►
From YouTube: K8s SIG Docs Meeting for 20210420
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
Hi
folks,
this
is
the
sig
docs
weekly
meeting
on
the
20th
of
april
2021.
we're
following
the
cloud
native
computing
foundation.
Code
of
conduct
so
be
excellent
to
each
other
people,
and
I'm
gonna
share
my
screen
with
the
agenda
when
I
find
it
cool
okay.
So
on
this
call,
do
we
have
any
new
contributors?
I
recognize
a
lot
of
faces
here.
Anyone
knew
don't
think
so
I'll
run
through
some
details.
This
week's
pr
angler
is
kb
hawkey.
A
Let's
move
on
to
the
agenda
and
talk
about
anything
from
the
upcoming
release.
1.22
any
update
there.
A
Okay,
I'm
I'm
not
hearing
an
update.
This
could
be
a
quick
meeting.
A
Hey
evie,
hey,
let's
move
on
to
talk
about
the
blog.
There
was
an
action
on
me
to
look
for
some
people
to
join
the
blog
team
at
sort
of
informal
or
even
formal
reviewers.
A
A
At
the
moment
we
have
a
number
of
people
who
are
proposing
blog
articles
and
the
reviews
are
getting
backlogged
and
we
could
definitely
use
more
people,
especially
the
early
stage
of
their
sort
of
contributor
ladder,
to
help
out,
with
reviews.
B
For
the
blog
reviewers,
are
you
looking
did
you
say
you
were
looking
for
people
to
help
like
editorial
edit
copy,
editing
reviews
and
not
doing
technical
views?
Is
that
that's
sort
of
the
more
people
you're
looking
for.
A
So,
but
both
of
those
kinds
of
contributions
are
valuable.
Reviewing,
for
you
know,
for
technical
accuracy
is,
is
useful
and
reviewing
for
style
tone.
A
You
know
correct
use
of
english
grammar
and
spelling
those
kinds
of
feedback
as
well.
We
do
have
you
know.
Blog
articles
are
often
improved
by
by
drawings
and
illustrations,
so
helping
people
vlog
in
line
with
the
you
know
the
weight,
the
kubernetes
style.
For
for
that.
That
is
also
helpful.
Any
of
those
contributions
are
welcome.
I
I
think
there's
very
few
that
aren't
okay,
cool
thanks.
C
Sorry
to
interrupt,
I
took,
I
took
a
look
at
the
the
slack
channel
and
I
was
trying
to
find
sort
of
ways
to
help
things
like
like
meeting
minutes
and
whatnot.
Is
there
a
center,
a
central
sort
of
spot
that.
C
Here's
a
list
of
things
that
we're
needing
help
with
go
at
it
or
is
there?
Is
it
just
go
into
the
to
the
chat
and
say
hey,
I'm
here.
A
I
I
think
that
the
blog
team,
I
think,
is
really
is
really
short
in
terms
of
active
blog
reviewers.
I
think
you're,
looking
at
at
two
or
three
people
who
are
who
are
busy.
I
recently
joined
this
review.
I
would
count
myself,
I'm
afraid
I
was
busy,
however,
being
a
a
blog
reviewer
and
having
the
the
privileges
to
add.
Lgtm
on
on
a
review
is
different
from
being
able
to
provide
feedback
to
people
who've
written
an
article.
A
So
those
informal
reviews,
I
think,
are
super
useful
and
that's
true
across
kind
of
the
kubernetes
org
in
general,
whether
it's
a
code
review
and
you're,
not
a
reviewer
for
that
area
of
code.
If
you
can
provide
constructive
feedback
to
help,
someone
get
that
code,
better
you're
helping.
A
If
you
can
help
someone
write
a
blog
article
that
that's
ready
to
be
have,
you
know,
approved
by
a
blog
approver,
you've
moved
things
along
you've
helped
and
that
kind
of
informal
early
contribution
by
people
is
exactly
the
sort
of
thing.
I
want
to
encourage.
A
If
you're
not
sure
what
that
might
look
like,
essentially
you're
doing
a
review,
just
maybe
call
out
that
you
know
you're,
not
speaking
for
the
blog
team,
formally
you're
just
trying
to
provide
constructive
feedback,
and
actually
they
have
misspelled
kubernetes
online.
