►
From YouTube: Retrospective (Public Stream) 2021-09-07
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
Good
morning,
everyone
this
is
the
get
lab
retrospective
today
is
september.
7Th
2021,
my
name
is
christopher
lefoultz.
I
am
sitting
in
for
kenny.
Johnston
to
mc
today.
Kenny
had
a
con
last
minute
conflict
to
come
up,
so
I'm
covering
for
him.
Well,
as
always,
we'll
start
with
previous
retrospective
improvement
tasks.
I
had
the
first
one
on
the
list,
which
was
looking
at
maintainer
availability
to
see
how
we
could
do
it.
We
haven't
made
much
progress
on
this.
A
In
the
past
month,
we've
been
challenged
with
other
items,
so
this
hasn't
been
as
high
priority,
so
we
have
as
much
progress.
Donald.
Are
you
on
the
line
to
talk
about
item
number
four.
B
Yep
thanks
christopher,
so
the
this
was
around
the
prioritization
of
p
ones
and
s
ones.
A
few
milestones
ago,
there
was
some
confusion
on
what
an
engineer
should
do
when
there
is
a
p1s
one
that
comes
through.
B
B
B
That
kind
of
covers
a
lot
of
what
we
have
in
our
plan
stage
handbook
and
then
there's
also
an
ongoing
conversation.
A
new
conversation
around
localized
feature
change
locks
that
may
alter
the
process
a
little
bit
so
taking
both
of
those
into
account.
I'm
not
going
to
make
another
change
to
the
global
handbook
page
and
we'll
just
kind
of
keep
an
eye
on
on
those
things.
A
Cool
I'm
looking
right
now,
so
the
next
two
items
we
didn't
get
updates
in
time
looks
like
tonya's
not
on
so
I'll
have
to
check
with
her
as
well
as
shawn,
so
I'll
work
on
getting
those
in
kenny
had
the
next
item,
which
was
we'll
check
into
the
handbook
about
providing
scoping
for
technical
investigations
and
creating
an
issue
template.
A
Basically,
there
was
a
tracking
issue
associated
with
this,
and
it
looks
like
it's
complete.
We've
improved
the
issue
template
for
technical
investigations
to
focus
on
scoping
note.
This
highlighted
to
me
the
that
we
use
spike
technical
fashion
technology
investigation
to
mean
the
same
thing.
I
create
an
issue
to
propose
to
consolidate
the
one
term
as
spike
so
looks
like
he's
made
some
good
progress
there
on
that,
and
that's
it
for
action
items.
A
The
next
discussion
topic
is
our
next
section
is
our
discussion
topics
and
the
first
one
is
from
arturo
arturo.
Are
you
on
the
call
doesn't
look
like
he
yeah.
C
Actually,
he
isn't,
he
said.
Kenny
was
gonna
speak
to
this.
A
Yes,
so
I'll
speak
to
it,
so
basically
the
zento
integration
was
a
community
contribution.
It
duplicates
a
lot
of
code
from
juror
issue
views
and
it's
an
interesting
tradeoff.
Should
we
accept
this
contribution
by
adding
technical
debt
or
push
for
the
highest
quality,
so
this
is
kind
of
the
classic
question
I
always
ask,
and
what
can
you
ask
us
to
kind
of
help?
The
discussion
is,
how
have
other
groups
approach
community
contributions
that
may
have
technical
debt.
D
Yeah,
I
added
a
comment
here.
I
think
there's
a
few
things
to
consider
specifically
with
this,
mr
that
went
through
or
that's
in
the
process
of
being
reviewed.
D
I
think
the
first
thing
is
jihu
is
a
new
team
that
is
starting
to
contribute
over
to
the
gitlab
code
base
and
similar
to
all
of
our
existing
engineers
that
learn
how
to
contribute
to
the
gitlab
code
base.
I
think
they're
learning
as
well,
so
the
first
thing
is
just
ensuring
that
iterations
are
small.
D
The
second
thing
that
I
mentioned
is
we
need
to
ensure
that
mrs
are
small
enough
to
review,
so
the
current,
mr
is
about
3
000
lines,
which
is
very
large.
The
reviewer
has
suggested
breaking
this
down
into
several
smaller,
mrs,
with
the
use
of
feature
flags
to
be
able
to
push
that
mr
through
and
then.
The
third
thing
is,
I
think,
maintainers
and
reviewers
should
continue
to
upload,
uphold
code
review
guidelines.
D
One
of
them
that
is
isn't
mentioned
in
our
code
review
guidelines,
but
is
one
of
the
core
principles
of
rails?
Is
don't
repeat
yourself,
so
keeping
your
code
dry.
So
if
this,
mr,
has
a
lot
of
duplicate
code
that
wouldn't
be
dry,
so
those
are
just
some
initial
thoughts.
