►
From YouTube: Kubernetes SIG Contributor Experience 20190328
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
B
A
Times
so,
starting
to
background
noise,
I
am
travelling
right
now,
I
am
going
to
be
from
stitches,
you've
got
each
and
let's
get
this
party
started.
First
and
foremost,
we,
as
always,
we
do
condoms,
be
awesome
to
each
other.
I
didn't
have
your
pretty
faces
on
my
board
right
now
for
soon.
So,
if
you,
if
somebody's
talking
this
behind
and
raise
your
hand
and
then
next
are
there
any
contributors
on
the
line
that
want
to
give
it
introduction.
A
E
D
Absolutely
so
Barcelona
is
moving
along.
We
last
week
we
had
89
total
registered
above
I
believe
we
got
an
update,
maybe
yesterday,
if,
if
you
have
a
new
number,
please
shout
it
out
or
put
it
in
the
chat
but
yeah.
We
are
ramping
up
here
with
a
bunch
of
people
joining
in
one
thing
that
we
talked
about
was
swag,
because
we
all
love,
swag
and
George
came
up
without
a
great
idea
around
a
luggage
tag
and
I
think
that
would
be
a
fabulous
idea.
D
Oh
115
now
up
from
89
on
Thursday
last
week,
so
yeah
we're
definitely
ramping
off
quickly
here,
having
a
luggage
tag.
Where
we're
talking
to
do
this,
CN
CF
see
if
we
can
get
that
done.
George
also
had
a
great
idea
to
actually
do
a
local
installation
of
essentially
having
a
local
box
for
all
the
downloads
that
are
that's
needed
for
the
101
and
201
workshops.
Looking
at
Harbor
as
the
registry
for
docker
images
and
then
also
having
a
bunch
of
downloads
there
for
a
dr.,
dmg
and
stuff
like
that,
so
really
awesome.
D
The
schedule
is
up.
I'll
put
the
link
in
the
notes.
We
do
have
a
sketch
there,
it
is
bare-bones
right
now
and
we're
filling
it
out,
but
we
do
have
four
sig
sig
face-to-face
sign
ups,
we
got
Windows
cluster
life
cycle
p.m.
and
UI,
and
they
are
on
the
schedule
already
so
hopefully
we'll
get
some
more
and
I
think
that's
it.
For
now.
F
A
A
C
A
And
this
is
another
issue
that
one
is
filled
with
the
community
site,
so
this
aims
to
Brittany
said
I
own
slash,
community,
not
necessarily
contributors.
I
mean
this
would
be
for
you,
such
as
well
as
30
years
right
sort
of
final
stages
of
this
redesign,
and
we
want
to
launch
the
thing,
but
there's
a
few
things
so
indicated
for
launch.
So.
D
A
B
A
A
G
A
G
G
A
A
H
A
J
J
I
A
I
B
Yeah
sure,
hey
everyone,
so
yeah
we
had
a
meeting.
Yesterday
morning,
Paris
tied
myself,
we
decided
to
do
it
in
a
small
group
just
to
kick
off
the
brainstorming
there.
We
have
a
separate
issue
out
there
to
create
that
team
for
triage,
and
we
are
wrangling
so
I
mean
just
to
brief
about
it.
We
are
building
a
team.
B
What
we
decided
is
to
have
a
triage
captain
they'll
be
leaving
the
triage
efforts,
and
you
know
it's
a
team
of
three
to
four
people:
five
people,
you
know
helping
with
the
triage,
creating
any
new
processes
if
it's
needed
based
on
you
know
what
we've
been
doing
around
other
projects
as
well
right,
other
things
I
mean
so
right
now
you
know
we
have
triage.
You
know
a
lot
of
efforts
with
the
release,
so
we
talk
about
that.
B
So
that's
something
I'll
be
follow
up
with
the
dark
team
because
they
already
have
a
PR,
regular
team
and
seems
like
they
are
really
happy
with.
You
know
to
stay
on
top
of
the
issues.
So
that's
something
we'll
be
following
up
with
protocol
and
other
guys
in
dark
and
and
see
what
we
can.
You
know
gain
from
their
experience
and
you
know
and
what
what
they're
thinking
right
again
we
create
something
there
to
start
with
and
then
how
folks
reviewed
it
you
know,
contribute
as
we
go
forward
and
I
think
price.
B
B
A
A
C
Okay,
so
this
wasn't
a
100%
micro
vessel.
It's
something
called
proposed
state
testing
yesterday
and
he
put
something
in
slack
about
it.
It's
everybody's
favorite
game.
Let's
change
how
github
reviews
work
and
what
does
it
review?
What
is
reviewing
and
what
does
approve
mean,
and
it's
all
like
crazy
fun.
Okay,
so
we'd
like
to
try
this
experiment
in
the
test
in
for
repo,
where,
if
you
go
through
github
UI
and
you
click
the
approve
button
like
when
you
review,
you
know
how
it's
such
a
good
comment
you
can
approve,
or
you
can
request
changes
today.
C
If
you
do
that
in
like
kubernetes,
community
or
kubernetes
test,
and
for
that
approve
is
interpreted
as
a
slash
approve
and
so
there's
a
shorthand.
Some
people
do
what
they
like
review
the
thing
and
then
they
click
the
approve
button
and
they
type
in
/lg
TM.
So
the
hell
GPM
is
in-text
and
github
interprets
the
big
checkbox
that
you
see
in
the
UI
as
an
approve
and
cool
PR
moves
forward.
