►
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
Hi
there
everyone-
this
is
michael
leo
the
static
site,
editor
and
I'm
joined
by
chad.
Today,
we're
going
to
go
through
some
issue
refinement
session.
This
time,
it's
led
by
myself
john's
on
pto,
but
also
specifically,
as
I
was
refining
some
of
these
issues
for
13.5.
A
I
ran
into
some
questions
about
what
these
things
actually
will
be.
So
let
me
share
my
screen
and
I
think
that
will
help
with
the
conversation
cool.
So
the
first
thing
that
I
have
questions
around
is
with
the
issue
around
adding
a
title
and
description
for
the
mr.
A
So
at
the
moment
in
my
early
specs,
this
was
like
the
designs,
using
kind
of
like
the
stepper
pattern,
to
indicate
a
title
for
the
change
and
the
description
for
the
change.
This
component
doesn't
exist.
B
A
In
pajamas
and
it
would
require
us
building
it
or
waiting
for
that
component
to
be
ready.
It
exists
in
like
sign
up
flows
and
like
planned,
choosing
or
checkout
flows,
but
as
a
formal
component,
it
doesn't
exist
yet.
So,
as
I
was
looking
at
this
design
for
13.5,
I
thought
to
simplify
it
where's
your
component.
B
A
Blue
number,
as
you
can
see,
the
one
and
two
I
kind
of
like
stole
this
design
like
it
was
inspired
by
this
design.
It's
a
stepper
component,
so
usually
it's
used
for
wizards,
where
you
kind
of
have
like
step.
One
fill
out
this
information
stuff
to
fill
out.
This
so
kind
of
like
a
checkout
flow
could
be
really
used
for
this.
So
you
know
here's
your
product
info,
here's
checkout
information,
here's
shipping
information,
it's
usually
used
in
those
contexts.
A
No
not
yet
no,
no
there's
an
issue,
that's
still
open
to
look
into
formalizing
it
and
building
it
into
pajamas.
So,
in
the
spirit
of
keeping
things
simple,
I
didn't
really
think
we
needed
it.
Yet
it
was
a
good
tool
to
say
like
okay,
first
through
distance,
I
can
do
this,
but
we
only
have
two
fields.
A
I
think
we
could
get
by
without
doing
it
when
I'm
proposing
to
change
it
to
is
submit
new
changes
with
just
a
label,
and
my
question
for
today
is
what
is
this?
What
is
going
to
be
this
like.
B
A
So
the
value
that
will
go
in
here
will
what
we're
hoping
to
do
is
populate
the
mr
description
with.
A
A
B
A
Yeah,
so
templates
is
one
thing
that
they
come
up
in
a
lot
of
user
testing,
user
research
and
people
being
like.
Oh
you
know.
If
I'm
doing
a
specific
thing,
I
expect
a
template.
A
The
other
thing
that
this
is
hinting
at
is
this
whole
idea
of
dog
fooding
the
static
site
editor
like
almost
having
the
stack
site,
editor.
B
A
The
static
site
editor,
so
I
didn't
know
how
far
we
wanted
to
take
this,
whether
we
just
pre-populated
with
like
one
standard
like
template,
for
you
know
the
default
handbook
template
for
changes,
or
is
it
just
going
to
be
blank?
This
is
a
question.
I'm
not
hey
yeah.
This
is
a
big
question
mark
for
me.
B
A
Cool
all
right:
let's
go
with
that
for
now
I'll
make
a
note
in
the
issue
saying
that
one
approach
for
this
for
13.5
is
just
to
use
a
text
area
and
saying
maybe
with
a
description
text
this
you
can
write
him
mark
down
for
now,
I'm
good
with
that.
Okay,.
A
So
the
next
one
is
is
this
this
issue
here
where
we
want
to
move
the
progress,
the
loading
animation
to
be
on
a
new
page,
so
this
is
taking
our
success,
page
and
kind
of
changing
into
the
status
or
our
progress
view
for
13.5.
A
I
think
this
is
kind
of
like
an
iteration
that
kind
of
makes
sense.
It's
like
a
spinner
and
the
loader
is
still
there.
That's
what
we
have
right
now,
but
my
question
is:
will
we
be
able
to
like?
Can
we
do
something
more
or
should
we
do
something
more
or
should
it
be
a
separate
issue
to
add
more
information,
so
feedback?
A
So
we
know
that
the
spinning
loading
is
because
we
are
creating
a
branch
submitting
changes
to
that
branch
and
then
creating
our
merge
requests
with
that
branch,
and
once
everything
is
done,
that's
when
we
say
your
merge
request
is
ready,
that's
done
using
promises
and
I
was
wondering
if
it's
worth
jumping
like.
