►
From YouTube: Kubernetes Public Steering Committee Meeting 20200406
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).
B
B
Welcome
everybody
to
the
kubernetes
steering
committee
meeting
for
the
month
of
March
I.
Am
your
posted
an
Erin,
her
convertor?
We
are
all
being
recorded
right
now
and
this
meeting
will
be
posted
to
YouTube
later
so
you
can
all
see
yourselves
adhere
to
the
kubernetes
of
code
of
code
of
conduct,
essentially
by
not
being
a
jerk
and
being
your
very
best
itself.
B
So
what
I
was
going
to
do
today
was
run
through
everything
that
we
have
listed
in
the
topic
section
for
our
meeting
and
see
if
we
have
any
time
left
over.
If
folks
have
anything
they'd
like
to
add
to
the
agenda,
they
are
free
to
do
so
that
I'm
going
to
call
on
Nikita
to
talk
to
us
a
little
bit
about
the
contributor
bill
of
rights,
issue
I'll
go
ahead
and
share
my
screen
home
doing
this.
C
D
When
you
are
a
new
contributor
in
trivalent
s,
you
want
to
contribute,
for
instance,
inside
github
you
have
to
sign
a
CLA
that
basically
means
that
we're
working
all
your
rights
through
the
entire
property
of
what
you
are
giving
away
to
the
to
the
kubernetes
organization
and
I
would
like
to
be
more
specific,
and
this
is
not
inside
either
of
the
code
of
conduct
are
in
the
CLA,
but
more
specific
about
what
can
of
interaction.
Newcomer
can
expect
from
different
actor
inside
you
see.
D
We
all
know
that
C
up
over
and
hope
you
are
very
busy,
and
this
proposition
does
not
make
man-hour
appear
out
of
nowhere,
but
we
have
to
be
very
straightforward
with
newcomers
that
are
maybe
not
experienced
and
open.
So
that
maybe
don't
know
very
much.
Ow
reviews
are
coming
up
and
maybe
try
to
explicitly
say
when
I
engage
in
such
activities
project
and
in
particular,
when
I
want
to
contribute
something
when
I'm
a
contributor.
What
cannot
write
can
I
expect
it's
okay
to
say
very
little.
You
have
the
right
to
be
treated
with
decency.
D
D
What
kind
of
rights
do
the,
and
maybe
it
can
be
minimal
and
just
restricted
to
the
code
of
conduct,
but
maybe
it
can
be
bigger
than
that
and
if
in
case
they
don't
have
any
any
particular
treatment
as
it's
the
case
in
numerous
open
source
project,
maybe
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
write
something
in
the
name
of
we
are
doing
the
best
effort
that
we
can.
We
also
what
you
were
are
busy,
please
be
patient
and
we
will
try
to
review
to
the
best
tricker
something
along
those
line.
D
B
That
said
so,
first
off
I
kind
of
question
I
believe
I
would
look
to
to
seek
and
should
be
their
experience
to
understand
how
well-documented
the
existing
pull
requests
in
review
process
is
laid
out
like
I'm
curious
what
what
documentation
said.
So
what
documentation
did
you
try
to
read
to
help
you
answer
these
questions,
but
then
I
think
maybe
more
specifically
I'm
curious,
like
what
was
it
that
happened
they
caused
each
to
need
to
go,
find
you.
D
Know
it's
like,
like
a
general
thinking
about
this
I'm,
a
contributor
of
the
sick
dogs,
so
I
contribute
mostly
to
the
French
localization
of
the
document
rubella
test
documentation.
So
this
is
what
mostly,
what
I'm
working
on,
but
I
was
trying
to
think
about
what
are
the
different
rights
and
because,
when
you
get
inside
the
community,
you
have
a
certain
amount
of
duty
constantly
it's
your
duty
to
sign
the
CLA.
It's
your
duty
to
do
XY
and
Z,
but
I
was
thinking
myself
just
like
you
get
inside
the
country.
