►
From YouTube: Kubernetes Contributor Experience SIG 20190213
Description
Weekly update meeting
A
A
B
A
B
C
D
Awesome
we
have
completed
a
first
venue
conversation
with
CN
CF
about
Barcelona
and
Shanghai,
and
very
high-level
about
San
Diego,
we're
all
good
on
that.
On
that
front
they
are
actually
they
being
CN,
CF
event
planners
or
actually
in
Barcelona
this
week.
Looking
at
the
space
so
next
week
we
should
have
some
photos
and
things
like
that.
Jonas
is
gonna
start
taking
over
the
Monday
meetings.
As
he's
gonna
be
running,
barcelona
josh
is
going
to
be
having
his
own
meetings
for
Shanghai
and
sounds
like
he
has
a
crew
there
and
that's
I.
E
A
A
D
H
Can
I
can
do
a
little
bit
of
a
summary
since
I
was
typing
last
night,
so
sign
ups
remain
off
wha
I'm
we
are.
We
are
not
yet
accepting
new
signups
into
slack.
We
are
continuing
to
keep
most
web
looks
and
API
integrations.
Offline,
I
believed
you
and
re-enabled,
but
everything
else
is
still
off
and
other
than
that
status
is
basically
unchanged.
Since
last
week
we've
we've
updated
some
of
the
user
wording.
H
The
plan
so
far
is
still
taking
shape.
At
this
point,
we
don't
yet
have
any
confirmation
from
slack
that
they
are
fixing
the
notification
bug,
and
without
that
we
are
extremely
hesitant
to
reopen
signups,
because
that
will
allow
any
spammer
that
gets
through
whatever
meager
protections
we
can
create
to
do
bad
things,
so
we're
we're
struggling
to
figure
out
how
to
deal
with
this
without
slacks
assistance,
like
the
most
I
can
say.
B
D
H
I'm
not
I,
thought
you
an
admin
or
an
owner.
You
may
need
to
be
an
owner
to
do
that,
not
sure
you
I,
please
welcome
to
try
I'm,
not
sure
that
you
are
actually
allowed
to
directly
change
people's
email
addresses
at
whatever
permissions
level.
Okay,
all
right!
Well,
I'll,
try
to
death,
not
I'll.
Let
someone
know
one
slack.
D
All
right
incident
related
stuff,
two
plus
two
plus
on
to
Noah.
It
sounds
like
I,
don't
know
if
we
have
agreement
or
quorum.
Yet
that's
what
I'm
gonna
try
to
figure
out
today
on
us
going
to
the
end
user
community
committee
and
having
that
community
weigh
in
as
to
whether
or
not
they
should
be
starting
to
moderate
slack
me
I'm
speaking
from
my
standpoint
right
now.
D
I
know
some
other
admins
feel
this
way,
but
I'm
not
going
to
speak
for
them,
so
they
can
on
this
call,
but
I
feel
like
this
is
officially
out
of
scope
for
contributor
experience
and
I.
Think
that
the
end
user
community
needs
to
step
up
here.
I
think
that
even
if
we
have
20s
all
26,000
contributors
that
we've
ever
had
in
communities
history
on
slack,
that's
still
only
a
third
of
the
people
on
slack
and
we're
contributor
experience,
we're
not
consumer
experience
and
I
think
that
we
don't
have
enough
resources
for
that.
D
F
H
Don't
think
we
need
to
figure
out
if
we're
going
to
deprecated
slack
for
non
contributor
functions
like
I
agree,
we
should
reach
out
to
the
end-user
community,
but
I.
Don't
think
we've
done
that.
Yet
so,
let's,
let's
see
what
they
have
to
say,
like
I
I
hope
they
are
willing
to
step
up
and
help
us,
and
this
will
be
great
and
then
everything
will
be
fantastic.
Okay,.
B
B
D
I
mean
I
think
we
need
I,
think
Noah
drew
Noah,
drew
up
our
chart
last
night
in
one
of
his
Docs
and
I.
