►
From YouTube: K8s SIG Docs Meeting for 20210406
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
Waiting
on
the
red
dot
now
all
right
actually
looks
like
he's,
recording
cool
all
right.
So,
hey
everybody
welcome
to
the
sig
docs
weekly
meeting
and
if
somebody
doesn't
mind,
I
guess
I
think
I
can
do
it
here-
kicking
out
fireflies
note
taker
already
done
perfect
awesome
thanks
everybody,
I'm
jim
angel,
a
co-chair
for
sig
docs.
It
is
april
6
and
it
is
10
30,
pacific
time.
A
So
before
we
get
started
any
new
contributors
joining
us
today
that
care
to
introduce
themselves.
A
I
see
a
lot
of
friendly
and
returning
faces,
so
welcome
back
everybody.
A
Moving
on
to
the
updates
and
reminders,
this
week's
pr
wrangler
and
next
week's
pr
wrangler
is
both
named
zack
two
different
individuals.
A
We
have
zach
core
lesson
this
week
and
we
have
zach
arnold
next
week
I'll
take
an
action
item
to
follow
up
with
zach
arnold
to
make
sure
that
there's
still
availability
there
and,
as
always,
approvers
make
sure
you
know
your
pr
wrangler
shifts,
there's
a
link
in
the
agenda
and
moving
on
to
the
release
121,
which
was
tentatively
scheduled
to
come
out.
This
thursday
sounds
like
there's
some
changes
there.
I
don't
want
to
take
any
thunder
away
from
ray
so
I'll
kick
it
over
to
you
to.
B
Right,
well,
it's
not
official
yet,
but
the
release
might
be
delayed
and
I
will
put
a
notice
if
it
is
official.
I
will
know
by
the
end
of
the
day
today,
so
the
current
status
for
docs
were
actually
not
too
good
or
yellow
red.
I
would
actually
probably
say
red,
because
the
integration
branch
is
not
healthy
and
the
branch
sync
has
some
build
errors
that
we're
tracking
down.
B
I
did
put
the
link
to
the
slide
to
the
slack
thread
on
the
agenda,
so
we've
talked
about
philippe
and
victor
there's.
Also
victor
here
is
on
the
call
he's
also
the
incoming
1.22
release
dogs,
lead
they've,
both
been
very
helpful
and
finding
the
root
cause
of
this,
and
we've
found
the
issue.
It
was
with
two
pull
requests.
I've
listed,
one
poll
request
should
be
applied
before
the
other,
but
since,
but
also
one
pull
request
is
applied
to
master.
B
So
I
do
have
a
suggestion
or
I
did
ask
if
we
could
revert
the
one
of
the
pull
requests
in
dev
121,
then
merge
master
to
dev,
121
and
then
reapply
the
and
we
apply
the
pull
request
to
dev
121
after
the
merge
is
done.
So
philippe
has
taken
a
look
at
that
and
also
said
that
that
sounds
good
as
well.
B
So
that's
something
that
you
know
I
want
to
discuss.
That
sounds
good
to
folks
here.
I
know:
there's
not
a
lot
of
detail
so
far,
but
yeah
do
you
want
any
questions?
So
far?
No
there's
quite
a
bit.
A
Yeah,
I
guess
I
don't
mind
if
you
could
explain
to
me,
like
I'm
five
as
far
as
the
conflict
that's
going
on,
I
kept
up
with
a
little
bit,
but
I
got
a.
B
Yeah,
I
guess
a
few
things
is
like
one
is
like
I.
The
first
thing
I
saw
was
a
missing
file
container
container.md,
so
that
was
in
the
build
error
in
the
in
the
sync.
I
also
saw
other
build
errors
as
well.
When
I
was
doing
the
the
sync
was
that
there
was
a
directory,
it
was
workload
resources,
I
believe.
B
So
there
was
a
bit
of
renaming,
so
there
was,
and
under
the
let
me
get
the
rights.
B
Path
here
so
under
doc,
slash
reference,
slash,
kubernetes,
dash
api
there's,
a
directory
called
workload.
Resources
looked
like
one
of
the
commits
renamed
it
to
work.