One
and
they'll
need
to
fix
that
you
you
can
you
can
tell
that
that
kind
of
thing
it
can
be
a
small
detail.
It
can
be
a
big
detail.
It
can
be
an
offer
to
say.
A
Let's
take
this
back
to
google
docs,
when
when
people
want
to
blog,
they
might
come
in
via
slack
and
say
hey,
I
want
to
blog
something,
but
I'm
not
up
on
github
and
markdown
and
hugo.
These
aren't
my
things
and,
and
they
want
to
collaborate
on
a
google
doc.
Well,
you're
welcome
to
join
in.
Like
you
can
collaborate
on
that,
you
could
be
a
co-author.
A
D
Okay,
I
have
a
question
so
so
do
you
just
I'm
not
sure
exactly
I
just
joined
the
channel
last
week.
I'd
be
happy
to
edit
some
blogs.
Do
you
just
I
don't
know?
Are
they
just
do
they
just
show
up
as
pull
requests
somewhere?
I
haven't
really
looked
at
it
yet.
A
Sure,
so
let
me
explain
that
a
bit
we
have
labeling
across
the
kubernetes
organization
done
by
a
robot
called
well
a
family
of
automation,
called
prow
and
the
label
that's
used
for
blog
articles
is
area,
slash
blog.
Let
me
put
a
note
in
that.
A
So
if
you're
familiar
enough
with
github
to
filter
issues
and
you
search
for
open,
pr's,
they're,
not
they're,
not
closed
and
they
have
area
slash
blog
as
a
label.
Those
are
the
ones
I'd
emphasize.
It's
really
helpful
to
find
people
who
are
not
comfortable
with
github
and
want
to
propose
you
know,
wording
via
google,
docs
or
whatever,
because
you
can't
find
those
from
whatever
you
I
mean
that
is
from
like
slack
channels,
and
that
is
from
informal
conversations
from
people
saying:
hey,
I'm
new
here.
A
What
do
I
do
and
maybe
that'll
be
the
only
message
they
send,
so
anyone
who
can
follow
up
with
that
is
is
helping
out
loads,
but
for
the
meet
and
drink
of
of
blog
reviewing,
it
is
find
that
label
find
the
stuff
that
doesn't
have
any
kind
of
review
on
it.
Yet,
and
you
know
you
know,
explain
what
kind
of
review
you're
doing.
Are
you
doing
a
content
review?
Are
you
doing
a
technical
review?
Are
you
trying
to
cover
both
cases?
A
Are
you
reviewing
its
content
guidelines?
Because
you
know
we
wouldn't
accept
something?
That's
overtly
marketing
a
particular
commercial
organization,
and
you
can
explain
why
and
say
hey.
This
won't
be
okay.
This
is
why
here's
the
guidelines
which
I
will
dig
out
and
I
will
dig
out
the
blog
guidelines.
D
That
that's
really
helpful.
I
I'd
be
glad
to
help
with
that
too.
So
I'll
I'll
start
looking
for
stuff
this
week.
A
Thanks
well,
thanks
to
everyone
who
who's,
you
know,
whatever
your
capacity
to
help
it's,
it's
appreciated
any
more
on
blog
contributions,
or
would
we
like
to
move
on.
E
Hey
real
quick,
so
there
was
the
blog
meeting.
I
think
on
thursday.
That
seems
to
have
disappeared
from
my
calendar.
So
I'll
just
mention
that
in
the
slack.
A
Sure,
I'm
not
sure
how
many
people
would
be
at
the
blog
meeting.
I've
heard
like
this
is
just
my
take
on
things
that
you
know
there
are
alcoholics
anonymous
meetings
where
they're
on
the
calendar
and
no
one's
going
and
then
one
person
turns
up
and
a
second
person
turns
up.
I
think
it
might
have
to
be
that
kind
of
building
things
up
again.
Okay,
I'm
really
keen
that
whatever
we've
had
before,
like
let's
not
throw
that
away.
A
But
let's
not
dwell
too
strongly
on
we've
got
this
this
rigor
and
these
processes
we
must
follow
them.