D
E
E
Could
you
could
be
read
like
you're
looking
for
additional
things
to
be
done,
like
additional
rights
to
be
conferred
to
contributors,
or
it
could
be
just
like
I
want
like
a
single-page
document
that
lists
so
what
to
expect
I've,
given
some
warmer
it
if
it's
the
former
that
definitely
like
I'd
like
to
highlight
what
things
you'd
be
asking
for
there.
In
addition,
if
it's
the
latter,
if
it's
just
like
a
simplified
document
of
there,
then
I
would
say
like
I
would
suggest.
That
would
be
just
like
a
picture
of
your
experience.
E
Thing
like
going
and
either
collecting
together
links
to
those
kind
of
things
or
reformatting
them
is
like
our
new
contributor
documentation,
a
certain
way
that
maybe
addresses
some
of
your
concerns
but
like
if
it's
a
documentation,
issue
strictly
I'd
say
like
it's
a
contrived
X
thing.
If
it
you're
looking
for
specific
rights
to
be
conveyed
to
people,
then
we
should
call
that
out
separately.
C
F
Yeah
yeah,
so
that
seems
like
something
we
can
definitely
do
on
the
Contra
backside
just
write
down.
The
here
is
what
they
expect,
but
then,
if
I
may
stir
the
pot
a
little
bit,
we
don't
have
things
returned
down
for
one
of
the
things
that
Tim
is
mentioning
on.
The
issue
is
like:
oh,
we
are
not
sick
based,
we
are
owners
based
right,
but
then
we
don't
have
return
down.
F
Do
we
have
written
down
here
is
the
expectation
for
you
to
be
on
the
owners
file,
and
here
is
when
we
will
take
your
out
of
the
owner
file.
If
you
don't,
you
know,
respond
in
the
sense
that,
if
you're
not
active
in
the
community
for
a
year,
if
you
we
know
several
people
essentially
who
have
rolled
off
to
kubernetes
and
are
doing
other
things
right.
So
how
do
we
clean
up
those,
so
people
don't
get
pulled
into
PRS
and
issues
where
and
assigned
to
it
and
signed
for
reviews
or
for
a
tool?
F
And
we
have
numerous
instances
for
across
all
SIG's,
where
you
know
we
don't
have
an
expectation
here
is
what
you
need
to
sign
up
for
when
you
get
into
the
owners
file
right.
So
that
is
another
way
of
thinking
about
it,
though.
The
reason
why
we
are
facing
this
problem
right
now
is
not
just
approvers
are
busy.
It's
just
that
we
we
might
not
have
the
set
of
approvers
that
we
should
approve
assigned
reviewers
and
typically
this
happens
when
you
know
across
the
board.
This
is
not
just
for
newcomers
across
the
board.
F
D
Super
interesting
point,
just
indeed
I
was
mostly
thinking
about
the
interaction
between
the
different
between
the
different
instances
of
power.
Like
the
approver
got
power,
the
contributor
got
a
little
bit
less
power
and
I
was
this
interaction
of
power
like
interact
with
each
other
and
because
we
are
in
the
community,
so
there
would
be
or
where
there
would
be
interaction
and
I
would
like
it
to
be
very
clarified
from
from
the
get-go,
and
maybe
maybe
the
document
that
you
laid
out
about
the
different
privileges
of
of
the
different
rules
inside
the
communities
with
different
holdings.
D
F
The
thing
here
is,
we
are
not
trying
to
make
a
decision
on
what
to
do
here.
This
is
more
like
we
should
write
down
what
we
expect
and
then
at
some
point
in
time
in
the
future,
when
we
are
all
out
of
this
covert
business
and
whatnot,
where
we
are
all
under
the
lots
of
pressure
and
things
like
that
right.