Loads
resources
same
with
policy
same
with
policy
resources
to
policies,
resources
and
in
120,
but
master
has
the
singular
version.
So
so
does
the
dev
121
brand
actually
both
have
a
similar
version,
but
it
looks
like
there
was
a
commit
that
renamed
it
to
the
to
the
plural
version,
to
work,
loads
resources
and
and
policies
resources.
B
B
I
have
to
make
sure
that
the
directory
names
are
correct
in
this
and
then
so
what
the
suggestion
is
that
for
the
pull
requests,
that's
is,
let
me
make
sure
I'm
saying
the
right
one.
B
B
A
Anyway,
that
helps
me
understand
at
least
there's
like
an
order
of
operations
almost
issue,
it
sounds
like
changes
happen
on
master
different
than
on
dev,
and
so
the
syncing
process,
just
kind
of
jump.
The
gun-
or,
I
guess
not,
jump
the
gun,
depending
on
which
angle
you're.
Looking
at
it
and
tim,
I
saw
you
had
your
hand
up
a
little
bit
ago.
Do
you
have
a
question.
C
B
Have
a
go,
yeah
that'd
be
great,
so
I
should
close
my
pull
request
for
the
sync
and
I'll.
Let
you
go
at
it.
C
Yeah
action
on
me
to
do
the
make
a
sync
pr
I'll
test
it
locally,
to
make
sure
that
all
the
mergers
you
might
want
to
do
on
that
will
will
emerge.
Okay
sounds
good.
B
So
put
the
thread:
the
link
to
the
slack
channel
thread
in
the
agenda.
I'll
also
put
the
notes
as
well.
That's
we've
stated
in
the
slack
thread
on
the
agenda
as
well.
A
B
On
the
release,
I
did
notify
the
localization
teams
last
week
about
the
timelines
for
this
week,
but
I'm
going
to
touch
base
again
with
them.
Once
we
once
we
finalize
what
the
schedule
is
going
to
be.
If
the
release
will
be
delayed,
if
it
will
be
delayed,
it
will
be
delayed
to
tuesday,
because
we
do
not
like
releases
on
fridays
or
mondays.
So
that
is
a
pretty
much
a
rule.
I
guess
so
we'll
be
if
it
will
be
delayed
if
it'll
be
on
tuesday.
B
Like
I
said
before,
it'll
be
end
of
day,
and
I
on
the
notes
here
it
is
on
the
agenda.
We
do
have
the
high
level
notes
on
what
the
process
is
for
the
release.
On
the
from
the
k
website
side,
I'd
like
to
update
net
loop,
fine
inform
the
all
the
localization
teams
and
we're
freezing
the
k
website
repo
a
day
the
day
before
the
release
so
either
tomorrow
or
on
monday.
Then
we'll
merge
the
branch
into
dev
121
and
cut
a
release,
1.20
branch
as
well.
A
Awesome
and
one
thing
I
know
that
seems
to
come
up
every
release,
but
it's
been
a
while,
and
you
probably
have
more
context
from
the
previous.
You
know:
119
release
or
120
release.
What
we've
done
in
the
past
for
the
freeze
is
open
up
an
issue
that
eventually
blocks
tide
and
then
I
believe
the
resolution
is
to
manually
merge
some
of
the
pr's
around
the
release.
Time
is
anything
changed
we're
on
there
or
are
we
just
moving
forward
with
the
manual
merge
process
just
curious
I'll.
B
Have
to
look
into
that,
I
I
the
one
I
sta
the
rulebook.
What
I
saw
was
to
go
in
with
the
manual
merge
process,
but.
A
Absolutely
manually,
yes,
it's
like
it's
click,
ops
at
that
point,
yeah
cool
all
right!
Well,
I
look
forward
to
that
and
I
I
think,
we'll
be
on
standby,
seeing
what
we
hear
in
a
day
to
day
as
far
as
the
release
getting
moved
or
we'll
get
prepared
for
thursday.
So
that's
awesome
anything
we
can
help
you
with
ray.
As
far
as
getting
things
rolling
sounds
like
tim's,
taking
a
heavy
bird
on
the.
A
A
C
In
yeah,
so
this
isn't
really
a
blog
team
update
per
se.