I
think
it's
more
important.
We
find
a
way
to
to
build
up
a
an
active
blog
team
and
and
get
that
going.
We
do
have
a
couple
of
people
who
are
like
blog
approvers
and
so
on.
Bob
killen
has
been
doing
sterling
work,
but
is
also,
I
think,
a
very
over
over
committed
resource
in
this
in
this
area.
A
So
yeah
like
the
people
who
are
doing
blog
reviews,
we
can
work
out
what
meetings
we
want
and
I
think
we
we've
got
amongst
the
active
contributors
like
this
is
a
community-led
activity.
I
think
we
can.
We
can
come
up
with
weekly
meetings
or
fortnightly
meetings
that
suit
the
people
who
want
them
great
thanks
right,
I'm
going
to
move
on
that
was
super
useful
and,
like
I
say
I
I
think
sigdocs
would
really
appreciate
helping
that
area.
Let's
talk
about
localization.
A
If
you
do
have
anything
to
bring
up,
you
can
mention
that
on
kubernetes
slack
and
kp
hawkey
conrad
shaw
has
mentioned
that
you
know
she's
reviewing
this
week
as
the
the
designated
pr
angler.
So
someone
you
can
particularly
reach
out
to
if
you've
got
problems
with
a
pull
request
that
you
you
want
to
get
reviewed
or
understand
how
things
are
going
and
we
have
one
discussion.
Item.
Oh
two
discussion.
Oh
hang
on.
A
I
see
that
there's
I
don't
know
who's
added,
but
there's
a
pr
there.
I'm
thinking.
D
A
D
A
I
haven't
looked
at
this
pr
chris.
Would
you
like
to
speak
about
that.
A
D
And
I
have
responded
to
all
your
issues
and
all
your
comments
and
raise
comments,
and
I
said
and
my
question
is
you
know
how
do
we
move
forward?
Can
I
can
I
get
it
merged
and
ray
suggested
that
maybe
it
needed
a
wider
review
because
it
is
kind
of
a
big
topic
and
I
just
kind
of
took
it
on
myself.
D
D
D
Request,
the
purpose
is
that
someone
goes
to
that
page
and
in
fact
there
was
someone
that
actually
entered
an
issue
about
this.
They
go
to
the
page
and
it
says
production
environment,
and
it
does
it
only.
It
has
like
four
links
as
it
currently
stands
to
kind
of
random
topics
on
on
production,
on
setting
up
a
production
environment.
D
So
I
thought
you
know,
as
I
was
reading
some
of
the
the
survey
that
you
guys
took
a
couple
years
ago,
and
people
said
they
sometimes
had
trouble
understanding
conceptually
what
was
going
on
so
I
started
looking
throughout
the
whole
doc
set,
there's
some
great
content
on
how
to
set
up
production,
quality,
kubernetes
environments
they're
in
pieces
all
over
the
place.
So
I
thought
I
would
do
is
I
would
say
from
a
conceptual
standpoint,
what
is
it
that
you
need
to
do?
D
Yeah
the
preview
so
I'll
put
it
in
the
chat
if
anyone's
interested
and
basically
what
I
said
was
okay,
I
talked
to
some
some
experts,
people.
I
know
that
have
set
up
kubernetes
and
production
environments
from
scratch
and
basically
said
what
are
the
things
you
need
to
think
about
going
into
it
and
the
main
things
they
said
that
are
going
to
be
different
from
just
a
regular.
You
know
your
own
development
environment
or
your
personal
learning
environment
is
availability.
D
It's
something
that
if
it
has
to
be
there,
what
do
you
have
to
do
to
make
sure
it's
available
scale?
If
it's
something
that's
going
to
grow
very
large?
How
do
you
plan
for
that
and
then
security
and
access
management?
Are
there
going
to
be
a
lot
of
people
hitting
this
thing?
What
are
the
security
issues?
D
You
need
to
do,
and
I
said
basically
take
those
take
that
lens
and
then
look
through
how
to
apply
that
when
you
go
to
set
up
your
your
kubernetes
production
environment
and
then
I
split
the
rest
of
it
into
basically
four
sections
setting
up
a
control,
plane,
setting
up
worker
nodes,
setting
up
user
access,
and
then
configuring
your
workload,
resources
and
all
those
are
things
you
need
to
consider
going
to
production
environment.
