►
From YouTube: UX/PM meeting Verify & Release
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
The
thing
is,
we
feel-
or
at
least
we
sense-
the
doors,
quite
some
additions
to
the
board
later
than
the
planning
milestone,
intent
right,
like
the
planning
time
for
the
milestone
and
then
after
Mouzone
already
started.
Some
additional
issues
were
being
added.
I
discussing
this
with
Jason
I've
heard.
This
is
mostly
done
by
John
Hampton,
for
example,
to
be
able
to
add
additional
issues
for
front
fenders
to
be
able
to
work
on
and
I.
Think.
A
Our
intention
with
this
agenda
point
is
a
you
know
to
communicate
this,
we
in
terms
of
availability-
and
this
was
mostly
because
all
those
issues
had
the
deliverable
item
or
label
to
do
so.
There
was
without
in-depth
knowledge
of
like
hey.
This
is
CY
polish
issue
or
something
like
that.
It
has
thus
as
a
lower
priority.
A
A
To
be
honest,
is
my
opinion
here:
I
think
that
is
a
really
I,
don't
know.
I
I
I
think
that's
a
very
inaccessible
way
of
knowing
the
prioritization
towards
such
items.
That's
the
only
way
you
can
know
is:
if
I
have
the
exact
same
board
before
me
as
us,
right
and
I
mean
I,
don't
know
which
board
you're
looking
at
to
be
honest.
A
A
Mean
to
be
honest,
nope,
most
often
when
I
go
to
a
board,
I
just
open
a
random
board
and
configure
it
in
the
in
such
a
way
that
it
shows
the
item
that
I'm
interested
in
that
might
be
different
from
you
know
something
that
is
staged
group
specific
or
something
like
that.
So
that
way
of
prioritization
doesn't
work
that
well
Amaya
yeah.
C
A
I
mean
you
were
very
responsive
and
you
know
making
those
issues
stretch
which
was
really
nice.
It's
not
that
we
don't
want
to
work
on
them,
but
you
know
like
it's
nice
to
know
what
is
the
most
important
to
look
at
and
you
know
because
we
want
to
ship
everything,
yep
def,
anything
to
add
Rihanna.
There.
D
D
C
D
D
A
D
A
Right,
let's
set,
let's
leave
it
as
I
says:
I.
Think
we're
pretty
resound
on
that.
Let
me
see
you
at
stage
Group
dedication,
I,
don't
know
if
you
have
given
an
additional
thought
or
any
of
you
Brendon
and
Jason,
but
I
know
we
discussed
last
time.
I
believe
me
and
Brendan
that
it
might
be
time
for
them.
You
know
like
to
have
a
dedicated
UX
or
for
both
teams
and
have
this
as
a
backup
for
the
other
one.
A
D
C
D
C
D
D
A
C
A
C
A
A
C
A
A
C
D
C
I,
don't
know
if
the
if
the,
if
the
front-end
team
could
get
to
cat
has
capacity
to
get
to
them.
It
would
be
nice
if
they
were
ready
to
work
on.
But
if
it's
not
possible,
then.
A
C
D
C
C
One
thing
that
you
can
do
is,
if
you
take
a
quick
look
at
them
and
you're
not
comfortable
or
you
think
it
feel
it
needs
more
analysis
than
just
move
it
back
the
backlog
or
something
it's
that's
totally
fine.
You
can
just
say
quick,
a
quick.
No,
you
know
like
don't
start
working
on
this
until
I.
Read
it
and
then.
B
Yeah
as
long
as
as
long
as
they're,
not
gonna
make
it
worse
right
with
whatever
the
engineer
is
gonna
go,
do
it's
like
you
could
let
it
go
through,
but
if
you're
like
no,
this
is
gonna
be
markedly
worse.
If
we're
not
careful,
it's
like
yeah
kick
that
away
yeah
or
if
it's
like
well,
this
is
better,
but
it
could
be
a
thousand
times
better.
B
B
B
If
it's
like
and
then
if
those
things
exist,
like
ping,
Jason
and
I
and
be
like
hey
I,
want
to
follow
up
next
release
with
this.