Clearly,
I'm
gonna,
I'm
actually
gonna
defer
to
divya,
who
I
see
is
on
the
call
divya
I'd,
give
you
the
floor.
D
Hello,
everyone.
I
know
it's
been
a
while,
since
I
actually
had
the
time
to
join
the
call.
So
as
far
as
the
blog
post,
I
from
the
release,
one
point
to
one
perspective:
we
have
like
a
cadence
set,
assuming
that
the
release
is
going
to
go
ahead
on
april,
8th
and
I've
posted
the
cadence
of
publishing
or
the
blogs
on
the
slack
track.
So
we
at
the
moment
are
looking
to
push
the
psp
deprecation
block.
D
That
tim
has
really
helped
us
in
reviewing
and
putting
you
know
putting
out.
Hopefully
we
are
looking
at.
You
know,
publishing
it
by
the
end
of
today
we're
currently
awaiting
an
approval
from
the
current
pr
wrangler
the
track-
and
we
are
also
sort
of
you
know-
awaiting
communication
from
cncf,
because
I'm
not
really
sure
if
there
are
any
policies
around.
D
You
know
communicating
the
state
of
a
release
prior
to
the
release.
Actually,
you
know
being
declared
out
of
the
public,
so
I've
written
to
cncf
regarding
that
should
go
back
by
end
of
day.
I
guess
so
once
we
once
we
have
that
sort
of
form
once
we
have
both
of
those
in
place.
I
shall
you
know
I
should
let
folks
know
on
the
pr
check
that
we
can
go
ahead
with
the
merge.
D
The
rest
of
the
stuff,
I
think,
is
there
on
the
slack
chats.
I
won't
go
too
much
into
detail
and
bore
you
if
there
are
any
questions.
Of
course,
I'd
be
happy
to
answer.
C
So
I
will
add
a
link
to
that
slack
discussion
that
you
mentioned
deviant.
I'll
put
it
in
the
chat,
so
anyone
who's
on
the
kubernetes
slack
is
welcome
to
mosey
on
over
and
check
out
that
particular
discussion.
Thank
you
for
posting
that
and
I
will
add
that
I'm
not
really
sure
about
the
doc,
the
blog's
review
process.
I've
recently
joined
the
blog's
team
as
sort
of
an
official
reviewer,
but
for
about
three
weeks
or
something-
and
I
don't
really
know
what
the
process
is.
D
C
That's
quite
this.
D
Is
quite
confusing
actually
to
me
as
well,
so
I
I
thought
you
you
were
aware
of
the
process,
which
is
why
I
was
like
really
confident
about
asking
you
to
review
stuff.
So
I
think
I'll
touch
base
with
bob
and
folks
and
the
folks
from
the
dog's
blog
team.
C
I
think
it's
just
me,
however,
my
gut
feel-
and
you
know,
there's
a
few
approvers
on
the
call
is
that
we
should
get
this
post
out.
There's
been
a
lot
of
people
discussing
it.
I
think
there's
been
eyeballs
on
it.
It
feels
better
to
get
the
post
out
today
than
it
does
to
to
wait
for
thorough
box
ticking
and
clipboards
approval.
C
A
Of
lgtms
just
needs
the
approval.
One
thing
that'd
be
good.
You
know.
I
know
that
I
really
lean
on
taylor
dozel,
as
well
as
caitlyn
bernard
from
the
blog
side
for
the
overall
review
process.
It's
possible.
The
documentation
already
exists
in
the
review
process,
but
if
not,
it
might
be
a
good
idea
to
get
that
documented
somewhere.
At
least
what
that
looks
like.
So
folks,
like
myself,
go.
Oh
here's
a
link.
Let's
follow
this.
You
know
step-by-step
process
as
far
as
getting
that
blog
merged.
C
Zach
has
said
he
will
look
in
the
morning,
so
I
guess
I'll
leave
that
for
zach
who
knows
about
these
things
and
we'll
I'll
follow
up
with
it's
already
got
loads
of
lgtms.
If,
if
for
some
reason,
zack's
not
around
cool,
that's
zach
cool,
sorry.
