►
From YouTube: Kubernetes SIG Contributor Experience Weekly Update
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
A
A
A
Nope,
okay,
regular
program
updates:
how
are
we
doing
for
the
Thursday
community
call
George
I
know
that
we
were
soliciting
people
last
week.
Did
you
get
everybody
that
you
needed?
Yes,.
C
C
Hours
is
all
set
ass.
You
have
to
do
a
PR.
All
the
time
zones
are
different
now,
so
those
of
you
might
want
to
check
we.
He
also
PR
the
community
meeting
like
MD
file
as
well.
So
just
a
heads
up
you
might
want
to
check
whatever
programs
your
running,
make
sure
your
time
zone
is
correct,
other
than
that
office
hours
I'm
going
to
set
to
announce
it
and
where
else
up
for
next
week.
D
Looks
like
I
could
do
roughly
two
more
if
anybody's
interested
this
would
be
Wednesday
December
5th
at
1
p.m.
Pacific
and
just
feel
free
to
DM
me
directly.
If
you'd
like
to
get
involved,
the
steering
committee
AMA
that
day
will
actually
be
at
the
early
session,
so
that
is
the
7:30
a.m.
PST
time
slot,
but
we're
all
good
please,
as
always,
for
those
who
are
getting
the
word
out
about
mentoring
programs.
Let
folks
know
that
this
is
a
great
way
to
get
their
mentoring,
questions
addressed
and
ease
forward
onto
your
networks.
A
E
D
Hey
Nikita
I'll
start
we'll
do
outreach,
he
lasts,
but
just
from
a
perspective
from
what
you
asked
in
the
email
for
stuff,
that
I
think
we're
really
proud
of
this
year.
That
we've
accomplished
I
think
that
would
be
two
things
and
Nikita.
Also,
please
weigh
in
I.
Think
one
is
that
we
have
continued
with
G
sock.
It
continues
to
prove
extremely
useful
for
us
and
produce
amazing
talent
and
amazing
projects
and
I
think
that
we
should
continue
on
with
this
and
then
also
meet
our
contributors.
D
It
went
from
zero
to
a
lot
in
the
hundreds,
some
episodes-
and
we
also
kind
of
discovered
that
code
based
tours
are
a
thing
and
that
they
would
be
popular.
So
we
did
a
lot
of
discovery
with
meet
our
contributors
and
proved
that
one-on-one
mentoring
isn't
always
necessary
in
certain
cases
and
that
quick
questions
can
anonymously
be
addressed.
So
I
think
those
two
things
are
probably
the
highest
value
that
we
have
in
mentoring
this
year.
Nikita.
What
would
you
add.
F
D
D
D
All
right
top
three
priorities
right
now,
one
on
board
a
outreach.
He
in
turn
we
I'll
get
to
our
each
in
a
second,
so
that'll
like
make
more
that'll,
have
more
context
behind
it.
But
this
is
a
media
priorities
on
board
a
one-out
reach.
He
in
turn
that
outreach
interns
going
to
do
you
the
dev
guide
and
they
will
start
December
5th
I'm,
also
looking
into
like
getting
them
a
cube
con
ticket
and
things
like
that.
D
D
So
I
think
we
should
definitely
work
on
that,
but
I
did
want
to
update
everybody
without
Ricci,
because
we
did
have
three
outstanding
internships.
Unfortunately,
we
only
received
one
well
excuse
me:
we
only
filled
one,
and
let
me
give
you
the
exact
quote
from
the
outreach
you
folks
as
to
why
we
didn't
fill
the
other
two.
D
The
exact
quote
is
so
you
have
this
firm
records.
The
exact
quote
come
these
did
not
receive
any
final
applications
from
outreach
applicants
who
were
eligible
for
this
round.
The
outreach
organizers
had
to
double
check
the
time,
commitment
details
of
some
of
the
applicants
who
had
their
initial
application
approved
and
who
made
a
contribution
to
kubernetes.
Unfortunately,
it
turned
out
they
were
not
eligible
for
this
round,
so
the
two
internships
that
we
had
for
Brendan
outstanding
or
not
filled,
so
that
is
the
mentorian
update.
A
Okay,
moving
down
into
dev
stats,
which
is
my
sub
project.