For
this
thing
that
Miranda
was
working
on
whatever
and
like
we'll
try
to
make
room
for
it.
So
that's
not
oh
yeah.
We
wrote
that,
and
now
it's
2
years
later-
and
we
never
feel
like
I-
would
totally
be
supportive
of
that.
I,
don't
know
about
Jason
yeah.
C
B
D
A
All
right
us
feedback
and
research
gathering
process
I
saw
this
question
post
by
Jason,
like
hey
the
Triana.
We
should
consider
get
her
in
you
actually
back
this
way.
So
Katherine
from
the
UX
research,
hey
I,
created
a
quick
test,
get
achieve
that
get
levers
on
this
and
a
bonus
question,
and
this
is
a
quick
usability.
Research.
Yes,
yeah,
perhaps
like
the.
What
are
your
application
is
directly
jasa
for
which
you
want
it.
You
would
like
to
use
this.
Oh.
C
C
A
D
A
My
first
thought
towards
this
was
also
we're.
Not
our
known
users,
like
our
users,
are
our
users
and,
in
the
sense
of
you,
know,
I've
been
trying,
and
although
it's
something
like
the
most
successful
thing
yet
I
think
it's
trying
to
start
to
get
values
like
that.
An
issue
knows
which
persona
it's
startling
right
and
if
you
just
ask
random
gitlab
engineers
like
hey,
what
is
your
that
your
idea
about
this
or
what?
What
is
your
opinion
about
this?
They
may
you
know
approach
it
from
their
perspective,
which
is
not
directly.
A
You
know
our
target
audience.
On
the
other
hand,
you
also
have
the
issue
itself.
Why
on
like?
If
we
have
specific
people
in
mind,
why
don't
we
just
reach
out
to
them
inside
of
the
issue?
Of
course,
you
know,
there's
the
ups
to
that
against
as
well
like
hey.
They
need
to
read
through
the
entire
issue,
and
you
know
the
research
test
is
a
more
focused
medium
and
it's
you
know.
Those
thoughts
were
going
through
my
head,
yeah.
B
I
mean
the
one
nice
thing
that
I
like
about
this
example.
Is
it's
it's
the
minimally
viable
research
right
like
it's
like
the
MBC
version
of
UX
research
thing
because
it
was
like
it
was
such
a
small
focused
thing
that,
like
which
of
these
icons,
means
closed
right
and
so
yeah
that
wouldn't
necessarily
work
for
some.
C
So,
like
Mauryan
for
release,
if
we're
building
release
features-
and
we
talk
tomorrow-
that
said
in
mark
and
others
are
very
much
aligned
in
the
board,
I
assume
are
aligned
to
saying
that
talking.
Tomaron
is
as
much
worth
as
much
value
is
talking
to
ten
actual
customers,
because
I
guess
like
well
there's
a
different.
A
few
different
one
is
that
we
can
just
do
really
fast
iteration
with
our
internal
customers,
but
also
that.
C
B
If
it
was
really
short
like
that
I
just
it
was
so
short
and
consumable,
it's
like
what.
If
and
then
it
would
be
an
interesting
experiment
of
experiments
to
see
what,
if
you
did
post
that
same
thing
after
you
be
able
to
get
ours
to
the
issue?
Well,
it
would
under
people
that
get
notified
on
that
issue,
give
you
a
decent
sample
of
feedback.
I,
wonder
you
know,
I,
just
thought
of
that,
as
you
were
describing.
C
B
C
B
Yeah
and
I
and
then
I
thought
of
like
the
internal
group,
which
is
the
group
I
used
to
lead
professional
services
like
they
used.
Not,
they
use
AWS
90%
of
the
time
and
and
have
been
trying
to
make
a
gitlab
a
Orchestrator
into
AWS.
Forget
lab,
like
in
a
very
motorway,
so
like
yeah,
that
groups
feedback
could
be
huge.
Yeah.
C
Tomorrow
and
then
we
had
that
really
nice
conversation
with
Mara
and
also
about
like
the
we
had
that
idea
for
the
future.
