►
From YouTube: K8s SIG Docs Meeting 20200107
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
Hey
everyone:
this
is
Tuesday
January,
7th
2020,
and
this
is
the
weekly
meeting
of
kubernetes
sig,
docs,
Jim
and
I.
Are
your
co-chairs
happy
new
year
right?
Oh,
let's
start
as
we
do
by
welcoming
folks
who
are
here
for
the
first
time,
I
see
a
bunch
of
folks
that
are
new
to
me
at
least.
So
let
me
go
in
alphabetical
order
here
over
in
the
chat
list.
B
Good
morning
afternoon,
it's
my
first
meeting
with
sig
Docs
work
from
our
XM.
We
are
in
Kuwait
Eddie's
training
and
consulting
firm
and
I
want
to
be
more
involved
with
and
to
contribute
to
kubernetes
and
cloud
Native
communities,
so
I'm
sure
I'm
here,
I'm,
probably
a
fly
on
the
wall
just
see
where
I
can
add
value.
Awesome.
A
C
A
A
A
I'm
gonna
jump
the
gun
a
little
bit
and
go
straight
to
process,
and
let's
talk
first
about
PR
Wrangler
shifts,
so
we
need
to
put
together
the
PR
regular
shift
and
not
to
rehash
December's
meeting.
This
is
the
one
part
of
being
a
sig
chair
that
I
absolutely
hate
is
putting
together
the
PR
Wrangler
shifts
it's
not
that
hard,
I
I,
just
don't
love
doing
it.
So.
E
Believe
in
December
an
exhausted
state
that
I
agreed
that
if
we
waited
till
January
I
would
be
willing
to
take
over
this
role.
And
here
it's
time
to
cash
that
check.
It
is
January
if
I
could
just
get
the
list
of
who
are
the
people
were
allowed
to
schedule
and
the
pointer
to
where
it
is
I
will
start
scheduling
and
if
I
do
a
horrible
job
on.
My
wonderful
colleagues
will
help
me
to
get
better
I'm
sure.
A
B
A
So
we
are
in
the
kubernetes
website,
repo
and
here's
the
owners
underscore
aliases
file.
Then,
if
you
scroll
down
to
line
42,
we
get
this
block
here:
sigdoc
C
and
the
owners-
and
this
is
the
pool
of
approvers
for
English
content
and
that's
the
the
pool
that
you
that
whoever
puts
together
the
PR
Wrangler
schedule
users
to
populate
that
list.
A
D
A
A
Usually,
when
I
put
this
together
in
the
past,
I
found
that
it's
easiest
to
do
it
in
like
six
months
at
a
time
just
because
the
tree
was
so
large
its
easiest
to
wrangle.
Because
nuts
we
have,
we
have
a
wealth
of
approvers
Dinkley,
and
so
not
everyone
gets
a
shift
every
quarter.
So
it's
easiest
to
sort
of
wrangle
the
wrangle
the
buys,
if
you're,
if
you're,
looking
at
it
six
months
at
a
time
but
yeah
it's
here
in
the
wiki,
okay,
cool.
E
E
E
G
E
A
A
F
A
Let's
see
just
from
a
repo
health
perspective,
when
I
looked
at
our
open
PRS
yesterday
we
had
292
open
pole
requests
160
of
those
were
for
English,
so
we
are
at
an
unhealthy
point
of
open
PRS
generally,
it's
good
if
we
can
keep
PRS
for
English
under
a
hundred
that
gets
a
little
crowded.
Sometimes
around
releases
like
up
to
120
is
is
fairly
normal
around
like
right
towards
the
docks
deadline
for
release,
but
generally
for
repo
health.
A
We
like
to
keep
our
PRS
for
English,
specifically
under
100,
and
there's
really
no
reason
it
has
to
be
like
over
60.
If
we
can
get
onto
that
point,
I
think
the
last
time
we
had
like
a
zero
PRQ
was
maybe
like
a
year
and
a
half
ago
when
Steve
Perry
was
just
like
I've
had
enough
everything's
getting
and
triaging
fixed,
and
it
took
like
Steve
Perry
meeting
a
personal
quest
of
vengeance
against
the
PRQ
to
get
to
zero
and
I.
