►
From YouTube: WG API Expression Bi-Weekly Meeting for 20200901
Description
WG API Expression Bi-Weekly Meeting for 20200901
C
C
A
C
D
B
D
B
Yeah,
I
I
suggested
that
to
mount
an
already,
but
my
concern
is
what,
if
you
send
an
object,
that
is
a
cluster-wide
cluster
and
it
has
the
namespace.
So
obviously,
you'd
only
include
increasing
the
in
the
path.
But
what,
if
it's
included
in
the
object?
What,
if
you're
trying
to
build
a
auto
completion
tool?
Is
it
going
to
suggest
that
you
specify
the
namespace
in
the
object?
B
B
D
Yeah,
that
would
be,
that
would
be
a
superior
typing
to
what
we
have
today.
I
think,
and
I'm
not
even
sure
I
would.
I
would
love
somebody
to
just
go
and
check
really
quick,
but
probably
not
blocking
for
this
meeting,
but
to
see
if
we
even
do
the
right
thing,
if
we
even
like
admit
an
error
back,
if
you
include
it.
A
A
D
Yeah
we'd
have
to
obviously
there's
going
to
be
wrinkles
in
this,
because
I
think
right
now
we
usually
shared
type
and
we
just
reference
it,
and
so
now
we
would
no
longer
be
able
to
reference
a
single
type
or
we'd
have
to
find
some
other
creative
alternative.
So
I'm
the
there
are
alternatives
here.
So
you'd
have
to
kind
of
like
go
through
them
and
figure
out
like
what
is
the
least
gross
way
to
fix
this.
D
Not
doing
that
would
mean
that
you
kind
of
have
to
like
mask
over
the
fact
that,
like
they're,
actually
the
same
type
in
open
api,
somehow
and
that's
also
a
little
a
little
weird-
I
I
don't.
Unfortunately,
I
don't
see
a
really
easy
way
to
to
tackle
this,
but
I
I'd
still
love
to
see
somebody
like
look
through
the
alternatives
and
see
which
one
is
at
least
the
least
gross.
A
D
D
Yeah
that
was
yeah.
I
I
think
I
think,
sending
out
a
even
like
a
half
page
thing.
It
says
like
these
are
the
viable
options
in
the
design
space,
even
ones
that
we
know
we
don't
like
with
like.
You
can
even
put
like
fine
print
they're
like.
I
don't
think
this
is
an
acceptable
solution,
but
these
are
the
only
options
we
have
and
then
we
could.
D
A
D
Yeah
I
mean
even
like,
even
if
we
had
to
like,
like
one
option,
I'd
like
to
see
considered
in
the
variance
is
like,
should
we
just
do
like
an
x-kubernetes
open
api
thing
that
at
least
tells
you
what's
going
on?
If
you
care,
that's,
obviously
a
lot
less
clean
than
anton's
suggestion
of
actually
picking
the
fixing
the
type
system,
which
would
be
amazing,
but
you
know
kind
of,
like
figuring
out
what
the
options
are
and
then
figuring
out
how
tractable
those
different
things
are
and
whatever
they
would.
D
A
C
D
E
A
A
B
A
E
B
A
B
A
A
I
have
one
remaining
issue
with
custom
resource
definitions,
because
the
current
test
tests
by
conflict
and
crt
status
gets
changed
behind
the
scenes
which
cause
the
conflict
in
the
test.
So
I
had
to
ignore
it
from
the
test
for
now,
until
I
find
a
better
way
to
test
it,
but
in
general,
all
types
have
implemented
all
types
of
cost
conflicts
so
far
have
implemented
status,
writing
and.
A
A
D
Yeah,
so
this
is
moving
along
where
jenny
and
I
spent
some
time
prototyping
late
last
week,
we're
gonna
spend
some
more
time.
This
week
there
was
an
interesting
thought
from
justin
santa
barbara
that
I
liked,
which
was:
if
we
did
it
right,
we
might
actually
be
able
to
have
the
same
interface
for
the
generated
go
types
that
we
use
normally
and
the
ones
that
we
need
to
use
to
build
manifests.
D
So
that's
that
was
a
comment
in
the
design
that
I'll
respond
to
today.
That
has
some
corner
cases
to
think
through,
but
yeah
we're
making
we're
making
a
little
bit
of
progress.
Currently,
the
goal
is
to
work
in
a
cube
builder.
A
feature
branch
then
use
that
as
a
way
to
get
feedback
from
a
community.
D
This
one
I
I
haven't,
made
real
progress
on
since
we
last
talked
because,
like
I
got
pulled
away
on
a
couple
other
things,
but
I
am
trying
super
hard
to
get
pulled
back
to
the
this
week.
I
really
want
to
get
a
example
of
how
this
might
look
if
we
put
the
tombstones
into
the
field
set
and
a
couple
other
things
so
hopefully
I'll
have
an
update
next
time.
A
B
A
A
D
D
A
D
A
D
Oh
sorry
about
that
which
one
we're
looking
at
yes,
so
we
have
continued
to
make
progress
on
this.
I
have
a
a
prototype
that
does
a
fix
up
past
so
that
we
deal
with
the
corner
case
of
what
happens
when
you
add
one
of
these
annotations
to
a
type
that
didn't
have
it
before,
and
you
have
a
bunch
of
data
in
the
old
format.
D
It
seems
to
work.
I
wanted
to
cover
the
reverse
case
of
when
you
go
to
turn
the
comic
back
off
again,
which
is
actually
a
little
trickier,
because
it's
kind
of
harder
to
identify
that
that's
happened.
So
I'm
going
to
try
and
get
that
sorted
out,
and
I
do
actually
need
to
write
a
little
mini
design
on
this,
because
I
think,
there's
enough
alternatives,
everybody's
going
to
see
that
so
we'll
probably
have
that
out
later
this
week,
but
yeah.
This
is
actually
one
of
the
things
I've
been
working,
the
most
on.
A
D
A
B
A
B
B
B
But
even
if
you
specify
a
string,
the
string
might
change
because
it's
going
to
be
500
meters
or
something
like
this,
so
the
string
is
changed
by
the
appearance
of
the
process.
We
can't
detect
to
change
or
not
so
we're
always
paying
the
date,
which
is
then
triggering
an
entity
right
of
the
resource,
even
if
nothing
has
changed.
It's
also
bad
for
you,
it's
bad
for
many
reasons.
It's
we
also
have
about
that
quantities
are
of
type
string
rather
than
types
of
industry,
so
it
also
fits.
A
D
B
B
A
B
F
A
A
A
Okay,
okay,
yeah.
We
have
this
one
last
week
that
we
want
to
investigate
the
curricularization
code
and
find
opportunities
to
define
some
validation
in
the
schema
or
make
it
a
exposure
schema,
and
we
still
need
somebody
to
look
at
it
once
we
want
to
do
it.
We
want
to
do
it
and
yeah
I'm
not
getting
any
new
input
from
from
lucky
lucky.
A
B
B
A
B
A
Depending
on
how
much
time
you
have
that's
the
problem,
yeah
right
now,
so
my
my
weekends
were
instead
of
working
for
my
saturdays
and
that's
almost
all
the
time
in
my
head,
so
I'm
I'm
I'm
checking
in
once.
I
have
something:
okay,
all
right,
then,
thanks
for
coming
and
have
a
great
remaining
day,
see
ya.