►
From YouTube: Title: Jakarta EE TCK Call #2 - September 8, 2021 5PM
Description
Recording of the Jakarta EE Platform TCK call #2 on September 8, 2021 with full video.
Listen to the discussion about refactoring the Platform TCK for Jakarta EE. Minutes from the call are available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zm0VBjB5UvYx6Rx-aVHp79SgimmR1O-j/view?usp=sharing
B
C
D
Hey
ed
brought,
I
oh
I
I
have
a
whole
bunch
of
hats
here,
mostly
well.
I've
been
involved
with
this
since
we
first
started
talking
about
trying
to
contribute
javi
over
to
jakarta.
Most
of
the
heavy
lifting
from
my
group
gets
done
by
all
and
guru
from
the
our
team
in
india,
but
anyway,
so
I'm
happy
to
help
out
wherever
I
can.
E
Okay,
I
can
go
next.
My
name
is
I'm
currently
a
graduate
student
at
usc
in
the
us,
but
I've
been
a
developer
in
the
past,
so
I've
been,
I
think
when
the
tck
calls
started
last
year,
so
I
thought
it
might
be
a
good
opportunity
to
kind
of
get
involved,
so
I
did
managed
to
read
a
little
bit
and
probably
had
a
minor
change
in
there,
but
I'm
glad
that
we've
had
this
call
so
that
I
can
sort
of
get
back
to
whatever
is
going
on.
F
F
Working
group
forums
as
relevant-
I
am
co-founder
of
tommy
tribe,
and
I
love
technology
and
open
source
and
the
right
things
happening
because
of
the
people.
I
think
anyone
using
the
technology
and
creating
that
technology
has
a
responsibility
to
move
it
forward,
and
it
just
depends
on
watching
carefully
how
we
do
with
that,
especially
in
the
open.
I
did
test
environments
and,
most
often
in
jakarta,
we
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do.
In
that
sense,
I
am
not
technical.
F
I
am
operational
strategy
and
I
love
these
kind
of
situations
where
we
bring
forward
record,
make
sure
that
we
spread
the
knowledge
foreign
department
for
other
developers
and
also
users.
They
will
want
to
invest
their
time
in
the
technology
because
we
need
new
friends
to
come
in,
not
those
of
us
that
have
been
in
the
industry
for
a
very
long
time.
That's
it.
B
A
B
F
F
B
A
All
right,
so,
okay,
let's
let's
get
started
you
all-
should
be
able
to
add
your
names
and
first
gender
item.
I
basically
mentioned
that
this
is
the
you
know.
This
is
the
second
call
in
case
you
didn't
know,
and
we
have
minutes
from
this
morning's
call,
and
I
we
copied
the
agenda
items
from
this
mornings
called
with
the
minutes
from
those
so
they're
still
in
the
original
form.
From
this
morning
you
know
unmodified.
A
You
know
we
can
add
our
minutes
as
we
go,
and
just
one
of
the
kind
of
yeah
mention
that
this
is
sort
of
an
experiment
having
two
calls
at
the
same
time
and
we'll
yeah
we'll
go
right
into
platform
tck
refactoring,
which
yeah
yeah
we
if
in
case
you
haven't
been
following
the
mailing
list,
we
have
a
draft
pull
request
that
up.
That
is
introduced
in
maven
projects
for
most
of
the
different
test
groups
and
it's
kind
of
just
kind
of
getting
things
moving
along.
A
D
A
A
A
Partly
because
we
don't
know
if
we'll
complete
the
effort
for
ee10
or
if
it'll
continue
after
ee10
into
ee
11,
we
hope
to
to
have
it
all
done.
But
basically
we'll
have
the
main
branch
on
the
master
branch
we
have,
which
we
haven't
renamed
yet.
But
we
talked
about
renaming
which
will
very
soon
get
started,
making
changes
for
ee10
and
that
will
definitely
be
that'll,
be
where
we
will.