Think
that's
the
last
time
that
happened,
but
like
60,
is
a
reasonable
number.
A
A
We
come
back
to
the
year
with
the
conversation
about
what
to
do
with
third-party
content.
I
don't
want
to
call
it
fresh
because
it's
anything
but
but
still
as
important
as
ever,
just
for
a
little
bit
of
context.
I
talked
with
with
jared
Botti,
who
generally
is
really
good
at
talking
sense
to
me
about
what
to
do
with
with
sort
of
big
picture
issues
and
Jared
looked
at
the
cap
that
we
proposed
and
said
this
really
shouldn't
be
up
for
a
cap.
A
A
If
we,
if
we
pull
back
the
scope
of
what
this
cap
is
proposing,
then
I
think
that
we
may
be
able
to
resolve
it
or
they
get
better
feedback
and,
as
it
turns
out,
I
agree
with
you,
I
think
trying
to
talk
about
third-party
content
and
dual
source
content
and
specific
policies
about
what
gets
vetted
is
too
much
for
a
single
cab.
So
I.
A
A
G
G
All
right,
yeah,
it's
too
big
and
it's
got
a
lot
of
vendor
become
tuned
in
that
way,
it's
very
relevant
to
things
that
are
specific
to
different
cloud
providers
and
so
on.
You
know,
I
think
that
page
was
my
motivation
for
wanting
to
get
involved
in
that,
basically
because
I
I
want
to
improve
that
page.
But
what
does
one
do?
I
am
and
I've
seen
other
things
recently,
so
it's
definitely
still
relevant.
G
A
Maybe
you
can
scope
this
disguise
question
somewhat
folks.
If
we
had
a
kept
that
was
specifically
limited
to
the
question
of
whether
Doc's
should
live
in
tree
or
out
of
tree
as
R
Emilion
put
it
yesterday.
A
E
Think
we
just
have
to
define
what
third
party
Doc's
mean.
I
think
the
one
thing
that
the
people
do
seem
to
like
that
I
think
did
serve
us.
Well,
was
all
the
getting
started.
So
you
know
it
seemed
okay
to
have
getting
started
for
all
the
different
things,
because
I
didn't
want
to
give
that
up
from
sig
Docs.
You
know
anytime
I
focus
on
open
source.
E
Maybe
they
want
to
get
started
with
Amazon
anyone
or
whatever,
and
it
seemed
like
that
was
enough
of
a
lifeline
and
it
should
be
in
our
Docs
to
help
them
go.
But
then
anything,
then
you
can
see
there's
places
in
our
Docs,
where
we
clearly
have
something
that
is
just
so
specific
to
somebody's
distribution
or
somebody's
managed
service.
It's
just
like
it
just
seems
like
a
fish
out
of
water
and
seemed
like
no.
That
should
be
an
and
third
party
that
should
be
in
some
Doc's
in
their
world.
E
If
that
made
sense,
so
I
kind
of
envisioned
it
as
well.
We
had
this
bridge
you're
learning
about
kubernetes
and
you
need
a
launching
point
to
getting
started
with
one
of
the
things
that
seemed
okay
and
then
a
lot
of
the
other
stuff,
particularly
if
it
looks
like
a
fish
out
of
water,
we're
only
for
one
distribution.
Do
we
talk
about
how
to
do
something?
E
C
You
yeah,
this
is
David,
it
kind
of
smells
like
it
opens
up
the
floodgates
if
you
do
allow
third-party
content
and
I
don't
know
I'm
how
you
would
manage
all
of
the
flood
in
a
in
a
very
fair
way.
That'd
be
one
of
my
concerns
is
there's
so
much
third-party
docs
to
review
right
its
distributions,
its
clouds.
It's
it's
a
lot.
C
E
And
I
think
I
would
agree
with
that
as
well.
I
mean
I,
think
we've
sort
of
got
some
grandfathered
content
in
that
we
kind
of
have
to
deal
with,
and
then
we
have
sort
of
new
stuff
going
forward
and
I
think
I
would
agree
with
you,
certainly
for
new
stuff
going
forward.
We
should
really
worry
about
third-party
content.
