►
From YouTube: 20210208 - Kubernetes WG Naming bi-weekly sync
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).
B
C
A
B
Hello,
hello,
folks,
so
yeah,
like
celeste,
said
we
are
at
the
working
group
naming
meeting
bi-weekly.
We
have
no
agenda
today
outside
of
walking
the
project
board
a
little
bit
and
anything
that
we
want
to
call
out
for
open
discussion.
B
So
chris,
do
you
prefer
chris
or
christopher
yeah
chris
chris
is
good,
yeah,
okay
cool!
So
if
you
have,
if
you
have
topics
that
you
want
to
discuss
like
feel
free,
we
can
do
that
first
and
then
we
can
jump
in
to
the
project
board.
D
Okay,
yeah,
there
was
just
one
thing:
potentially
I
didn't
have
anything
specifically.
I've
been
ever
since
the
solarwinds
thing.
Things
have
gone
crazy
where
I
work,
but
there
was
one
thing
that
we
talked
about
was
or
that
in
the
last
email
on
december
1st.
So
this
is
way
back
was
what
to
do.
D
Getting
new
terminology
or
changing
terminology
when
they
are
using
terminology
that
we've
deemed
to
be
offensive
in
in
some
cases
you
know
like
the
other
project,
is
also
changing
and
we
can
kind
of
adopt
their
terminology,
but
in
some
cases
we
may
want
to,
I
guess
the
choices
are
kind
of.
Do
we
adopt
our
terminology,
do
we
say
make
a
disclaimer?
This
is
the
terminology,
another
project
uses
and
it's
not
the
terminology
that
we
find
acceptable,
but
in
order
to
understand
the
documentation,
we're
doing
it.
D
B
Was
so
I
would,
I
would
think
that
maybe
we
should
maybe.
This
is
a
good
time
to
turn
this
into
an
issue,
because
I'm
not
sure
that
we
have
one
on
the
board
for
for
it,
and
I
can
I
can
do
that
later.
It
will
just
be
a
brain
dump
of
what's
in
the
mailing
list.
So
my
feeling
is
is
one
we
we
try
our
best
to
affect
change
everywhere
within
reason
and
and
like
first
right
within
our
our
direct
scope,
so
anything
within
this
project.
B
I
think
that
we've
discussed
some
alternatives
in
the
past
of
so,
if
you're
familiar
with
the
you
know,
some
of
the
the
kubernetes
examples,
examples
and
guest
book
examples
where
the
ultimate
decision
was
to
was
to
change
the
example
right.
Let's
use
technology
that
we
use
technology
that
we
already
knew
was
using
preferred
terminology
and
and
and
do
that
instead
right.
B
So
in
those
cases
I
think
what,
if
and
when
it's
a
one-to-one
swap
roughly,
because
I
think
the
example
that
had
come
up
was
like
was
postgresql.
Was
it
postgresql?
It
was
my
sequel
right,
my
sequel.
B
Right
so
like
in
in
in
that
instance,
it's
kind
of
like
one-to-one
swap,
but
I
think
it
got
trickier
because
one
of
the
examples
might
have
been
redis
and
I'm
not
sure
where
they
they
are
at
on
changes
wise,
but
the
version
of
redis
that
we
were
using
for
that
particular
example
still
had
non-preferred
terms.
So
so
I
think
in
in
the
case
of
like
it's
it's
an
option.
B
Like
you
know,
one
of
our
options
is
an
option
to
swap
technology
where,
where
appropriate,
with
the
hope
that
the
technology
has
parity
with
what
we
were
using
for
right.
So
the
in
the
my
sequel,
maria
db
case,
it's
kind
of
one-to-one
swap
roughly
right
in
projects
that
we
have
associations
with.
So
in
the
case
of
like
you,
know,
one
of
the
the
conversations
that
came
up
like
the
the
prometheus
black
box
exporter
right,
that's
something
that
we
can
explore
for
sure
right.