A
Awesome
cool
anything
else
on
the
blogs
are
going
out,
sounds
like
we
have
a
lot
of
things
queued
up,
we're
kind
of
it
seems
like,
and
please
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
it
seems
like
we're
somewhat
blocked
on
just
the
overall
approval
process,
but
not
necessarily
the
content.
Getting
these
blogs
out
the
overall
release.
Everything
seems
green,
except
for
the
approval
process.
Is
that
a
fair
statement?
D
That
would
be
a
fair
one
to
say,
because
I'm
a
little
confused,
like
tim,
said
about
the
approval
process
for
the
blog
pit,
but
otherwise
we've
gotten
in
all
the
blogs.
According
to
the
deadlines
we
said
that
was
last
week
and
we
were
able
to
get
them
well
ahead
in
time.
So
I
think,
apart
from
the
approvals
they're.
A
All
right
well,
thanks
for
bringing
that
up,
davey
and
tim
appreciate
all
your
help
and
I'll
definitely
be
willing
to
help
and
unblock
whatever
I
can
do,
but,
like
I
said,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
the
the
blog
team
is
well
aware
too,
before
we
start
rapid
fire
approvals,.
F
Oh
thanks,
yeah
and
and
before
I
get
into
the
one
topic
listed
a
huge
huge
thanks
to
tim
bannister,
one
of
the
most
difficult
issues
we
had
with
the
localization
teams
were
certain
files
they
weren't
able
to
own
because
of
how
things
were
structured
and
tim
came
up
with
a
really
innovative
approach
of
using
symbolic
links
and
fixing
it,
and
he
submitted
a
pr,
and
it
was
just
awesome
so
tim.
F
Thank
you
very
much
that
just
you
know
very
proactive,
really
nice
and
then
the
other
quick
issue
that
I
have
listed
is
just
a
request
from
the
korean
localization
team.
They
want
to
know
if
they
could
use
the
standard.
Sig
docs
zoom
account
for
their
meetings.
F
Previously
jim,
you
approved
the
spanish
localization
team
to
be
able
to
do
this,
and
then
I
put
the
time
in,
I
don't
think,
there's
a
conflict
with
anything,
but
but
eventually
we
may
need
a
better
process.
If
this
starts
to
scale
up
and
make
sure
things
don't
conflict
and
you
know,
will
we
eventually
need
another
zoom
account.
I
don't
know
is
that
cncf
gives
us
one
of
these
things.
Maybe
I'm
not
sure.
F
A
Yeah
yeah-
and
I
appreciate
you
bringing
that
up
and
I
think
it's
good
also
to
get
this
discussion
on
on
record
per
se.
If
you
will
so,
then
other
folks
could
reference
it
if
needed.
But
ultimately
we
do
have
a.
I
believe
it's
cncf
funded,
I'm
not
sure
who
actually
puts
the
bill
to
it,
but
it
is
a
kubernetes
google
group
email
address
that
has
a
login
to
a
zoom
account,
that's
a
paid
zoom
account
and
ultimately,
all
the
sub
projects
that
fall
under
sig
docs
could
get
a
meeting
created.
A
A
So
from
an
actual
implementation
standpoint,
we
might
want
to
have
a
discussion
around
how
we
can
automate
this,
maybe
a
little
bit
more
more
of
a
structured
way,
because
right
now,
the
way
the
process
is,
I
would
have
to
log
into-
or
I
say
I'd
be
any
of
the
tech
leads
or
co-chairs
log
into
the
zoom
account
using
our
google
account
credentials,
creating
the
meeting
and
then
sharing
out
the
the
kind
of
like
spits
out
zoom
will
spit
out
the
like
meeting
notes
so
right
now,
it's
a
very
manual
process,
zero
issues,
doing
it
for
docs
and
for
sub
projects
of
docs.
A
I
know
we've
done
it
for
security.
We've
done
it
for
our
weekly
meeting.
We've
done
it
now
for
the
spanish
subgroup.
It
would
be
no
issue
at
all
to
do
it
for
the
korean
localization
team
as
well.
I
wouldn't
mind
seeing
more
structure
around
the
process,
though
just
instead
of
you
know,
logging
into
zoom
and
creating
the
account
and
copy
and
pasting
it
somewhere.