So
when,
when
we
are
clear
and
we
get
to
a
regular
cadance
at
that
point,
we'll
figure
out
how
to
implement
it
or
enforce
it,
and
things
like
that
at
least.
F
D
There
is
different
open
source
community
that
I'm
acquainted
with,
and
one
in
particular
was
led.
Was
the
community
of
the
0nq
project
that
laid
out
all
so
that
is
called
c4
I
can
send
the
link
in
the
agenda,
but
basically
it's
a
very
radical
way
of
looking
at
contribution
is
that
your
code
is
mastered.
If
it
passes,
say
it's
much.
D
No
questions
asked
and
then
after
the
community
will
like
eventually
revert
or
commit
eventually,
but
basically
as
soon
as
you
contribute
something
it's
accepted
right
away
and
the
leader
of
the
project
used
to
say
even
my
daughter
can
mail
stuff,
and
so
the
point
of
view
is
quite
radical.
So
maybe
it's
not
the
right
fit
for
kubernetes,
but
it's
a
radical
point
of
view
that
asserted
that
as
soon
as
somebody
made
an
effort,
an
active
effort
as
well
as
a
human
being
to
come
to
the
project,
then
it
should
be
welcomed.
D
Of
course,
after
you
will
look
at
the
code
of
course,
after
you
can
make
different
beliefs.
Of
course,
after
you
can
revert
some
comments,
but
the
first
step
is
always
to
say:
you're
welcome
in
your
own
hoody
I'm.
Not
saying
that
this
is
the
right
fit
for
the
tribunal
test
project
I'm.
Not
since
this
is
it
should
be
applied
as
it
but
I'm
saying
that,
as
intellectual
point
of
view.
D
G
F
D
F
B
D
So,
basically,
what
I'm
not
asking
to
have
extra
right
I'm
just
want
to
bootstrap
the
thought
of
saying
explicitly
what
a
contributor
can
expect
at
every
level
of
its
engagement
with
their
engagement
with
the
tremendous
community.
So
that's
that's
what
I
had
in
mind,
so
it
can
be
a
very
minimal
set
of
right.
It
can
be
just
a
bare
minimum
with
the
code
of
conduct,
but
at
least
it
explicitly
said
something
and
then
after
if
different,
sig
wants
to
be
to
overbeat.
D
F
D
A
Is
already
an
expectation
stock
in
the
contributor
guide,
Wow
it's
linked
into
the
agenda
and
it
does
talk
about
code
reviews
and
expectations
for
latency
and
there's
also
a
linked
linked
language
for
each
membership
role
inside
of
the
community
membership
dock.
That
says
that
each
role
is
expected
to
be
responsive
to
review
requests
as
per
those
community
expectations.
A
B
Like
this
is
an
area
where
new
eyes
are
extremely
valuable,
I
think
I'm
I
personally
am
coming
at
it
from
the
perspective
of
I.
Think
we
have
everything
you're
asking
for
documented.
That's
why
I
and
some
other
people
have
asked
like
what
specific
problem
are
you
encountering
that
you're
trying
to
solve
and
cannot
that
allows
us
to
understand
what
we
don't
have
documented,
but
it
could
be
that
we
do
have
a
no
documented,
it's
just
hard
to
find
somebody
who
has
fresh
eyes
to
be
able
to
to
condense
it
down,
but
again,
I,
agree,
I!
B
B
So
I
will
move
this
into
in
progress,
but
I'm
gonna
end
up
removing
contributor
or
removing
steering
from
this
issue.
There
was
something
related
to
this
was
to
ensure
their
odd
numbers
of
voting
leaders
to
ensure
that
tie
decisions
are
broken
again.
I
kind
of
feel
like
this
is
maybe
it
can
Trebek's
issue,
but
just
to
I,
don't
know
if
anybody
here
wants
to
share
their
perspective.
B
But
again,
I
want
to
be
clear
that
we're
always
interested
in
understanding
like
what
specific
interaction
or
issue
did
you
have,
or
did
you
encounter
that
led
you
to
realize?