You
know
we
will
have
the
ee10
support
by
defaults.
A
If
the
refactoring
branch
doesn't
get
completed
in
time
and
what
I
mean
by
completed
is
we
have
all
we
have
all
of
the
same
test
running
and
we
have
all
the
same
tests
that
we
intend
on
on.
Having
running,
I
should
say,
and
that
meet
the
ee10
requirements,
so
yeah
new
tests
can
be
added
and
all
of
the
current
ones.
G
A
F
I
do
I
have
a
question
so
scott
for
the
you
call
it.
I
call
it
a
squash
as
well.
If
we
do
this,
because
now
we're
working
on
10,
remember
that
we
created
the
application,
the
feature
that
allow
us
to
say
or
list
via
cards,
all
the
contributors
to
every
release.
This
was
created
for
nine
and
we
optimized
it
for
ten
for
for
nine
point
one
and
is
busy
what
we
did
is
we
chose
commits
and
we
chose
pr's
merged.
F
A
Investigating,
let's
see
so,
there
was
one
change
that
I
lost
with
the
squash
that
what
you
know
I
deleted
the
line
that
was
modified,
so
I
would
so
I
didn't
lose
one.
You
know
one
change
and
I
noted
the
reference
you
know
that
reference
to
in
the
comments,
but
you
know,
since
the
code
was
deleted,
I
you
know,
I
think
it.
I
thought
it
was
okay,
but
is.
Is
that
what
you
mean
like
when
you
squash
you
lose
like?
I,
don't
I
don't
I
don't?
A
I
don't
intend
on
squashing
other
people's
commits.
This
was
just
you
know.
I
I
changed.
I
don't
know
a
lot
of
lines
of
a
lot
of
lines,
a
lot,
a
lot
of
commits
and
the
squash
was
just
to
clean
up
the
you
know
the
the
history
to
make
it
more
readable.
I
actually
have
the
original
branch
before
I
squashed
saved
off,
so
we
can
kind
of.
We
can
talk
about
that
offline,
maybe
on
the
mailing
list.
F
F
So
I
think
this
is
something
important,
even
if
it's
only
you
making
the
work,
we
know
how
many
commits
went
in
and
all
this
stuff
and
it's
important
in
stats,
as
you
can
see,
if
you
haven't
seen
this
go
into
the
9.1
for
those
of
you
that
are
new,
go
into
the
9.1
release
page
and
see
exactly
the
stats,
we'll
tell
you
what
went
down,
and
this
is
so
important.
So
it's
got
up
to
you.
We
can.
We
will
not
hijack,
and
I
don't
think
it's
a
good
idea
to
hijack.
F
But
when
I
thought
about
this,
since
I
was
the
one
leading
the
project
with
the
driver,
that
is
in
the
front
end,
my
my
requirements
were.
I
want
to
see
how
many
commits
I
want
to
see
how
many
pr's
and
how
many
people
contributed.
That's
it
if
we
need
to
adjust
it.
I
need
to
know
so
then
a
new
pr
will
happen
and
we
need
to
modify
it.
This
is
important
because
that
is
how
we
thank
every
contributor
in
the
community
so
important,
including
if
your
workers
guys
don't
matter.
We
cannot
hide
it.
F
A
D
I
had
a
question,
so
it
looks
like
a
large
part
of
what's
going
on
with
this.
This
pr
is
shuffling
around
files
moving
them
from
one
location
to
another.
Do
you
have
a
is
you
know
for
people
that
are
trying
to
follow?
What's
going
on
it's
a
little
hard
to
read,
you
know
to
there's
almost
there's
over
25
000
files
that
are
changed
here.
Do
you
have
a
sort
of
something
that
describes
here's?
What
my
goal
is
here's?
What
we're
you
know,
here's
what
we
had!
Here's,
what
we're
moving
to
do!
