►
From YouTube: Kubernetes SIG Docs 20170912
Description
Meeting notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ds87eRiNZeXwRBEbFr6Z7ukjbTow5RQcNZLaSvWWQsE/
The Kubernetes special interest group for documentation (SIG Docs) meets weekly to discuss improving Kubernetes documentation. This video is the meeting for 12 September 2017.
A
Okay,
this
meeting
is
now
being
recorded
hello
and
welcome
to
the
Sig
Doc's
meeting
weekly
meeting
for
kubernetes
on
September
12th
2017
I.
Am
your
host
Zach,
coy,
listen
and
let's
get
rolling.
If
you
see
me
post
a
link
to
the
agenda
in
the
chat
window,
just
in
case
you
did
not
already
have
that
open
right,
I,
don't
think
we
have
any
new
attendees,
but
any
do
we
have
any
new
attendees.
Today
you
going
once
going
twice
everyone's
an
old
hand.
A
This
is
you
get
grizzled
pretty
quickly
in
this
thing,
alright,
let's
see
first
on
our
agenda
is
repo
labels,
so
we
are
down
from
150
for
repo
labels
to
30.
If
you
want
to
see
what
went
away
and
why
you
can
see,
there's
a
link
to
issue
number
53
39
and
if
you
have
any
questions
about
that,
even
though
the
issue
is
closed,
we
can
absolutely
discuss
it
there.
A
In
the
middle
of
removing
a
lot
of
labels,
there
was
a
request
for
a
new
label
for
tutorial
related
content
from
the
katakana
team,
who
does
who
builds
the
tutorials.
So
there
is
a
team
/
cata
Kota
repo
label.
Now
so
if
they
find
the
off
chance,
you
happen
to
be
doing
issue
triage
and
you
see
a
tutorial
related,
PR
or
issue.
That's
been
opened,
that's
that's
the
label
you
can
assign
to
it
that
will
make
sure
that
it
finds
the
home.
It
needs
to
that
it
that
it
gets
to
the
home
where
it
belongs.
B
With
regard
to
their
release,
notes,
Radek
and
I
have
been
meeting
weekly
several
times
a
week
to
talk
about
how
we
want
to
proceed.
It
looks
as
though,
where
there
is
still
a
bit
of
outstanding
content
to
come
in
so
for
purposes
of
redoing.
The
information
architecture
I
started
at
Google
Doc
this
morning.
I
should
share
it
with
you.
B
Zak
I
haven't
actually
done
very
much
with
that,
because,
as
I
was
looking
through
the
content
a
little
more
carefully
I
realized
just
how
much
is
still
missing
and
I
don't
mean
things
undocumented,
but
I
mean
inadequate
release
notes,
notably
very
few
of
them,
actually
tell
anybody.
What
changed
I
believe
the
cig
auth
is
one
notable
exception
to
this
they've
been
a
very
nice
job
of
explaining
what
chain
and
in
life
matters.
B
Some
of
this
is
pretty
easy
to
extrapolate.
Some
of
it
is
not,
and
I
will
just
put
it
to
this
relatively
small
group,
most
of
whom
aren't
involved
in
the
release
and
then
I'll
figure
out
who
to
ask
about
this
right
now.
I'm
thinking
since
writers
are
newly
assigned
to
this
release,
my
plan
at
least,
is
for
one
case
where
I
can
identify
the
author
of
a
bunch
of
content.
That's
missing
this.
B
A
B
B
Now
I
want
to
do
a
trial.
Balloon
of
this
conversation
approach
before
I
suggest
that
we
try
to
extend
it
and
I.
Don't
know
how
and
I
kind
of
like
to
brainstorm
it
a
little
bit
more
with
Radhika
when
she's
back,
because
I
think
that
she's
not
out
for
too
long
and
then
we
may
well
be
asking
other
folks,
you
know,
can
you
please
go
talk
to
I?
Would
try
to
identify
specific
individuals
I'm
what
you
know?
B
It's
not
that
hard
to
do
that,
much
digging
and
in
the
PR
streets
love
to
see
who
actually
authored
content
that
the
PRS,
except
for
this
one,
which
was
the
first
one
on
the
PRS,
are
pretty
clear
about
it,
and
so
I'd
like
to
proceed
incremental
II
on
it.