F
Yeah,
so
I
don't
know
something
we
want
to
just
get
documented
after
we
figure
out
the
process
or
yeah
I
mean
that
was
the
thing
you
know
people
make
requests
that
it's
first
come
first
serve.
Is
it
right
so
just
something
to
think
about?
You
know,
I
don't
know
if
you
want
me
to
work
on
a
proposal
or
if
you
want
to
push
me
in
a
certain
direction
of
what
you'd
like
to
see
in
the
proposal.
A
Yes,
I
I
really
wish
there
was
a
way
we
could
automate
this
much
like
test.
Infra
does
if
we
could
have
some
sort
of
yaml
format
to
say:
hey
spit
me
out
a
zoom
meeting,
but
I
don't
anticipate
that
being
likely
or
being
worth
the
technical
debt
associated
with
it,
but
yeah
we
can
work
offline
on
that,
but
just
to
put
it
out
there
we
do
have
the
account.
Giving
access
to
subproject
is
not
an
issue
right
now.
A
Any
of
the
co-chairs
tech
leads
could
definitely
take
care
of
this
task
and
I
think
that
the
boundaries
of
it
are
obviously
no
conflicting
meetings
between
the
two
unique
links
and
things
like
that
where
I
wish
there
was
automation
there
isn't,
but
that
shouldn't
stop
us
from
creating
that
for
the
korean
localization
team.
So
I.
F
Yeah,
I
know
I
can
handle
it
and
I'll
take
that
off
their
plate,
I'll
be
happy,
so
I'll
work
with
you
on
that
and
we'll
just
put
a
little
policy
in
place
or
whatever,
maybe
we'll
write
it
up
and
put
it
somewhere.
You
know
with
regards
to
the
automation.
I
don't
think
these
requests
come
that
often
that
that
you
know
it's
going
to
really
you're
going
to
get
the
benefit
out
of
the
automation
is
my
guess
I
mean
I
think
we
get
one
every
six
months.
You
know.
G
F
But
okay,
so
I'll
work
with
you
offline.
F
A
B
Yeah,
I
do
it
just
pr27248,
it
just
needs
and
put
in
the
chats
for
dev
121.
It's
like
the
first
half
of
the
reference
generation.
It
hasn't
improved.
It
just
needs
an
lgtm
I'm.
Actually.
I
wonder
if
felipe
should
verify
that
this
does
not
revert
any
changes.
He's
done
for
the
api
for
the
reference
stocks
as.
C
B
Yeah,
so
this
hasn't
improved.
It
just
needs
an
lg
tm,
but
let
me
chat
with
philippe
just
to
make
sure
that
this
is
okay
to
go
for
121,
because
I
know
some
of
the
processes
to
generate
the
reference
stocks.
It's
going
to
change
for
120
for
122,
which
I'm
going
to
add
to
the
roll
handbooks,
but
all
right.
Let
me
take
this
back
and
get
an
okay
from
bleep.
C
A
That
could
have
been
me
fat
finger
in
it
when
you
were
talking
right,
yeah,
awesome,
cool
yeah,
so
once
you
get
that
approval
from
philippe,
let
me
know
if
you
still
need
any
issues
moving
that
forward.
I
definitely
lean
on
some
of
the
other
folks
for
the
ref
gen.
You
know
I
know
karen's
been
very
active
there,
jimmy
tim
all
active
in
that
area,
so
I
don't
wanna
slap
an
lgt
lgtm
just
for
the
sake
of
slapping
it
on
there.
I,
like
some
folks
with
more
context,
definitely.
C
Cool,
I
will
talk
to
you
ray
about
that
as
well,
because
I
might
shortcut
that
for
the
work
I'm
doing
later,
okay,
all
right
sounds.
E
E
So
that's,
I
think,
one
two
nine,
I
know
tim
had
made
a
comment
about
a
sha
one
checksum
difference
between
what's
out
there
on
the
on
the
repo
and
then
what
was
actually
in
the
in
the
pr.
So
I
attempted
to
fix
that
so
wondering
what
might
be
the
the
next
step.
A
Got
you
so
I
don't
have
the
context
in
the
issue
and
I
don't
want
to
spend
other
folks
time
watching
me
trudge
through
appear.
