►
From YouTube: 20210407 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).
B
Okay,
everybody
hello.
This
is
the
kubernetes
league
architecture,
production
readiness,
some
project
meeting
or
whatever
the
date
is
today
april,
7
2021,
I
think,
and
all
right.
So
I
guess
brian.
We
have
a
few
new
few
new
attendees.
Today,
brian
he
was
asking
about
the
what
we
do
here.
So
yes,
the
the
idea
is
to
apply
kind
of
some
of
these
sre
type
of
principles
and
review
of
features
as
they
go
through
the
development
cycle
in
kubernetes
and
before
they.
B
So
at
each
stage
of
the
development
cycle,
the
alpha
beta
and
stable
phases.
We
have
a
set
of
questions
associated
with
that
feature
that
we
want
to
get
answered
and
at
alpha
it's
really
really
minimal.
It's
basically
just
can
we
turn
this
thing
off
and
if
we
turn
it
off,
I
turn
it
on
and
turn
it
off
again.
Are
we
gonna
break
stuff?
B
You
know
so,
can
we
undo
the
damage,
but
then,
as
you
go
up
in
your
levels
of
stability,
you
are
expected
to
meet
more
criteria,
and
so
all
of
those
are
in
the
template,
and
so
we
look
for
monitoring.
We
look
for
a
kind
of
known
failure.
B
Modes,
mitigations
things
should
people,
people
should
do
if
if
they
see
those
failure
modes,
some
of
it's
just
docu
like
the
alpha,
like
I
said
on
and
off,
but
it's
like
sort
of
documentation
around
like
what
components
do
you
actually
need
to
set
these
feature
gates
in,
and
you
know
just
try
to
make
it
as
easy
as
possible
for
people
to
discover
the
information
they
need
to
support
the
feature
in
the
field
to
know
if
it's
working
and
and
and
all
of
that,
so
as
as
part
of
the
process,
what
that
means
is
that
every
release
cycle
as
sigs
commit
to
certain
features.
B
They
write
these
community
enhancement
proposals,
which
is
not
that
we're
just
part
of
that
process
and
and
in
that
they
have
to
fill
out
this
questionnaire
and
there's
a
group
of
us
that
sits
down
and
reviews
them
make
sure
the
answers
are
adequate.
Typical
types
of
things
we
see
hey,
you
need
to
add
a
metric
here
or
your
metric
isn't
sufficient
or
you
know.
Yes,
you
really
do
need
a
future
gate
for
that.
B
B
The
last
cycle
121
was
the
first
release
where
this
was
mandatory
and
there
were
65-ish
caps,
so
that
was
you
know:
20
20,
I
guess
in
in
121
we
there
were
only
three
of
us,
so
it
was
like
20,
odd
reviews
per
person
and
oh
okay,
there
we
go.
Thank
you
yeah.
We
each
had
22
exactly,
and
so
you
know
we
love
to
broaden
the
pool.
We
don't
want
to
be
a
bottleneck
on
the
development
process.
B
We
want
to
be
a
a
you
know,
a
an
important
gate,
but
not
a
bottleneck,
and
so
we
did
document
a
procedure
for
how
people
can
join
the
team.
Thank
you
to
atlanta
for
helping
make
that
happen
and,
and
atlanta
was
our
first
new
member
since
the
formation
of
the
group.
B
So,
basically,
if
you're
interested
we're
going
into
the
122
enhancement
cycle
pretty
soon,
and
so
the
process
is
documented
there
in
our
in
the
community
repo,
I
believe
under
sick
architecture,
production
readiness.
But
basically
it's
you-
do
some
reviews
and
say
that
you're
shadowing
in
those
reviews
and
then
as
we
you
know,
the
people
on
the
approver
list
see
those
reviews
and
there's
enough
of
them
and
they're.
They
look
like
they're
on
the
right
track
and
you
feel
confident
in
your
reviews.
C
Yeah
yeah
well
she's
been
doing
some
work
for
me,
so
I
figured
oh
man.
This
is
embarrassing.
Maybe
I
should
help
out
a
little
bit.
I'm
a
maintainer
for
container
d.
I've
been
around
forever.
I
work
on
cry
tools
and
kublet,
sometimes
okay,
extractor
guy
right.
I
work
for
ibm,
so
yeah,
the
other,
the
other
side
of
ibm.
B
C
C
D
I
think
the
agenda
item
is
action
item
review,
of
which
I
had
two,
which
I
well
I
did
both
of
mine
sort
of,
so
one
of
them
was
updating
the
template
to
put
slos
before
slis.
I
have
a
pr
up,
lgtm
did
so
yay,
I
don't
know
if
somebody
else
wants
to
approve
it.
I
can't
approve
it,
but
that's
done
so.
I
linked
it
in
the
comment
where
it
was
assigned
to
me
previously,
but
I
can
link
it
in
today's
notes.
D
If
we
need
to
the
other
action
item
I
had
was
to
see,
if,
like
maybe,
we
could
get
the
bot
to
like
auto
assign
the
like
prr,
reviewers
or
approvers,
based
on
whatever
the
content
of
the
file
says
and
supposedly
either.