I
know
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
time,
but
I'm
talking
about
a
matter
of
a
day
or
two
and
I
will
put
a
I,
will
put
a
shout
out
into
the
select.
A
B
For
folks
who
are
more,
you
know,
we've
gone
through
our
lease
or
to
my
biggest
concern
and
really
because
to
is
that
I,
don't
know
how
to
answer
this:
how
to
get
better
content
for
what
already
exists.
I
know
how
to
deal
with
that
I
mean
one
or
another.
We
can
figure
that
out
where
content
might
be
completely
missing,
I,
don't
know
how
to
figure
that
out,
that's
probably
the
biggest
concern,
and
if
anybody
on
this
call
is
in
touch
with
people
at
this
point,
I'm
thinkin
individual
contact
may
be
most
effective.
C
C
So
I'll,
just
as
you're
looking
for
that
I'll
say
we're
both
we're
both
on
track
and
I'm.
A
little
worried
we're
on
track
with
everything
we
know
about,
and
those
are
the
those
are
the
ones
that
have
marked
it
needs
docks.
Yes
in
this
petite,
some
of
them
have
key
ours
already
and
I
feel
like
we
have
time
to
help
the
remaining
PRS
for
any
of
these.
C
C
C
B
Does
seem
like
persistence
is
a
whole
lot
of
the
reality
of
what
we
have
to
do.
I
was
in
naming
no
names,
but
I
was
in
a
meeting
yesterday
where
in
a
contributor
said,
oh,
yes
and
I
think
I
have
to
get
docs
in
for
this
feature
this
week
and
I
said
no,
the
deadline
was
last
week
at
the
response
was
oh
well.
We
worry
about
the
docs
later
and
lots
of
times
the
docs
come
in
after
the
release.
Ships
and
I
know.
B
A
C
Yeah
so
yeah.
The
schedule
said
that
last
week
on
Wednesday,
your
PR
was
supposed
to
be.
It
was
supposed
to
exist
and
by
tomorrow
Wednesday
tomorrow
it
was
supposed
to
be
ready
to
be
merged.
So
if
people
have
not
yet
even
created
their
PRS
they're
quite
a
bit
behind
okay.
A
C
A
C
B
D
C
A
A
E
E
Yeah
gke
team
meeting
they
asked
me
to
do
that
so
I
need
a
prep
a
little
bit,
but
so
with
respect
to
the
code
contributors
documentation,
so
I've
been
working
with
Paris
who's,
a
new
community
manager
and
she
she's
a
Googler,
and
we
we
have
a
list
of
people
that
are
interested
in
helping
out
with
that
through,
like
the
it's
sort
of
compiled
from
the
issue
in
github
and
she's,
going
through
kind
of
like
the
the
governance
stuff
like.
How
do
you
start
a
working
group?
Whatever
I
mean
we
kind
of?
E
Did
it
ours
like
ad-hoc,
but
I?
Guess
she's
trying
to
do
it
more
legit,
so
so
I'm
gonna
we
just
started
like
last
week
or
so
so
I'm
going
to
start
meeting
with
her
regularly
and
then
we're
gonna
have
a
meeting
and
I
think
the
the
key
to
people
that
we
need
in
the
meeting
for
the
first
one
is
Michael
and
then
also
joy
or
Jorge.
How
do
you
pronounce
the
name?
Jo
Archie
I,
think.
C
E
But
the
idea
is
that
probably
I
will
just
sort
of
guide
them
with
the
high
level
kind
of
framework
that
comes
out
of
like
the
user
journeys
project
and
then
she'll
work
with
the
that
working
group
more
like
because
they're,
probably
at
the
extinct
architecture,
experience
a
contributing
experience
and
API
missionary
level
and
kind
of
like
heard
those
cats
but
I
think
the
initial
MVP
for
that
shouldn't
be
too
difficult
because
Mike
already
assembled
like
all
the
materials
that
exists
so
it
hopefully,
the
initial
version
won't
be
too
arduous
and
then
from
that
we
can
expand
on
it.
E
But
I
think
that's
also
brought
up
a
bunch
of
other
kind
of
personas
that
people
wanted
to
pursue
because
there's
one
for
the
SDK
stuff
this
just
which
is
actually
kind
of
different
than
the
code
contributors.