Does
anyone
else
have
context
tim?
It
sounds
like
you
might
have
been
active
on
that
pr
and
I
do
know
the
issue
and
at
least
know
the
overall
solution.
There.
C
Yeah,
well,
it
was
what
I
remember
is
that
there
were
two
solutions.
One
is
you
know
we
could
convert
the
image
into
scalable
book,
vector,
graphics
and
the
other
one
was
yeah
a
mermaid
update.
C
When
I
reviewed,
I
noticed
that
the
file
being
committed
didn't
match
the
source
in
terms
of
an
exact
checksum
match
and
when
you've
got
minified
javascript
and
it
doesn't
match.
That's
that's
not
right,
like.
I
think
we
should
be
able
to
show
that
we
have
exactly
the
same
document
so.
E
That
was
production,
oh
yeah,
absolutely
tim,
and
I
attempted
to
take
care
of
that.
Originally
I'd
sort
of
just
done
it,
a
quick
hack
of
a
cut
and
paste
of
the
file
contents,
but
understand
what
you
were
looking
at.
So
I
added
a
second
commit
to
fix
that,
and
I
confirm
that
the
the
sha-1
checksum
match
between
what
is
in
the
pr
and
then
what
is
in
the
mermaid
repo.
C
A
Tim,
you
got
your
plate
full.
I
have
no
problem
with
taking
a
look
at
that
one
and
verifying
it
now
that
makes
sense.
In
my
apologies
chris,
I
definitely
made
the
recommendation
to
do
the
directly
the
copy
and
paste
I
I'll
call
it
the
lazy
way
for
me,
because
it's
a
quick
and
easy
way
to
get
it
done,
but
absolutely.
A
E
Absolutely-
and
I
learned
something
as
well
so
I'll
make
sure
that
happens
in
the
future.
A
Cool,
I
will
let
me
update
the
agenda
here
with
the
actual
pr
itself
and
then
I'll.
Take
the
ai
to
review.
A
All
right
moving
on
to
the
discussion
so
abigail,
I
know
that
you've
done
a
great
job,
leading
the
data
studio
efforts
there.
I
feel,
like
I've,
somewhat
been
a
blocker
at
least
not
participating
in
that
pr,
but
I
didn't
want
to
lose
sight
of
this.
There's
really
no
action
other
than
raising
awareness
continuing
to
to
drive
this
forward,
and
I
linked
to
the
most
recent
comment
as
of
two
hours
ago,
of
kind
of
the
next
steps
I
did
want
to
share
that
much
like
the
zoom
account
uses
a
google
group's
email
address.
A
We
do
have
an
official
email
address
that
we
could
use
for
data
studio,
I'm
not
sure
if
a
google
studio
account
could
be
used
for
for
data
studio
or
not,
but
that's
kind
of
what
I
was
thinking
is
potentially
using
that
official
sig
leads
channel
or
at
least
integrating
it
somewhere
there.
So
no
action
abigail,
I'm
sure
if
you
want
to
add
anything
else
or
anything
we
can
help
with,
but
I
still
wanted
to
raise
visibility.
There.
G
Oh
yeah,
that
sounds
good.
I
don't
like
I
said
I
just
was.
I
just
had
some
thoughts,
so
I
edited
it
and
the
comment
there
like
you
that
you
linked
but
yeah
just
trying
to
get
the
account.
So
that
sounds
that
sounds
like
it
will
work
for
what
we
need.
So
maybe
we
can
test
it
out
at
some
point
and
so
move
things
forward.
A
Awesome
cool
yeah.
I
think
that's
a
great
solution
that
you
that
you've
identified
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
seeing
that
actually
come
to
life.
So
I
appreciate
you
continuing
to
drive
that
forward
and
I
think
we're
we're
coming
to
a
good
conclusion
here,
all
right
and
moving
on.
Is
it
layla.
H
H
We
missed
the
deadline
for
the
previous
release,
but
we
have
another
deadline
that
is
coming
next
week
and
we
are
working
on
the
documents
and
and
people
in
the
team
are
having
like
working
on
all
those
features,
the
bugs
and
all
those
documents
that
are
coming
and
I'm
trying
to
be
helpful
in
terms
of
giving
them.