A
So,
let's
see
I
I
don't
have
a
like
a
write-up
of
of
that
and
I
it
changed
a
lot
since
we,
you
know,
started
this
branch
and
initially
I
was
trying
to
keep
the
test
all
in
in
the
same
location.
I
didn't
want
to
move
any
tests
around
at
all,
but
then
we
decided
we
had
some
discussion
on
the
tcga
pck
mailing
list
about
moving
to
the
maven
conventions
for
where
test
tests
are
stored
and
yeah
that
you
know.
A
We
didn't
change
any
package
names,
but
we
just
changed
the
so
you
know
the
source
location
to
follow
the
maven
location
convention,
for
you
know
where
tests
belong
and
that's
one
aspect
of
a
lot
of
moves
that
you
see
in
the
in
the
pull
request
and
then
and
then
there's
some
other
movement
movements
of
trying.
I
I
I
try
to
take
some
of
the
a
lot.
You
know
what
you
know.
I
won't
go
into
the
whole
thing,
so
I
think
it's
I
think
it.
A
B
Scott
from
from
the
context
of
the
of
the
of
the
conversation
that
has
been
going
as
far
as
I
remember,
we
have
like
three
threats:
email
threats,
kind
of
pointing
to
the
pr,
and
also
the
pr
got
a
couple
of
comments.
From
my
point
of
view
and
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong,
one
of
the
apart
from
the
decisions
like,
for
example,
junit,
5
or
testing
g,
one
of
the
key
points
that
I
haven't
seen
anyone
provide
feedback
on
how
to
solve.
A
Yeah
so
so
there's
we
discussed
the
at
the
code
level
on
that
question.
That's
one!
That's
one
of
the
agenda
items
down
below,
but
from
the
user
perspective
we
we
talked
about
as
well,
and
there
was
concern
about
users
that
depend
on
the
current.
You
know
test
harness
or
the
porting
kit
more
or
some
aspects
of
both
what
they
might.
You
know
what
they,
what
they
might
you.
A
To
do
so,
I
don't
know
if
you're
talking
about
that
as
much
as
the
internal
use,
but
you
know
one
of
the
yeah
this,
since
this
is
all
about
the
refactoring
aspects
we
did
we,
we
do
have
enough
yeah.
We
do
talk
about
that
in
in
a
minute.
So
maybe
we
can
talk
about
user,
the
user
aspects
as
well.
So
we
didn't
talk
about
that
this
morning,
but.
A
Let's
see,
let's
see,
okay,
it's
it's
down,
yeah
yeah!
So
it's
like
it!
It's
a
little!
It's
it's
a
bit
further
down,
but
this
is
fundamentally,
you
know,
should
we
use
junit
5
or
test
ng
in
the
platform
tck
and
some
some
spec
tcks
are
already
using
testing
g
and
are
quite
happy
with
it,
and
you
know,
junit
5
is
also
a
very
you
know
very
popular.
You
know
test
harness,
so
it
it
that
you
know
there
are
trade-offs
one
one
of
the
advantages
of
test
ng
is
they.
A
That's
closer
to
what
users
express
now
with
keywords:
it's
not
the
same
as
keyword
as
our
platform,
tck
keywords,
but
it's
you
know
probably
like
the
closest
to
what
we
you
know
what
we
use
in
keywords
and
that
you
know
you
could
you
could
have
yeah.
You
could
express
similar
things
to
what
we
have
in
keywords
for
all
the
current
tck
tests
that
are
in
optional
groups,
so
that
so
that
you
know
there's
some
advantages
of
test.
Ng
and
junit
5
seems
to
be
popular
as
well,
and
someone
asked
too
yeah.
A
A
It
just
you
know
it
just
when
you
get
to
excluding
the
tests
it
would
have
to,
it
would
be
at
it
would
be
kind
of
at
a
or
enabling
our
you
know.
You
know
our
district.
Sorry,
enabling
or
disabling,
like
the
equivalent
of
keyword
properties
for
test
groups,
are
sorry
for
optional
tests
and
test
groups.