I
think
the
proud
bot
or
feta
bot
could
potentially
do
this,
and
it's
just
a
matter
of
like.
Do.
We
actually
want
to
put
in
the
effort
to
like
figure
that
out
or
does
it
matter.
B
I
mean,
I
think,
that
the
I
I
I
don't
need
that,
but
you
know
I
know
you
prefer
a
github
workflow.
So
if
that
works
for
you
then
go
for
it.
It's.
D
Definitely
challenging
to
figure
out
what
is
assigned
to
me
if
it
is
not
actually
assigned
to
me
in
github,
but
I
vaguely
understand
that
maybe,
like
the
is
there
like
a
cap,
cuddle
tool
or
something
like
that
that
should
like
does
that
have
if
that
can
tell
me
everything
that
I
need
to
review,
then
that's
perfectly
fine.
It.
B
Does
but
you
know
it's
not
it's
far
from
perfect
itself,
so
it
it.
It
was
originally
built
to
to
go
through
the
the
files
in
the
in
the
repository
and
then
I
just
was
like
that's
not
useful
to
me.
I
needed
to
go
through
pr,
so
I
just
shoehorned
it
in
there
in
a
very
awkward
way.
B
B
Assigning
it
via
pro
would
be
would
be
really
nice
and
there
was
some
other
comment
I
was
gonna
make
but
yeah,
but
but
that's
what
that's
the
tool
I
used.
You
do
get
some
issues
with
all
of
these,
where
certainly
with
cap
cuddle
aware,
if
the
yellow
file
is
unpersable
for
some
reason,
then
it
doesn't
know
what
to
do
and
it
can't
actually
even
alert
you
know
yeah.
So
I
had
to
go
through
all
the
errors,
errors
and
all
the
pr's
too.
B
Right,
that's
what
I
was
gonna
say.
What
would
be
nice
would
be
able
to
to
balance
them,
but
because
right
now
it's
just
up
to
the
author
to
pick
somebody-
and
I
I
don't
I
don't.
I
don't
think
it's
such
a
huge
burden
to
do
that.
But,
like
you
know,
we
did
have
some
like.
Oh
wojtek
is
way
over
subscribed,
give
that
to
me
and
then
and
then
he's
like
yeah,
but
I
really
want
to
do
this
one.
So
it
does
cause
some.
B
You
know
confusion
sometimes,
but
you
know,
balancing
it
automatically
probably
would
have
similar
problems
so.
D
And
I
think
the
bot
is:
is
it
smart
enough
to
figure
that
out?
Maybe
not.
I
know
that
it
will
tell
you
to
assign
approvers
when
you
need
approvals
in
certain
areas.
I
don't
know
if
it's
smart
enough
to
assign
multiple
reviewers,
but
I
don't
know
I
mean
there's
no
point
in
boiling
the
ocean
right
like
if
it's
not
a
problem,
it
doesn't
seem
like
it
would
be
super
obviously
easy
to
add.
So
I'm
fine
to
let
it
be.
We
know
how
to
add
it.
D
If
we
need
to-
and
I
would
say
for
like
the
future,
I
mean
the
good
news
is
if
somebody
needs
the
pr
approval
and
your
name
is
on
it.
Hopefully
they
will
be
chasing
you
down.
It's
not
like
it'll
just
sit
there
and
like
you'll,
never
hear
about
it
again
and
if
that's
the
case
then
maybe
you
didn't
need
to
approve
it.
So.
B
D
B
Weeks,
yeah,
okay,
cool,
then,
let's
see
I
didn't
take
any
notes
during
that.
Let's
see.
B
Yeah,
okay,
cool,
thank
you,
so
I
will
shamefully
admit
that
I
did
not
get
to
either
of
my
ais
again
and
it's
been
a
little
hectic,
but
I
I
I
I
will
get
to
them
in
this
next
cycle.
I
I
need
to
it's
getting
too
late,
otherwise,
so
not
much
more.
To
say
about
that,
my
two
items
were
one's
just
tweaking
a
paragraph
about.
B
I
think
environments
try
to
get
people
to
think
through
their
feature:
roll
out
and
roll
back
and
that
sort
of
thing
in
h.a
environments
or
doing
upgrades.
I
don't
know
I
have
to
go
back
and
look
at
the
notes,
something
to
that
effect
and
then
the
survey.
We
really
want
to
repeat
the
survey
and
tweak
it
that's
going
to
take
some
time.
So
I
need
I
need
to
block
out
a
good
chunk
of
time
to
revise
those
questions
and
make
them.
B
We
were
using
some
ways
to
connect
the
data
that
we
needed
in
the
last
time.
You
did
it.
D
B
All
right
really,
I
think
I
think
you
managed
to
somehow
not
have
any
action
items
from
last
time.
So
is
there
anything
else
we
need
to
discuss,
or
should
we
just
wrap
it
up.
B
Okay,
all
right
well,
thank
you
mike
and
brian
for
joining,
and
you
know
we
read
every
two
weeks
and
often
it's
like
this,
it's
just
quick
check
in
and
then
we
move
on.
So
you
know
occasionally,
there's
there's
bigger
things
to
discuss,
but
but
we'd
be
happy
to
have
you
in
any
time.