C
Just
one
line,
I
don't
think
we
should
reduce
our
quality
standards
for
contributing
community
contributions.
I
think
in
general
we
uphold
them.
We
hold
them
the
most
part
to
the
standards
that
our
development
team
is
held
up
to,
and
I'm
sure
we've
all
heard
the
most
recent
quality
messaging.
That's
gone
out.
It's
these
these
types
of
things
that
seem
like
it's,
okay,
we
can
probably
get
away
with
it
anytime,
you're,
questioning
and
you're
saying:
oh,
we
can
probably
get
away
with
it.
A
So
one
aspect
that
I
see
is
is
you
know
we
could
have
a
community
contribution
that
gets
halfway
there
and
effectively.
We
need
to
finish
the
community
contribution
to
get
it
up
to
our
standards.
A
You
know
one
thing
that
I
would
encourage
folks
to
do
in
that
situation
is
to
get
their
their
manager
and
as
well
as
products
involved,
because
I
think
it's
critical
to
make
sure
that
we
understand
kind
of
the
impact
of
that,
because
I
think
I
think
outside
community
contributions
can
oftentimes
be
a
good
start,
but
I
don't
know
if
we
can
necessarily
guarantee
that
a
community
contribution
is
going
to
get
to
our
standards
in
these
situations.
C
I
will
say
christopher
currently
because
of
the
the
priorities
on
the
teams.
There
probably
isn't
the
capacity
to
finish
it
up
right
now,
so
I'm
not
sure
what
you
say
to
the
reviewer.
When
you
don't
have
capacity,
you
won't
for
a
while.
I
mean
to
the
contributor,
when
you
won't
have
capacity
for
a
while.
A
Yeah,
that's
why
I
think
we
need
to
engage
product
in
it
is
kind
of
for
that
discussion
right
because,
like
I
think,
that's
where
messaging's
kind
of
key
to
that
and
making
sure
we
have
a
a
good
aspect.
We
can.
We
can
ask
the
community
contribution
person
to
potentially
you
know,
give
them
some
suggestions
on
things
to
approach.
A
The
challenges
is
when
it
maybe
is,
they
don't
have
the
technical
ability
or
I
don't
have
the
resources
potentially
to
to
do
as
much
verification
as
we
have.
E
Jerome,
I'm
happy
to
provide
that
feedback
too
to
shan
as
we're
both
kind
of
involved
there.
That
sounds
good.
A
Cool,
if
there's
no
additional
feedback,
we'll
move
on
to
the
second
discussion
topic.
This
is
from
michelle
michelle.
You
want
to
verbalize
your
question.
F
F
There
was
a
small
opportunity
to
work
on
them
on
this
last
medicine,
but
at
the
end
we
didn't
do
it,
so
one
of
the
opportunities
will
be
like
having
them
back
on
the
medicine
review,
not
as
a
priorities
for
big
ones,
but
at
least
having
them
to
mark
that
we
are
trying
to
work
on
them,
and
I
see
that
the
question
is
how
their
teams
are
integrating
their
community
and
mrs
on
their
teams.
A
Cool,
so
what
are
folks
thoughts
as
far
as
how
they
integrate
their
community
mrs
reviews,
into
their
workflows?
Where,
where
do
they
typically
see
them
come
in?
Do
they
just
let
the
community
contributions
come
at
any
time
or
do
they
kind
of
consciously
think
about
it?.
A
D
I've
typically
worked
in
areas
with
fewer
community
contributions,
so
product
intelligence,
growth,
fulfillment,
less
people
are
contributing
to
those
areas.
But
during
the
odd
time
we
do
get
community
contributions,
they're
sort
of
managed
in
a
little
bit
of
an
ad
hoc
manner.
So
someone
has
put
together
an
mr
we'll,
just
ping,
an
available
engineer
to
try
to
lend
a
hand.
D
C
I
would
also
agree
with
jerome
that,
typically,
as
they
come
in
they're,
usually
pretty
small,
so
team
members,
the
biggest
thing
is
finding
them.
Maybe
sometimes
product
gives
them
to
us,
because
we,
it
might
not
have
the
right
labels
on
it,
but
they
do
them
ad
hoc,
except
for
the
one
we
were
just
talking
about
as
an
exception.
If
this
is
if
it's
significant-
and
that
requires
a
lot
of
effort,
you
would
have
to
try
to
figure
out
where
we
could
prioritize
it.
But
that's
very
unusual.
F
In
in
this
case,
package
was
already
doing
that
before
I
just
don't
think,
and
I
know
that
we
are
not
doing
it
anymore.
So
what
we
are
planning
to
do
is
adding
them
again
during
the
planning
for
the
milestone.
G
Yeah,
I
can
speak
to
the
the
plan
ones
a
little
bit
like
we
have
a
small
number
of
like
really
active
community
contributors
like
a
handful
that
we
can
like
I've
done,
calls
with
them.