Our
top
three
priorities
right
now
are
we're
moving
away
from
using
the
dashboard
as
much
for
like
action
based
check-ins.
So
much
is
like
a
more
of
a
general
health
of
the
community
check-ins
and
also
so
what
falls
into
that
also
is
making
sure
that
the
data
remains
accurate
and
then
another
thing
that
we're
working
on
is
fleshing
out
the
readme
into
a
full
users
guide.
So
we
have
the
readme
up,
but
we
think
that
we
would
like
to
add
some
work,
clothes
and.
A
Adding
all
of
the
descriptions
to
the
bottom
of
each
of
the
graphs
and
also
turning
the
repo
groups
into
the
cig
groups
and
I
think
that
that
has
added
more
value
to
the
graphs
than
just
showing
the
graphs
without
any
kind
of
explanation,
or
just
having
it
be
the
arbitrary
repo
groups
and
then,
finally,
what's
in
our
immediate
roadmap
to
accomplish
after
coupe
con
I'm
gonna
throw
the
mobile
site
back
out
there.
That's
that's
something
that
we're
anticipating,
really
picking
up
steam
right
after
right
after
could
come.
F
C
G
Worries
now
boring
is
great
yeah,
it's
good
right,
yeah
yeah
I
mean,
from
my
perspective
and
I,
think
that's
with
one
of
the
interns
are
getting
right.
The
main
missing
link
is
the
technical,
docs
local
test,
build
and
and
and
I
think
those
are
in
the
works.
So
I'm
more
than
happy
to
shift
my
attention
to
that
and
how
about
with
that
as
much
as
possible?
Okay,.
H
C
Big
blocker
right
now
is
that
the
metadata
for
caps
is
not
standardized,
so
it's
impossible
for
us
to
ingest
caps.
So
we
can't
do
here's
a
list
of
tips,
so
the
best
we
can
do
is
kind
of
like
list
the
files
in
a
directory.
So
it
looks
like
a
big
LS.
Basically,
hey.
I
B
So
the
intent
is
to
develop
a
CLI
that
actually
manages
the
kept
lifecycle
and
it
basically
takes
the
human
element
out
of
the
metadata
and
supplants
it
with
well-known
fields.
They
got
marshaled
in
the
code
so
that
you
have
a
consistent
representation
and
all
that
it
also
does
the
generation
of
the
templates
so
that
the
template
is
consistent
across
caps,
I'm
working
with
Caleb
to
try
and
get
this
dropped.
Hopefully,
before
Kubik
on
there
he's
made
a
tremendous
amount
of
progress,
so
we're
we're
just
trying
to
get
that
done.
B
So
the
idea
is
that
part
of
this
process
of
going
to
a
lot
is
that
we
standardize
or
do
what
we
can
with
the
caps
that
we
already
have
so
that
they
fit
hopefully
somewhat
into
this
and
then
moving
forward.
It
should
also
be
in
its
own
repository
so
that
the
rendering
for
the
site
is
is
easier
as
opposed
to
trying
to
call
out-
or
you
know,
I
have
a
be
a
subpart
of
some
other
site.
B
I
Chased
quick
question:
would
it
be
possible
to
have
this
tool
do
some
kind
of
validation?
We
could
stick
in
CI,
so
we
could
say.
Oh,
this
is
a
cap.
Did
somebody
actually
submit
all
the
meta
data
properly
or
did
they
go
fudge
and
create
their
own
value
in
a
field,
and
then
we
can
throw
an
error?
Is
that
something
we
could
do.
B
I
B
Basically,
what
we
want
to
do
is
be
able
to
have
a
manual
human
and
human
activated,
workflow
completely
ready
by
queue,
the
other
automation
stuff
and
how
he
deal
with.
That
is
something
that
it'll
be
open
source,
so
anybody
can
go
in
and
write
it
and
go
so
hopefully,
people
who
are
interested
in
gauged
will
take
that
on.
H
B
And
that's
part
of
why
the
this
cap
will
have
a
CLI
and
the
CLI
manages
the
metadata,
so
that
is
not
human.
It's
actually
lunges,
the
the
yam
all
together
keeps
the
the
metadata
separate
so
that
it's
not
actually
human.