So
there's
going
to
be
more
stuff
down
the
pipeline
and
I'll
update
you
when
I
get
more
info
awesome
and
then
I
guess
for
the
next
topic
agenda
item
like
for
the
Chinese
translation
project,
Dan
Cohen
from
the
Linux
Foundation
has
seen.
Cn
CF
suggested
that
we
schedule
one
of
our
zigzags
meetings
to
like
something
like
8:00
a.m.
E
Pacific
time
so
that
they
can
to
the
people
in
China
can
join
in
and
then
we
can
get
synched
up
because
they
had,
you
know,
had
a
flood
of
like
PRS
that
were
a
lot
of
typos
and
stuff
like
that
which
they
have
now
reduced,
but
to
get
synced
up
with
their
effort.
We
should
probably
talk
with
them
directly
and
there's
I
think
a
thread
going
on
in
the
sig
Docs
Google
Group.
E
So
but
it
sounds
like
they,
they
have
a
pretty
well
organized.
They
have
like
spreadsheets,
saying
like
who's
supposed
to
do.
What
and
like
they
have
the
list
of
contributors.
So
we
can
see
like
when
we're
looking
at
a
PR
like.
Are
they
part
of
the
project
or
not?
And
for
our
part,
we
don't
have
to
review
it
ourselves.
We
just
have
to
tag
it
and
make
sure
that
they
go
through
the
review
process
before
we
merge
it
and
in
general.
E
Other
process
is
just
that,
like
they
have
several
organization
like
different
companies,
contributing
so
whoever
submits
a
PR.
They
need
someone
from
a
different
organization
to
review
it
so
keep
them
kind
of
legit
and
then,
once
that
other
person
gives
it
the
LG
team,
then
we
can
go
ahead
and
merge
it.
So
we
can.
B
E
E
E
E
A
Right
thanks,
bye,
all
right,
I
think
one
I
wanted
to
boost
the
visibility
on
handling
pull
requests
that
have
the
need,
needs
tech
review
label.
There
is
a
list
of
available
tech
reviewers,
but
it's
in
the
wiki
and
the
wiki
github
wikis
are
unfortunately
silos.
There's
they
did
they
don't
I
mean
you
can
link
to
them,
but
they
don't
necessarily.
A
It
would
be
a
really
good
thing
to
keep
that
list
fresh.
So
as
you
work
with
different
SIG's
and
folks,
they
show
an
interest
in
Docs,
as
you
encounter
people
who
would
be,
who
would
potentially
be
good
reviewers,
it
would
be
awesome
if
we
could
add
them
to
the
list,
just
pull
them
for
their
interest
and
make
sure
that
that
our
list
of
tech
reviewers
is,
is
accurate
and
up
to
date
and
and
fresh
with
people
who
were
interested
in
doing
the
reviews
and
are
able
to
handle
them
well.
C
I
will
take
a
look
at
that
and
end
them
and
I'll
work
on
adding
something
for
the
contributor
Docs
awesome.
Thank
you,
Steve.
We
might
want
to
consolidate
and
right
now
we
have
that
information
in
a
spreadsheet.
We
have
it
in
a
wiki
and
you
know
maybe
we
could.
Maybe
it
should
be
in
the
docs.
You
know
we
should
maybe
pick
one
place
and
just
go
with
that
sure.
Yeah.
A
We
originally
had
a
presentation
scheduled
for
today
from
Radhika
about
open
source
projects,
but
unfortunately,
she's
had
to
death
and
her
family
and
just
had
to
take
emergency
leave
so
condolences
to
her.
We
will
reschedule
that
presentation
for
another
time,
but
do
we
have
any
other
items
that
we
need
to
discuss
anything
else
for
the
agenda.
B
I'll
bite
only
because
we've
got
extra
time
and
if
this
turns
into
something
tarnish,
let's
drop
it,
and
but
along
the
lines
of
things
that
I
have
looked
for
and
not
found
guidance
on
in
my
queue
for
the
Ducks,
we
Pope
currently
and
I've
got
a
couple
of
long
ish,
PR,
so
not
particularly
difficult
to
review,
but
they
are
for
purposes
of
I,
didn't
restore
and
swatch.
They
do
not
shake
out
when
they
put.
B
A
B
Realize
what
we
should
be
doing-
a
very
big
kind
of
you
know
all
of
the
baskets
question,
but
is
the
first
large-scale
work
done
and
I'm
not
gonna
stand
on
style
guide
persnickety.
