing
from
going
through
all
those
different
settings
is
that
there
are
some
pages,
for
example,
some
pages
that
follow
the
collapsing
and
expanding
format
and
some
pages
that
just
kind
of
list
everything
there
are
some
settings
where
you
need
to
take
an
action,
and
there
are
some
settings
that
are
just
kind
of
showing
you
information.
E
So
I
just
see
kind
of
a
mixed
bag
of
how
settings
are
arranged,
and
I
think
that
probably
will
hopefully
tie
into
what's
going
on
in
the
solution.
Validation
about
the
format
but
yeah.
But
I
had
just
had
a
question
personally
here:
do
you
any
of
you
kind
of
have
ideas
for
the
best
way
to
access
different
areas
of
git
lab,
I'm
not
sure
if
that's
by
getting
a,
for
example,
getting
a
gold
or
what
is
it
gold
or
ultimate
subscription?
E
A
All
I
know
is
that
you
can
get
gold.
You
can
request
to
have
your
membership,
your
account
upgraded
to
gold,
there's
a
link
in
the
handbook.
I
can
find
that
if
you
haven't
done
that
already
and
then
I
think
you
can
like
put
in
a
one-off
request
to
have
a
specific
group
upgrade
upgraded
to
gold
as
well,
but
I'm
not
sure
about
I'm
not
100
sure.
That's
even
documented.
That
might
just
be
like
slack
rumors
yeah.
E
In
the
past,
I
I
did
the
gold
thing
from
the
handbook,
but
I
got
it
applied
to
the
account-
or
I
guess
the
personal
name
space,
and
it
wasn't
until
like
literally
a
couple
years
later
today
or
a
couple
days
ago,
where
I
was
like
wait,
is
that
the
problem,
because
all
the
groups
that
I
create
are
all
on
the
free
plan,
and
I
never.
I
never
really
understood
why
until
now,
but
I
was
just
curious.
If
that's
how,
for
example,
you
would
handle
like
going
in
to
see
different
tiers
or
if
designers.
A
I'm
interested
to
hear
how
you're
doing
it,
because
I
don't
have
insight
into
those
tiers.
I
I
just
use
my
gold
account
and
one
of
my
blind
spots
would
be
like
the
admin
for
self-managed
instances
right
like
I'm.
I
haven't
taken
upon
myself
to
install
it
on
a
server
myself
and
assign
myself
an
admin.
That
would
probably
be
my
first
instinct
rather
than
install
the
gdk
and
run
it
locally.
But
what
do
you
all
think.
B
I
have
I
thought
about
this
in
general,
as
in
like
the
kind
of
focus
on
our
group.
Right
now
is
not
so
much
like
answering
where
exactly
every
single
setting
will
go.
B
To
say
like
can
you
check
this
to
see
if
this
will
work
for
your
kind
of
group,
because
you
could
have
the
group
like
the
static
site
editor
that
has
almost
no
settings
right
like
we
have
like
a
configuration
file,
you
know,
or
we
have
other
teams
that
require
a
lot
of
like
integrations
with
third
parties
and
like
prometheus
and
all
these
other
things
and
configuration
files
and
then
like
teams
that
have
to
set
up
special
runners
to
do
things
so
for
us
to
get
that
domain
knowledge
across
everything.
B
I
think
we're
going
to
gain
that
through
getting
it
feedback
from
the
other
teams
and
then
from
there.
We
build
that
knowledge
and
some
of
that's
already
been
discussed
in
the
settings
ux
stuff,
but
I
think
yeah
diving
into
the
details.
B
Yeah,
the
golden
ultimate
accounts
are
probably
like
the
way
to
go
and
then
yeah.
I
don't
know
what's
going
on
with
get
pod,
but
it
might
be
like
special,
like
instances
that
could
be
set
up,
because
I've
heard
with
gitpod
that
setting
up
like
scenarios
or
configurations
that
require
runners
and
things
like
that
is
less
painful
through
getpod,
especially
for
what
we
need
to
do
where
we
just
need
to
like
click
through
and
go
through
things
rather
than
building
on
top.
B
Talking
from
a
design
product
here,
derek
you
know
in
your
case,
you
might
need
to
like
build
and
run
things
properly,
but
yeah,
just
like
kicking
the
tires
and
seeing
what's
under
there.
I
think
yeah
get
pod
and
like
getting
the
proper
ultimate
accounts
are
the
best
ways
for
now.
C
I
haven't
used
the
git
bot,
but
it
sounds
like
a
great
alternative
from
what
I
understand
what
it
is
so
either
that
or
the
gdk.
I
would
basically
I'd
recommend.
That's
a
great
question
by
the
way,
catherine,
like
I've
never
thought,
like
that's
a
great
question,
so
I'd
probably
look
in
like
the
gdk
channel
or
maybe
there's
a
get
pod
channel,
or
something
like
that
and
like
because
it's
hard
not
to
envision
that
the
gdk
would
allow
you
to
set
a
flag
or
some
or
do
something
and
it'd
be
built
in.
C
So
you
could
test
the
different
tiers.
Basically,
that
you'd
be
very
surprised
if
you
can't
do
that
in
a
simple
way.
Obviously
it
could
be
wrong,
but
I
think
just
asking
in
the
gdk
channel
would
at
least
get
you.
You
know
someone
probably.
E
Thank
you
yeah.
I
kind
of
I
kind
of
forgot
that
it
actually
in
this
group,
that's
not
a
situation.
You
have
to
think
about
too
much,
because
the
static
side
editor,
is
not
at
a
certain
tier
but
like,
I
think,
maybe
for
the
groups
working
on
ethics
or
something
they
might
have
had
encountered
the
situation
where
so
that
actually
makes
sense.
C
B
So
another
point
I
want
to
raise
here
is
like,
even
if
we
got
access
to
anything
in
gitlab,
there
are
scenarios
that
us
as
a
group
we
may
not
know
about.
D
B
Example,
like
with
cascading
settings
where,
in
compliance
they
deal
with
this
a
lot
where,
if
something's
set
at
the
instance
level
inside,
like
the
project
level,
this
a
checkbox
may
be
ticked
or
unticked,
and
you
don't
really
know
why
it's
happening
or
like.
If
you
tick
that
checkbox,
you
can't
really
change
it
or
like
it's,
not
disabled
or
like
little
things
like
this.
Even
if
we
have
access
to
the
thing
I
this
is
where
I
think
like
getting
feedback
from
other
people.
E
E
Because,
as
I
was
doing
the
settings
audit,
I
was
like
this
isn't
going
to
be
every
single
one
for
the
group
settings,
but
at
least
we're
not
necessarily
concerned
about
too
granular
level
for
now
so
I'll
resolve
that
at
some
point,
but
not
right.
Now,
just
my
disclaimers
that
the
group
settings
are
not
fully
complete
because
I
haven't
resolved
that
yet.
E
A
Thanks
for
doing
that,
audit,
by
the
way,
that's
it's
going
to
be
very
helpful.
E
A
No,
no
thank
you
yeah.
I
was
just
looking
for
the
web
hook
settings
now,
and
so
I
was
curious.
What
those
look
like,
but
yeah,
that's
that's
it
for
the
agenda.
Anything
else
for
for
today.