Think
it's
like.
We
need
at
least
3
/
8
hour
shift
around
the
clock,
so
I
mean
we're
talking
about
like
a
team
of
at
least
20
people,
and
if
we're,
if
our
responsibility
is
only
1/3,
then
we
need
at
least
10
plus
consumers
I
mean
I,
think
we
need
somebody
in
kubernetes
users
at
all
hours
at
least
know
this
to.
F
F
H
D
I
think
we're
just
giving
it
like
at
some
point.
We
just
have
to
give
up
the
risk
of
that.
This
I
mean
that
this
is
gonna
happen
again.
So
I
feel
like
that's
where
the
risk
assessment
comes
in,
of
the
risk
assessment
comes
in,
of
what
are
we
doing
with
slack
is
a
platform
period,
so
I
don't
think
we're
ever
going
to
fully
prevent
what
happened
unless
we
know
that
it's
lack
for
sure,
fixed
vulnerability.
F
D
E
George,
you
would
then
slack
in
maybe
we
could
they
in
some
sort
of
blacklist.
So
most
of
the
most
of
the
people
that
came
on
and
and
had
an
illicit
messages
that
they
sent
out
came
from
certain
different.
They
signed
up
using
certain
and
mail
servers
right
and
certain
domains,
so
we
could
blacklist.
Those
I
would
get
rid
of
some
of
it.
H
F
The
other
possibility,
if
we
were
opening
up
registration
for
end-users
again,
is
to
funnel
them
to
a
specific
channel
and
not
allow
them
to
immediately
join
other
generals
yeah.
Would
it
would
cut
the
amount
of
of
moderation
that
we
have
to
do
in
the
event
of
an
attack,
because
you
know
a
lot
of
what
was
going
on
in
Sunday
night?
F
Was
the
attackers
signing
up
for
multiple
accounts
and
if,
when
they
did
that
there
was
both
a
delay,
even
if
it
was
completely
programmed
delay
like
not
a
human
involved,
but
simply
stuff
didn't
get
approved
immediately?
So
if
there
was
both
a
delay-
and
they
were
all
funneled
specifically
into
a
new
user
channel,
then
that's
the
only
channel
that
we
would
have
to
worry
about,
protecting
and
totally
get
them
kicked
off.
What's.
H
H
I
A
B
D
C
I
apologize
I
can't
raise
my
hand
because
I'm
on
mobile
right
now,
but
I
thought
so.
We've
we've
been
operating
the
slack
instance
for
a
while
now,
and
is
this
the
first
large-scale
like?
Is
there
am
I
forgetting
about
any
other
instance
where
we've
had
like
a
large-scale
issue
like
this?
Are
we
essentially
potentially
having
a
big
reaction
to
a
single
incident,
and
maybe
is
there
middle
ground
in
there
where
we
could
still
explore
options
like
we
should
go
to
the
end
user
community?
We
should
get.
C
You
know
assess
whether
this
is
a
like
having
end
user
discussions
in
our
slack.
Is
that
something
that
there
is
appetite
to
maintain
an
appetite
that
has
backing
to
maintain,
but
as
far
as
the,
how
much
of
a
risk
is
it
to
reopen?
Sign
ups
see
how
things
go
if
we
have
another
issue
like
then
be
able
to
take
some
of
the
more
like
drastic
measures
like
63
moderators,
that
seems
that
seems
drastic
to
me.
I.
A
Could
be
wrong
and
other
people
feel
free
to
correct
me,
but
it
was
my
my
takeaway
from
our
discussion
last
week
was
that
once
this
group
finds
you
they
will
continue
to.
They
have
a
habit
of
coming
back
and
doing
it
again
and
again
and
again
once
they
find
you.
So
they
have
found
us
so
history,
which
would
indicate
that
they
would
probably
do
this
again
in
the
near
future
once
they
once
they
were
able
to
and.
