►
From YouTube: Kubernetes Community 1 3 Retrospective Part 2 20160715
Description
We have PUBLIC and RECORDED weekly video meetings every Thursday at 10am US Pacific Time.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VQDIAB0OqiSjIHI8AWMvSdceWhnz56jNpZrLs6o7NJY
This is the Special Edition 1.3 Retrospective Part 2 --
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1COLrHw619SXrUU1hlqaVzZel2o2nUvAlEM0xLeOHkc4/edit?ts=577640df&actionButton=1
A
So
good
morning,
good
local
time
I
seee,
who
is
not
in
morning
at
this
point
today-
is
Friday
July
fifteenth,
and
this
is
part
two
of
the
Cabernet
days
community
retrospective.
It
is
a
recorded
meeting
that
will
be
published
on
YouTube
and
I
will
hand
this
now
over
to
Jason
singer
Dumars,
who
is
going
to
be
our
guest
moderator?
A
B
You
for
the
wonderful
introduction,
just
a
little
bit
of
background.
This
is
part
two
of
the
retrospective.
We
ran
over
time
last
time
n
to
respect
the
fact
that
we
had
a
lot
of
input.
They
didn't
make
it
into
the
document.
We
felt
it
was
important
to
continue
a
discussion
as
such,
I'm
just
going
to
quickly
go
over
the
working
agreements
that
we
have
from
last
time
and
respectfully
ask
if
anybody
has
a
need
to
add
that
we
do
that
now.
B
Working
agreements
simply
are
a
way
that
we
can
all
work
best
through
this
process
to
make
sure
everybody's
heard
and
the
opinions
are
respected
and
documented.
So
the
working
agreements
for
last
time
were
that
we
respectfully
communicate
with
one
another
that
we
try,
if
at
all
possible,
to
not
point
fingers.
So,
instead
of
blame,
we
try
and
seek
solutions
and
collaboration
and
issues
our
system
problems
and
not
individual
or
fault.
B
That
is
a
really
big
deal
because,
essentially
working
on
a
giant
robot,
if
you
will
and
it's
something
that
we
need
to
do
in
a
way
that
we
were
problems
in
the
robot
enough
people
that
built
it.
And
lastly,
this
is
a
huge
one.
Just
procedurally,
if
you're,
not
speaking,
please
mute,
there
is
a
raise
your
hand
feature
as
well
and
zoom
if
you're,
using
that
and
if
Sarah's
have
able
to
to
a
new
issue,
will
do
that
otherwise,
I'd
meet
yourself
and
on
the
right
side
of
the
document.
B
If
you
scroll
down
I,
have
added
some
comments
which
are
simply
telling
us
how
long
we
should
allocate
for
each
part
of
these
discussions
just
so,
we
don't
run
over
because
last
time
we
definitely
did
that
so
I
without
further
ado.
Let's
go
ahead
and
jump
into
the
last
parts
of
the
feedback,
and
essentially
these
were
the
items
that
we
had
asked
people
to
talk
about
in
terms
of
what
could
have
gone
better.
B
So
these
are
definitely
areas
where
we
want
to
identify
and
target
improvements,
and
those
specific
improvements
will
go
into
in
the
following
section.
So
if
you
have
something
to
add
to
the
bottom
of
the
bullet
point
list
here,
please
do
we're
starting
at
the
work
better
and
we
will
go
from
there
and
we
have
15
minutes,
starting
with
better
documentation,
around
development
versions
of
docker
being
tested,
OSS
and
the
submit
cute
testing
against,
etc.
A
Think,
broadly,
this
has
been
work
that
has
been
happening
even
1.3.
We
covered
it
it's
fairly
great
length
with
all
of
the
changes
that
we're
going
in
ahead
of
ahead
of
during
and
through
the
1.3
release,
and
it
is
work
and
and
that
that
the
work
continues
during
this
as
a
highlighted,
improvement.
A
B
B
Like
all
right,
well,
I
think
that
in
to
your
point
earlier
Sarah
this
seems
like
this
is
another
one
that
we've
has
been
given.
A
lot
of
attention.
Mm-Hmm
seems
like
the
pull
request,
sir,
are
being
handled
more
deftly
now
than
they
were
say
three
months
ago
for
sure
two
months
ago,
all
right,
honoring
cut-off
dates.
B
C
C
A
Think
that's
certainly
a
possibility.
I
think
we
could
also,
as
a
community
say
we
to
do
this
and
have
have
to
do
it
and,
if
anything,
that
slips
thorough
needs
to
be
discussed
at
greater
length.