Are
we
able
to
hook
into
those
promises
to
give
feedback
to
say,
yep,
creating
branches
step?
One
is
done
step
two
this
time
step
three.
Is
that.
B
C
B
B
C
The
one
thing,
though,
that
we
did
mention
that
I
don't
see
here
is
a
call
out
that
we
mentioned
when
we
discussed
this
in
the
previous
issue,
refinement
when
there's
a
call
out
that
they
can
close
this
window.
If
they
want
to
they're
not
going
to
lose
any
information
like
to
make
it
really
clear,
they
can
go
on
with
whatever
the
rest
of
their
work
is,
or
they
could
wait
for
the
button
to
show
up.
B
C
Yeah
that
was
sort
of
the
main
point
and
one
of
the
main
points
of
moving
this
to
the
end,
so
we
wouldn't
block
whenever
they
were
doing
it.
There
was
no
longer
this
confusion
like
do.
I
have
to
stand
around
and
wait
for
this
to
finish
whatever
it's
doing
and
with
no
feedback,
and
now
they
have
some
feedback,
and
I
think
explicit
message.
No,
you
don't
have
to
wait
all
right.
A
B
C
B
A
A
C
I
am
sorry
if
nobody's
I
don't
know
if
the
api
by
default
assigns
the
assigner
to
it
or
if
you
have
to
do
that
explicitly,
but
that's
a
good
point,
perhaps
as
part
of
creating
the
mr,
we
should
ensure
that
the
person
doing
it
is
assigned,
and
then,
where
do
they?
Do
it
right
here
by
clicking
the
link
for
later
they
can
ensure
they
can
find
it.
A
Cool,
so
one
thing:
that's
on
my
mind
with
this
whole
creation
of
mrs
and
if
we
close
the
window
is
getting
back
to
the
mr,
would
it
be
like
bad
practice
to
assign
the
person
who
created,
for
example,
if
I
created
this
change
when,
when
the
stack
site
editor
is
doing
its
job
here
and
when
it
creates
the
merge
requests,
it
assigns
myself
as
it
as
the
assignee.
A
A
A
C
A
C
So
there
should
be
a
drop
down
there.
Oh
it's
loading,
give
it
a
second.
C
C
When
I
click
in
there,
perhaps
you
need
to
be
on
the
main
page
like
go
to
go
to
the
merge
request.
Tab.
Sorry.
A
C
No
actually
mine
is
is
working
from
here.
Recent
issues
that
comes
up.
C
B
C
A
C
B
A
That's
good,
so
my
action
item
here
will
be
to
refine
the
information
here,
we'll
keep
it
simple
with
the
spinner,
but
we
can
potentially
show
a
link
here
to
feel
all
all
the
merge
requests
related
to
me
right.
C
A
C
A
A
A
One
approach
is
open
and
it
has
the
arrow.
Another
approach
is
to
have
a
split
button,
open
web
ide
or
open
static
site
editor.
C
C
C
B
A
Talking
about
was,
let's
say
I
was
on
the
handbook
page
and
then
I
go
into
the
static
site
editor,
but
I
want
to
associate
this
change
to
an
existing
merge
requests,
so
this
is
taking
the
static
side
editor
into
the
multi
multi-page
world.
So
here
with
the
stack
side
editor
I
entered
it
and
now
I
want
to
say
you
know
what
I
don't
want
to
create
a
new
merge
request
for
this.
A
I
just
want
to
associate
this
change
here
to
one
of
my
existing
merge
requests
that
I
already
have
on
the
fly
on
the
go
right,
so
the
problem
we
had
initially
in
our
previous
solution,
validation
was.
It
was
too
hidden
the
way
to
select
your
merge
request
or
configure
your
merge
request,
and
this
is
this
is
an
idea
I
have
where
we
use
the
bottom
area
here,
where
we
had
the
title
to
become
like
an
area
to
control
the
merge
requests.
C
Yeah
there's
another
place
on
the
existing
mr
view,
where
you
can
paste
a
link
or
type
numbers.
Have
you
seen
that.
B
C
C
C
B
C
C
Especially
for
the
first
iteration,
if
we
I
don't
know
how
self-contained
or
cohesive
this
code
is
to
just
pull
it
in
as
is
and
not
have
to
write
it
ourselves,
yeah
so.
A
A
Still
get
an
old
one
if
it's
not
on
your
list,
so
that's
the
pace,
an
issue,
your
social.