H
Trying
to
help
with
the
documentation
mostly
and
my
question
is:
would
it
be
great
good
to
have
the
list
of
the
prs?
I
understand
that
you're
going
through
all
these
issues
and
pr's
by
next
week,
tuesday,
so
we
can
review
them
or
one
good
good.
Another
good
thing
would
be.
I
really
appreciate
if
we
can
have
a
smaller
meeting
with
someone
from
sick
dogs,
so
I
can
get
more
information
on
the.
H
What
are
the
best
practices
worst
practices
in
terms
of
like
getting
the
documents
ready
and
why
we
are
asking
this
is
because
some
of
the
features
have
like
specific
users
and
for
each
kind
of
user
usage
or
scenario.
We
need
to
prepare
like
one
document
to
explain
it
and
if
we
can
have
those
questions
and
ask
for
more
guidelines
from
someone,
that
would
be
very,
very
helpful
to
us
to
prepare
those
documents
and
then
get
the
prs
ready
for
the
review.
H
The
team
also
working
on
a
blog,
and
I
think
they
are
capturing
the
changes
in
the
blog
as
well,
but
any
30
minutes
meeting
with
sick
dog
this
week
would
really
make
my
life
easier,
because
I'm
new
to
google
and
also
open
source
community
for
kubernetes.
So
I
might
have
some
of
the
questions
from
the
team
getting
this
question
and
gathering
those
questions
and
just
ask
it
from
from
someone.
A
Awesome
definitely
and
more
than
happy
to
help,
and
one
thing
that
I
might
suggest
as
well
is
more
than
happy
to
capture
some.
You
know
smaller
working
groups
for
sessions
to
talk
about
best
practices,
but
in
actuality
these
sig
doc
weekly
meetings
would
be
a
great
spot
to
bring
up
some
conflicts
best
practices.
I
think
that
would
be
a
very
valuable
discussion
for
even
a
wider
group.
I
think
your
your
desire
and
goals
to
to
produce
this
documentation
could
impact
more
folks
trying
to
do
the
same
thing.
A
Is
this
coming
in
1.22?
So
this
is
really
for
the
next
release
cycle.
H
It
is
for
the
next
release
cycle,
but
as
part
of
like,
because
we
already
missed
the
previous
release,
we
are
going
to
get
this
done
by
the
following
weeks.
So
and
everything
is
ready
and
we
are
going
to
have
other
post
ga
tests.
H
So
it
is
going
to
ga
this
next
week,
but
we
break
the
tasks
to
some
like
milestones
and
one
of
the
milestones
for
that
is
next
end
of
next
week
with
getting
whatever
we
have
and
try
to
make
all
the
documents
for
what
what
we
have
so
far.
So
we
don't
want
to
practice
this
going
all
the
way
to
the
next
release
and
not
having
the
documentations
for
what
we
already
have.
A
Awesome,
I
really
appreciate
you
bringing
this
up
early,
especially
getting
a
head
start
on
some
of
the
documentation.
It
sounds
like
victor
is
going
to
be.
The
release
lead
for
122.,
so
most
likely
victor
will
have
some
pretty
important
input
there.
A
As
far
as
the
overall
process
and
with
ray
leading
the
current
release
cycle
as
well,
might
have
some
valuable
feedback
for
what
that
transition
looks
like
my
recommendation
would
be
bringing
up
some
of
these
issues
and
discussion
points
in
weekly
meetings
as
part
of
an
agenda
item,
and
I
think
also,
if
you
haven't
already
joining
the
sigdoc
slack
channel
posting
there
for
attention
and
if,
for
whatever
reason,
you
feel
like
it's
not
getting
attention
ping.
A
Anything
else
folks
would
like
to
bring
up
for
discussion.
A
I
did
have
one
other
comment:
just
wanted
to
to
bring
up.
Is
there
anyone
else
joining
us
that
we
missed
early
on
for
new
contributors.
A
Okay,
well,
that's
all.
I've
got
last
call
for
any
discussion
topics.
A
All
right:
well,
I
appreciate
you
all
and
talk
to
you
soon.
Thank
you.