Although
aaron
you
participated
in
a
bunch
of
burn
down
movies,
did
you
feel
that
the
cut-offs
were
not
discussed
in
a
meaningful
and
appropriate
way
there
to
make
a
decision
to
move
forward
with
something
even
beyond
the
cutoff
or
were
there
still?
It's
just
happening
kind
of
nice.
C
So
number
one
I
apologize,
but
I
didn't
really
attend
as
many
of
the
130
/
and
downs
this
time.
So
there
may
have
been
a
lot
discussed
there.
That
I,
completely
missed
I
think
that
in
the
name
of
transparency,
one
thing
that
can
be
done
for
these
burnt-down
meetings,
I
think
we
sort
of
started
to
see
this
from
TJ
and
things
consolidated
towards
a
release
was
daily
reports,
know
what
actually
was
discussed
and
what
the
follow
up
was,
because
generally
that
sort
of
filtered
out
in
slack
messages
and
moving
on
a
bunch
of
random
issues.
C
If
you
weren't
participating
in
that
meeting
well,
I
guess.
The
other
question
here
is
what
exactly
a
cutoff
date
means
so
like
I'm
sort
of
curious.
If
we're
talking
about
cut-off
dates
in
the
context
of
earlier
go
no-go
decisions
prior
to
code
slush
or
if
we're
talking
about,
we
should
have
cut
off
the
release.
When
we
said
we
were
going
to
cut
the
release,
not
you
know
deferred
a
week
or
two
because
of
random
issues
right.
A
A
Then
we
continued
to
add
and
cherry-pick
things
in
during
the
code
/,
which
I
do
think
was
within
the
agreement,
but
it
didn't
necessarily
you
know,
didn't
could
have
been
better
communicated,
didn't
necessarily
have
to
happen,
still
open
for
discussion
and
then
the
the
choice
you
hold
the
release.
While
we
actually
fixed
the
critical
bug,
which
I
think
was
the
right
decision
met
with
the
agreements
was
fairly
well
communicated.
But
of
course,
in
every
situation
we
want
to
find
bugs
earlier.
C
D
C
A
Happen,
it
happened,
erratically
and
I
think
we
could.
We
could
codify
it.
Maybe
it's
the
first,
it's
hard
to
say
the
first
of
every
month,
because
there
would
only
be
two
in
a
seven-week
coding
period.
You
know
like
what?
How
much
do
you
want
time?
Do
you
want
to
spend
in
those
community
meetings
on
this,
and
maybe
the
answer
is
quite
a
bit:
I
I.
E
Think
I
would
say
quite
a
bit-
and
I
think,
like
that
I
know,
at
least
on
our
team.
The
tension
was
sort
of
palpable
because
we
would
show
up
to
the
community
meetings
expecting
that
there
would
be
a
forum
to
discuss
some
of
the
new
release
issues
and
then
the
community
meeting
would
be
ninety
percent
like
new
feature
stuff
going
forward,
and
so
I
know
we
we
would
feel
we
would
come
out
of
this
community
meetings.
Sort
of
feeling,
like
though,
but
really
important,
stuff
wasn't
getting
discussed.
E
A
C
Totally
so
I
I
started,
maybe
what
might
be
missing
from
the
community
meeting
in
just
the
same
way
we
have
like
a
demo
from
the
community
every
week.
We
really
should
have
some
sort
of
discussion
about
either
the
one
for
release
or,
like
a
particular
feature
on
the
release,
a
real,
deep
thought,
unlike
somebody
who's
voting,
that
feature
should
stand
up
and
advocate
for
it
maybe
I,
don't
know.
Just
to
sort
of.
C
You
know
how
we
have
like
the
five
days
of
Coober
Nettie's
after
there's
a
release
on
the
blog
right,
something
akin
to
that
to
give
people
an
idea
of
what
may
potentially
be
landing
and
giving
Cooper
Nettie's
release.
Okay,
just
just
sort
of
a
recurring
way
to
like
give
a
forum
to
talk
about.
What's
going
into
the
release
to
the
communities,
yep.
A
I'm
also
going
to
be
enforcing
sig
reporting
going
forward.
I
haven't
said
that
anywhere,
but
here
yet
but
I'm
going
to
send
an
email,
probably
first
of
next
week
to
the
sig
Lee,
it's
saying
you're
going
to
get
drafted
because
we're
not
getting,
and
maybe
the
answer
is
you're
going
to
get
drafted.