It's
human
control
in
the
sense
that
a
human
must
type
kept
space
generate
space.
You
know
Mike
kept
type
whatever,
but
in
terms
of
generation
of
the
metadata
and
changing
of
state
in
the
metadata
and
all
that
it's
done
with
the
cat.
So
you
kept
space
promote
this
whatever
okay.
H
B
H
C
H
So,
as
aside
from
the
caps
I'm
just
curious,
like
are
we
going
and
are
we
going
and
modifying
the
contributor
site
cap
itself,
because
scope
is
changing
or
like
I
like
where,
where
we
at
with
that
alignment
between
like
what
we
originally
had
sat
like
okay,
this
is
the
thing
that
we're
gonna
go
and
build
they've
compared
to
what
we
actually
have
built
because
I
know
there's
a
whole
lot
of
stuff
going
on
with
that
laughs,
I
and
there's
like
there
is
a
thing.
But
how
closely
does
that
match
and
does
there
a
goal
shift?
C
Cap
is
like
one
of
the
first
ones
like
that:
I
have
to
go
back,
I
have
to
go
back
and
look
because
I'm
getting
a
lot
of
questions
from
people
that
don't
understand
what
the
sites
for
and
we
scoped
it
out
about.
Maybe
I
should
I'm
basically
want
to
bring
it
back
into
the
discussion
because
I'm
not
really
sure
it's
doing
what
people
want,
or
maybe
we
thought
it
we
wanted
this
six
months
ago.
Maybe
we
don't
so,
can
we
add
a
content
strategy
to
the
cup.
D
B
I
I
Parts
of
contributing
to
the
community
and
they
couldn't-
and
so
we
can
kind
of
start
to
see,
here's
some
expected
outcomes
that
people
thought
they
could
do
and
they
couldn't
figure
out
how
to
do
and
we're
frustrated.
Those
are
the
perfect
kinds
of
things
we
can
say:
here's
users,
here's
data,
here's
the
expected
outcome.
Now:
how
do
we
create
a
content
strategy,
so
somebody
can
easily
figure
this
out
and
that
might
be
a
good
way
to
kickstart.
This
content
strategy
process.
D
It
I
think
if
three
to
four
of
us
can
attack
this
together,
like
like
what
Matt's
mentioning,
we
already
have
a
lot
of
data
from
the
surveys
and
from
previous
surveys
and
from
contributor
summit
surveys
and
things
along
those
lines.
So
we
have
that
covered.
So
maybe
we
could
just
like
pull
in
a
focus
group
and
do
some
other
content
and
do
some
other
content
strategies
and
activities
around
that
but
kind
of
divide
and
divvy.
The
work
is
anybody
in
favor
or
object
that
the.
H
Other
thing
I
was
I
was
gonna
suggest
is
like
if
we
need
to
kind
of
recent
research
or
efforts
and
find
out
what
what
pieces
need
to
be
tackled,
and
even
if
we
need
to,
like
you
know,
break
things
into
manageable
pieces
to
make
sure
that
nobody
like
this
is
an
all
in
one
person's
play
that
it
isn't
like
just
George
Bob
that
are
tackling
this.
If
we
are
able
to,
if
maybe
sorry,
maybe
my
suggestion
was,
we
do
a
focused,
contrive
axe
meeting
where
it's
like.
H
The
agenda
item
for
today
is
like
brainstorming
on
a
contributor
site,
and
maybe
that
is
more
useful,
like
after
of
a
focus
group
like
has
something
together
to
bring
back
to
us.
So
then
we
can
go
like
yes
we're
all
behind
this.
What
do
we
need
to?
How
can
we
help?
How
can
we
like
bring
bring
that
to
the
the
front
yeah.
C
Because
the
original
scoping
was
very
finely
scoped
like
the
whole
point
of
the
cap,
was
just
to
make
a
front-end
to
the
community
repo
actually
making
major
changes.
So
the
community
repo
was
like
out
of
out
of
scope,
but
I
think
people
want
to
restructure
the
entire
community
repo,
which
is
fine.
It's
just
now.
The
cap
really
has
no
place
to
live
so
Jeff.
J
I'm
actually
thinking
it
might
not
be
that
they
want
to
restructure
the
community
repo,
but
framed
around
a
contributor
website.
