►
From YouTube: 20201008 SIG Architecture Community Meeting
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
All
right
well
welcome
to
those
who
can
join
live
today
in
the
october,
8th,
sig
architecture.
Meeting
just
reminder:
this
is
a
recorded
meeting
uploaded
to
youtube
for
posterity,
and
so,
let's
just
be
in
our
best
behaviors.
A
So
the
first
item
on
here
we
can
just
talk
through
was
raised
by
laurie
around
trying
to
close
out
any
items
specific
to
looks
like
the
original
source
issue
is
about
getting
kept
out
of
the
community
repo
into
a
separate
location.
I
think.
A
My
initial
read
on
this,
and
unfortunately
I
don't
know
laura's
context-
was
that
we've
largely
completed
that
task,
like
the
design
talks,
have
largely
shifted
out
of
the
community
repo.
I'm
curious
if
others
are
aware
of
tasks
that
were
being
tracked
here,
that
maybe
laurie
hadn't
yet
been
introduced
to
that
we
could
enumerate
and
help
guide
her
in
her
absence.
B
B
Yeah
that
comment
I
just
threw
into
zoom
is
the
main
one
that
I
think
is
not
resolved.
A
Okay,
well,
hopefully,
I
can
follow
up
with
laurie
after
she's
got
some,
hopefully
delicious
food.
That
was
the
only
other
major
item
aside
from
standing
order
of
business.
Maybe
I'll
pause
here
and
see
if
anyone
else
wanted
to
raise
a
particular
topic
not
yet
thrown
on
the
agenda
for
discussion.
Otherwise,
we
can
just
transition
to
any
updates.
You
want
to
do
on
the
sub
projects.
B
I
did
want
to
point
people
to
the
the
label
aqua
metadata
policy
discussion,
since
it
wasn't
on
the
agenda.
We
probably
shouldn't
dive
into
it
here,
but
that
was
brought
up
on
the
list
and
I
think
that
would
be
a
good
thing
to
visit
in
a
future
meeting.
So
take
a
look
at
the
mailing
list
and
the
linked
docs
and
think
about
that.
If
you're
interested
weigh
in
on
the
docs
and
we'll
probably
put
that
in
the
agenda
for
next
time,.
B
Were
like
three
three
discussions
that
are
sort
of
related
that
all
got
started
around
the
same
time,
so
tim
was
asking
about
use
of
selectors
and
labels
on
namespaces
for
purposes
of
policy
tim
all
clear,
so
that
was
tim
hawkins
tim
all
claire
was
talking
about
metadata
policy
and
whether
policying
the
existing
things
or
adding
a
new
field
to
hold
like
cluster
owned
metadata.
Anyway.
They
these
all
intersect
and
yeah.
All.
A
C
I
can
probably
cover
for
him.
Oh
perfect
playtex.
Do
you
just
want
to
get
started
now
sure
I
may
miss
something,
because
I
wasn't
prepared
for
that,
but
hopefully
nothing
important.
C
So
basically,
we
wanted
to
to
make
production
readiness
actually
required
for
release
for
caps
or
for
proposals
targeting
120
released,
but
we
literally
realized
a
week
ago
that,
like
we,
didn't
update
the
kept
template
so
that
no
one
was
really
aware
of
that.
So
unfortunately
it's
it's
still
not
required.
It's
recommended
we
will
be
also
working
with
like
there
are.
There
are
at
least
probably
10
15
something
like
that
in
that
release
of
caps
that
actually
failed.
C
That
already
still
people
at
least
some
people
are
looking
into
that
and
are
paying
attention
to
that
which
is
cool.
We
will
be
working
with
others
like
after
the
freeze
so
that
they
will
feel
that,
obviously
it
we
can't
block
them
if
they
don't
do
that,
because
we
didn't
announce
it,
but
we
will
be
working
with
them.
I
from
my
experience
in
the
119
release
cycle,
people
were
actually
keen
like
when
I
was
pinging
them
to
to
fill
that
to
feel
that
they
were
doing
that.
C
No,
no,
no,
not
immediately,
but
like
many
of
them
like
filled
that
after
all
and
we
we
go,
we
went
for
them.
I
think
we
there
weren't
there.
There
aren't
any
any
significant
changes
from
the
119
release
in
terms
of
questions
or
anything
like
that.
C
We
didn't
get
any
like
significant
feedback,
that
some
questions
doesn't
work
or
make
sense
or
doesn't
make
sense,
or
anything
like
that
that
the
two
issues
that
we
currently
see
that
we
would
like
to
attack
somehow
are
the
first
one
is
like
tooling
on
our
site
and
then
sure
like
ensuring
that,
for
example,
only
prr
team
can
approve
prrs
and
no
one
else
how
where
how
to
organize
and
how
to
enforce
that
people
will
be
filling
them
and
how
we
how
we
track
them
so
so,
mostly
like.
C
I
would
call
it
more
tooling
thing,
which
is
purely
for
us
and
probably
for
the
release
team
to
to
be
able
to
track
that
the
track
track,
prs
and
second
thing,
which
is
more
like
really
question
question
related.
C
Is
there
are
a
number
of
cabs
that
or
proposals
that
are
adding
a
field
for,
I
think,
adding
a
field
in
the
api,
for
example,
to
to
introduce
a
new
feature,
and
we
would
like
to
be
able
to
monitor
number
of
workloads,
for
example
using
this
feature
or
something
like
that,
but
we
don't
like
for
now.
We
are
we
because
of
lack
of
like
other,
better
ideas
that
will
result
in
like
introducing
a
dedicated,
very,
very
oriented
metrics.
We
we
decided
that
it's
fine
for
to
like
have
that
like
have
that.
C
C
A
Awesome
thanks,
I
think
you
did
a
perfect
impression
of
john-
are
any
other
representatives
for
the
additional
sub
projects
available.
When
I
give
it
an
update,
I
haven't
looked
at
the
latest
attendance
list.
B
A
All
right:
well,
if
there
are
no
other
major
topics,
were
addressed
today,
I'm
happy
to
give
everybody
back
their
45
minutes.
A
All
right
cool:
well,
thanks
those
everybody
will
join
and
dems.
I
see
you're
just
able
to
join
and
you're
you're
here
at
the
end
now,
so
we
had
a
very
efficient
meeting,
all
right,
all
the
best
everyone
I'll
talk
to
you
guys
later.