We
need
to
understand
what
your
sig
is
doing
in
the
1.4
timeline
and
there
needs
to
be
what
what
are
those
things
and
you
need
to
be
reporting
on
them
and
it
won't
be
every
week
but
it'll
be
more
regularly
if.
F
F
Some
time
so
I'd
like
to
I
suppose
did
it
would
be
useful.
It
will
are
split
dominions,
so
we
have
to
discuss
some
some
generic
and
some
are
the
important
stuff
during
the
enjoy
meetin.
At
the
same
time,
I'd
like
to
propose
to
run
something
like
burnout
metallics
under
like
your
braces,
not
every
day,
not
every
two
days
but,
for
example,
every
week
or
every
two
weeks
where
we'll
discuss
some
technical
studies
is
going
to
be
included
colorless.
F
So
it
will
really
useful
because
people
who
are
interested
in
that
stuff
have
to
be
up
to
date
with
with
everything
that
happens
within
the
community
and
using
the
technical
set
of
the
men
just
like
what
buildings
only
features,
including
some
important
bug,
fixes
and
everson
hands.
At
the
same
time,
I
agree
with
Sharon
that
we
have
to
include
some
really
important
stuff
into
our
community.
F
A
F
I
agree,
I
agree
with
you
every
sue,
that's
why
I'm
proposed
indistinct
and
move
down
to
Sunspear
admitting
where
we'll
discussed
it
like.
We
have
her
burnout
meetings
and
we
discussed
it,
stop
there.
So
that's
why
I'm
proposing
to
run
this
burnout
mentions
more
regular
basis
and
disgusted
stuff
there.
F
E
Have
I
have
proposed
this
in
the
past,
along
with
the
notion
of
like
a
release
session
where
their
release
has
a
regular
cadence
meeting.
That's
separate
from
the
community
meeting
I
totally
support
that
proposal,
I
think
having
at
least
a
place
where
these
issues
are
regularly
discussed.
Those
are
interesting
to
go
to
it
again.
I.
D
G
D
D
And
we
need
to
have
some
dashboard,
ideally
based
on
features,
repository
right,
which
indicates
the
progress
and
hopefully
sorry
can
help
pushing
sig
leads
to
update,
even
even
if
it's
for
now
in
formalin
features,
just
indicate
percentage
or
whatever.
Oh
they
burn
down,
and
we
can
update
the
dashboard
on
a
separate
meeting
and
I'll
community
just
update
the
community
I.
Don't
think
community
has
people
to
kind
of
start
go
install
the
features.
It
will
be
a
three
hour
meeting
today,
yeah
hold.
G
D
I
think
there's
one
of
the
things
which
came
out
in
community
meetings
many
times
there
is
no
single
place
to
have
a
high
level
overview
of
the
most
important
features,
not
in
this
particular
release.
So,
while
see
you
see
yes,
I
agree,
each
seek
should
be
able
to
discuss
and
people
interested
in
particular
see
they
should
join
that
meeting.
If
we
can
help
some
high-level
dashboard
is
over
okay.
D
F
F
Yeah
the
same
the
same
stuff
that
we
have
been
running
this
my
journey
wanted
to
release.
So
we
expect
around
that-
and
one
word
for
that:
I've
started
working
on
that
and
like
collaborated
with
mica,
and
also
guess,
we
are
working
on
that,
sir
I
suppose
the
dashboard
would
be
like
a
great
visualization
for
that.
At
the
same
time,
we
have
to
run
out
to
some
discussions
to
get
in
there
because
we
have
to
discuss
some
stuff.
It's
for
that.
One
down.
B
I
have
to
be
moderator
for
just
a
second
on
two
things:
unless
we
have
about
five
more
minutes
allocated
for
this
section,
the
discussion
I'm
happy
to
extend
it
by
five
minutes.
If
there's
agreement
on
that,
but
one
part
of
that
is
that
we're
I'm
hearing
a
lot
of
suggestions
about,
we
could
create
a
dashboard
or
we
can
do
this
with
that.
B
I
want
to
make
sure
that,
if
we're
saying
that
these
are
suggestions
that
we
want
to
pursue
as
a
community
that
you
add
them
in
the
actual
items
and
take
ownership
by
putting
your
name
by
it,
otherwise
these
things
will
be
just
drifting
off
into
the
winner,
not
getting
any
action.
So
let's
continue
for
the
next
five
minutes,
there's
two
more
items
that
have
been
added.