F
And
the
thing
is,
it's
not
gonna
be
only
the
4chan
folks
I'm,
an
IRC
channel
admin
for
some
IRC
channels,
and
it's
just
a
fact
of
life
on
IRC
that
periodically
that
you
have
certain
bots
like,
for
example,
there's
one.
That's
nicknamed
islamabad
that
periodically
shows
up
and
it
automatically
signs
up
for
all
kinds
of
random
accounts
using
a
very
large
array
of
hijacked
email
servers.
So
we
can't
block
it
out
and
posts
random,
quran
verses.
F
F
And
there
isn't,
like
I
mean
IRC
moderation
has
been
around
for
a
long
time
and
they've
had
a
lot
of
people
there,
people
who
actually
have
access
to
the
servers
trying
to
do
automation
to
keep
these
groups
out
and
and
ultimately
nothing
is
a
hundred
percent
successful
because
they
just
have
a
lot
more
free
time
than
you
do
so.
I
would
agree
with
LC
that
on
not
only
the
4chan
folks,
but
these
attacks
haven't
gotten
some
publicity.
F
H
So
I
agree
with
that.
It
is
all
completely
true,
but
also
the
reality
remains
that
the
only
of
all
of
the
slacks
that
I
am
on
the
only
group
I
have
seen
that
has
carried
out.
This
attack
has
been
this
one
4chan
group
that
appears
to
use
the
same
MO
every
single
time.
So
that
is
also
true.
It
is
not
something
to
rely
on,
but
it
has
been
the
reality
up
until
now,
I
have
deployed
the
the
block
list
onto
one
of
the
other
slacks
that
I
moderate.
H
F
Well,
in
in
like
IRC,
we
have
to
make
the
decision
of
whether
having
it
open
is
worth
tolerating
a
certain
amount
of
eye
trouble
right,
because
freenode
no
FTC
have
not
walked
down
their
servers
and
prevented
new
people
from
signing
up.
They
said:
okay,
well,
having
these
periodic
attacks
and-
or
you
know
things
like
Islamabad
is
tolerable,
given
keeping
the
platform
open
the.
F
J
In
the
last
week
that
we've
been
turning
away,
signups,
like
the
reason
that
we
want
to
like
block
bad
actors
in
general,
is
because
we
want
to
stop
people
from
you
know
getting
pissed
off
at
the
community
and
turning
away
from
the
community,
but
I
would
say,
like
the
amount
of
people
and
not
attacked
I
got
pissed
off
and
actually
did
turn
away
from.
The
computing
is
probably
a
lot
less
than
the
amount
of
people
we
just
did.
Let's
sign
on
this
past
week,
so
like
we're
like
so
we're
like
I.
J
Think
we'd,
like
the
reaction.
This
is
that
we're
scared
to
get
people
on
the
community
were
scared
to
piss
off
our
existing
members
in
the
community,
but
at
the
same
time
I
think
we're
just
not
letting
them
in
which
is
even
like
we're,
not
letting
in
a
lot
more
people
than
we
would
be
pissing
off
if
they
were,
if
they
were
getting,
spend
members.
D
H
F
F
F
K
Just
what's
like
discuss
it
wolf
rate
limit
people
like
if
they
try
posting,
you
know
three
times
within
a
10-minute
period
or
something
like
they
are
responding
to
like
different
posts
within
a
10
minute
period.
It
will
hide
all
their
posts
and
wait
for
them
to
be
approved.
All
this
stuff
is
tunable
and
actually
sort
of
adaptable,
based
on
sort
of
your
user
trust
system.
Yeah.
G
The
hierarchy
of
trust
levels
is
something
that
makes
it
unique
and
much
more
easy
to
moderate
in
a
throttled
way.
If
it's
the
it
is
the
opposite
of
open
free
discussion,
but
normally
it's
not.
It
only
triggers
really
if
there's
abuse
or
somebody
new
who
hasn't
quite
proved
themselves.