We
want
to
try
simplifying
this
in
testing
for
land,
so
that
a
github
review
approval
event
is
interpreted.
C
Both
has
an
LG
TM
and
as
an
approve,
so
that,
if
you
have
sufficient
rights,
interacting
with
the
github
UI,
does
all
the
needful
and
you
don't
need
to
know
about
all
the
LT
TM
approves
them.
The
thought
is,
this
might
be
a
easier
experience,
a
less
surprising
experience
and
last
friction
II
experience,
and
we
were
thinking
about
going
this
just
intestine
front
to
see
how
it
plays
out
there.
C
The
reason
I'm
bringing
it
up
here
is
to
see
if
y'all
are
cool
with
that
so
generally
like
we're
just
changing
it
in
one
repo
and
it's
a
repo
and
by
say
testing.
So
maybe
I
shouldn't
talk
to
you
about
it,
but
we
feel
like
it
might
be
surprising
to
people
and
so
we're
trying
to
consider
how
best
make
sure
that
expectation
is
made.
Clear.
I
was
thinking
we
just
broadcast
out
kubernetes
dev
telling
you
about
it.
C
D
C
I
believe
the
way
that
this
would
it
cause
if
I
request
changes
I
will
end
up
removing
both
of
the
things
I
am
capable
of
removing.
So
let's
talk
about
how
things
work
today,
if
I
forget
about
github,
do
I
at
all
I'm
just
using
text.
Okay,
so
you
put
LG
TM
on
a
PR,
but
you
missed
something
and
I
noticed
that
something
is
wrong.
C
I
can
then
come
in
and
apply
and
type
L
GTM,
cancel
and
I
will
remove
the
label
that
you
applied
and
that's
totally
cool
I
can
do
this
just
as
a
kubernetes
auric
member.
It
doesn't
matter
which
owners
files
I'm
in
and
it
doesn't
matter
which
owners
file
you're
in
just
as
long
as
we're
org
members
different
for
approve.
If
you
roll
in
and
you
approve
and
you
have
sufficient
privileges
and
all
the
right
owners
files
in
the
approved
label
shows
up
if
I
approve,
cancel
and
I'm,
not
in
any
of
the
owners.
C
J
Yeah,
so
I
was
wondering
if
we
could
loop
back
to
the
contributor
site,
because
I
still
kind
of
need
working
URLs.
So
I
was
talking
about
it
with
Josh
and
Bob
yesterday
and
we
could,
if
we
could
just
set
up
like
the
comms
folder
and
like
the
contributor
guide
as
like
a
first
step
like.
Would
that
be
a
problem.
A
D
C
J
Which
which
communities
like
the
website
or
web
sites
yeah?
So
what
I
would
like
to
do
is
turn
it
on,
but
not
do
the
URL.
So
we
can
get
the
content
right
while
I
ask
Alex
for
a
skin.
Would
that
be
okay
like
because
the
repo
right
now
is
trying
to
generate
from
the
community
site
and
I
think
what
we
want
to
do
Bob
does
that?
Do
that,
like
Josh.
E
A
A
H
So
Catherine,
who
is
a
resident
sig
testing
awesomeness
person
besides
Erin,
has
been
doing
a
lot
of
Awesome
slack
development.
Now
that
she's
become
a
slack
admin
and
currently
all
of
these
automation
tools
like
the
reporting
button
and
the
slack
log
and
whatnot
they
live,
and
the
test
in
for
a
repo
and
I
feel
like
that
is
wrong.
H
So
this
is
me
just
surfacing
that
they
live
in
tests
infra
and
they
should
probably
move
to
some
sort
of
a
country
Bex
repo,
whether
that's
like
ke
sig,
slash,
slack,
slack,
ops
or
whatever.
You
know
that
that
can
be
up
for
future
discussion,
but
yeah,
that's
something
that
needs
to
move,
probably
in
the
next.
Probably
before
cube,
come.
C
Thank
you
for
reminding
me
of
that
I
totally
meant
to
bring
that
up
today.
Yeah
I'd
really
like
to
propose
context.
I,
don't
know
if
it's
another
sub
project
or
if
I
dumped
it
under
the
slack
moderators
sub
project
or
whatever,
but
I
really
think
a
repo
like
a
slack
BOTS
repo
in
kubernetes.
Six
is
extremely
appropriate
here,
because
slack
bots
don't
really
have
anything
to
do
with
testing
and
I
am
very
supportive
of
that.
A
C
Cool
so
in
terms
of
following
the
appropriate
process
here,
do
I
need
to
the
mailing
list
and
get
lazy
consensus
from
everybody.
Do
I
need,
you
know
just
need
approval
from
one
or
more
of
the
chairs,
or
one
or
more
of
the
tech
leads.
How
would
you
recommend
we
proceed
to
make
sure
we
have
the
right
written
decision
and
have
followed
the
right
process
to
decide?
Yes,
confirm,
x1
stay
in
this
repo.
C
My
experience
as
a
kid
Batman
is
other
snakes,
often
like
decide
this
in
a
meeting
and
I
really
prefer
a
written
decision.
So
a
written
decision,
the
meeting
notes
or
something
on
the
mailing
list
is
sufficient
and
usually
we're
not
picky.
It's
kind
of
up
to,
however,
the
sink
chooses
to
run
itself
a
lot
of
other
six
that
we
interact
with
it's
just
like
a
sig
chair,
says:
yeah,
it's
cool.