Now,
that's
you
know
only
allow
well
I
guess:
shinu
came
up
with
it,
but
the
only
allow
like
if
you're,
behind,
like
2020,
commits
or
whatever
before
the
rebase.
So
we
kind
of
tunes
that,
with
Mara
and
I,
think
we
came
out
with
something
really
cool.
That
was
a
good
bit
of
user
research.
That
I
thought
went
well.
A
C
Then
the
other
thing
that
I'm
trying
to
do
I
opened
just
a
couple
this
morning
was-
is
open,
actual
issues
in
the
UX
research
group
that
are
for
things
that
are
like
three
four
releases
in
the
future.
Nice
and
I,
don't
know
exactly
how
their
process
is
going
to
work,
but
they
have
a
nice
ishi
template
that
that
asked
some
good
questions
and
I
assume
you
guys
are
participating
in
that
I.
Don't
know
actually
know
how
designing
research
work
together
here,
but
yeah.
A
For
now
what
if
they
are
saying
so
the
UX
research
team
has
to
test
right.
They
take
up
the
bigger
UITs
research
tasks
and
they
deliver
on
the
results
and
the
other
side
is
they
provide
the
processes
in
place
for
smaller
UX
research
tests
for
us
to
do
with
ourselves?
Look
if
this
is
a
bigger
thing,
it
would
be
their
responsibility
and
they
will
probably
give
you
an
estimate
as
to
when
they
were.
They
are
able
to
provide
results,
and
that
way
we
can.
You
know
utilize
the
results
eventually.
C
So
the
next
item
is
mine.
I
was
wondering
if
it's
a
good
time
now
to
split
this
into
you,
verify
and
release
being
separate
meetings,
because,
although
we
have
things
in
common,
Brendan
and
I,
I
think
it's
just
in
the
sense
that
we're
both
product
managers
we're
not
really
working
on
the
same
release
and
verify
items
anymore
and
then
potentially
also
have
this
with
the
rest
of
the
team,
so
that
everybody's
getting
insight
on
what
what
we're
doing
we're
not
talking
about
anything,
that's
like
hidden
from
developers.
C
That's
for
sure,
but
I
think
that
some
of
these
things
we're
talking
about
they
would
also
benefit
from
and
share.
Their
insights,
like
my
own,
are
the
things
that
you're
mentioning
I,
think
things
that
probably
developers
are
experiencing
as
well
and
having
this
conversation
with
them
included,
we
might
even
find
some
more
interesting
ideas.
Yeah.
A
C
A
You
know
the
the
the
length
of
the
meeting
was
variable
at
best
I
think
these
days
the
meeting
is
a
little
bit
shorter
and
it
may
might
make
a
room
for
these
kinds
of
things.
Well
before
you
know,
we've
walked
through
every
item,
and
then
somebody
had
to
talk
to
is
something
about
it
and
left
only
a
small
amount
of
time
to
discuss
something
you
act
specifically
and
everybody
would
would
be
bubble
backed
by
us
talking
about
things
which
only
matter
to
a
subset
of
the
people
attending
the
meeting.
I
think.
A
D
C
D
D
D
C
They'll
all
say
personally:
I
don't
mind
synchronous
meetings
at
all,
it's
not
in
the
company
culture
and
we
try
to
defend
from
getting
to
synchronous
because
we
have
people
globally
and
I
totally
understand
it.
But
if
you
ever,
for
any
reason
want
to
just
have
a
quick
chat,
I'm
always
up
for
it
and
you
could
schedule
one
everyday
and
it
wouldn't
ever
bother
me
yeah.
D
D
B
I'd
echo
that
I
mean
I
came
from
from
sales,
agate
lab,
which
is
way
worse
at
asynchronous
than
any
other
department.
So,
even
again,
if
you,
even
if
you
added
a
call
to
my
schedule
every
week,
it
would
still
be
less
calls
and
meetings
than
I
had
I
would
still
feel
asynchronous
compared
to
sales
all.