B
I
think
that
the
the
in
that
case,
in
particular
the
there's,
an
opportunity
to
be
more
deliberate
and
less
ambiguous
with
the
language,
but
not
I,
I
think
the
the
feeling
on
the
mailing
list
was
that
it
wasn't
necessarily
it
would
fall
into
kind
of,
like
second
third
order
concerns
where
it
wasn't
necessarily
offensive
or
we
didn't
feel
like
it
was
defensive,
but
we
felt
like
it.
There
was
an
opportunity
to
be
clearer,
so
that
is
a
conversation
that
we
can
totally
have
with
with
the
prometheus
folks.
B
The
the
tricky
thing
there
is
that
it
is,
it
is
actually
the
name
of
their
you
know
of
their
tool
right,
so
that
has
implications
for
them.
So
you
know,
I
think
I
think
a
conversation
is
worthwhile,
but
I
do
like
the
suggestion
of
we
use
this
tool
for
this
example
or
for
this
purpose,
but
you
know
disclaimer,
like
the
the
kubernetes
kubernetes
project
that
adheres
to
you
know.
B
The
kubernetes
project
adheres
to
policies
that
are
have
been
policies
and
recommendations
that
have
been
set
forth
by
working
group
naming
here.
Some
of
our
recommendations
point
to
yada
yada
right
in
this
case.
This
is
a
you
know,
this
is
an
exported
project,
or
this
is.
This
is
a
project
that
we've
entered.
This
is
a
thing
that's
used
in
an
example
where
it
is
the
thing
that
we
need
to
use
for
the
example
something
so
forth.
Yeah
we
can.
We
can
totally
work
up
some
language
to
that
effect.
D
D
B
D
B
B
Yes,
we
should.
We
should
absolutely
try
where
we
can
and
and
continue
to
set
a
good
example
here,
but
yeah
I
will.
I
will
mark
down.
B
Okay,
so
let's
let's
jump
into
the
project,
if,
unless
there's
something
else
we
want
to
cover
before
then.
D
A
Okay,
cool
from
the
backlog
to
in
progress
and
I'm
trying
to
reorganize
it
in
there.
It's
on
the
top
so
feel
free
to
ask
me
about
that.
When
you
are
ready,
stephen.
B
Sure
sure
all
right,
so
we
have
a
set
of
symbol
updates,
and
I
believe
these
were
all
in
flight
with
aaron
to
review.
B
B
I
know
that
aaron
has
been
doing
some
updates
on
the
on
the
working
group,
kate's
infraside
for
other
things,
so
not
sure
if
he
currently
has
the
bandwidth.
But
let
me
look
at
okay,
so
he's
got
one
open.
This
is
needs
rebase,.
A
B
Okay,
cool
yeah,
so
they're
roughly
in
the
same
state
they
need.
They
either
need
to
rebates
review,
but
are
maybe
good
to
push
along
the
guestbook
and
redis
documentation
yeah.
This
is
what
we
were
referring
to
before
update
started
from
paul
czar.
I
believe
we,
this
might
have
been
grabbed
by
jim
and
another
pr
yeah.
A
One
of
those
open-
it
still
needs
a
bit
of
work,
though
so
jim
opened
the
pr,
but
he
hasn't
done.
For
example,
the
main
issue
with
pulsars
pr
was
that
he
was
using
a
private
image
and
we
needed
him
to
not,
and
so
he
jim
still
needs
to
make
updates
along
those
lines
just
at
a
baseline
level.
Before
we
can
merge
that.
C
B
B
C
B
B
B
Okay,
the
contributor
needs
to
one
work
on
some
cla
stuff
right
as
well
as
actually
make
the
change.
So
the
change
suggested
here
was
conductor
based
on
our
recommendation.
What
we
really
want
is
control,
plane
and
I've
linked
the
adr
here
so
waiting
for
that
change
to
happen,
as
well
as
the
contributor
to
submit
cla.
B
Let
me
touch
on
this
one
first
yep
so
for
the
general
I
I
guess
for
the
general
case,
not
just
the
website,
but
across
the
board.