Hey
I
wanna
solve
like
this
class
of
problems
right,
so
we
do
want
to
make
sure
we
are
helping
community
members
feel
welcomed
and
able
to
get
their
contributions.
It's.
D
From
this
one,
it
was
mostly
thinking
in
terms
of
like
a
Yaqui
of
decision
and
structure
inside
the
tribunal
test
project
and
mostly
to
think
what
is
the
final
decision
that
could
happen.
What
is
connected
supreme
decision
inside
a
given
contribution,
for
instance,
let's
suppose
that
I
want
to
give
a
certain
Pio
such
an
issue,
that
is
touching
a
certain
aspect
of
trivalent
s.
What
is
the
final
core
of
people
that
we
decide
whether
or
not
a
given
request
will
be
announced
or
given
issue
will
be
the
people
on
the.
B
D
B
B
G
Like
promoting
a
culture
where
maintainer
czar
like
hit
it
against
each
other,
I
think
to
date
to
some
of
Tim
and
Daniel's
points
on
the
issues,
there's
a
in
my
experience.
Majority
of
the
time,
a
shared
understanding
or
thoughts
among
the
maintainer
is
that
they
try
to
reach
consensus
before
merging
I've.
Yet
to
encounter
an
issue
where.
G
It
might
have
appeared
as
drastic
as
this
note
implies
like
at
the
other
day,
once
the
code
merges
like
that.
Sig
needs
to
needs
to
support
it
and
oftentimes
I
think
code
doesn't
get
merged
because
the
sig
doesn't
yet
want
to
take
on
the
support
that
comes
with
that
code
and
I.
Think
I
think
that's
a
fair
thing
for
maintainer
x'
to
be
able
to
try
to
have
a
dialogue
and,
in
general,
I
I'm,
not
aware
of
a
particular
SiC,
where
this
is
an
issue.
D
So
basically,
you
are
saying
that,
from
experience
from
empirical
experience,
consumption
is
mostly
all
the
time,
which
is
that
we
don't
need
to
have
an
odd
number
of
approval
because
I'll
announce
because
most
of
the
time
for
not
say
100%
of
the
time
a
confirmed
fuse
is
reached
among
all
the
parties.
Yeah.
G
And
I
would
say
also
historically
where
consensus
can't
be
reached
as
a
project.
We
try
to
identify
points
of
extension
to
allow
someone
who
felt
differently
to
do
their
action
right.
So
like
a
lot
of
our
dialogue
early
in
the
project
around
how
do
I
get
something
core
into
the
project
or
how
do
I
get
my
API
concept
explored?
B
J
A
A
A
J
Small
one,
that's
fine.
The
one
question
I
think
I
have
is
like
to
make
sure
one
of
the
problems
we've
had
with
the
with
Twitter
or
any
PR,
for
that
matter
is
the
notion
that
it
can
be
commercialized
and
monetized
by
individual
companies.
So
a
lot
of
this
we,
as
so
long
as
we
adhere
to
you,
know
that
it's.
J
A
Also
included
I
made
sure
to
include
an
fo
inside
of
the
marketing
charter.
I
can
link
to
that's
actually
linked
inside
of
the
zoom
link
if
you
want
to
grab
that
air
into,
and
the
etho
specifically
calls
out
that
these
folks
that
are
on
the
marketing
committee
are
doing
so
as
individuals
and
not
as
representatives
of
their
project.
I
mean
excuse
me
of
their
companies
and
that,
if
we're
writing
blog
posts
to
duck
out,
if
it's,
like
mainly
people
at
your
company,
that
you're
writing
about,
so
that
it's
not
seen
as
a
sales
pitch.
A
G
G
A
Like
whatever,
whatever
we
decide,
like,
whatever
the
owners
of
caps,
decide
that
needs
needs
more
feedback.