Actually,
if
you
know,
let's
screw
those
and
then
if
we
need
to
revisit
any
of
these
other
things,
that's
so
good
can.
G
Yes,
so
I'm
just
going
to
say
that
I
I
understand
the
need,
but
from
my
perspective
it's
actually
quite
a
significant
amount
of
work
to
to
update
the
status
of
everything
in
many
different
places.
So
I
I,
don't
I,
don't
really
have
a
good
solution
in
mind,
but
yeah,
so
so
I'm
just
I'm,
just
sort
of
throwing
it
out
there
that
that
this
is.
This
is
too
much
effort.
G
A
C
I
think
there's
like
a
difference
between
a
cig
owner
and
a
feature
owner,
perhaps
crew
yeah,
but
so
I
put
down
the
next
two
things
they're
kind
of
related
and
they
have
to
do
with
release
next.
So,
as
a
cluster
operator,
there
was
a
like
a
breaking
changes,
I
think
in
the
13
release.
That's
only
gonna
take
a
look
known
issues
and
important
steps
before
upgrading
was
the
section,
but
there
wasn't
an
action
required
section.
C
G
C
Yeah
but
just
symptomatically
I
had
other
things
that
were
going
on
while
we
were
driving
towards
the
release
but
I
sort
of
noticed
through
cig
testing
that
people
were
trying
to
chase
in
these
DNS
conformance
related
failures
and
I
didn't
really
quite
drop.
What
that
was
about
I
know
that
Federation
really
really
had
to
get
in
4
1-3,
so
this
was
being
pushed
hard
and
it
just
kind
of
snuck
right
by
so
it
back
again
to
like
really
vocal
broadcasting
the
status
of
your
feature.
It
seems
like
what
happened?
C
Is
the
agreement
had
either
explicitly
or
implicitly
been
made?
I
don't
know
that
like
this
is
going
in
so
whatever
it
takes
to
get
it
in
fully
has
to
happen,
like
I.
Think
I
missed
that
conversation,
but
I
totally
agree.
This
is
a
bug
we
can
happily
file
about
this
I'm
just
started
calling
out
like
as
a
cluster
operator.
Maybe
what
could
be
done
to
prove
this
is
to
like
give
I,
don't
know
right.
What
have
people
use
your
betas
and
actually
read
your
beta
release
notes,
but
then
the
changes
were
called
out
there.
B
C
So
I'm
just
calling
out
that
specific
occurrence,
but
it
seems
like
there
should
be
an
action
required
section,
just
full
stop.
If
there
was
for
any
of
the
betas.
You
probably
want
to
like
roll
all
of
that
up
because
I'm
coming
to
it
as
somebody
who
has
never
looked
at
this
until
like
I'm
upgrading
from
12
to
13,
so
I,
don't
know
any
of
the
step-by-step
things
that
have
happened
in
the
beta
I
need.
All
of
that
to
be
rolled
up
cool.
D
B
Great
okay,
cool,
well
Ron
time
next
is
I.
Think
the
most
exciting
part
of
the
Richer,
which
is
all
the
things
that
we've
gone
over
here,
can
leave
in
two
things.
We
can
do
better
for
1.4
and
beyond.
So
I
have
some
some
things
here.
A
lot
of
these
are
from
last
time
the
also
we
have
the
things
here,
some
of
these
rolled
up
and
actually
on
some
of
not
so
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
just
freeform.
Have
everybody?
B
B
Daniel,
how
do
you
feel
in
terms
of
the
process,
the
things
that
you're
working
on
I
seems
like
you're,
really
heavily
burdened
with
a
lot
of
these
things
that
are
going
on?
Is
there
can?
Can
we
help
you
as
a
community
where
things
that
we
can
do
to
increase
membership
and
sick
testing
or
something
that
would
be
good
for
you
set.
G
A
G
So
we
have
a.
We
have
a
build
cop
rotation
here
in
inside
google
that
and
then
the
responsibility
of
that
role
is
investigating
test
failures.
So
so
in
theory,
somebody
is
doing
this.
It
wouldn't
be
bad
to
have
a
backup
person
and
also
the
role
is
a
week-long
rotating
rotation,
so
you
lose
next
after
a
week.