Aaron
has
also
been
working
on
a
bunch
of
changes
to
some
of
our
more
critical
repos.
B
So
if
you
think
k
org
as
well
as
kate's
dot
io,
where
we
handle
the
file
and
image
promotion
configurations
as
well
as
the
infra
scripts
for
working
group,
kate,
tinpra
he's
working
on
using
those
as
kind
of
a
canary
repos
to
test
some
of
these
changes
and
noting
some
of
the
process
required.
B
The
you
know
the
the
pre-submits
and
things
that
you
are
periodic
jobs
that
you
may
need
to
update
so
intestine
for
our
jobs,
the
way
they're
configured
if
you're
using
pod
utils,
which
is
the
newer
and
recommended
mechanism
for
configuring.
These
proud
jobs.
B
B
Nothing
looks
too
intense
or
things
that
we
can't
deal
with
yet
I'd
like
to
get
the
sig
release
repos,
as
well
as
the
enhancements
repo
as
some
of
the
next
some
of
the
next
targets
for
testing
and
as
we
document
I'm
gonna,
sync
up
with
aaron,
because
he's
done
more
of
this
at
this
point
and
as
we
document
it,
we
kind
of
want
a
workflow
to
help
people
be
successful
in
changing
these
branches
like
okay.
B
Well,
when
you
start
you
have
to
do
this,
then
you
have
to
go
change
your
your
jobs.
Then
you
have
to
change.
You
know
whatever
scripts
you're
using
that
are
targeting
like
blob,
slash,
master
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
So
that
is
so
that
is
well
underway.
I
believe
he's
also
sent
an
email
out,
maybe
a
few
weeks
back
regarding
it.
So
that's
really
cool
to
see,
and
it's
really
cool
to
see
that
we
we
don't
have
too
many
issues
there.
B
I'm
not
sure
if
we
mentioned
this
on
the
previous
meeting,
but
github
is
also
what
we
were
initially
waiting
for
was
the
go
ahead
from
github.
There
is
a
github.com
renaming,
I
think,
is
the
name
of
the
repo
and
they
give
you
so
that
is
kind
of
like
their
update
on
where
they're
at
with
renaming
branches.
So
what
we
wanted
to
make
sure
of
is
that
the
branches
that
were
renamed
prs
would
get
retargeted
to
the
correct
branches.
B
Ci
would
continue
to
to
run
so.
The
big
part
from
the
github
side
is
done
where,
if
you
were
to
change
a
branch
today,
it
will
make
sure
that
the
prs
that
were
targeted
for
that
branch
are
retargeted
to
the
newly
named
branch.
B
What
we
are
trying
to
work
out
right
now-
and
this
will
be
especially
especially
important
for
larger
repos-
you
know
kubernetes
kubernetes,
being
one
of
our
larger
repos.
A
website,
I
think,
is
a
good
example
in
terms
of
you
know,
volume
of
prs
coming
in
when
you
rename
the
branch
it
so
it
re-triggers
some
of
the
context
checks
for
each
of
these
prs,
which
means
that
ci
will
rerun
and
having
a
ci
retrigger
for
all
of
the
prs
that
are
currently
open
on
the
master
branch
in
kubernetes.
B
Kubernetes
is,
I
think,
the
nicest
way
to
say
is
problematic,
so
we
are
we're
trying
to
think
through
that
process.
So
we
are
definitely
starting
with
smaller
repos
to
see
see
kind
of
the
areas
of
impact
and
we're
also
chatting
with
github
to
get
more
clarity
on
how,
when,
if
it's
possible
to
to
not
have
to
not
have
those
things
be
retriggered
not
have
those
those
pr
checks
be
retriggered.
B
So
this
is
something
that
we
would
want
to
verify
is
okay
before
we
consider
making
that
change
on
on
website
as
well,
because
I
think
that
you
know
the
so
website,
probably
kate's
in
for
test.
Infra
is
another,
probably
a
good
example
of
where
it
could
be
incredibly
disruptive
to
our
infrastructure.