A
It
would
be
kind
of
at
the
test
group
level
and
if
there's
a
different
way
to
do
that
with
junit,
it
wouldn't
be
consistent
to
do
that,
but
it's
possible
that
we
could
do
both.
If
you
know
if
there's
like
yeah,
if,
let's
let's
just
say
hypothetically,
let's
say
you
know
someone
takes
all
take.
You
know
someone
volunteers
to
work
on,
I
don't
know,
let's
say
ejb
or
the
persistence.
C
C
F
A
So
the
so
so
I
I
think
a
lot
of
the
refactoring
you
know
can
happen
in
this
standalone
spec.
You
know,
teams
repositories,
that's
one
path.
The
other
path
which
I'm
kind
of
see
look
seeing
as
a
default
path,
is
that
the
refactoring
will
happen
in
the
platform
tck
for
technologies
that
the
spec
team
doesn't
engage
on,
making
making
those
changes
in
their
repository
and
we
kind
of
yeah.
A
So
you
have
the
whoever
is
going
to
do
the
work
maybe
wants
to
use
something
different
or
do
we
say
you
know
no,
and
if
we
you
know,
I'm
not.
If
I
don't
mind
saying
no,
I
don't
mind
saying
we
have
to
use
j
inert
or
we
have
to
use
tests
ng
to
avoid
you
know,
creating
a
mix
of
too
many
different
technologies,
but
we
kind
of
already
have
standalone
tcks
using
different
technologies
as
it
stands.
A
When
someone
goes
to
run
that
you
know
the
different
tests,
it
would
be
better
if
they
all
used
one
technology.
I
I
mean
I
definitely
I
agree
with
that.
I
guess
what
the
question
I'm
posing
is:
if,
if
someone
volunteers,
though,
to
do
the
work
and
they
want
to
use
the
other
test
framework,
would
we
want
to
say
no
we'll?
Just
you
know
we're
going
to
always
use
whichever
one
we
choose
you
know
now
or
we
you
know
that
I
think
that's
cut,
that's
kind
of
the
trade-off.
F
F
I
think
this
needs
to
be
discussed
as
a
single
topic
and
a
thread,
and
we
should
use
a
tck
mailing
list,
because
it's
that
important,
I
believe,
in
lack
of
flexibility
when
there
are
serious
issues.
What
cleaning
things
so
maybe
having
two
tools
is
great,
but
we
should
have,
you
know,
start
the
discussion
and
then
later
like
once
you
say
you
know,
let's
discuss
this
for
two
weeks,
for
example,
and
then
we
can
have
a
doodle
pool
and
say
use
both
limit
to
one,
because
you
know
this
might
go.
F
You
know
it
needs
to
be
boxed
too
between
a
week.
How
much
time
do
we
have
to
discuss
on
this
and
the
pros
and
cons?
We
need
to
hear
from
all
these
other
people.
I
will
even
cross
post
it
with
community
right,
because
every
api
has
different
mailing
lists
and
you
cannot
go
and
do
what
you
did
last
time.
That
was
super
amazing
sending
the
same
message.
This
is
so
important
because
it's
a
testing
tools
that
you
need
to
reach
out
anyone.
F
I
have
no
idea
how
we
would
choose
to
do
this,
but
I'm
saying
you
know
we
can
go
on
and
talk
about
it
forever
here
and
I
think
oliver
already
spoke
but
to
read,
you
have
yet
to
say
anything
ed.
You
have
not
said
anything,
definitely
use
this
call
to
do
that.
But
what
I
want
to
make
sure
is
that
this
code
is
not
the
one
to
decide
what
happens
in
the
tc
case.
F
A
A
D
I
do
okay,
so
okay,
one
thing
to
think
about
is
so
you
write
the
tests
right.