And
yes,
you
could
get
past
that,
but
you
would
have
to
spend
weeks
days
weeks
month,
proving
yourself
a
part
of
the
community
and
then
turn
malicious
like
it's.
It's
such
an
investment
that
the
type
of
attacker
that
we're
talking
about
isn't
likely
to
make
I.
F
K
F
H
F
So
far
that
plan
for
sign
up
as
far
as
I
can
tell
he
is
we're
going
to
put
this
out
to
the
end
user
group
see
if
we
can
get
a
whole
bunch
more
moderators.
If
we
can
get
all
bunch
of
more
moderators,
then
we'll
look
at
opening
up
signups
again.
If
we
can't,
then
we're
going
to
move
to
a
scheme
where
we
direct
users
to
discuss,
etc
and
slack
starts
becoming
a
thing
just
for
contributors.
Is
that
correct?
That
is.
H
F
F
D
C
C
D
And
that's
gonna
be
problematic
when
we
invite
consumer
people
into
it,
yeah
I
think
we
there
isn't.
There's
no
perfect
solution
here.
Other
than
I'm
not
gonna
lie
to
you.
Y'all
I
think.
The
perfect
solution
here
is
to
have
slack
only
for
contributors
and
for
consumers
to
be
pushed
to
discuss
and
stackoverflow
like
we're,
not
gonna
get
a
perfect
solution
here.
B
G
B
B
For
this,
then,
have
one
more
person
deal
with
that
I,
don't
know
how
strongly
the
rest
of
you
feel,
but
like
I,
don't
like
I
feel,
like
we
kind
of
put
the
faith,
putting
the
I
don't
know
putting
the
fate
into
the
users
seems
kind
of
like
the
wrong
thing
to
say
there,
but
it's
like
we
want
to
have
this
nice
open
thing,
but
in
order
to
do
so,
we
have
to
have
24-hour
coverage.
So
we
either
get
the
volunteers
or
we're
gonna
have
to
figure
something
else
out.
B
I
agree
right
and
then
I
mean
there's
got
to
be
65
people
in
there
somewhere
right
and
then
someone's
gonna
have
to
be
a
lead.
They're
gonna
have
to
write
their
own
governor
they're.
Gonna
have
to
do
all
these
things,
but,
like
we
kind
of
have
to
do
that,
like
our
hands
being
forced
and
away
here,
right
I
mean.
Does
anybody
else
feel
like
I.
H
Think
that
something
else
does
have
a
little
bit
more.
Flexibility
like
as
I
think
it
was
Josh
mentioned,
like
single-channel
guests,
is
a
possibility
like
that,
as
a
thing
that
we
could
do
of
putting
people
of
putting
non
contributor
members
that
you
can
only
access,
good,
bernetta
status.
You
know
that
is
still
not
the
outcome.
I
would
prefer,
but
it
is
an
available
option.
F
D
C
C
D
C
D
F
Also
do
want
to
contrast
one
thing
here,
which
is
from
my
perspective.
The
the
only
thing
we
lose
by
pushing
the
end
users
on
to
discuss
is
that
we
lose
this
sort
of
easy
continuum
from
end
user
to
maintainer.
Right
then
everybody's
in
the
same
pool,
which
is
nice,
because
it
makes
it
easier
to
encourage
people
to
move
up
to
the
next
level.
F
From
my
perspective,
the
the
easy
continuum
is
really
the
only
thing
we're
losing
and,
and
so
when
I
look
at
doing
a
bunch
of
complicated
automation
in
order
to
protect
people
on
slack,
it's
not
very
appealing
from
that
perspective
cuz.
It
feels
like
we're
doing
a
lot
of
work,
particularly
when
you
know
having
just
come
from
a
testing
for
a
meeting
where
we
don't
have
enough
people
to
work
on
automation
for
building
kubernetes
yeah.
It
feels
like
a
misallocation
of
resources,
I.