B
So
we
are
still
trying
to
be
a
little
metered
in
the
approach
and
careful
there
and
details
to
follow,
which
will
probably
be
on
both
like
the
the
github
at
kubernetes
io
mailing
list,
as
well
as
like
kubernetes
dev
right,
because
this
is
large
enough
that
it
should
be
spread
wide.
So
stay
tuned
hope
to
have
something
in
that
around
that,
hopefully
middle
of
middle
february.
C
A
Right
so
remove
insensitive
wordings
from
the
docs
like
just
easy
or
simple.
So
in
the
great
tradition
of
open
source,
people
have
started
work
on
this,
without
necessarily
our
blessing,
which
is
totally
fine.
It's
karen
bradshaw,
who
is
a
well-known
member
of
sig
doc,
so
somebody
who,
frankly,
I
think
I
can
we
can
trust
to
do
the
work
and
execute
on
the
spirit
of
the
work
rather
than
just
the
letter.
A
She's
already
submitted
one
pr
and
I've
had
it
merged
for
easy,
and
I
believe
she
is
looping
back
around
for
simple
at
the
moment.
I
it
might
be
useful
to
have
a
formal
recommendation
on
that.
However,
I
don't
think
it's
actually
necessary
because
wording
like
simple
and
easy
and
just
is
non-standard
just
from
a
pure
technical
writing
perspective.
That's
it's
like
a
part
of
the
the
canonical
like
don't
do
this.
A
Don't
do
this
words,
so
I
don't
think
we
actually
need
to
to
formalize
that,
because
that's
just
a
part
of
like
what
it
is
to
write
documentation
but
work
on
that
is
progressing,
which.
B
Is
pretty
cool,
so
I
think
that
we
do
need
to
formalize
it
and
so
far
as
it
doesn't
need
to
be
a
project,
it
doesn't
need
to
be
a
project
document
per
se,
but
it
should
be
well.
It
should
be
a
project
document
that
links
to
suggestions
on
technical
writing
standards
right.
Okay,
I.
B
Right
so
at
least
at
least
there's
a
pointer
to
say,
like
these
are
some
of
the
we
do
we,
you
know
we
do
to
some
extent.
Some
repos
already
have,
I
believe,
in
the
contributor
guide,
there's
already
a
style
guide
and
I
believe
a
website
also
has
a
style
guide.
So
I
think
that
if
we
get
a
snippet
in
both
of
those,
if
it's
not
already
covered
around
suggestions
for
terms
like
these
and
you.
D
B
Yeah,
but
in
you
know,
in
cases
like
in
cases
like
just
right,
you
can
just
drop
it
right
it
you
know
it
usually
it
doesn't.
It
doesn't
add
much
value
to
the
to
the
sentence
outside
of
saying
like
this
is
a
thing
you
should
have
known
and
and
like
it's
an
unnecessary
sentiment
right.
B
I
found
that
amusing.
No,
no,
that's!
First!
No,
that's
perfect!
That's
perfect!
So
recognizing
that
it's
also
part
of
our
vernacular
in
general
and
and
having
people
well-intentioned
people
call
you
out
on.
It
allows
us
to
move
towards
being
better
right.
So
thank
you
for
that.
So
yeah
and
I
mean
you
know
you
can
you
can
make
the
argument
for
for
a
few
of
these,
but,
like
celeste
said
these
are
already
considered
canonical
for
for
technical
writing.
B
So
I
think
that
if
we
want
to
lean
on
those
recommendations
which
we
should
we
need
to
make
it
easy
for
people
to
find
them.
Yep.
A
I
agree.
Okay,
I
don't
know
that
we
need.
A
B
Jeff
over
here
is
saying:
I'm
working
on
a
draft
addition
to
the
kubernetes
style
guide
that
encourages
reviewing
drafts
and
with
inclusive
language
before
submitting
the
pr
and
include
instructions
on
running
alex
js.
So
we,
let's
see
what
happens.