G
C
I'm
not
necessarily
signing
up
for
this
because
I'm
already
out
of
bandwidth
but
I'm
wondering
if
it
would
be
helpful
for
the
community
or
to
sort
of
encourage
some
volunteers
if
we
could
get
some
kind
of
overview
of
the
past
two
months
of
fun
that
you
waiting
through
just
to
sort
of
understand
where
we
were
what
and
done
and
and
how
far
we
think
we
have
to
get
out.
I'm,
certainly
happy
to
help
collaborate
with
you
on
that
offline.
C
B
C
Release
notes,
section
I'm,
just
kind
of
brainstorming
here
the
past
to
burn
down
meetings
that
I
attended.
Super-Earth
has
two
releases
I
guess
when
I
did
a
turn
now
meetings
it
seemed
like
docks
were
saved
the
very
last.
It
was
more
important
at
the
bit,
get
the
bits
get
cut
or
the
docs
got
finalized
and
I.
H
And
I
just
wanted
a
second
that
point:
I
had
quite
a
bit
of
trouble,
you
know,
I
ran
a
webinar
afterwards,
and
so
many
of
the
features
that
we
had
launched,
we
didn't
have
details
on.
We
didn't
have
good
documentation
on,
and
this
was
a
week
afterwards.
So
I
think
that
it
there
is
a
challenge
in
pre
announcing
stuff,
because
we
want
to
make
sure
that
you
know
press
and
other
coverage.
Everything
is
properly
timed,
but
yeah
I
think
we
can
certainly
work
too.
B
C
One
thing
that
might
help-
and
then
I
can
take
this
stuff
with
eric-
is
Alma
secretly,
though
one
of
the
things
we
do
a
lot
is
like
readme
driven
development,
so
I,
he
write
the
reasoning
for
the
thing
you
forgot
the
bill.
There
might
be
something
where
we
have
like
a
Dodge,
that's
being
drafted
on
the
feature.
All
things
go
along
like
what
the
actual
experiences
at
the
end
of
the
feature
being
released.
I
do
feel
like
it
really
no
place
right
now
to
like
have
a
were
compartment
stock.
B
A
B
B
So
is
there
an
idea,
or
we
thought
about-
maybe
some
sort
of
org
chart
type
things
we
understand
who's
sort
of
responsible
for
web
because
I
think
didn't
mean
II
would
have
a
hard
time
understanding
without
watching
for
a
full
release
cycle
who,
who
is
kind
of
leaving
what
and
how
and
why
and
it
might
be,
it
might
be
just
a
document
or
something
like
that.
I
don't
know,
but
is
there?
Does
anybody
have
any
thoughts
on
how
best
to
negotiate
that
there.
D
A
There's
a
list
of
feature
of
code
base
owners
based
on
directories.
There's
a
list
of
special
special
interest
group
leads,
which
can
also
usually
get
you
pretty
far
and
then
there's
the
new
proposal
around
the
elders
group,
but
I
think
coalescing.
That
into
some
cohesive
peak
picture
would
be
helpful.
Okay,.
A
C
C
F
Yeah
so
also
after
you
used
to
be
an
intermediate
I,
my
holes
close
to
create
something
like
the
next
milestone,
because
not
all
the
features
are
going
to
be
added
to
wondered
for,
but
we
also
have
to
mark
them
just
just
to
define
it.
There
have
to
be
added
to
some
other,
or
at
least
not
to
wondered
for
so
I'm
going
to
also
handle
that
item
and.
H
A
B
C
Look
at
your
face,
I
mean
I
really
want
to.
I
want
to
but
I'm
just
being
realistic
about
the
bandwidth
that
I
have
based
on
what
I've
been
able
to
accomplish
in
sig
testing,
thus
far
I
think
I
can
be
of
more
value
in
helping
be
communicative
about
this
stuff,
because
I
care
deeply
about
this
I
think
it's
super
important
I
think
annuals
done
a
lot
of
great
work.
That's
kind
of
all
the
bandwidth
I
have
to
offer
at
the
moment.
Maybe.
C
E
I
C
You
I'll
just
say
this
as
an
accurate
I,
couldn't
necessarily
put
this
down
as
an
action
item,
but
it's
something
that
Ryan
and
I
think
Daniel
first
proposed
the
idea,
if
not
right
now,
very
shortly,
tests
are
going
to
be
assigned
owners
based
on
a
file
in
the
communities,
retail
and
if
those
tests
flake
it's
likes,
are
automatically
going
to
be
assigned
to
those
owners
and
I
think
that
was
called
out
somewhere
in
here
as
focusing
less
on
testing
and
that
sort
of
stuff.
That
is.
