►
From YouTube: 20220420 SIG Arch Prod Readiness
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
Hello,
we
have
started
recording
welcome
to
today's
edition
of
production,
Readiness
review
sub-project
of
Sig
architecture.
It
is
Wednesday
April,
20th
2022..
There
is
one
item
on
the
agenda.
It
is
my
fault.
The
item
on
the
agenda
is
the
appropriately
vaguely
named
prr
and
sustainability,
which
is
a
lead
into
I,
am
taking
a
little
bit
of
time
off.
A
I
am
not
going
to
be
working
on
kubernetes
for
the
125
release,
and
so
I
am
going
to
move
myself
to
prr
Emeritus
for
next
release
like
approval
Emeritus
status
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
like.
First
let
you
know
before
I
do
that,
but
second,
maybe
like
raise
a
wider
discussion
about
it.
A
One
of
the
difficulties
right
now
is
that
you
know
there's
only
four
of
us
and
we
have
a
very
big
workload
and
we
haven't
really
managed
to
join,
get
anybody
else
to
join
the
team,
to
sort
of
spread
that
out
a
bit
more
so
figured
I'd
like
bring
it
up
as
sort
of
a
wider
item
of
discussion
and
see
what
folks
have
to
say.
B
I
certainly
appreciate
the
heads
up:
good
luck
with
whatever
it
is,
you're
going
to
be
doing,
I
think
that
a
lot
of
what
we
do
is
going
to
be
informed
by
the
next
survey
that
we
send
out.
B
The
survey
that
we
have
will
give
us
a
point
of
comparison
for
we
weren't
doing
prr
review
and
then
we
had
sort
of
faced
in
and
then
by
the
time
we
issue
this
one
I
think
most
releases
will
be
under
open
covered
by
PRI
review
and
if
we
see
significant
Improvement
I'm
hoping
that
that
will
drive
that
will
make
a
clear
value
proposition
for
the
group.
B
A
That
sounds
great
to
me.
I've
been
trying
to
take
notes
I'm
totally
in
agreement.
I
think
you
know
if
the
if
I
definitely
anecdotally,
like
gotten
a
lot
of
feedback
on
like
yes
going
through
this
prr
process,
helps
people
better
understand
how
like
people
in
production
actually
might
use.
These
features
turn
them
on
to
bug
them.
A
That
kind
of
thing,
and
so
in
that
sense
like
it's
definitely
helping
these
folks
improve
the
way
that
they're,
writing
and
adding
new
features,
but
yeah
I
mean
if
we
we
don't
have
any
significant
data
indicating
one
way
or
another
or
maybe
like
just
having
it
in
the
the
template
and
like
prompting
this
to
people
is
enough.
We
don't
necessarily
need
another
layer
of
approval,
I'm,
not
sure,
but
yeah
all
great
points.
C
Yeah
I
think
that
I
agree
that
we,
this
data
will
be
useful,
I
think
that
lack
of
evidence
or
like
very
small
evidence
that
it
helped
significant
or
it
helped
visibly
I-
think
it's
not
necessarily.
C
Saying
that
we
are
not
doing
good
job,
because
many
problems
that
I've
seen
in
production
recently
weren't
the
ones
that
we
actually
introduced
recently
or
the
the
newly
introduced
features
introduced,
but
rather
were
connected
also
to
things
that
existed
for
quite
some
time
or
some
combination
with
other
things
or
missing
features
like
so.
C
It
may
be
a
signal
that
it's
not
useful,
but
it
doesn't
have
to
be
a
signal
that
it's
not
useful,
so
I
think
it
might
also
I
started
wondering
like
recently
it's
a
little
bit
too
late,
but
I
started
wondering
if
we
can
somehow
distinguish
the
problems
that
users
are
facing
between
the
newly
added
features
from
something
that
that
effectively
were
long-standing
issues.
B
Yeah
I
was
trying
to
be
careful,
not
to
say
I,
think
the
group
should
disband
on
those
results.
I
wanted
to
be
able
to
present
the
options
to
Sig
Arch
since
they
Charter
us
and
say
this
is
what
the
data
are
suggesting.
B
These
are
the
options
that
we
see
lay
out
different
options
that
are
available
and
see
what
cigarch
would
like
to
do.
I'm,
not
presupposing
I'm,
not
presupposing
what
that
outcome
will
be
because
I
agree,
lack
of
clear
evidence
does
not
mean
it
was
not
helpful.
I'm
gonna
say
that
whether
it
was
helpful
or
not
is
not
a
statement
on
how
good
a
job
this
group
has
or
has
not
done.
We
could
have
done
an
excellent
job
and
the
results
that
we
produced
may
still
not
have
produced
the
outcomes
we
wanted
right.
B
Not
a
statement
against
what
we
did,
it's
a
statement
about
the
outcome
and
whether
we
want
to
try
to
achieve
that
outcome.
A
different
way.
C
Yeah
I
I
fully
agree
like
like
it's
a
a
little
bit
of
like
exaggeration,
but
like
one,
can
imagine
like
a
perfect
design
for
all
those
features
and
like
faulty
implementations
of
all
of
them,
and
that,
like
doesn't
mean
we
we
didn't,
do
a
good
job.
It
means
that
something
didn't
go
well
somewhere
else
and
it
I
fully
agree
that
it
may
also
mean
that
we
are.
C
Maybe
this
is
actually
useful,
but
maybe
not
in
this
stage
of
this
project.
Maybe
we
have
like
other
more
important
problems
that
we
should
solve
first
before
we
before,
like
the
production
Readiness
or
the
current
version
of
production
ready.
Yes,
so
I
fully
agree
that,
like
whatever
the
results
will
be
I,
think
we
should
we
should
we
should
regroup
and
think
what
what
those
really
mean
for
us.
Yeah
I,
fully
agree
with
that.
B
Thanks
for
bringing
it
up
and
like
I
said,
I
hope
you
have
I
hope
you're
successful
whatever
you're
going
off
to.
A
Yeah,
thank
you
just
just
basically
medical
leave,
so
you
know
nothing
particularly
exciting
or
anything
like
that.
But
gotta
take
care
of
yourself
so
yeah
do
we
have
any
other
business
for
today's
agenda.