Or
what
have
you
we're
trying
to
set
up
a
process
by
which,
if
folks
need
more
feedback
on
CAPS,
they
can
get
more
feedback
and
not
get
buried
and
in
the
enhancements
folder
or
any
other
issues
that
need
larger
feedback
and
larger
larger
horns
over
I
guess.
G
A
Have
not
thought
about
any
of
this
I'll?
Let
you
know
that
Derek
so
I
mean
we
can
even
take
cats
totally
off,
but
I
think
my
concern
with
caps.
Is
that
there's
many
many
many
that
from
both
author
and
review
or
request
more
feedback,
and
that's
really
what
I
was
trying
to
pay
attention
to
from
the
first
jump?
A
F
A
G
B
So
I'm
just
trying
to
do
some
actual
feedback
here
it
sounds
like
there
are
no
objections
to
contributor
experiencing
contributor
experience,
managing
a
Twitter
account
aimed
at
contributors.
You
do
have
the
requested
clarification
around
how
it's
used
for
caps,
but
otherwise
I
can
consider
it
as
a
binding
them.
B
A
B
B
G
B
G
B
E
So
I
I
don't
open
this
issue
just
kind
of
shepherding
our
request
through
to
the
steering
the
Koster
API
provider,
digitalocean
maintainers,
looking
for
some
some
basically
cloud
credits
for
digitalocean
to
be
able
to
run
into
end
testing,
we
have
similar
with
Google,
Cloud
and
AWS
before
we
actually
get
to
the
point
of
a
funding
request.
I
wanted
to
explore.
Like
can
we
just
get
cloud
credits?
The
digital
ocean
is
the
ncf
member.
E
It
looks
like
nior
has
said
that
they
don't
have
an
agreement
right
now,
but
if
we
raise
a
service
request
with
kind
of
like
an
approximate
budget,
they
can
reach
out
to
digitalocean
and
see
what
they
can
do
there
at
this
point,
I'm
just
looking
for
consensus
from
steering
to
like
move
ahead
with
that
and
put
that
request
into
the
CNCs
service
task
and
just
keep
pushing
this
one
forward.
Anybody
have
any
questions
or
objections
to
moving
this
one
forward.
B
Going
once
going
twice:
okay,
no
objections.
My
only
maybe
point
of
process
question
is:
should
listen
come
in
via
an
issue
in
the
kubernetes
funding,
repo
I,
don't
know
not
sure
if
we've
done
a
fantastic
job
of
publicizing
it
baby,
but
just
to
put
it
on
the
recording.
We
do
have
a
repo
called
kubernetes
funding
where,
if
you
want
infrastructure
and
things
like
that,
this
is
the
process
you
can
follow
to
make
sure
that
it
lands
on
our
radar.
So
if
I
go
through
and
create
a
new
issue.
B
K
B
F
F
D
K
K
F
F
B
F
B
So
I
think
I'll
send
out
an
email
to
the
steering.
No
one
was
asking
for
you
to
take
a
look
at
this.
We
as
fearing
do
you
need
to
do
a
simple
majority
vote,
whether
or
not
we
approve
this.
My
impression
based
on
lurking
on
the
Sagarika
textured
mailing
list,
is
this
group
is
more
or
less
a
Reese
coping
or
superseding
of
the
apply
working
group.
I
maybe
have
some
questions
about
why
the
fly
working
groups
that
should
remain
around
there's
avoiding
broken
links
to
previously
made
decisions
in
that
work.
B
A
A
It
definitely
needs
reformatting,
but
I
figured.
It's
definitely
also
going
to
have
comments
from
all
of
you
all
and
changes,
so
I
did
not
make
it
as
pretty
as
possible.
Knowing
that
information.
This
is
intended
to
be
the
bootstrap
document.
Obviously
we
have
a
lot
of
catch
up,
catch
up
to
do
with
46
working
groups,
user
groups,
committees
etc.