G
B
B
A
C
C
F
Possibly
we
may
add
this
notes
to
like
I
noticed
at
some
six
around
and
damnation
meeting
notes
on
a
github.
Possibly
I'm
not
sure
that
it's
a
good
idea
to
run
meeting
notes
on
their
to
it
and
get
your
notes
on
a
github
but
possibly
add
in
some
status.
Updates,
like
the
static
status
of
this
and
get
help,
might
be
a
good
relative
to
to
a
dynamic
document.
A
D
C
H
Yes,
so
that's
what
I
was
referring
earlier,
that
you
know
we've
been
collecting
the
set
of
work
we
would
like
to
do
for
one
dot
for
and
prioritizing
it
there's
a
bit
more
that
we
need
to
do
over
the
next
week
and
then
in
the
next
community
meeting.
The
PM
group,
which
was
recently
formed,
would
like
to
come
back
with
here's
the
proposed
set
of
features
for
14
and
also
a
timeline
for
when
to
close,
which
you
know
this
is
the
first
time
I
guess
we
are
doing
this
process,
so
we
will
try
that
out.
H
E
I
think
the
elephant
in
the
room
on
us
is
whether
we
really
mean
it
about
the
mid
august
clothes
for
the
release
or
is
what's
really
going
to
happen.
Is
it's
going
to
be
a
bunch
of
interest
and
some
features
that
some
important
subset
of
the
community
feels
like
is
really
important
and
we
just
have
to
have
more
time
to
get
them
in,
and
so
the
release
is
really
going
to
slip
out
a
month
beyond
that.
E
So,
to
the
extent
that
I
have
a
vote
and
I
in,
but
one
person
it
is
I
was
actually
planning
on
sharing
it.
With
the
coup
days,
I
literally
have
a
draft
open
in
my
mail
today,
I
was
planning
on
sharing
it
with
Cuban
at
he's
dead
and
asking
and
saying
like
look
guys
and
girls.
Unless
we
are
not,
you
know.
Unless
we
leave
open
the
thing,
we
should
declare
a
close
date
and
so
I
was
going
to
propose
something
like
next
Friday
and
say.
E
E
C
E
E
H
B
So
I'm
a
little
concerned
that
we're
sort
of
talking
a
little
bit
more
about
what
we're
going
to
do
in
14
in
at
a
level
of
detail
that
probably
needs
a
better
audience
than
the
one
we're
giving
it
right
now.
Is
there
a
way
that
we
can
raise
this
really
important
issue,
I
mean,
obviously
you
know
I
David
you're
going
to
be
presenting
this
or
how
is
how
are
you
planning
on
sharing
the
proposal?
What's
what's
the
what's
the
audience?
Well,.
E
We've
shared
many
times
the
feature,
repo
we've
said
many
many
many
times
that
if
you
want
to
work
on
something
in
one
for
you
need
to
have
a
feature
repo,
you
do
have
a
proposed
on
the
future
repo
we
have
not
yet,
and
we've
also
shared
many
times
the
timeline
for
14
and
it's
in
fact
no
different
than
13
or
12.
As
far
as
like,
where
features
happen,
we're
testing
happens,
we're
slush
happens.
It
is.
E
Yes,
all
true,
but
we
have
shared
it.
You
couldn't
respond
and
say
it
wasn't
shorter.
If
you
didn't
know
what
it
was
what'd
you
do.
So
my
point
is:
is
that
we've
done
all
the
like
sharing?
We
have
not
yet
shared
the
my
proposal.
It
literally
was
just
me
talking
with
some
folks
realizing
that
we
hadn't
said
like
hey.
When
do
you
have
to
have
your
feature
stub
in
for
better
or
worse,
I
was
going
to
share
it
with
Cooper
Nettie's
dev
today
and
remind
people
regularly
over
the
course
of
the
next
week.
E
B
I
think
just
making
sure
that
we're
elevating
that
conversation-
and
it
might
be
worth
mentioning
I
mean
it's.
The
community
meeting
is
a
little
late,
if
that's
indeed
the
timeline,
but
if
there's
AI
guess
as
a
community,
if
we
can
ensure
that
we're
having
those
discussions
with
people
that
we
know
are
our
stakeholders
or
who
might
be
blindsided
by
that
short
timeline,
then
we
should
probably
do
our
best
to
do
that.
Just
as
a
community
yeah.
H
B
H
D
Or
just
on
this
feature
proposal,
and
so
on
right
still
kind
of
external
to
google,
the
timeline
for
works
for
us,
it
works
for
us
right.