What
do
we
want
to
put
in
this
contributor
website?
Because
some
of
the
content
might
not
be
from
the
community
repo?
It
might
be
aggregating
things
from
multiple
different
places.
D
We
should
also
file
an
issue
and
maybe
even
set
up
like
a
contributor
Docs
print
I
saw
that,
like
just
from
just
from
when
George
surfaced,
this
site
I
saw
that
a
lot
of
our
Doc's
had
things
in
there.
That
should
not
be
surfaced,
like
the
word
etc
on
a
web
site
and
like
that
would
also
play
hand-in-hand
with
a
style
guide.
Bob
already
filed
the
issue
for
a
style,
so
I
think
all
of
these
would
be
really
good.
Building
blocks
to
that.
H
G
H
H
C
So
what
I
was
thinking
about
doing
is
like
rewinding,
three
steps
back
in
a
cut
process,
because
some
of
them
didn't
exist
the
first
time
we
did
them
anyway,
just
basically
it's
like
I'm,
resubmitting
it
for
approval
again
like
we
did
the
first
time
and
then
we'll
nitpick
the
entire
thing
and
then
do
the
statuses
all
over
again
sounds
good
to
me.
Sound
like
a
plan,
okay,
cool.
H
H
So
yeah
we
need
to
kind
of
refocus
and
set
our
priorities
as
far
as
existing
things
that
have
been
in
flight,
proud
of
completing
in
the
last
year,
really
I
think
the
biggest
change
like
it's
it's
almost
a
year
now
that
it's
been
up
and
running,
but
I,
think
label
sync
and
being
able
to
have
consistent,
labeling
and
colors
and
implementations
across
all
of
our
repos
on
all
of
our
orgs
has
made
a
significant
impact
on
both
setting
things
up,
as
well
as
having
a
consistent
experience
everywhere.
You
go
that
you
know.
H
Okay,
there's
going
to
be
the
cig
labels,
there's
going
to
be
there's
a
certain
set
of
priorities
and
that
kind
of
stuff
things
that
we
know
we
need
to
implement.
But
again,
as
I
said,
we
need
to
kind
of
reorganize
and
reset
our
priorities
going
into
the
next
year.
Three
things
that
we
know
we
need
to
implement.
We
need
to
improve
our
cherry-picking
process.
That's
been
been
stale
for
a
while.
We
thankfully
updated
our
cherry-pick
documentation.
H
H
We're
also
looking
at
we're
still
going
to
be
chugging
along
towards
this.
Removing
direct
write
access
to
repos
going
to
the
the
overreaching
point,
which
is
github
x'
permission
set,
is
not
very
granular,
so
we're
trying
to
work
around
that
and
be
able
to
get
more
granular
with
how
we
hand
out
permissions
so
that
certain
things
that
we
can
hand
out
to
everybody
or
a
large
set
of
contributors.
H
H
Okay,
I'll
roll
right
into
github
management,
which
is
next
so
github
management,
is
something
that
we've
had
kind
of
more
clear
direction
and
we've
had,
in
my
opinion,
lots
of
successes,
since
we
kind
of
established
it
as
far
as
establishing
policies
and
processes
for
our
github
orgs
and
who
gets
access
to
what
and
why
we've
had
the
parabola
stool
was
created
this
year
and
the
membership
procedure
has
been
now.
We've
been
able
to
delegate
that
out.
H
The
kind
of
our
priorities
going
into
the
next
year,
our
next
kind
of
highlight
that
we're
gonna
be
tackling,
is
github
team
management
and
being
able
to
identify
like
who
is
in
a
team
and
who
is
authorized
through
PRS
and
owner's
files,
not
kind
stuff
to
change.
The
team's
will
they'll
be
defined
in
in
a
get
repo
and
that'll
be
driving
the
source
of
truth
behind
github
teams,
which
will
inherently
make
both
notifications
and
handing
out
github
permissions
way
easier
and
more
transparent.
H
Second,
which
is
kind
of
related,
is
solidifying
a
new
github
team
structure.
As
far
as
what
we're
recommending
out
to
SIG's,
because
that
still
hasn't
been
a
thing
that
we've
been
able
to
clean
up.