So
I
wrote
the
process
for
20
like
what
20
21
and
on
would
look
like
with
us
anticipating.
A
A
So
obviously
nobody
has
had
a
chance
to
review
the
PR
in
question
but
feel
free
to
work
with
me,
async
with
questions
and
then
possibly
on
this
one
of
the
open-ended
questions
that
I
did
have
on
the
issue.
There
are
several
still
and
I'm
actually
still
updating
those,
but
one
of
the
questions
is
according
to
what's:
what's
the
actual
card
I
think
it's?
Is
it
our
charter?
A
No,
it's
up
inside
of
changes
MD
in
the
steering,
folder
I
think
this
might
be
a
large
enough
change
that
we
would
need
to
follow
a
four-week
policy
for
comments
and
questions.
But
I
also
wanted
to
hear
from
you
all
as
to
whether
this
is
a
large
enough
change.
It's
a
little
bit
ambiguous
there.
So
pretty
much
figuring
out,
I
guess
our
governance
and
decision-making
process
on
this
as
well
at
a
meta
level,.
B
F
F
One
of
the
things
that
we
are
asking
for
sig
leads
to
do
is
something
more
than
that
they
have
done
before,
and
and
one
of
the
things
that
is
lacking
for
sig
leads
and
technical
leads
is
what
is
a
group
of
people
that
I
can
get
help
from
right?
There
is
no
strong
definition
of
this.
Is
the
list
of
sig
members.
Is
it
the
list
of
people
in
the
mailing
list?
Is
it
the
list
of
people
in
the
owners
group?
Is
it
the
list
of
people
who
show
up
for
the
meetings
right?
We
don't
have.
F
There
is
no
sense
and
I.
Consider
myself
part
of
signal,
for
example
right.
That's
because
I
feel
that
I
am
but
then
I
don't
know
if
direct
thinks
the
same
way
or
not.
So
you
know
there
is
no
sense
so
Apache
it
works,
because
there
is
a
well-defined
group
of
people
that
maintain
a
specific
project,
and
one
of
them
is
basically
leading
the
project.
So
the
way
it
works
in
Apache
is
you
know
any
one
of
the
the
people
in
the
sing.
The
equivalent
of
saying
can
essentially
do
this
job.
F
So
that
gives
them
a
sense
of
belonging
that
they
are
part
of
the
cumulus
community.
Can
we
do
something
equivalent
for
six
so
and
then
the
sig
leads
would
have
the
the
thing
to
say.
Okay,
these
are
the
sort
of
people.
I
can
pull
for
different
roles
for
different
things.
Maybe
one
of
them
can
help
help
me
with
taking
a
turn
at
writing
up
all
the
stuff
that
is
needed
for
this
reporting
structure
that
that
that
was
my
thought
process.
When
I
was
talking
to
you
about
it,
Paris
and.
A
We
don't
think
like
sub
project
owners
and
owners
and
mailing
list
members
would
not
would
necessarily
qualify
in
that
definition.
Or
do
you
want
to
see
that
actually,
those
three
things
drawn
out
somewhere
or
sorry
for
asking
another
question,
but
or
do
you
want
us
to
ask
the
chairs
how
they
are
explicitly
measuring
membership?
With
the
report
responses.
F
A
F
J
Kind
of
reverse
some
of
this,
some
of
the
some
of
the
things
that
are
asking
here
are
the
order
of
the
asks,
are
less
supportive
and
were
dictatorial
when
I
read
them
because
I'm
reading
it
right
now,
why
we're
doing
it
so,
like
I,
understand
the
purpose
in
a
tent,
but
the?
What
is
the
endgame
of
some
of
this,
and
what
are
we
really
trying
to
do?
J
The
I
think
the
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
clarify
intent,
that
the
purpose
of
this
is
to
better
serve
them
right
and
to
make
sure
that
we
are
trying
to
like
how
can
we
help?