If
we
do
PR
proposal
PR,
it
will
probably
take
about
a
week
at
least
to
get
the
point
where
we
can
start
margin
code.
So
we
okay.
So
if
we
have
this
tight
deadline
and
we
expect
in
features
to
make
the
deadline,
can
we
get
some
kind
of
SLA
on
PR
feedback.
E
To
be
clear
and
again,
this
is
I
had
not
talked
about
this
I.
Perhaps
shouldn't
have
brought
it
up
as
quickly
as
I
did,
but
to
be
clear,
what
I'm
saying
what
I'm
proposing
excuse
me
is
that,
in
order
for
your
thing
to
appear
in
one
point
for
your
feature,
repo
stub
item
needs
to
appear
in
the
feature
repo
by
the
end
of
next
week.
And
again,
that's
what
I
said
previously.
It
sounds
like
that
date
is
a
little
bit
aggressive,
that's
fine,
but
what
I'm
saying
is
is
that
it
is
I.
E
Yet
my
next
Friday
you
should
have
that
template.
You
should
have
cloned
the
template
written
a
one
word.
One
sentence,
description
of
your
feature
and
the
title
and
have
it
in
the
future
repo.
Now
that
does
require
some
groundwork
for
you,
which
is
you've,
talked
it
over
with
your
sig,
and
you
generally
feel
like
it's
good,
but
you
should
not
have
it
should
not
block
on
PR
reviews,
and
things
like
that.
Does
that
make
sense
another.
E
D
E
D
D
H
Just
say
I
think
it
does,
because
we're
trying
to
build
up
a
backlog
and
not
everything
will
make
it
to
14,
not
everything.
That's
there
even
now,
we'll
make
it
within
14,
so
I
think
I.
Think
it's
fair.
If
you
think
that
you
know
it's
something
that
you'd
like
to
target
for
14
or
maybe
partially
develop
in
that
time
frame,
then
I
think
it's
there
to
put
it
in
ya.
D
So
then,
let's
gain
my
suggestion:
let's
do
at
community
meeting
canals
that
to
set
expectations
correctly,
please
submit
the
features
that
will
be
helpful
for
determining
by
code
404
and
one
dot
five.
Instead
of
setting
expectations,
that
everything's
is
going
to
be
there
by
next
Friday,
we'll
make
it
in
12
for
God.
J
As
we
shorten
the
release,
cycles
will
have
more
and
more
features
to
span
multiple
releases
and
in
practice,
even
the
things
we
did
for
most
of
its
not
three
pieces
actually
span.
Multiple
releases
like
pet
set
is
just
one
example.
Where
really
you
know
wasn't
really
done
in
time
or
calling
an
alpha
it's
kind
of
usable,
but
as
people
said
you
know
not
all
the
documentation,
is
there
etc.
I
mean
really
it's
an
incomplete
feature.
J
That's
just
reality,
so
you
know
we
would
like
to
actually
get
to
monthly
releases
or
maybe
even
shorter
releases,
and
have
more
of
a
train
model
where
people
are
not
targeting
a
specific
release,
but
they
work
on
their
feature
and
it
gets
into
some
release
and
they
don't
have
to
wait
too
long,
whichever
release
tickets
into.
But
you
know
there
are
a
lot
of
things
we
need
to
do
in
order
to
make
that
happen.
I
don't
expect
that
to
happen
in
the
next
nine
months.
Probably.
B
So
is
the
guidance
that
we
want
to
give
err
on
the
side
of
putting
your
your
one
line
in
the
featured
repo,
and
it's
not
done
with
the
assumption
that
it's
going
to
be
in
1.4,
it's
more
that
you're
you're,
essentially
getting
on
whatever
train
or
cadence
work
for
the
releases
is
that
has
to
be
the
case.
Okay,
yes,
and
as
people.
J
E
J
C
Just
looking
forward
to
hearing
the
actual
release
infrastructure,
that's
going
to
be
put
in
place
to
enable
these
faster
releases,
I
really
think
there
needs
to
be
a
little
more
discussion
about
that,
not
here,
but
eventually
I.
Look
forward
to
that
bright,
shiny
future
I
just
wanted
to
real
quickly
talk
about.
We
have
all
these
action
items
to
address.
What
didn't
go?
Well,
I'm
curious.