So
I've
I've
talked
to
a
bunch
of
experts
about
this.
D
D
You
know
bring
someone
else
in
and
get
help
on
it,
but
for
the
most
part
it
kind
of
says
what
I
wanted
to
say
and
and
then
I
had,
I
incorporated
all
the
issues
like
that
you
had
and
that
ray
had
you
remember
it
now
right
tim.
A
B
Did-
and
this
might
have
already
been
covered
in
your
issue-
the
conversations
in
the
issue
I
didn't-
I
didn't
go
through
all
of
those
in
the
pr,
but
this
is
this-
was
like
an
index
file
that
opened
that
had
the
list
for
the
the
sub
pages
is
that
something
that
is
still
there
like
is
the
menu.
Like
the
same
that
you
could
get
to
the
production
item,
items
that
were
under
you
know
what
I'm
saying.
E
D
In
there,
in
context
of
where
they're
interesting,
I
also
incorporated
all
the
links
from
the
best
practices
page,
because
I
looked
at
those
and
really
none
of
them
really
applied
to
learning
environments.
They
were
all
best
practices
for,
if
you're
doing
a
production
kind
of
environment.
So
I
got
all
those
links
in
the
context
of
the
text
on
this
page
as
well,
I
mean
we
could
add
the
links
to
the
bottom.
B
Okay,
I
was
just
wondering
in
the
case
of
how
it
is
done
in
other
pages,
like
the
the
underscore
index.markdown
file,
I
think
has
like
a
like
a
template
that
that
pulls
in
the
links
and
that's
why
it
was
just
the
four
links
that
were
pulled
in
from
the
subpages
within
that
folder,
and
I
didn't
I'm
just
raising
it
because
I
didn't
know.
If
that
would
cause
issues.
You
know
not
really
any
real
issue,
but
if
that
will
cause
any
problems,
if
we
do
want
to
change
that
template
going
forward
or
like
you.
A
B
A
Mean
I'm
going
to
talk
about
the
technology
here,
a
little
bit
because
our
our
theme
we
use
doxy,
lets
you
customize,
whether
you
want
automatic
indexing
for
subpages
or
whether
you
want
to
provide
your
own
and
we,
you
know
both
of
those
approaches
are
fine.
Some
sections
deliberately
say
I
am
the
index.
Someone
has
written
an
index,
I
don't
add
the
same
thing
again
and
other
pages
are,
for
example.
The
task
section
currently
is
entirely
automatically
generated
from
the
pages
within
it
and
that's
fine
too.
A
A
I
think
the
convention
is
that
when
you
have
a
more
narrative
page
like
this,
that
either
in
the
page
overview
this
this
pr
overview
is
really
short.
It's
two
sentences.
A
So
if
you
want
to
abigail,
you
could
add
that
feedback
as
a
question
to
the
to
the
pr-
and
I
think
I
would
I
encourage
you
to
do
so,
because
I
think
it's
good
feedback
and
be
good
to
have
that
down.
B
A
I'm
also
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
how
I
review
and
the
big
question
I
have
in
my
the
two
questions
I
have
in
my
mind,
are
well
three
right.
Two
main
questions
are:
is
the
new
content
factually
accurate?
Are
we
introducing
regressions
by
that
there's
new
content,
we're
adding
it
and
it's
technically
wrong?
It's
misleading
like
we
should
not.
We
should
not
merge
those
pr's
I
would
be.
A
There
are
some
exceptions
when
I'd
merge,
something
like
that
and
then
immediately
log,
an
issue
saying:
okay,
good
first
issue:
we
need
to
go
and
fix
this
accuracy
that
I've
just
this
inaccurate
content
that
I've
just
merged
for
an
exceptional
reason.
The
next
question
is:
is
the
revised
page
better
than
the
old
page
overall?
A
A
Does
this
right
make
the
docs
a
better
place,
and
it
doesn't
mean
that
the
new
page
has
to
be
perfect.