We
we,
the
community,
collectively,
get
to
support
these
tests
right,
so
the
more
complicated
we
make
that
environment,
the
heart
of
that
support
obligation
will
be
right,
and
it's
not
today.
It's
you
know
three,
five
years
from
now,
when
somebody's
you
know
trying
to
run
a
test,
you
know
that
was
created
this
year,
but
you
know
they're
just
finally
getting
around
to
to
you
know
doing
a
compatibility
certification.
D
So
I,
in
my
to
my
way
of
thinking,
limiting
the
choices
I
I
think
is
is
a
positive.
It
helps,
I
think
it
will
help
vendors
right
because
they
have
to.
They
have
to
learn
enough
about
all
these
test
environments
so
that
they
can
set
them
up,
run
them
and
get
positive
or
you
know,
get
deal
with
their
non-positive
results
and
then
be
able
to
diagnose
that
themselves,
and
you
know
finally
get
to
a
compatible.
D
You
know
compatibility
a
positive
compatibility
run.
The
the
degree
to
which
that
is
complicated
is
you're
going
to
be
reflected
in
how
many
people
come
back
to
us
and
say
I
tried
to
run
these
tests.
I
couldn't
get
them
to
work,
you
know,
and
how
much
are
we
going
or
we
will
we,
as
a
community
willing
to
you,
know,
invest
our
time
in
helping
them
get
that
done
the
more
we
can
do
up
front
to
simplify
and
regularize
the
environment,
the
better
off.
I
think
we
will
be
long
term.
F
D
F
E
I
mean
yeah,
I
mean
I
kind
of
agree
with
you
know,
keeping
things
simple
with
just
I
mean,
rather
than
having
too
many
technologies
in
the
mix.
I
think
it's
probably
make
things
easier
for
people
who
gonna
maintain
it
in
the
long
run.
I
I
think
yeah
I
mean,
rather
than
adding
anything
more
there.
I
just
probably
had
a
question
for
you
know
for
people
who
kind
of
trying
to
kind
of
jump
in
on
this
effort.
E
E
A
So
I
think
that's
and
we
all
you
know
a
there's
other
goals
as
well,
which
is
making
it
easy
for
the
spec
api
projects
to
take
over
the
you
know
the
tcka
test,
and
some
of
them
are
doing.
You
know
doing
this
already.
You
know
they're
working
on
doing
their
own
refactoring
or
getting
you
know
getting
their
own.
You
know
tck
test
suite
going,
but
not
every
every
spec
api
project
will
do
that.
So,
okay.
E
A
Not
every
not
every
test
has
to
move
to
a
spec
api
project,
but
they
could
it
just
you
know
it.
It
kind
of
it
kind
of
helps.
The
you
know,
reduce
the
or
you
know,
improve
the
process
of
releasing
a
new
ee
release
in
the
sense
that
there's
less
contention
at
the
spec
api
level
if
they
control
their
own
tck,
because,
basically
they
don't
have
to
wait
for
the
platform
tck
to
release
or
to
make
available
the
tck
that
they
need
to
complete
their
part
of
the
ee
release.
A
F
B
For
wrapping
up
this,
I
was
looking
at
the
meeting
notes
from
the
previous
call,
and
one
topic
that
was
mentioned
there
is
that
it
seems
like
there
is
the
possibility
to
to
offer
an
integration
of
both
frameworks,
but
also
something
that
it
hasn't
been
mentioned
on
the
previous
call,
and
in
this
call
is
also
the
scope.
How
much
do
we
want
to
invest?
I
don't
know
how
how
hard
is
to
do
that?
How
many
effort
will
that
will
take
what
we
what
we
want
to
prioritize?
F
B
Are
you
meaning?
No?
No.
The
thing
is
that
on
on
the
millions
from
the
previous
call
the
options,
the
the
initial
question
was
junit
5
or
test
ng
right,
but
there
is
a
third
option,
which
is
both
right,
so
kind
of
following
what
oliver
state
you
know
that
more
sometimes
is
contra
can
be
counterproductive.