I,
don't
know
how
we
scope
it
define
it,
but
I
think
we
just
want
to
be
a
little
sensitive
that
we
do
have
some.
E
A
Mean
the
easiest
way
to
keep
something
from
bid.
Writing
is
to
never
have
it
there.
In
the
first
place,
you
know
the
best.
Doc's
are
the
Ducks.
You
don't
need
so
I
I
do
agree
with
you
that
that
sort
of
matrix
of
cloud
providers
on
the
getting
started
page
serves
a
useful
function
and
it's
the
one
place
in
the
docs
that
I
think
is
valuable,
but
at
this
point
the
more
the
more
that
this
sort
of
freshens
in
my
mind
and
the
discussion,
the
more
I
think
that
we're
we're
rehashing
well-trod
ground.
A
So
I
think
at
this
point
that
the
the
way
forward
is
to
revise
that
cap
to
be
very
straightforward
in
scope
and
talk
very
specifically
about
about
third-party
content
about
what
it
takes
for
third-party
content
to
be
included
in
the
docs.
There
are
some.
There
are
some
components
where
they,
where
a
third-party
solution
is
required.
So.
A
But
being
very
clear
and
using
the
the
list
that
Tim
put
together
in
the
in
the
cap,
that's
open
right
now
as
a
starting
point
to
go
through
and
say
to
the
eh
contributors:
hey
we're
moving
this!
This
content
doesn't
belong
here
anymore.
We're
moving
this
out
of
tree
we're
willing
to
work
with
you
to
give
you
a
time
frame
to
to
re-home
this
content,
but
it
doesn't
belong
here
anymore
and
you
have
an
arbitrary
period
of
days
like
90
days.
That's
enough
time
to
say,
find
a
new
home
for
this
content.
A
G
And
then
Kingdom
Greg
yeah,
it
should
be
a
quick
point.
I
think
there's
a
bunch
of
stuff
where
it's
sort
of
how
to
use
thing
with
kubernetes
and
it's
a
useful
expository
article
one.
You
know
how
to
do
logging
with
kubernetes
and
we've
used
elasticsearch.
The
blog
is
a
good
place
for
that.
I.
Think
because
you
can
let
it
rot.
E
E
You
know,
move
your
content
out
or
before
we
move
your
content
out
or
you're
allowed
to
use
a
redirect
that
piece
of
setting
up
the
policies
for
for
removing
the
content,
I
think
by
itself
standalone
becomes
a
very
smaller
cap
that
I
think
will
be
if
we
feel
we
need
to
get
approval
from
the
architecture
board
or
whoever
was
letting
you
know
the
last
time
and
you
need
our
approval.
I
can't
remember
if
it
was
I
think
it
was
architecture,
that's
a
more
digestible
piece
and
then,
in
a
similar
fashion,
set
bring
out.
E
Specific
like
that,
if
that
makes
sense,
and
then
if
we
can
knock
off
the
easy
ones,
then
we
can
leave
the
few
ones
that
we're
gonna
get
bike
shedded
on
and
and
have
a
little
tougher
time.
We
can
kind
of
defer
those
and
then
be
able
to
feel
like
we
made
some
progress
because
we
took
some
of
the
lighter
easier
pieces
of
the
cap
first
and
got
them
approved
yeah.
E
A
It's
the
the
one
so
API
documentation
in
general
is
the
one
piece
of
our
stack
that
is
not
well
put
together.
It's
pretty
gross.
Frankly,
we've
got
an
open
eye,
open,
API,
spec,
that's
been
applied
to
like
the
main
API
Docs,
and
then
things
are
put
together
and
like
wrangled
with
go
generators
and
it
just
it
doesn't
need
to
be
as
complex
as
it
is.
A
And
it's,
though,
it's
the
one
piece
of
our
doc
history
that
that
I,
don't
really
know
I,
don't
know
why
things
are
the
way
they
are
I
assume
that
folks
made
the
best
decisions
that
they
could
at
the
time
with
what
they
had.
But
it's
also
clear
to
me
that
the
way
that
things
are
isn't
the
way
that
they
can
remain
and
I
would
like
to
I
would
like
to
see
what
we
can
do
about
improving
that
content,
but
I
also
don't
want
to
assume
that
everyone
is
as
dissatisfied
with
it
as
I.