You
know
it
has
to
be
better.
The
the
perfect
is
the
enemy
of
the
merged,
and
then
there
is
a
third
paperwork
type
question.
We
must
make
sure
that
we
follow
the
content
guide,
so
no
linking
to
third-party
commercial
interests.
A
No,
you
know
no
breaching
cncf
guidelines.
Well,
don't
do
that
so
long
as
those
sort
of
paperwork,
tech
check,
boxes
that
are
important
are
covered,
there
are
no
technical
inaccuracies
and
we
are
making
improvement.
Then
I'm
I'm
might
need
to
approve
things.
A
So
if
anyone
is
on
this
call
and
is
happy
to
review
it,
either
informally
at
an
informal
review,
so
our
convention,
for
that
is
that
you
review
with
the
capital,
letters
lgtm
or
the
words
looks
good
to
me
or,
if
you're
a
reviewer
for
it
for
the
english
localization,
then
it's
the
proud
command
lgtm,
which
is
meaningful
and
we'll
add
a
label
lgtm
to
the
to
the
issue
either
of
those
things
will
move
it
on.
Does
someone
want
to
step
forward
on
that?
One.
B
Since
I
was
was
had
questions
on
it,
I
I
can
take
a
pass
that
I'm
not
an
official
reviewer
though,
but
I
can.
I
can
take
a
pass
and
do
an.
A
Interview
in
formal
reviews
I
mean
I
started
here
by
you
know
like
my
journey
towards
being
currently
a
technical
lead
was
that
I
started
by
doing
informal
reviews
on
prs
and
people
said
well.
These
are
useful,
please
do
more
of
them,
and
so
people
who
can
review
and
help
move
things
on
we
want.
We
want
you
to
do
that.
It's
it's
it's
contribution
that
we
entirely
value.
D
So
if
I
could
add
just
a
little
more
context
to
it
as
well,
I
I
thought
hard
before
I
did
this
to
make
sure
I
kept
all
like
third
party
vendor
direct
information
out
of
it.
That
says,
oh
by
the
way
you
don't
have
to
do
any
of
this.
You
know
aws
or
google
or
azure.
They
can
do
this
better.
I
kept
all
that
stuff
out.
I
did
have
a
section
at
first
that
said:
here's
what
you
here's,
what
someone
else
could
do
for
you.
I
had
a
rather
long
section
about.
D
Well,
you
can
go
serverless,
you
don't
even
have
to
set
up
a
server.
You
can
have
them
do
the
control
nodes
you
can
have
them
do
worker
nodes.
Instead,
at
your
suggestion
tim
actually,
I
took
away,
I
threw
out
that
whole
section.
I
will
eventually
present
it
as
a
blog
and
just
put
a
little
bullet
list
saying
hey.
Can
you
can
consider
that
someone
else
can
do
this?
There's
just
a
short
bullet
list
right
near
the
beginning,
but
everything
else
in
here
is
meant
to
be
non-controversial.
D
It's
really
just
meant
to
to
give
an
entry
point
to
lots
of
stuff
throughout
the
the
documentation.
That's
already
there
that
people,
maybe
won't
can't
find
on
their
own,
so
this
sort
of
gives
them
a
context
and
gives
them
sort
of
conceptual
entry
into
into
the
content.
So
that's
my
main
point:
it's
not
to
push
any
one
way
of
doing
things,
but
really
to
just
get
an
entry
point
into
a
lot
of
things.
It
was
kind
of
random
the
way
it
was
before,
with
kind
of
four
random
links.
A
I
think
it
could
use
another.
You
know
passive
review
by
someone
who's,
not
you
chris.
You
know
because
that's
needed,
but
your
your
your
competitors,
you
know
your
the
thing.
We're
comparing
it
with
the
existing
page
is
not
great,
so
I
think
you've
got
an
easy,
easy,
easy
journey
to
convincing
people
that
you've
made
an
improvement
here,
and
I
you
know
you
should
be
confident
that
time
and
resources
permitting
we
will
get
this
through
sounds
great.
Okay.
Well
I'll!
Look
for
your
input
abigail!
A
I
appreciate
that
and
remember
chris,
so
kp
hawkey
has
picked
up
the
pr
angle
for
this
week.