How
can
we
foster
things?
How
can
we
help
facilitate?
How
can
we
help
make
things
better
for
people
that
are
there,
because
the
way
it
reads
this
sounds
like
an
obligation.
I
also.
A
Have
a
lot
of
other
Burbage
that
I
did
not
include
in
this
PR.
That
is
less
process
by
the
way
like
I
said
Christoph
and
a
couple
other
people
saw
it,
but
I
did
not
include
it
in
this
TR
because
I
just
wanted
to
talk
about
process,
so
I
have
a
lot
of
the.
Why
and
the
and
the
fact
that
we
want
this
to
be
collaborative
not
in
this
PR.
J
Because
everything
I'm
looking
for
like
nowadays
as
both
of
a
steering
member
and
si
as
a
chair,
is
that
as
a
chair,
I
I,
look
for
any
help.
I
can
get
to
be
honest,
just
being
like
brutally
honest,
like
I
need,
help
like
all
the
time
and
I've
developed
a
structure
to
help
do
that,
and
even
if
I
can
solicit
more
people
to
help
build
that
out
even
better.
But
the
the
reality
is
is
that
everyone,
the
people
that
are
marked
as
chairs
today,
are
in
the
same
struggle,
if
not
worse
than
my
current
situation.
J
It's
probably
worse,
to
be
honest
because
I
at
some
point,
I
declare
bankruptcy
a
while
ago
and
I
said
I'm
stepping
back
for
a
bunch
of
things.
So
I
guarantee
you
that
most
people
are
in
this
scenario
where
they
are
looking
for
help,
but
don't
know
why
so
I
think
I
think
intent.
Matters.
A
lot
in
this
document,
I
think
making
sure
that
the
purpose
and
the
goal
the
document
outlines
intent
before
a
person
even
reads
further
and
then,
as
you
read
through
it
it'll,
be
clear
why
the
intent
is
there.
E
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
comment
like
I,
think
I
think
are
the
intent
at
least
like
the
last
time
we
talked
about.
This
was
tuple.
It
was
both
hey.
What
can
we
do
to
help
like?
Where
are
the
where
the
sticking
point
in
your
seg?
Do
you
have
any
sticking
points?
Have
you
thought
about
what
those
sticking
points
are
in
your
sig
like
encouraging
those,
because
those
will
allow
us
to
either
like
connect
them
with
resources
like
steering,
can't
necessarily
solve
all
your
problems.
E
But
if
we
know-
and
if
the
sig
is
aware
and
we're
aware
of
like
where
some
of
those
sticky
points
are,
we
can
connect
with
resources
to
to
help
that,
but
there
was
also
intent
as
far
as
like.
We
need
to
know
that
you're
alive
and
we
need
to
know
that
you're
healthy,
and
that
was
like
the
other
kind
of
half
of
the
intent.
So
having
some
some
kind
of
more
you
know,
I
say
the
goal
would
not
be
dictatorial
but
more
process-oriented.
Things
of
just
like
hey.
Are
you
alive?
E
Because
again,
if
we're
saying
this
is
a
requirement,
and
you
have
to
do
that-
I
don't
want
this
to
be
like
just
another
drag,
but
you
know
we
need
to
go
and
chase
people
because
it's
going
to
take
them.
You
know
an
even
an
hour
to
do
like
that
that,
to
me,
I
don't
want
to
add
another
hour
of
work
to
everything
chair,
but
having
that
balance
of
like
okay,
we
do
need
to
know
these
little
bit
little
process
bit
to
know
that
you're
alive
and
you're
healthy
and
then
beyond
that
hey
here's.
E
B
A
Pr
in
the
Y
and
the
intent
from
everything
that
we've
discussed
in
the
last
three
steering
meetings,
so
we've
talked
about
this
I
already
have
most
of
it.