Let's
see
what
happens
and
I
think
a
layer
on
top
of
this
watch
for
this
pr
and
layer
on
top
of
it
with
technical
writing,
recommendations,
cool.
B
Okay,
this
is
related
to
all
of
the
pr's
that
are
in
flight
that
need
to
be
adjusted
from
aaron.
So
that's
cool.
This
is
already
in
progress,
but
it's
on
sig
auth
for
this
change
in
particular,
so
follow
up.
There
would
probably
be
useful.
B
Okay,
stateless
example:
this
is
the
guestbook
thing
that
is
in
progress
already.
C
B
I
wonder,
what's
left
completed
for
future
releases,
suggesting
we
remove
from
I'd
like
to
keep
it
on
our
project
board
just
for
austerity's
sake,.
B
But
I
don't
think
there's
any
action
required.
So
maybe
we
need
a.
B
A
B
Yeah
yeah
yeah,
so
we
can.
We
can
workshop
the
words,
but
it
sounds
like
we
need
another
column
if
you
can
drop
that
as
an
ai
in
the
notes.
Yes,
thank
you.
Thank
you
all
right.
B
Same
okay,
I
gave
an
update
on
this
earlier.
B
B
Okay,
so
we
want
to,
I
guess,
check
back
in
on
this.
A
B
And
I
don't
think
it
is
yeah
we
would
want
to
chat
with
the
api
machinery
folks,
because
I
don't
think
this
is
we're
not
necessarily
changing
an
api,
but
it
is
touching
the
content
right.
It
is
touching
the
file
that-
and
it's
also
touching
a
v1
beta
1
policy
file,
which
I
don't
know
if
I
don't
know
what
phase
v1
for
the
policy
v1
beta1
is
in
like
if
it's
active
and
can
be
touched,
yeah.
A
C
B
A
B
B
C
C
B
I
think
you
know
we.
I
think
we
will
also
need
to
do
a
like
definition
of
done
exercise,
perhaps
right,
because
a
lot
of
I
think
we've
got
like
the
overarching
need
to
to
to
update
terminology
across
the
board
where
that
cuts
into
various
areas.
It
depends.
B
It
depends
on
what
the
what
the
area
is,
the
scope
of
work
so
on
and
so
forth.
I
think
that
the
intent
to
update
terminology
to
be
racially
neutral
is
why
we're
here.
I
think
that,
as
new
terms
come
up
like
we
should,
we
should
say
like
what
it
is
done
for
allowless
denialist
and
close
this
out
right
and
and
say
that,
like
the
you
know,
close
this
with
a
here
are
some
some
of
the
pr's
and
the
you
know.
B
This
is
the
explicit
like
this
idea
right
or
this
goal
is
like
the
explicit
charter
of
working
group
naming
right
to
to
to
work
on
this
throughout
the
community
and
that
it
will
depend
on
the
code
area
and
new
recommendations
that
come
up
and
as
they
come
up
right,
we
don't
want
to
have
this
perma
open
right.
B
A
lot
of
these
are
test
infra
related.
I
believe
there
is
a
deprecation
impo
in
place.
Adr
is
up
for
review
and
that
adr
has
merged
alternate
names
in
whitelist
blacklist,
and
I
believe
that
yeah,
some
of
these
are
gonna,
require
deprecations,
flag,
config
api
field
changes,
but
in
progress
and
yeah.
So
one
mentioned
about
the
announcements
that
some
of
the
announcements
have.
Some
of
the
previous
announcements
will
also
include
that
terminology
and
we
don't
necessarily
want
to
change
those,
but
maybe
consider
a
disclaimer
and
okay.
B
B
Allow
bootstrap
to
use
default
remote
branch,
so
this
is
more
of
the.
This
is
around
the
release:
engineering,
some
of
the
build
jobs,
the
kubernetes
e
to
e
tests,
so
bootstrap
that
he's
that
aaron's
referencing
here
is
an
image
that
we
use
to
kick
off
various
scenarios
and
test
infra.
Some
of
them
are
end-to-end
scenarios.