So
if
things
you
know,
if
you
do
want
advice
on
how
do
I
get
my
pr
merged
or
hey,
this
has
got
an
informal
review.
Can
you
help
move
it
forward?
There
is
always
every
week,
a
person
from
sigdocs
who
has
put
themselves
down
as
they
in
the
chair
for
that
week.
E
A
In
the
agenda
that
I'm
screen
sharing
is
to
the
the
website
wiki,
and
you
can
find
you
know
you
can
find
who
the
current
wrangler
is.
So
that's
that's
a
useful
thing.
If
you've
got
a
pr,
that's
a
problematic.
You
want
some
advice
that
the
pr
angler
is
is
someone
that
we
want
you
to
be
able
to
turn
to
great
thanks
very
much
appreciate
it.
A
Any
que,
like
we've,
talked
about
a
review,
and
I
one
of
the
reasons
I've
been
happy
to
talk
a
bit
about
that
in
a
bit
more
detail
is
because
I
think
it's
useful
for
people
who
aren't
doing
reviews
to
understand
what's
involved,
and
you
know
how
they
can
get
help
and
so
on.
Has
anyone
had
any
questions
on
that?
That's
popped
into
their
mind.
You
know,
while
that's
been
discussed,.
D
A
On
github
all
pull
requests
well
this
in
a
public
repository.
This
is
a
public
history,
we're
not
like
using
github
enterprise
or
private
repos.
This
is
open
source
public
development.
Anyone
can
join
github
and
get
a
github
username
and
can
comment
on
a
pull
request
and
propose
change.
Anyone
we'd
like
you
to
follow
the
cncf
code
of
conduct.
A
Otherwise
we
will,
you
know,
ban
you,
but
as
long
as
you're,
not
overtly
abusive
or
otherwise
a
problem,
we
value
your
feedback,
and
so
I
can
go
and
look
at
any
bit
of
kubernetes
code
or
indeed
some
other
cncf
project.
Like
I
don't
know,
cnab
I
can
go
and
look
at
their
pull
requests
and
I
can
go
and
put
a
comment
saying
yeah.
This
looks
alright
to
me.
I
know
we
should
merge
this.
That's
an
informal
review.
A
I
can
go
and
look
at
someone's
proposed
change
to
another
bit
of
kubernetes
or
anywhere
on
on
the
web
on
github
and
say
you,
you
know
what
you've
misspelled
the
name
of
the
project.
Yeah
you'll
need
to
fix
that
and
I
can
use
the
suggestions.
Api
to
say,
hey
here,
is
what
you've
written,
but
spelled
correctly
as
a
comment.
That's
a
review
like
if
you
provide
a
comment
on
a
pr
and
you
fix
someone's
typo
and
you
give
them
a
suggestion.
A
Using
the
suggestions
feature
in
github,
you've
done
an
informal
review
and
you
can
go.
You
know
the
next
level.
Up
on
that
is,
you
can
go
through
in
a
structured
way
and
say
hey.
You
know
this
is
good.
This
is
good.
I
like
that.
You
might
want
to
think
about
this
wording.
Here's
a
markdown
error
that
I've
spotted
that's
good
and
you
know
and
give
that's
a
that's
a
review,
it's
informal,
because
your
review
doesn't
count
towards
the
process
of
getting
it
merged.
It's
it.
A
Can
it's
meaningful
to
the
person
who
wrote
it
they'll
really.
I
hope
they'll
really
appreciate
the
feedback,
but
before
we
make
changes
to
the
live
website,
we
need.
You
know
the
automation
to
spot
that
a
person
designated
as
a
reviewer.
Has
you
know
or
done
the
automation
steps
to
get
the
lgtm
label
on
there?
A
So
lgtm
labels
are
around
checking
that
the
content
is
technically
accurate
and
it's
kind
of
correctly
spelled
valid,
markdown
and
so
on
and,
if
someone's
documenting
a
technical
feature,
we
sig
docs
might
go
and
ask
a
different
part
of
kubernetes
contributors
to
say,
like
maybe
it's
a
networking
change,
we
might
ask
the
network
special
interest
group
and
say
hey
this
is
this?