That
is
how
I
am
interpreting
your
feedback.
Oliver
correct
me:
if
I'm
wrong,
how
much
do
you
get
yeah?
How
many,
how
much
we
want
to
to
to
invest
in
that
direction?
B
A
So
so,
let's,
let's
jump
into
how
yeah
and
and
to
the
time
aspect
the
you
know
for
for
what
al
alwyn
has
done
on
the
and
others
on
the
proof
of
concept
for
restful
web
services.
Alan.
You
mentioned
that
we
have
400
tests
converted
so
far
and
that
he's
he
you
know.
Basically
he
said
that
getting
the
framework
set
up
in
the
first
pl
you
know
play
you
know.
A
F
A
A
You
know
to
to
do
you
know
to
expect
someone
to
manually
make
all
those
changes.
So
it's
either
going
to
be
multiple
people
updating
tests
or
it
could
be
a
few
people
making
a
large
number
of
changes,
but
the
yeah,
the
the
amount
of
failure
feel
or
mistakes
that
would
that
might
be
missed.
By
that
you
know
it's
just
I.
A
A
Yeah
so
yeah,
so
so
that
that
was
you
know
where
we
got
it.
You
know
we
were
getting
into.
You
know
how
long
it
takes,
and
we
did.
We
also.
We
also
talked
about
you
using
like
like
on
the
servlet
mailing
list
steward
douglas
mentioned
some
of
the
work
he
did
for
quarkus
to
convert
tests
over
to
you
know,
to
use
a
killian
and
and
shrink
wrap,
and
you
know
the
idea
of
having
some
java
code
that
automates.
A
You
know
just
just
to
kind
of
give
a
sense
of
what
people
you
do
with
shrink,
wrap
shrink
wrap
is
the
expressive
api
that
lets
you
construct
a
a
war,
add
classes
to
a
war.
Add
deployment
descriptors,
add
that
war
to,
and
you
know,
to
an
ear,
and
you
know
whatever
else
you're,
you
know
you're
doing
in
your
test
archives
and
so
yeah.
F
A
A
F
B
I'm
that
thing
that
also
worked
an
email
thread
that
so
far
I
recall,
I
only
see
one
conversation
about
automation.
We
have
that
email
trade
already.
I
think
we
can
follow
up
on
that,
because,
right
now
at
least
I
I'm
seeing
some
one
example
that
that
so
far
in
the
mailing
list
in
that
email,
trade,
we
haven't
been
able
to
see.
So
I
think
we
can
follow
up
on
that,
but.
B
I
don't
I
don't
remember
right
now.
My
timing
machine
is
a
little
fuzzy
in
my
mind,
but
I
think
it
was
like
two
weeks
ago
and
I
don't
know
it
was
lucas.
I
don't
know
if,
if
you
were
the
one
who
provide
feedback
about
this
automation
part,
but
anyway,
I
think
now
we
have
an
example
that
we
can
iterate
on
that
inventory.
A
Yeah
yeah
yeah,
luke
yeah
lucas
had
brought
up
the
you
know
having
a
he
wanted,
yeah
he
he
wanted.
He.
He
pointed
me
to
an
example
elsewhere
of
a
bash
script
that
converted
tests
into
maven
test
folders
and
that
would
that
was
yeah
that
yeah
that
that
was
yeah.
That
was
a
bit
different
that
was
just
converting
to
maven
but
yeah.
I
remember.
G
G
Basically,
the
script
contained
set
of
rules,
and
it
was
also
able
to
use
proper
commands
on
the
repository
so
like
gitmo
for
svn
move
or
whatever.
So
even
these
steps
were
recorded
in
the
history
and
they
were
recorded
as
one
step
it
wasn't.
A
mix
of,
I
don't
know
hundreds
of
commits,
but
it
was
just
one
point
in
the
historic
comic
history:
okay,.
