►
From YouTube: Kubernetes SIG Scheduling Weekly Meeting for 20210812
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
Hi
everyone
welcome
to
the
sig
meeting.
This
meeting
is
recorded
and
will
be
uploaded
to
youtube,
so
I
have
the
agent.
I
don't
think
we
have
any
items
in
the
agenda,
but
one
thing
we
could
discuss
is
the
set
of
features
that
we
would
like
to
focus
on
in
the
next
and
current
release.
No,
no,
now
being
current
like
123.,
so
I
I
opened.
I
updated
this
spreadsheet
or
I
created
the
spread,
a
new,
a
new
tab
for
123..
A
A
So,
looking
at
the
spreadsheet,
like
I,
I
migrated
most
of
the
items
from
122..
It
seems
that
we've
mostly
addressed
most
of
them.
The
only
item
that
moved,
I
think
from
previous
virginia's
refactoring
core
dependencies.
A
Yes,
okay,
yeah!
Sorry,
as
I
was
saying,
the
only
item
that
seems
to
more
big,
a
major
item
is
refactoring
kate's
core
dependencies
out
of
the
framework,
and
then
we
have
a
couple
of
features
that
could
graduate
as
well
to
beta.
Can
you
remind?
Can
anyone
remind
us
if
preferred
nominated,
node
graduate
debate
or
not
quite
fine,.
A
But
but
it
doesn't
matter
like
this,
one
should
be
easy,
but
I'm
pretty,
but
I
know
that
prioritizing
nodes
based
on
one
capacity
did
not,
and
I
don't
think
we
have
any
other
features
in
these
graduating
to
date.
Under
scheduler.
A
Okay,
so
that
being
said,
I've
added
the
item
related
to
v1
beta3,
which
we
discussed
over
slack.
So
we
have
the
change,
changing
the
weights
and
simplifying
the
plug-in
config
api.
A
We
have
this
is
going
to
require
a
cap,
I'm
planning
to
send
out
mike.
Are
you
interested
in
like
executing
and
implementing
it?
This
is
not
going
to
be
a
small
change,
I
believe,
like
not
too
big,
but
not
too
small
too,
because
it
will
require
changes,
probably
to
the
how
the
plugin,
like
you
need
plugins
to
register
themselves
and
extension
points
and
whatnot.
A
Okay
sounds
great,
so
then
does
anyone
on
the
kodak
have
any
concerns?
Do
we
believe
that
generally,
we
would
like
to
go
in
that
direction
and
then
just
like,
let's
wait
and
see
the
cap
and
discuss
the
details,
do
we?
I
just
want
to
confirm
again
that
this
is
the
we
we
agree
on
this.
B
A
Okay,
great
okay,
and
then
we
have
this
outstanding
icon.
I
don't
think
we've
made
any
progress
on
this.
One
refactoring
assume
forget
parliament
to
reserve
undeserved.
A
It's
still
it's
an
open
issue.
I
don't
know
if
dang
sync
is
interested
in
actually
pursuing
this,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
it
is
something
critical
or
do
you
think
it's
part
of
overall
refactoring
of
the
core
schedule
code
logic
into
the
framework?
A
Do
we
think
that
this
is
a
like
a
at
least?
This
is
how
we
see
it
like
it's
a
it's
part
of
that
you
know
goal
of
simplifying
the
scheduler.
You
know
logic
outside
the
framework.
B
A
I'm
aware
of
I'm
not
aware
of
any
open
issues
or
current
discussions
on,
like
you,
know,
major
features,
but
please
let
me
know,
I
mean
add
them
to
the
spreadsheet
or
if
you
want,
we
can
discuss
them
now
as
well.
I'm
only
aware
of
this
like
major
change,
which
is
the
simplifying
the
plug-in
content,
and
then
we
have
three.
C
I
have
just
one
thing
for
the
sub
projects:
if
we
can
talk
about
that,
we
can
talk
about
offline,
but
for
the
scheduler
we're
looking
at
adding
a
new
api
version
that
will
allow
people
to
configure
multiple
profiles
really
just
similar
to
what
we
have
profiles
in
the
scheduler
kind
of
just
copying.
That
design
so
I'll
add
the
links
into
that
under
the
under
the
current
descheduler
issue
that
was
listed
in
there,
and
if
anyone
has
any
comments,
they
can
follow.