Is
your
area?
Please?
A
Would
someone
from
the
network
special
interest
group
check
that
this
is
technically
accurate
and
add
the
lgtm
label
to
this
pull
request
and
we'll
say
that
we're
not
going
to
move
things
forward
until
that's
happened
because
it's
essential,
we
don't
want
to
mislead
people
and
there's
a
second
check
which
is-
and
this
is
done
by
sig
docs
people-
nothing
to
do
with
other
sigs
and
what
have
you,
which
is
approval
so
irvy
and
I
are
approvers
our
job.
A
A
Someone
else
has
reviewed
the
the
accuracy
of
the
change
in
terms
of
tech,
technical
correctness
and
wording,
and
so
on
I
approve
and
once
approval
happens
and
lgtm
is
in
place.
Automation
does
the
boring
work
of
merging
it
and
publishing
it
to
the
website.
A
A
little
detail
I
mentioned
is
that
sometimes,
if
I,
if
I'm
confident
in
the
standing
of
a
reviewer
and
I'm
approving,
I
will
look
just
at
the
first
page.
I
won't
look
at
the
the
markdown
changes
at
all
because
it's
got
an
lg
tm
and
my
job
there
is
is
to
look
as
an
approver
at
the
at
the
pr
description.
A
So
I've
I've
had
changes
where
I'm
approving
I
haven't
looked
at
the
code.
I've
been
confident
that
ci
has
tested.
It
won't
break
the
website,
I'm
confident
that
another
person
has
added
lgtm
and
that
they
meant
it,
and
I'm
confident
that
the
the
pr
description
makes
sense
as
an
improvement
to
make
slash
approve.
A
So
there
are
two
slightly
different
roles
there.
We
never
want
to
have
the
ability
to
give
someone
the
ability
to
change
their
website
on
their
own,
so
I
can't
change
the
website,
even
as
a
tech
lead.
Someone
else
has
to
check
my
work
once
you're.
Once
all
that's
happened,
your
change
is
on
the
live
website.
A
Nice
thanks
appreciate
that
cool.
Well,
let's
move
on
to
the
discussion
part
and
talk
about
this
was
carried
over
from
last
week,
I'm
not
sure
which
which
person
brought
this
up
but
control,
plane
versus
control,
plane,
node
in
documentation.
E
Yeah
I
brought
this
up
last
week.
Okay,.
E
A
Cool,
well,
I
mean
there's
room
to
just
carry
on,
but
it
sounds
like
you're
all
sorted,
yes
cool.
I
will
look
back
and
say
steve.
We
asked
earlier
in
the
meeting
if
there
are
any
new
contributors,
I
don't
know
if
you've
joined
a
sig
docs
meeting
before.
But
if
you,
if
you're
new
here,
please
feel
welcome
to
introduce
yourself.
A
Oh,
and
I
would
add
that,
if
you're
unable
to
speak
but
when
I'm
introduced
by
the
chat,
because
you're
you
know
muted
or
don't
have
audio
an
instruction
by
the
chat
is
also
fine.
If
you
want
to.
A
Okay,
any
more
topics
for
this
week's
meeting.
F
Yeah
me
sorry,
reacted
really
late
to
the
update
for
122
release.
So
currently
we
are
in
week
zero,
let's
say,
and
I'm
not
sure
yet
what
the
release
cadence
will
be
for
this
if
it
will
be
the
same
or
if
it
will
be
a
new
one,
three
three
times
per
year.
The
discussion
is
not
definitive
yet,
or
at
least
it
wasn't
until
I
checked
it
last
time
I
am
currently
in
the
process
of
picking
up
the
shadows
and
week
one
will
be
next
week.
A
Okay,
so
you're
nominating
what
was
the
word
for
your
something:
selecting
dog
shadows?
Yes,
exactly:
okay
and
you're,
starting
on
this
next
week.
Yes,
okay,
cool
thanks
victor
well!
I
guess
that
was
the
last
item.
So
thanks
everyone
I'll
give
you
a
few
minutes
of
your
tuesday
back.
Thank
you
very
much.
That's
a
sig
meeting.