We
we've
known
for
a
while
now
that
the
current,
like
a
team
structure,
that
sinks
were
told,
to
go
and
make
that
that
hasn't
been
working
and
that
hasn't
been
having
the
intended
impact.
But
we
need
to
kind
of
solidify
proposal
and
have
the
the
tools
in
place
to
drive
a
new.
H
A
new
team
structure
and
third
would
be
looking
at
repos
and
in
particular,
repo
permissions
and
how
they
associate
to
teams.
So
we're
kind
of
just
doing
this
layered
model,
where
we
tackle
like
specific
functions
in
github
that
are
done
either
by
the
org
ownership
team
or
by
repo
admins
and
being
is
seeing
like.
H
H
The
proud
of
accomplishment
would
be
the
biggest
one
being
being
able
to
delegate
the
membership
procedure
now
that
the
tooling
is
in
place
for
that,
and
the
next
kind
of
immediate
thing
after
cube
con
is,
is
github
team
management
and
extending
the
tool
like
the
code
is
in
place.
We
just
need
to
really
like
kick
the
tire
and
for
the
procedure
cuz.
Once
we
cover
up
moving
the
team
membership,
the
old
way
of
member
of
manually,
adding
people
removing
people
from
teams
will
be
overwritten.
C
I
think
you're
answered
this,
but
not
sure
so.
I'm
just
gonna
ask
so
when
I
I
had
to
put
stuff
in
kubernetes,
cigs
I
had
to
like
ping
you
and
then
you
jiggled.
It
is
what
you
just
said
mean
that
that
becomes
automatic
as.
C
C
Yes,
so
as
people
are
putting
stuffs-
let's
say
in
kubernetes
say
from
getting
things
out
of
whatever.
Are
you
still
having
to
go?
Make
sure
that
I
have
access
to
KK?
Therefore,
I
should
have
access
like
when
you're
talking
about?
Is
that
the
part
that
you're
talking
about
that's
the
next
bit
with
the
team
management
so.
H
H
Holding
us
back
from
doing
that
in
an
automated
way,
and
the
thing
is
it's
auditing
and
I've
been
kind
of
avoiding
it,
but
it
is
something
that
does
need
to
be
done,
which
is
ok,
auditing,
our
current
orgs
and
figuring
out
who's
inactive,
who
doesn't
the
permission?
Okay,
who
has
moved
on
from
the
kubernetes
project
completely
and
pulling
that
access
back
before
we
start
using
a
membership
list
of
source
of
truths
to
automatically
of
newaccess
gotcha
gotcha?
H
Okay,
that
that
that's
kind
of
a
big
piece
there,
but
the
auditing
bit
is,
should
be
something
we
do
in
the
next
year.
But
it
it
it's
a
it's
a
big
that'll,
be
a
big
project
to
kind
of
tackle.
It'll
involve
lots
of
like
user
communication
and
that
kind
of
stuff,
because
we
don't
want
to
accidentally
pull
back
access
that
people
need
all.
K
C
Hit
it
back,
then,
all
right,
so,
let's
probably
start
with
moderation,
because
that's
probably
like
a
big
one
that
we
did
so
I
did
a
bunch
of
PRS
on
our
moderation
processes
that
we
didn't
have
before
it
was
kind
of
like
everyone
be
cool
to
each
other.
So
we
actually
wrote
stuff
down
things
like
when
you're
a
moderator,
you're
expected
to
do
this.
C
When
you
c-span
step
abcdefg,
I'm
kind
of
like
an
escalation
process,
we
did
a
process
of
kind
of
pruning,
how
we
did
moderation
of
all
the
individual
lists,
so
I
think
this
actually
Arnon
was
working
on
the
spreadsheet
for
Paris,
that's
like.
Where
are
we
actually
talking
and
it's
like
a
big
list
of
links
and
then
it
still
needs
a
lot
of
help.
Fyi
yeah!
So
me
we're
doing
things
like
what
is
the
list
for
kubernetes
dev?
Look
like
there's
some
lists
that
were
set
open
to
open
posting.
C
That
shouldn't
be
think
things
of
that
nature.
Some
of
that
was
was
reactionary.
Some
of
it
was
just
hey.