L
Not
sure
I
want
to
phrase
this
in
the
visibility
aspect
of
communities
as
an
explicitly
inclusive,
community
and
I'm,
not
sure
that,
that's
necessarily
is
you
know
a
step
in
the
right
direction,
considering
the
people
that
are
using
slack
today
for
making
a
decision
about
whether
or
not
slack
is
gonna
be
our
primary
unit
of
communication,
then
that's
a
different
conversation,
but
since
it
is
today
making
that
delineation
I
think
harms
us
in
terms
of
you
know
the
basic
codex
of
the
kubernetes
community.
That's
already
been
laid
down.
A
Okay,
so
I
was
it
sounds
like
we're.
Gonna
take
this
back
to
the
community,
see
what
we
can
do
there
in
terms
of
volunteers
and
then,
if
we
don't
get
sufficient
support
from
the
the
broader
and
user
community,
then
we
will
come
back
regroup
and
consider
other
options
like
pushing
non
contributors
to
discuss.
J
G
G
A
B
Quick
thing
I've
been
I've,
been
trying
to
go
after
like
senior
people
and
stuff
and
tell
them
hey
we're
getting
an
influx
of
new
user
questions
and
stuff
I
could
really
use
some
help,
answering
questions
on
both
Stack
Overflow
and
discuss.
So
if
you
could
let
your
co-workers
know
that
if
they've
got
time
in
between
a
coffee
or
something
just
looking
at
a
question
would
really
help
us
out
right
now,
we've
got
a
lot.
New
users
are
engaging,
but
not
a
lot
of
people
are
answering
their
questions,
so
I
think.
D
K
D
H
D
D
D
A
A
I'll,
kick
it
off
so
just
to
wrap
back
around
to
a
discussion
we're
having
a
couple
of
weeks
ago.
We
made
it
a
goal
to
meet
as
a
group
and
have
a
face-to-face
meeting
for
our
sick.
I
know
that
it
was
proposed
that
we
just
extend.
We
just
count
our
in-person
meeting
in
Barcelona,
as
our
face-to-face
meeting
are
people
here.
Okay,
with
that,
the
second
most
supported
suggestion
was
to
use
Google
next,
as
our
face-to-face
meeting.
B
D
A
H
A
B
K
D
Not
got
an
answer,
but
I
did
reach
out.
I
actually
have
a
I'm
actually
seen
a
couple
folks
this
afternoon
that
have
better
connections
there
than
I
do
so
I'm
hoping
to
get
some
responses.
Do
you
want
to
fill
everybody
in
with
what
we
talked
about
about
the
Google
Group
stuff,
give
some
context,
because
it's
that's
another.
It's
another
hit
on
moderation
of
proprietary
tools,
so.
K
Killed
the
Arve
in
May,
there's
a
bunch
of
changes
happening
to
Google,
Groups
and
apparently
one
of
the
lesser
used
options
was
the
new
user
moderation
queue
and
if
you
have
that
enabled
it
will
flip
over
a
moderation
for
the
entire
Google
group.
So
every
post
has
to
be
moderated.
Instead,
it's
the
new
user
posts
as
an
on
or
off
thing.
D
That's
exactly
how
we
moderate
y'all,
so
that
very
unused
feature
for
everybody
else
is
extremely
used
here
in
open
source
land.
So
I
am
trying
to
see
from
other
Googlers
here
like.
Is
there
another
strategy
for
moderation
like
what's?
The
deal
should
maybe
also
looking
at
other
strategies
for
our
mailing
lists,
so
I
feel
like
our
entire
communication
structure
architecture
this
year
is
going
to
be
hit
so
brace
ourselves.
Winter
is
coming
for
productivity
tools,
maybe.
B
H
F
So
if
you
are
the
person
who
was
planning
on
doing
those,
please
put
your
name
down
in
that
grid.
Right
now,
I
only
have
four
action
items
because
there's
several
potential
axiom
items,
but
it
starts
with
one
so
I'm
preparing
to
request
any
user
committee
to
ask
for
additional
moderators.
Somebody
needs
to
write
that.