G
We
can
see
their
activities
on
issues,
so
we
have
a
fairly
good
idea
of
like
what
they
intend
to
do,
but
it's
still
like
way
too
ad
hoc
for
my
comfort.
To
be
honest,
we
can't
like,
if
we
say,
we've
de-prioritized
a
feature,
but
we
have
a
very
active
community
contributor
on
that
feature.
A
So
it's
one
thing:
I've
actually
been
wrestling
with
john
is:
how
do
we
make
sure
we
understand
the
cost
of
keeping
a
piece
of
functionality
or
feature?
That's
been
de-prioritized,
particularly
around
more
around
the
operational
costs
associated
with
it,
but
I
think
community
costs
should
also
be
considered
as
well
in
those
situations.
A
So
I
think
we
have
to
basically
start
thinking
in
terms
of
what
those
expenses
are
and
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
can
quantify
that
because,
like
that's,
that's
where
we
can
go
back
for
product
investment
and
make
clear
that
kind
of
these
are
the
trade-offs
and
that
might
cause
us
to
make
some
hard
decisions.
A
But
actually
those
are
the
sometimes
the
hard
decisions
are
the
best
decisions
for
us
to
make
as
an
organization,
because
it'll
make
sure
that
we're
focused
on
the
right
things
and
also
taking
into
consideration
that,
whereas
right
now,
I
think
we
do
the
I'm
not
sure
what
the
right
term
is
that
articulates
us,
but
the
term
I
would
use
to
sweep
it
under
the
rug.
You
know
it's
it's
still
there,
but
it's
it's!
You
know
it's
it's
hit
for
views,
so
it's!
G
Yeah
and
actually
I'm
think,
I've
been
thinking
about
that
as
well
and
it
became
it
just
became
very
noticeable
sort
of
in
the
last,
maybe
month
or
two
that
we're
like
giving
significant
capacity
to
service
desk,
not
just
on
the
engineering
side
actually,
but
also
from
gabe
and
the
product
managers
as
well
like
they
have
to
keep
in
touch
and
kind
of.
G
You
know
these
contributors
have
a
very
like
well-defined
view
of
where
they
want
to
take
service
desk,
and
that
has
to
align
with
our
plans
for
refactoring
other
parts
of
the
application
and
so
on.
So
it's
kind
of
like
we
can't
ignore
it
anymore,
we're
very
grateful
for
it,
but
we
can't
ignore
that.
It
is
like
we're
assigning
capacity
to
something
that
we
have
said.
We
prioritize.
D
I
added
a
comment
here
that
says
I
tie
this
back
to
what
christopher
mentioned
above
when
we
were
discussing
the
previous
discussion
topic
about
looping
product
in
so
if
it's
a
larger
or
a
lower
quality,
mr,
it's
probably
going
to
take
more
engineering
resources
to
get
it
up
to
par.
So
that's
something
that's
going
to
take
capacity
which
needs
to
be
planned
for
john.
E
And
then
I
just
added
a
point
that
is
probably
not
communicated
too
broadly,
so
this
may
be
the
first.
Some
people
are
hearing
about
this,
but
there's
a
new
team
in
quality
called
open
source
outreach.
It
can
be
the
dri
to
help
with
these
sort
of
things.
Traditionally,
it's
just
like
identifying.
Community
contributions
has
fallen
to
engineering
productivity
and
it's
one
of
many
responsibilities
that
doesn't
get
the
attention
it
needs.
With
this
new
team.
A
All
right
we'll
go
into
the
improvements
for
the
next
release
to
track.
We
didn't
have
many
that
came
out
of
this
discussion.
John
john
hope,
your
idea
about
quantifying
we
may
want
to
try
to
figure
out
if
there's
something
we
could
do
there,
but
probably
the
biggest
consideration
for
the
next
retro
is
the
fact
that
we're
discussing
moving
to
sub-department
retros,
so
that
was
kind
of
just
as
discussed
this
morning.
A
So
it's
pretty
hot
news,
but
it
seems
like
a
good
transition
time
for
that,
where
we
actually
have
potentially
more
meaningful
discussions,
but
then
quote
by
some
department,
so
kenny's
gonna
work
on
a
proposal
around
that
and
maybe
implement
it
as
soon
as
the
beginning
of
next
month,
and
then
I
put
one
in
for
german
kyle
because
it
sounded
like
there
might
be
some
follow-up
work
around
the
specific
community
contribution
because
it
sounds
like
it's
quite
large
and
the
challenge
is
associated
with
that.
A
There's
the
two
other
action
items
from
the
last.
There
are
actually
other
three
action
items
from
the
last
from
the
last
update
that
I'll
be
following
up
on
as
well
just
see
if
we
can
get
additional
feedback
there.