I
happen
to
zoom.
We
should
check
all
our
lists
and
then
Paris.
You
spent
a
lot
of
time.
I.
Don't
know
if
you
just
want
to
talk
about
the
zoom
moderation
stuff,
because
I
feel
like
that
was
a
very
large
project.
I,
don't.
K
C
C
D
Okay
and
then
what
are
the
three
things
that
we're
gonna
be
a
better
top
priority
for
us
right
now,
I
would
say:
relieving
sig
chairs
of
administrative
duties,
I
would
say
continuing
to
work
on
zoom'
as
a
relates
to
keeping
community
safe,
because
we
still
have
at
least
five
to
ten
SIG's,
who
are
still
using
personal
meeting
IDs
that
I
need
to
chase
down.
I
saw
Christoph's
face.
That
is
actually
why
I
would
like
to
I'm.
D
Gonna
actually
say
this
on
record
I
found
a
way
to
take
away
all
of
the
credentials
and
user
licenses
from
sig
leads
and
create
a
centralized
process
for
zoom
meaning.
So
then
sig
leads
don't
actually
have
to
do
any
kind
of
administration.
We
would
control
that
from
a
global
perspective
and
I
think
that's
the
best
bet.
I
just
have
not
written
up
for
proposals,
so
I
guess
a
priority
for
me
would
be
to
turn
right
up
this
proposal
and
then
also
I
would
say.
A
G
suite
proposal
is
also
a
top
priority
for
us.
D
We
feel
like,
in
order
for
us
to
to
do
a
lot
of
the
cool
stuff
that
we
want
to
do
with
automation.
We
need
something
as
powered,
that's
powerful,
that
has
something
like
an
API
and
global
controls,
team
drive,
centralized
ownership
of
documentation,
etc,
and
that
proposal
will
go
to
the
steering
committee.
Hopefully
before
Thanksgiving
I
actually
have
a
draft.
C
C
You
know
like
we
know
we're
having
a
hard
time
getting
all
the
leads
to
like
register
for
Q
con
or
even
respond
so
I
think
there's
still
a
lot
of
work
to
be
done
there.
As
far
as
you
know,
where
should
I
be
paying
attention
the
most,
if
I'm
a
leader
in
the
community
and
I,
think
in
general
we
say
/dev,
but
we
also
have
an
issue
where
we'll
send
things
to
death
and
sometimes
the
where
doesn't
get
out.
So
we
find
ourselves,
you
know
repeating
things
over
in
the
community
meeting.
C
D
That
will
come
from
an
enhanced
communication,
markdown
file,
which
will
be
the
artifact
of
the
issue.
That's
open
right
now
for
the
communications
assessment
and
that's
what
Arnold
and
I
have
been
working
on
and
we're
still
like.
I,
don't
know,
10%
short
of
that
and
if
please
I'm
like
this,
is
like
pretty
much
begging
at
this
point.
If
anybody
could
help
us
with
that,
I
would
greatly
appreciate
it
so
that
we
can
have
a
complete
landscape
of
our
communication
stuff.
So
I
don't
have
to
keep
iterating
on
45
editions
of
the
communication.
Markdown
file
can.
C
D
Yeah
so
I
think
generally
keeping
our
community
safe
is
the
most
high
priority
that
we
have
and
then
probably
taking
away.
Administrative
crap
from
sig
leads
and
admins
and
team
leads,
and
everyone
else
in
the
community
is
definitely
a
priority
for
us,
because
we
all
know
that
not
everybody
can
be
a
zoom
administrator
and
we're
pretty
much
asking
70
people
to
do
that.
Right
now,
yeah.
C
Oh
and
some
other
highlights
I'm
going
out
of
our
order:
sorry
LC,
but
but
the
office
hours
I
meet
our
contributors,
programs
and
stuff
we're
seeing
increased
traffic
and
participation
from
people,
so
it
feels
that's
doing
well.
The
user
forums
are
doing
very
well
I.
Think
as
far
compared
to
the
old
google
groups,
stats
wise
I
can
I
can
like
print.
