►
From YouTube: [SIG ContribEx] Weekly Meeting for 20221207
Description
[SIG ContribEx] Weekly Meeting for 20221207
A
B
I
am
behind
due
to
changes
in
job
stuff,
so
I
will
catch
up
with
it,
but
we
are
having
discussions
in
slack
about
what
we
should
actually
talk
about,
instead
of
because
it
sounds
like
the
topics
really
aren't
driving
with
people.
So
that's
kind
of
the
general
note
on
that.
One
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
discuss
it
here,
just
kind
of
keep
discussing
it
in
slack,
but
I
am
behind.
So
it's.
A
B
C
C
B
B
D
B
A
B
A
Okay,
that
will
go
into
summits,
so
I
wanted
to
do.
A
journal
call
out
there's
a
couple:
people
that
have
poked
about
potentially
interested
in
being
a
lead
for
kubecon
EU
next
year,
well
for
the
contribution
EU
next
year
and
I
just
wanted
to
see.
If
anyone
else
was
potentially
interested,
you
can
either
say
it
publicly
on
the
call
or
you
can.
You
know
ping
myself,
Josh
or
anyone
else.
That
is,
if.
C
You
really
need
to
have
a
European
at
least
co-leading,
that,
given
what
about
reaching
out
to
the
the
no
they're
exactly
the
wrong
people
to
reach
out,
nobody
say,
is
let's
go
ahead
and
reach
out
to
the
Amsterdam
kubernetes
Meetup,
which
is,
is
very
active
and
and
has
some
really
good
organizers
and
see
if
they're
interested
in
becoming
part
of
a
contributor
Summit,
except
that
they
are
running
their
own
standalone
kcd
two
months
before
kubecon
and
so
exactly
the
wrong
people.
Yeah.
A
E
E
D
C
A
F
A
G
Which
that's
a
good
update,
I
think
I
might
have
mentioned
before,
but
the
name
change
has
gone
through.
So
our
section
of
the
repo
is
now
called
contributor
comms.
If
you
find
any
places
that
say
marketing
team,
we
welcome
and
encourage
you
to
file
a
PR
to
update
that
to
contributor
comms.
Hopefully
we
got
all
of
the
places
where
there
are
links,
but
for
the
just
the
words
marketing
team.
We
didn't
use
automation
to
find
all
of
those,
so
you
may
see
them
updates.
G
We
had
a
number
of
new
Folks
at
our
last
meeting,
which
is
always
exciting,
so
hopefully
we'll
see
them
back
again.
This
week
we'll
see
we
have
updated
our
repo
with
new
roles
for
our
sub
project.
We've
been
working
basically
over
the
last
year
to
to
Define
what
we
want
the
roles
in
our
group
to
be
and
to
decide
who
would
lead
them,
so
that
is
now
updated,
except
for
sub
Project
Lead,
which
we
had
been
debating.
D
G
C
Cool
so
I've
been
holding
off
on
a
lot
of
the
comms
role
approvals
for
you
to
plus
one
them
caslin
the.
Let's
make
sure
that
that,
if
anything
needs
my
LG,
TM
and
I
haven't
noticed
that
you,
plus
one
did
particularly
because
I
was
out
tech
for
a
couple
of
days
that
that
we
get
those
clear
cool
just
because
a
lot
of
them
came
in
and
you
know
and
I
noticed
them
my
new
PRS
and
I'm
like
okay.
This
looks
okay,
but
caslin
needs
to
approve
it
cool
the.
G
Yeah,
there's
that
we
also
need
to
update
our
teams
list
in
GitHub
and
update
some
of
like
the
owner's
files
and
things
like
that.
So
it's
a
good
exercise
in
there
that
we've
been
doing
kind
of
understanding
what
all
the
labels
are
and
who
has
access
to
what
and
so
kind
of
part
of
that
we'll
sync
up
on
that
later.
C
A
F
F
We
see
the
videos
pop
up.
There
are
two
recordings
every
time
we
make
one
and
one
comes
from
spleen
and
one
comes
from
the
zapier,
the
zap
that
we
have
so
yeah
I
think
we
just
wanted
to
start.
Having
that
conversation,
I
guess
like
what
are
steps
are
from
moving
forward.