C
A
If
you
can't
find
it
or
like
it's
not
on
the
list,
so
it's
just.
You
can
paste
in
the
url
and
oh.
A
A
C
A
C
C
B
C
B
A
Wow,
oh,
it
does
work
on
mobile,
so
the
tooltips
like
the
eyes,
the
informations
and
stuff,
like
that.
That's
a
good
lab
to
work
on
mobile.
B
A
Other
way
to
approach
the
design
is
always
like.
Can
you
take
the
information,
that's
inside
the
tooltip
and
extract
it
somehow
onto
the
page,
and
the
question
then
becomes
if
it's
on
the
page,
should
it
go
like
somewhere
on
the
page
and
if
it's
not
worthwhile
to
have
on
the
page?
The
question
is
like:
why
do
you
really
need
it?
So
I
come
from
my
personal
preference
on
is
always
to
try
to
avoid
using
them,
because
it's
like
more
work
to
update
and
maintain,
and
but
it
does
save
space.
So.
C
B
C
B
A
C
A
A
A
So
so
far
in
our
group,
we've
just
been
talking
about
the
mr
as
like,
and
it's
like
a
one-shot
deal.
He
have
one
shot
to
make
the
change
and
work
in
the
static
site
editor,
and
that's
it.
A
One
thing
that
came
up
in
solution,
validation
last
time
is,
if
I
made
a
subsequent
change
or
I
wanted
to
add
a
commit
message
to
my
change.
That's
different
from
my
mr
title.
Am
I
able
to
do
that?
Other
tools?
Don't
really
let
you
do
that.
So
when
I
say
other
tools,
it's
like
other
kind
of
like
static
site,
editor
tools
out
there
that
kind
of
trying
to
make
it
user
friendly.
A
They
kind
of
abstract
it
away
and
just
have
like,
like
updated
from
this
tool
as
like
automated
messages,
and
then
they
squash
it
on
merging.
But
if
we
want
to
practice
best
practices
for
the
handbook
scenario,
yeah.
A
What
I'm
thinking
is
that,
like
on
the
first
first
time
you
created
yeah,
you
have
to
add
the
title
and
the
mr
and
all
that
stuff,
but
subsequent
ones
become
just
like
adding
a
change
message
and
submitting
the
change.
And
if
you
want
to
edit.
B
A
Or
you
know
update
this,
then
you
go
about
updating
that
and
which
brings
us
back
to
this
whole
idea
of
like
checkout
flows
and
stuff,
like
that,
where
the
information
that's
like
constant
is
like
would
be
like
the
title
and
the
description,
but
the
things
that
keep
on
changing
it
would
be
like.
This
is
a
very
abstract
view,
but
it's
like
information
about
the
merge
requests
here,
but,
like
new
stuff
would
appear
here.
A
Like
you
know,
here's
a
change
for
like
describe
this
most
recent
change
so
only
like
the
things
that
need
to
be
filled
in
will
be
like
opened.
A
Yeah
and
that
takes
us
to
this
kind
of
flow,
where
this
bottom
button
becomes
like
review
changes
and
then
that's
the
part
that
would
pop
up
the
merge
request,
details
and
then
provides
you
a
gateway
to
view
your
recent
change
add
a
commit
message
and
submit
it
yeah
right
now.
I
that's
like
probably
like
a
few
milestones
down
the
road.
C
Right,
I
think
that
all
makes
sense
I
personally
for
for
my
personal.
I
think
that
the
commit
message
is
important
and
also
when
you
think
about,
for
example,
in
the
main
gitlab
repo
there's
a
lot
of
pretty
strict
rules
about
how
the
commit
message
must
be
formatted
and
they're
set
up
as
like
pre-commit
hosts,
so
not
that
many
people
might
have
that
set
up
for
their
static
sites,
but
it's
still
possible,
and
so
in
some
cases
people
may
need
to
have
control
over
that
in
order
to
even
make
a
valid
commit
message
yeah.
C
A
B
A
Also
have
scenarios
with
people
using
the
static
site
editor
who
are
like
the
sole
user
and
would
like
commit
directly
to
main
or
master
and
and
then
that
would
be
a
different
option
that
will
probably
have
to
explore.
Where
changes
you
make
just
automatically
kick
off
the
build
processes
and
all
that.
C
A
Cool
all
right,
this
is
good.
Thank
you,
for
I
think
we
covered
all
the
points
in
the
agenda
items
will
update
the
agenda
items
with
the
points
that
we
talked
about
and
the
subsequent
issues
tomorrow
and
then
yeah
and
then
the
engineers
involved
in
those
tickets
can
chime
in
on
that.