This
I
just
have
no
sense.
At
all
sure,
I
mean
it's
no
kleh
nation
is
to
merge,
because
any
improvement
is
better
than
no
improvement
and
at
the
same
time,
are
we
and
I
don't
know
the
answer
to
this
question.
Are
we
missing
out
on
Trinity's
to
help
contributors
improve
their
contributions?
Is
it
PR
the
appropriateness,
I,
don't
question.
A
I
think
it
can
be
a
fairly
a
fairly
short
discussion.
Well,
I
think
it
could
be
as
long
as
we
could
ever
possibly
pour
words
into
it,
but
for
the
purposes
of
confining
confining
the
discussion
to
what
kind,
when
should
we
be
saying
yes,
and
when
should
we
be
saying
no
I
think
we
can
bound
that
reasonably
well,
our
style
guide
is
fairly
minimal
right
now
and
it
points
to
general
things.
Like
readability,
we
don't
have.
A
We
don't
have
a
fully
mature
style
guide.
That
says
these
are
the
specific
conventions
that
you
should
use
for
an
abundance
of
cases.
It
just
says:
is
it
readable
and
so
I
think
that
that
biased
towards
merging
content,
realizing
that
this
is
a
large
open
source
project
with
many
contributors
I
think
that's
an
okay
bias
to
have.
That
said,
there
have
been
a
couple
of
PRS
where
I
have
said.
A
However,
less
than
fluent
I
think
it's
okay
to
push
back
and
say
hey
this
needs
work.
I
can
point
uses
some
examples
of
why
and
how
but
I
think
the
bias
towards
healthfulness
is
good
working
for
free
as
a
writer
for
someone
else,
it's
not
good.
So
in
I
guess
in
your
own
best
judgment.
If
it
feels
like,
you
were
being
asked
to
write
something
for
somebody
for
free,
that's
not
an
okay
thing
to
do.
A
Unless
you
have
the
volunteer
bandwidth
and
you
want
to
do
it,
but
it's
okay
to
it's:
okay,
to
push
back
when
the
content
when
merging
content
would
be
a
barrier,
but
it's
also
okay
to
dive
in
and
make
the
tweaks
to
the
PR.
That
will
make
it
better
if,
if
doing
so,
would
take
less
effort
than
it
would
take
to
say.
No.
Is
that
helpful?
Yes,.
A
C
C
According
to
this
style
guide,
say:
they're,
not
capitalizing,
names
of
API
objects,
I,
don't
I,
don't
hold
up
the
PR
to
bring
the
entire
document
into
line
with
the
style
guide
and,
in
fact,
I'll
all
go
in
favor
of
consistency
with
with
the
rest
of
the
document.
So
that's
that's
one
place
where
I
do
kind
of
the
pragmatic
thing.
Instead
of
the
the
pure
thing
which
would
get
it,
you
know
try
to
bring
the
whole
document
into
alignment
with
the
style
guide
that
the
the
far
end
is
a
brand
new
topic.
C
I
just
had
one
of
these
yesterday
written
by
someone
who
speaks,
we
said
the
second
language
and
I
think
just
telling
them
to
go.
Look
at
the
style
guide.
Would
these
would
be
an
exercise
in
frustration
for
them
in
those
cases,
I'll
do
an
edit
pass
either
right
there
in
the
github
UI.
You
know
that
requires
me
to
ask
them
to
turn
on
allow
edits
by
maintains,
because
that's
always
turned
off,
even
if
the
person
turns
it
on
I've
had
some
luck
getting
people
to
turn
that
on
and
then
I
can
make
an
edit.
C
There
was
another
one
today
that
I
thought
was
big
enough
had
to
edit
I
need
to
edit
several
files
I'm,
actually
opening
a
pull
request
against
that
person's
repo,
so
I.
For
me,
it's
it's
it's
a
judgment.
Call
I
I
will
go
in
there
and
do
you
know
do
a
full
edit
pass,
maybe
spend
an
hour
or
even
two
if
it's
a
long
topic
in
other
cases,
I'll
just
put
notes,
I
know,
if
you
notes,
could
you
change
this,
for
that
I
will
just
let
it
stay
consistent
with
the
existing.