If,
if
we
do
want
to
go
that
route.
A
A
F
A
A
F
A
A
A
Okay,
we'll
move
over
to
GitHub
management.
Probably
the
only
thing
you
might
have
seen
an
email
that
I
saw
Decatur
the
other
day
about
us,
enabling
retain
lgtm
through
squash
for
KK
I.
Don't
expect,
there's
gonna
be
any
pushback
on
that.
It's
been
working
just
fine
in
K
website
for
a
while
now
so
next
Tuesday
that
will
probably
be
flipped
on
wanted
to
do
it
after
you
know
all
the
release
stuff.
Just
to
you
know
nothing
settled
there.
H
H
H
So
I
had
some
a
proposal
in
the
issue
that
you
can
see
to
try
and
add
some
additional
labels
with
automation.
So
that
way,
people
could
query
based
on
those
labels
to
know
quickly
which
PRS
are
ready
for
review,
or
you
know
so
that
that
makes
life
a
lot
easier.
If
I
can
share
the
issue
or
open
it
up.
If
you'd
like.
H
H
Foreign
I
certainly
could
flush
more
out
on
the
automation
criteria,
but
I
think
just
generally
I
think
the
first
question
is:
are:
are
people
like
the
four
labels?
Does
that
does
the
general
idea
make
sense
or
not,
and
then,
if
so,
does
the
four
four
labels
in
and
of
themselves
make
sense
or
not
and
then
I
think?
If
we
go
from
there
we
could.
We
could
fine-tune
the
automation
criteria,
side
of
things
and
could
work
on
yeah.
You.
A
A
A
C
C
D
D
H
Yeah
I
hear
it
so,
like
I,
said
automation
criteria,
that's
gonna,
like
it's
I,
mean
I'm.
Sure
that's
going
to
require
a
lot
more
flushing
for
the
different
things.
Approval
is
a
really
complicated
one
and
and
I
think
in
my
mind,
order.
Priority
would
be
like
the
needs
review
and
the
weight
on
author
would
be
the
two
higher
higher
priority
ones.
If
I
had
to
you
know,
look
because
those
I
think
will
were
the
most.
You
know,
I.
H
H
Exactly
after
that,
and
then
you
don't
know,
you
know
it
could
be
days
or
weeks,
and
you
didn't
realize
that
the
author
was
there
or
you
could
just
be
spending
a
lot
of
time.
You
know
checking
back
on
on
the
one
that
you
did
a
review
on
to
wait
for
the
approver
and
you
just
you
know,
that's
just
wasted
time
that
keeps
adding
up
and
you
multiply
that
by
the
number
of
PR's
and
you
just
you
know
it's
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
wasted
time,
I
think
across
a
lot
of
reviewers
and
approvers.
H
A
H
But
that's
why
I
think
that's
the
automation
is
important
part
of
it
yeah
right
and
that's
part
of
what,
because,
if
you're
relying
on
people
manually
to
add
needs
review
that
kind
of
defeats
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
the
purpose
right,
okay,
so
I,
don't
know
how
much
of
this
is
automatable
like
technically
but
I
I
know
at
least
some
of
it
is
I
I
can't
imagine
it
would
be
too
too
complex
with
all
the
label
automation
we
already
do
in
the
in
the
whole
thing.
So.
A
B
A
B
A
A
Yeah
I'd
say
like
we
do
our
sort
of
first
round
review
here
and
then
we'll
bump
it
up
to
sort
of
the
the
community
at
large.
It
also
probably
worth
talking
with
some
of
the
folks
in
test
infra
that
actually
are
the
owners
and
handle
a
lot
of
the
the
coding
of
the
automation
side
of
things,
but
yeah
no
I
I
agree.
It's
a
problem
actually.
A
H
D
D
A
Okay,
yeah
yeah
biggest
thing
is
the
the
cncf
was
developing
this
little
thing
to
basically
surface
like
good,
first
issue
type
stuff
for
all
the
various
projects
and
are
looking
for
feedback.
So
that's
a
quick
tldr
on
on
that
one.
If
everyone
wants
to
take
a
look
at
it
before
potentially
talking
slack
about
it.