F
So
semi-related
and
I
don't
mean
to
divert
here,
but
I
was
talking
to
a
co-worker
this
morning,
who
recently
completed
their
cka
in
CKD,
exam
and
I.
Don't
know
if
everyone
on
the
calls
of
wherever
you
can
use
the
Cooper
day's
documentation.
While
you
take
the
ckn
CKD
test,
helpful
resource
and
the
co-worker
said
that
the
API
reference
Docs
and
the
cube
shuttle
reference
Docs
were
incredibly
invaluable
to
their
ckan,
see
exam
not
saying
the
user.
F
Experience
is
great,
not
saying
they're
widely
used
in
love
greatly,
but
the
value
from
SEK
exam
was
something
that
was
not
necessarily
in
my
purview
when
dealing
with
some
of
these
woes
of
BAPI
and
reference
stock
generation.
My
personal
opinion
on
the
matter
is:
this
should
be
automated.
It
should
be
out
of
sight
out
of
mind.
F
I
think
that
this
is
ripe
for
we're
taking
tools
and
we're
having
people
build
other
tools
that
are
building
off
of
other
people's
tools
and
feel
like
you're
saying
we
get
into
this
Pandora's
box
of
a
cluster
mess
and
I
think
that
there
might
be
a
way
to
automate
this
where
Doc's
host
the
API
is
in
the
reference
Docs,
but
we're
not
necessarily
the
people
responsible
for
generating
and
managing
that
content.
Maybe
the
burden
falls
on
the
application
owners
or
the
actual
binary
owners
I'm,
not
just
throwing
it
out
there.
A
Thank
you.
It's
it's
valuable
to
know
that
at
least
anecdotally
that
that
folks
are
finding
it
helpful
in
an
applied
context,
even
if
that
context,
just
like
a
cke
or
CKD
exam,
that's
good
to
know
other
folks.
There
other
feedback
about
whether
the
other
the
APA
API
Doc's
back,
handle
about
the
user
experience.
G
I've
noticed
that,
like
the
cross-referencing
is,
is
really
missing.
I've
seen
issues
for
people
saying
I've,
looked
at
this
API
doc
and
I.
Don't
understand
this
thing
and
there's
another
page
that
tells
them
how
to
do
this
particular
thing,
but
they're
not
finding
it
and
what
we
do
with
you
know
like
markdown
human
written
documentation
is
weed
out
of
weed
weed.
Oh
okay,
you're!
Absolutely
right!
There
should
be
a
link.
G
Is
it
what's
next
link,
you
know
good
first
issue,
Help
Wanted,
move
on
and
that
mechanism
I
think
is
gonna,
be
I,
don't
know
if
people
will
know
that
they're
missing
out
on
that,
because
you
know
how
do
you
know
what
you're
missing
but
I
think
people
are
missing
out.
A
D
A
A
A
But
I
guess
before
I
do
I,
it
seems
like
a
worthwhile
place
to
dig
in
but
I
also
I,
guess
what
I
would
love
is
a
sanity
check.
Does
this
seem
like
a
reasonable
place
to
invest
a
lot
of
effort
that
will
frankly
be
invisible
because
there's
a
huge
knowledge
burden
on
it
and
if
it's
not
broken
in
a
way
that
is
causing
significant
user
pain,
I,
don't
know
how
worthwhile
it
is
to
dive
in
so
I
guess,
just
a
really
quick
up
or
down
does
API
a
does.
H
A
F
So
that's
where
I
get
my
maybe
and
ice
wanted
to
clarify
that
I,
don't
think
it's
we're
slowing
down
the
efforts
there
that
Karen
is
is
working
on
to
improve
that
I
think
the
release
lead
will
then
have
an
easier
path
to
you
know
generate
those
docks
but
down
the
road.
Definitely
I
think
this
is
a
you
know,
ripe
for
automation,
great,
yes,.
A
D
A
F
Yeah
definitely
so
every
year
we've
been
rolling
the
doc
docs
that
we
reference
for
the
meeting
minutes
and
what
happens
is
over
the
course
of
the
year
becomes
too
big
to
manage.