F
F
Okay,
what
is
it
stopping
you?
We
saw
the
email-
I
remember
it
was
like
I
feel
like
it
was
weeks
ago
due
to
the
holiday.
So
forgive
me
what
is
stopping
you
and
your
team
for
committing
a
wiki
or
a
page
under
documentation
for
the
tck
or
whatever
else
we
can
put
it
in
the
repos
so
that
we
can
use
you're
like
a
case
study,
because
you
have
completed
the
migration
issues,
so
we
could
use
the
lessons
learned
and
especially
during
this
conversation,
I
don't
think
it
was
a
follow-up
in
your
thread.
F
G
F
A
I'm
not
sure
that
this
is
aligned
with
what
we're
looking
to
do
to
the
test
sources,
though
this
this
is
about
being
able
to
reorganize
the
layout
at
any
point
in
time
which
we
had
to
do,
you
know
had
had
to
do
and
we
are
doing,
but
the
goal,
the
the
goal
that
we
we
talked
about
covering,
I
think
was
you
know
yeah.
Basically,
we
want
to
be
able
to
to
commit
yeah.
A
A
But
if
we,
if
we
have
an
idea
that
can
can
be
applied
to
converting
the
tests
themselves
to
yeah,
which
which
is
a
different
yeah,
it's
a
different.
It's
a
different
problem,
yeah
and
you
know
to
walk
through
the
tests
and
convert
the
tests
themselves.
Not
so
much
the
converting
the
yeah,
the
or
you
know
the.
D
A
C
C
C
C
F
C
C
F
So
while
we
wait
for
a
scott,
no
from
forest
cats,
it's
three
minutes
to
go
to,
and
I
think
I
think
lucas.
I
know
you
work
on
this,
and
maybe
it's
not
open
source.
So
if
you
can
share
whatever
you
can
share,
I
think
it's
important
as
out
of
a
scope
for
this,
but
definitely
the
work
done
is
it
can
be
applied
hopefully
later
once
priorities
are
tackled
so
up
to
you
to
write
it
in
the
minutes
and
say
hey.
F
I
want
to
do
this
and
you
can
send
a
foreign
thread
and
say
I
attended
this
call.
This
is
my
recommendation.
I
attended
the
tck
call
and
I
am
owning
this
for
the
next
few
weeks.
This
will
come
up
and
you
know
it's
your
job
to
create
expectations
and
limit
them
for
those
of
you
that
this
is
your
first
call.
How
do
you
feel
about
this?
We
have
two
minutes
to
go
and
we
try
to
be
on
time.
B
I
think
it's
good
because
it
helps
to
think
a
little
bit
what
the
different
email
threads
and
bring
them
all
on
top
of
the
table
and
try
to
to
discuss
so
looking
forward
for
the
next
ones.
Unfortunately,
we
would
like
to
see
code
and-
and
everything
and
one
hour
is
not
enough
for
trying
to
move
over
that,
but
I
think
this
is
this
was
a
productive
one.
F
C
C
F
Ed
lucas
you
have
joined
before,
do
you?
Does
everyone
here
believe
that
this
is
important
so
much
so
that
we
could
have,
and
maybe
every
two
weeks,
a
one
hour
where
we
connect
and
go
through
the
pr's
or
whatever
threats
are
happening
and
hash
out
whatever
has
been
miscommunicated
and
the
threats
writing
is
complicated.
F
The
hardest
thing
we
need
to
do
is
communicate
clearly,
and
it's
so
hard
at
times,
because
we
all
live
abroad.
But
these
calls
might
be
a
good
point
to
say:
hey
the
email
may
be
harsh,
but
the
tone
is
different
when
you
know
the
person
it's
like
a,
I
call
it
a
hey.
It's
not
that
bad.
Ask
directly.
That
kind
of
thing
do
we
have
more
calls
like
this.
F
F
We
totally
took
over
and
we're
saying
how
wonderful
the
call
was,
and
you
can
read
it.