Some
of
them
are
build
scenarios
for
kubernetes
content.
So
this
is
a
this.
B
This
script
image
all
that
stuff
is
deprecated,
has
been
deprecated
for
some
time,
so
my
suggestion
here
would,
while
we
could
make
a
change
and
while
the
change
is
probably
easy
enough
to
make,
there
is
an
overall
want
to
to
stare
at
jobs
that
are
still
using
bootstrap
and
and
move
them
off
of
bootstrap.
B
So
this
is,
I
think
this.
I
think
this
should
remain
in
to
do
and
another
thing
that
I
have
to
get
in
get
in
contact
with
hearing
about.
B
Sweet
all
right
so
compostable
dedicated
website
github
repo,
should
a
compose
task
page
exist
on
kubernetes,
I
o.
So
this
is
a
question
of
duplicate
content,
but
also
a
question
of
naming
yeah.
So
this
this
is
another
redis
one
with
the
master
slave
references.
B
B
So
I
think
I
think
one
we
should
make
the
determination
on
where
the
content
needs
to
live
and
then,
wherever
that
content
ends
up
like
deduplicate
the
stuff
and
then
wherever
that
content
ends
up
living
the
next
stage.
I
would
say
that
these
are
two
tasks,
not
one,
and
the
next
stage
would
be
assessing
the
the
language
they're
in.
A
We
probably
need
to
communicate
that
in
the
issue,
because,
yes,
sorry,
I'm
just
like
looking
for
it
on
the
board.
A
Yeah,
let
me
yeah.
Let
me
comment
on
this,
probably
after
this
meeting
to
set
karen
on
a
path.
B
B
What
I
was
referencing
before
is
kind
of
one
of
the
mechanism
that
we
use
to
inject
various
configurations
into
prow
jobs
and
repo
configurations
are
one
of
them,
so
the
base
ref
for
the
repo
there
are
435
jobs
that
explicitly
reference
master
when
they
mean
whatever
the
default
is
so
so
yeah.
This
is
a
great
idea
having
bassref
auto
populate
when
the
defaults
with
the
default
remote
branch.
B
If
it's
omitted-
and
maybe
this
happens
already
so
that
would
be
cool-
then
it
would
just
be
a
remove
instead
of
a
replace.
But
there
still
is
some.
There
will
still
be
some
toil
involved
in
fixing
this,
and
it
looks
like.
B
Okay
again,
this
is
pretty
pretty
nascent,
but
another
one
to
ping
erin
about,
so
that
is.
Do
we
want
to
touch
on
these
backlog
items.
A
So
japanese
docs
still
use
master.
I
believe
it
was
them
and
the
germans
that
we
had
to
speak
to
the
german
docs
have
actually
started
moving
forward
with
this.
I
believe
they've
actually
opened
a
few
prs
to
remove
that
language.
The
japanese-
I
don't
think
we've
heard
back
from.
B
Okay,
so
it
looks
like
the
file
was
renamed
here,
but
the
okay,
all
right,
oh
no!
This
is
just
the
right.
Oh.
A
Yeah,
this
is
so
they
haven't
from
what
I've
seen
I
haven't
heard
back
from
them.
At
the
same
time,
I
think
this
is
a
candidate
for
no
further
action
needed
from
us,
like
we've
informed
them,
but
it's
it's
in
their
hands.
The
the
translations
are
all
autonomous.
A
A
Okay,
but
I
don't
think
that
there's
offensive
terminology
that
needs
to
be
addressed,
so
I
actually
think
what
we
need
to
do
is
come
into
that
effect
and
say
like
we
don't
we've
evaluated
this.
We
don't
think
there's
a
a
naming
or
inclusivity
issue
at
play
here,
but
we
do
think
there's
a
sig
style
guide
issue
and
so
we'll
punt
it
back
to
sig
docs.
B
Okay,
cool:
you
want
to
take
care
of
that.
A
Okay,
then
I'm
gonna
say:
let's
call
the
meeting
in
three
two
one.