C
If
we
want
to
address
the
fact
that
community
participation,
especially
on
the
Help
Wanted
labels,
seem
to
work
well,
what
could
be
due
to
continue
to
encourage
that
for
the
14
release
it
seems
like
maybe
that
could
be
another
regular
like
showcase
at
the
community
meetings
or
something
you
know,
I'm,
certainly
going
to
try
to
be
more
vocal
about
it
at
sig
testing
for
whomever
attends
that.
But
what
could
we
do
to
raise
the
profile
of
this.
J
One
thing
I'm
working
on
is
identifying
you
know.
Mike
was
talking
about
how
long
it
takes
to
get
things
merged
and
everything
so
I
think
they're
fused
sides
that
one
is
in
13
and
previously
we,
you
know
a
bunch
of
people
said
we
want
these
features
we
get
in
and
we
didn't
really
assess
whether
realistically
we
had
enough
review
bandwidth
actually
get
all
those
features
in
so
the
question
the
answer
to:
can
we
get
an
SLA
on
reviewing?
J
The
answer
is
no
not
unless
we
actually
constrain
the
amount
of
stuff
that
we
say
that
we're
going
to
review,
and
so
we
don't
have
a
process
for
that.
Yet
so,
anyway,
we
have
a
bunch
of
problems.
Some
of
them
are
tooling,
a
lot
of
them
are
tooling.
Some
of
them
are
code
structure.
We
have
a
lot
of
process
gaps
if
documentation
gaps
and
yes
Sarah.
We
need
to
train
reviewers,
that's
part
of
both.
J
That's
a
bunch
of
the
process
gap
items
so
I'm
planning
to
been
accumulating
this
list
over
the
past
couple
days,
planning
to
send
a
note
to
Cooper
Nettie's
dev
about
things
that
are
sort
of
top
concerns.
For
me-
and
this
is
one
of
the
big
areas,
if
you
look
at
the
contributors
graph
for
the
projects,
we
have
grown
the
number
of
contributors
in
the
project
by
an
order
of
magnitude
and
we've
not
increased
the
velocity
at
all.
J
J
So
so
we
you
know
that
there
are
a
bunch
of
sources,
the
problem
I'm
not
going
to
go
over
all
them
now,
but
if
we
can
get
help
from
the
community
of
chipping
away
these
things,
like
one
thing,
that's
very
frustrating
to
me-
is
the
implementation
of
owners,
which
was
just
one
of
the
dozens
of
problems
that
we
have.
But
you
know
it's
been
an
outstanding
issue
for
over
a
year
and
multiple
people
have
volunteered
to
do
it
and
everybody
flakes
out.
Nobody
finishes
it.
J
C
So
here's
just
a
real,
quick,
PR
review
sort
of
thing
I
is
a
non
googler
notice
that
sometimes
issues
are
PRS
are
assigned
to
like
other
Googlers
to
review.
Would
it
be
helpful
if
I
still
just
like
out
of
that
person
and
say
hey
I
looked
over
it
and
it
looks
good
to
me
absolutely
help
save
them.
Some
work
I'm
trying
to
do
what's
the
convention
there
yeah.
J
And
so
so
the
short
answer
is
yes,
and
if
you're
actually
are
familiar
with
an
area
code,
you
go
through
and
take
a
look
and
you
can
give
meaningful
constructive
feedback
or
you
think
it
looks
fine,
and
you
say,
hey
I'm,
really
familiar
with
this
area
looks
good
to
me.
Then
you
know
that
Doug
definitely
will
save
us
a
lot
of
time.
J
Another
thing
we
need
to
do
is
actually,
if
you
really
know
your
wood
saw
Mary
the
code,
we
should
add
you
to
the
list
of
reviewers
to
get
auto
assigned
like
it's
not
intended
to
be
a
Googler.
Only
thing
it's
just.
You
know
Red
Hat
and
Google.
When
we
initially
implemented
the
tool
to
do
auto
assignment,
he
tried
to
brainstorm
a
list
of
possible
reviewers,
and
we
did
that
and
then
like
a
years
gone
by
and
that
list
has
not
been
significantly
updated
right.
G
J
B
C
C
B
Also,
maybe
we
need
a
meeting
to
actually
address
the
the
velocity
issue
because
that's
never
going
to
get
better
unless
we
actually
target
it
as
something
that
gets
better.
So,
yes,
I
agree.
So
we
have
exactly
one
minute
left
I
want
to
thank
everybody
for
your
participation.
I
have
to
say
that
I
had
not
expected
a
staff
to
solid
full
productive
hours
of
retro.