You
can
check
it
at
the
end,
but
the
question
is
the
way
something
we
have
is
continuation.
Do
we
have
these
calls
every
two
weeks
on
wednesdays?
Only
once
remember
this,
the
call
was
supposed
to
be
only
once
today
and
then
another
one
two
weeks
from
now,
and
our
question
is:
do
we
keep
it
two
weeks
from
now
on
wednesday,
not
too
close,
but
one.
A
F
Sometimes
closure
is
possible
not
because
this
is
not
the
call
to
make
the
decisions,
but
maybe
to
connect
with
someone
that
is
not
understanding
the
situation
and
has
some
questions
like.
Surely
it
had
a
really
great
question
that
now
is
recorded?
Why
are
we
doing
this,
and
why
are
we
talking
about
this?
And
now
he
understands
right.
F
So
I
say
my
recommendation
will
be
for
september
and
october
to
do
twice
a
month,
and
then
we
see
what
happens
if
there
is
attendance
and
what
is
attendance,
how
many
committers
and
how
many
contributors
does
the
project
have
we're
not
keeping
track,
but
jakarta
has
about
like
almost
110
or
something
committers.
So
we
can
do
this
month,
another
one
that
will
be
and
then
in
october
2
and
then
see
what
happens
because
we
have
the
new
calendar
and
we
have
total
flexibility
to
delete
whatever
it
is.
F
You
are
an
admin
you
can
delete
and
announce,
and
my
recommendation
is
to
do
exactly
what
you
did
now.
You
send
the
agenda
and
you
send
the
agenda
after
the
call
and
before
the
call,
and
that
brings
the
plus
100
and
the
forum
that
might
be
interested
one
week,
one
week
in
advance
to
know
hey.
That
call
is
happening.
I
will
try
to
join
right,
it's
about
habits
and
discipline,
but
that's
my
take.
I'm
biased.
A
I
mean
we're
only
you
know
one
yeah,
today's
the
first
day
into
it.
So
I
mean
we
could
repeat
it
in
two
weeks
and
and
try
it
and
yeah,
and
you
know
see
you
know,
you
know
how
how
it
goes
so
yeah
I
mean
it's,
it's
good
feedback
and
we
do
want
to
keep
it
aligned
and
on
track
and
we
do
in
october
we
do
have
some
spec
ballots.
A
F
F
A
It's
it's
another
meeting,
it's
yet
another
meeting
in
two
weeks
that
we'll
all
need
to
attend,
and
so
that's
do
people
want
their
time
or
do
they
want
you
do
you
know?
Do
they
think
that
the
you
know
it?
You
know
it
helps
to
keep.
You
know
to
keep
it
going
more
frequently.
I
guess,
and
I'm
certainly
I'm
open
if
people
you
know
you
know,
want.
F
F
A
F
You
know
what
I
was
thinking
is.
The
specification
committee
has
on
off
calls
at
nine
in
the
morning
on
wednesday,
and
I
was
saying
that
we
could
use
those
spots
when
the
specification
committee
is
not
meeting.
You
know
like
twice
a
month
and
then
just
have
that
for
this
month
and
next
month
and
then
move
forward.
Nine
in
the
morning
is
easier
than
two
two
p.m.
For
many,
and
maybe
oliver
you
are
in
europe,
I
have
no
idea.
You
work
here
with
type.
I
love
you
guys
but
like
who
here
is
awake?
F
Yeah
exactly
so,
we
can't
do
this.
It
needs
to
be
at
nine.
In
the
morning
I
say
nine
in
the
morning,
I'm
super
biased.
I
already
saw
and
sent
a
message
months
ago
to
scott,
let's
do
at
night
in
the
morning
instead
of
a
friday
wednesday,
so
it's
got,
we
have
to
end
set
307,
but
this
is
your
call
and
I
took
over
because
you
were
gone
so.