C
You
know,
charts
and
stuff
for,
like
other
statuses
and
stuff
for
coupon,
but
it
feels
like
all
those
programs
are
kind
of
firing
on
all
cylinders
and
once
the
community,
the
new
community
page
lands
and
actually
tells
users
that
they're
there
they'll
be
even
more
effective,
but
I
feel
like
those
that
you
know
the
community
meeting
we've
gotten
feedback
on
how
to
change
up
the
format
a
little
bit.
We've
been
doing
it.
C
D
C
D
C
D
C
D
C
D
Thes
on
the
agency
that
I
that
I
have
right
now
is
like
kicking
my
butt
on
a
daily,
because
they're
doing
like
fits
like
50
graphs
at
this
point
and
like
working
with
designers
on
50
different
graphs
is
difficult,
I
think
so,
there's
been
a
lot
of
back
and
forth,
as
you
can
imagine
so,
I'm
hoping
that
those
are
delivered
to
us.
Well,
actually,
it
is
a
requirement.
I
gave
them
a
hard
stop
like
we
will
produce.
D
We
will
produce
the
graphs
from
the
survey,
as
is
our
cube,
Khan
intro
right
now
we
have
I,
think
22
that
are
done,
and
most
of
that
is
just
descriptive
information
about
the
surveys.
The
survey
respondents
which
isn't
even
necessarily
like
too
helpful
to
us,
but
it
was
important
than
the
less
to
put
it
on
the
infographic
anyway.
So
that's
also
something
else
that
will
have
ready
for
our
cube
content.
Ramone
all
right.
D
D
D
C
I
would
actually
say
that
it
feels
like
this
year,
especially
for
Seattle
people
really
kind
of
came
to
us
as
far
as
sig
leads
and
chairs
and
stuff
like
when
we
asked
for
hey.
What
do
you
want?
The
existing
contributor
summit?
We
had
a
Google
document
and
they
all
just
went
in
there
and
put
I
want
this.
I
want
this
thing
this,
whereas
before
they
were
like
we'll
just
have
an
unconference,
we'll
see
you
there
so
I
kind
of
feel
like
other
people
now
we're
starting
to
like
say.
C
D
Three
things
that
were
working
on
right
now,
obviously
the
Seattle
contributor
summit
we
are
also
working
on
I,
mean
I,
know
this.
This
might
sound
super
hella
advanced,
but
we
are
working
on
like
the
strategy
and
what
that
looks
like
for
next
year
as
well,
like
we've
already
updated.
Steering
committee
like
George,
sent
an
email
recently
to
steering
280
of
them
an
update
and
at
the
bottom
of
the
email,
pretty
much
said
that
we'd
like
to
move
to
an
invite-only
format
and
things
along
those
lines.
D
So
that's
I
would
say
like
a
number
three
priority
for
us
right
now,
with
the
first
being
get
the
first
get
the
next
one
launched,
but
then
like
pretty
much
right
after
that,
we
are
gonna,
go
into
a
session
with
CN
CF
to
talk
to
them
about
what
go
forward.
Looks
like
also,
what's
the
with
the
roles
and
responsibilities
of
CN,
CF
and
contributor
experience,
and
it
relates
to
any
kind
of
contributor
or
event.
That's
that
we're
meeting
in
January.
So
that's
actually
something
that
we're
gonna
work
on
right
after
post
coupon
too.
C
C
D
D
Know
like
wait.
No,
that's
actually
going
on
right,
oh
yeah!
Next
week
we
should
totally
get
Josh
to
have
an
update
with
photos
and
share
screens,
and
things
like
that,
like
your
cats
and
dogs,
good,
alright,
I
think
that's
it
for
events.
What
else
did
I
miss
coming
up
after
coupon?
That's
the
that's
the
meeting
with
C
and
C
F
about
responsibilities
and
budget
and
who's
and
kind
of
who's
responsible
for
what
I
believe
in
C.
D
A
C
D
D
Yeah,
when
LC
and
I
did
they
did
the
Copenhagen
one
I
felt
like
we
flied
through
it
like
because
it
was
just
so
much
else.
You
know
we
were
up
there
like
just
flying
through
stuff,
think
we
were
pretty
much
just
reading
slides
at
that
point,
because
we
had
just
so
much.
Data
like
I
was
like
meeting
the
community
meeting
the
other
day.
It
was
just
like,
oh
god,
attendeth.