I
wanted
to
leave
a
lot
of
that
out
of
the
community
health
check,
since
that's
the
process,
I
think
that
that
stuff
belongs
in
governance,
Docs
and
that's
why
I
wanted
to
leave
that
off
of
this
dock
for
discussion
and
once
that's
done,
though,
I'm
still
unclear
as
to
whether
or
not
this
is
a
four
week
change.
A
E
Yeah,
if
this
is
the
first
time
we're
doing
it
if
I'm
to
be
perfectly
honest,
I,
have
a
concern
about
trying
to
push
this
and
rush
this
through
before
end
of
month.
You
know
not
only
not
only
do
I
think
we
we're
still
in
the
process
of
like
hey.
We
want
to
review
this,
and
maybe
we
can
do
an
internal,
pushing
steering
and
say
like
hey,
okay,
where
we
want
to
at
least
get
our
concerns
addressed
within
a
week
or
so.
E
But
then,
after
that,
we
need
to
get
this
in
front
of
people
and
say
like
hey.
This
is
a
new
process,
a
new
thing,
we're
asking
if
you,
if
we
give
folks
a
little
bit
broader
time,
also
just
the
state
of
the
world,
wrapping
that
in
putting
something
more
onto
people's
plates
I
think
it's
I,
don't
know,
I!
Think
the
fees
I
understand
the
desire
to
keep
this
moving
and
not
wanting
it
to
drag
on
longer,
but
I
hope
you.
A
Yeah
your
comment
in
the
doc
was
like:
how
fast
can
we
get
this
so
I'm,
extremely
okay
with
bumpiness
I,
feel
like
a
lot
of
steering
committee
members
on
the
line
right
now.
We're
really
excited
about
this,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
like
yeah
the
tone
here,
it's
not
me
trying
to
get
this
shove
this
down
people's
throats,
so
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
publicly
as
well.
My
tone
here
is
those
issues
been
open
for
three
months,
so
we've
been
having
a
hard
time
collaborating
on
it.
F
B
In
the
event
that
we
need
to
have
a
high-bandwidth
discussion
to
resolve
any
remaining
unknowns,
I
would
say
we
aim
to
like
have
all
the
PRS
out
there
and
all
the
instantly
remembers.
You
don't
buy
our
next
private
hitting
and
then
people
is
walk
out
of
that
private
meeting
with
you
sending
an
email
out
to
start
gathering
results.
A
Why
I,
personally
prefer
not
putting
any
dates
in
here
I'm
just
nervous,
though
about
not
putting
dates
in.
That
means
that
we
don't
do
it
so
I
think
there's
two
folds
here:
I
put
the
dates
in
here
and
things
like
that
to
lead
us
to
a
to
lead
us
to
a
path,
not
necessarily
to
push
the
community
to
a
stringent
date
that
is
unreasonable,
so
I'm,
fine.
B
With
that,
like
this
is
kind
of
ties
to
who's
the
next
person,
we
nominated
me
as
the
bosun
for
this
public
meeting
I'm
happy
to
continue
to
be
the
bosun
and
for
them
for
the
private
meeting.
So
I
can
make
sure
that
we
have
I
can
help.
Keep
us
accountable
to
be
actually
reviewing
that
PR
and
they
make
sure
we
get
this
closed
out
by
our
private
meeting
and
then
during
the
primary
meeting
that
we
can
decide
who
the
next
person
is
and
if
I'm
blowing
scope
by
trying
to
tie
those
two
things
together.
B
B
Hooray
and
I
I
just
wanted
to
reiterate
it's
something
like
two:
it's
important
that
we
acknowledge
that
we
are
in
kind
of
a
very
unique
time
right
now.
You
know
I
certainly
want
to
be
the
very
best
that
I
can
be
and
do
all
the
things,
but
that's
not
always
possible
right
now,
so
I
will
do
what
I
can
to
hold
us
accountable,
but
it's
also
okay,
if
we're
having
a
difficult
time.