Maintain
a
lot
of
folks
in
the
community
have
issues
with
them.
Historically,
we've
created
a
new
doc
and
it
started
retro
actively
linking
old
Doc's
through
that
process,
which
is
presenting
some
challenges,
such
as
the
community
repository
currently
points
to
the
wrong
documents.
F
When
you
go
to
those
google
docs
and
you
click
on
the
link
to
go
to
the
current
documents,
that
link
doesn't
work
also,
so
it
starts
to
getting
this
kind
of
mess
of
multiple
links
to
multiple
places,
from
multiple
things
every
single
year
over
and
over
again.
So
after
chatting
with
some
folks,
we
had
the
idea
that
we
would
take
the
base
content
of
this
doc
and
archive
it
somewhere
and
then
link
that
archived
doc
to
the
sig
Doc's
channel
and
hopefully
not
deal
with
this
mess
again.
A
D
A
J
We
don't
know
if
this
is
gonna
eventually
fold
into
into
Doc's
proper
or
some.
You
know
another
sig
or
become
a
working
group
or
things
like
that,
but
there
were
four
or
five
tasks
that
were
left,
undone
and
I'm
sure
we
will
identify
things
as
we
move
along,
so
we
don't
really
have
a
long-term
plan
for
this
in
terms
of
exit
or
continuing
it.
We're
just
going
to
kind
of
see
what
happens
so
it
should
be
fun.
J
A
A
D
A
A
Kaitland
I'm
gonna,
throw
you
under
the
bus
a
little
bit
and
boost
a
talk
that
we
had
at
kook
on
it,
San
Diego,
where
you
said
that
this
particular
time
slot
does
not
work
especially
well
for
you
and
that
you
might
like
to
see
it
changed.
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
married
to
this
time.
Slot
either
do
is
there?
Is
there
something
one
would
like
to
say
about
like
a
new
time
right
now,
or
do
you
want
to
like
put
a
note
for
next
week's
discussion?
I
I
think
that
would
be
great
I
find
that
even
just
a
little
bit
earlier
in
the
day
before
all
the
meetings
start
taking
place
would
be
awesome
or
just
a
different
day
of
the
week.
My
Tuesday's
tend
to
be
very
busy
and
I
feel
like
Tuesday's,
a
pretty
busy
day
for
a
lot
of
people,
but
I
also
think
it'd
be
great.
If
we,
if
we
had
any
flexibility
to
move
it
earlier
for
some
of
our
international
time
zones
as
well.
I
A
I
Yep,
those
are
my
two
preferences
but
I
think
it'd
be
great
to
revisit
it
with
the
group
as
well.
Just
now
that
we're
in
a
new
year
to
see
what
what
works
best
for
everyone.
E
I
mean
just
if
we
could
either
just
get
a
list
of
choices,
because
my
calendar
gets
really
crazy
and
I
booked
this
for
the
year.
I
can
find
other
slots,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we
don't
think
a
slot
where
I'm
like
oh
there's,
there's
no
way.
I
can
attend
that.
I
can
certainly
move
stuff
around.
So
if
we
just
have
a
couple
of
choices
that
we
can
just
pick
from,
what
would
help
me
a
little
would
be
really
helpful.
E
I
E
What
y'all
didn't
notice
is
I
didn't
actually
say
that
we're
a
doodle
pull
because
I
felt
like
oh,
no,
if
I
say
it,
then
maybe
I'm
the
one
who
has
to
put
together,
but
if
I
kind
of
hit
into
it
and
somebody
falls
into
that
trap
like
Kaitlyn
and
says
it
look
who
got
the
action
item.
Uh-Huh,
smarter
ala
on
the
branch.
K
A
G
A
G
D
A
D
C
C
Scope
of
work
that
was
the
what
I
signed
off
for
I
reached
out
to
someone
in
my
company
for
an
example
of
a
scope
of
work
for
marketing
stuff
can
I
have
a
draft
of
what
I
guess
is
to
be
sent
to
a
CNC
F
group
for
further
processing.
I,
don't
know
who
you
wanted
me
to
to
work
with,
or
collaborate
with
zoom.