►
From YouTube: Kubernetes Public Steering Committee Meeting 20200203
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
A
So
the
first
topic
on
the
agenda
say
was
the
steering
panel
for
Amsterdam.
We
did
get
that
approved.
We
were
expecting
five
of
the
seven
steering
committee
members
in
Amsterdam
for
that
panel.
The
schedule
may
end
up
moving
around
specifically
because
it
looks
like
there's
a
conflict
with
a
different
session
that
Nikita
and
I
are
doing
for
contra
vex,
but
we're
going
to
sort
that
out.
That
is
that
we're
just
gonna
do
kind
of
like
another
AMA,
but
we're
also
going
to.
B
C
So
this
was
something
we
are
discussed
and
last
private
steering
committee
meeting,
and
we
thought
about
bringing
this
on
again
when
more
folks
were
on
the
previous
steering
committee
meeting
committee
were
present
since
they'd
have
more
context.
So
the
question
that
we
were
talking
about
was
mainly
about
the
national
and
the
thinking
behind.
What
was
the
reason?
User
groups
were
created
as
a
part
of
the
kubernetes
community
structure
and
if
it
would
make
sense
to
move
embassy,
ncf
user
groups
instead,
I.
D
It's
very
low
overhead
from
a
community
perspective
to
monitor
and
maintain
it's
just
you
give
them
a
slack
channel
and
you
give
them
the
capability
to
you
have
a
meeting
if
they
want
one,
that's
a
request
one,
but
that's
pretty
much
it.
So
the
objective
was
to
provide
a
forum
for
users
to
self-service
and
select
in
and
out
of
it,
yeah.
E
E
For
better
for
worse
to
lose
their
stature
or
presence
that
already
exist
in
the
community,
sig
big
data
was
one
of
those
they
had
moved
to
a
user
group
as
well,
so
I
think
the
big
data
style
use
case.
It's
more
one
that
felt
appropriate
for
a
CN,
CF
user
group,
then
maybe
what
we
had
traditionally
in.
D
E
I
I'd
be
curious
if
I'd
be
happy
to
take
the
to
develop
on
how
often
say
they
use
a
group
date.
Data
group
is
meeting
to
see
if
it
actually
sense
to
continue
the
only
other
music
group
that
know
where
they're
discussing
is.
Is
the
VMware
users
group
I'm,
not
aware
of
there
being
other,
like
it
aggressive
user
groups
or.
A
Those
are
the
only
two
like
officially
sanctioned
ones
that
have
like
gone
through
and
like
have
an
entry
in
Sigma
Amal
and
that
kind
of
stuff
we
don't
there's
I,
don't
know
how
old
the
cloud
provider
like
the
cigs
that
used
to
be
things
that
removed
under
state
cloud
provider
but
still
host
their
own.
Like
cloud
providers,
specific
meetings,
I,
don't
know
how
much
of
those
meetings
is
user
support,
like
kind
of
stopped
versus
actually
focusing
on
like
cloud
provider
code,
I.
G
D
Only
speak
from
history,
we
didn't
notice
that,
like
EWS
had
taken
a
turn
for
support
style
thing
for
a
while
ago,
especially
as
you
know,
communities
took
up
in
popularity.
I
do
not
know
about,
though,
it'd
be
interesting
to
somebody
to
be
able
to
like
give
a
broad
update
or
like
walkthrough,
where
everybody's
at.
A
A
Like
an
Apache
style
like
hey,
is
your:
is
your
group
alive?
Are
you?
Are
you
meeting
and
just
kind
of
like
pulling
that
like
all
the
chair
like
I,
miss
in
this
case
would
be
like
cares
and
leads
cuz
we
in
our
particular
structure,
but
basically
just
to
check
in
that,
like
hey
everybody,
who's
listed
as
a
lead
for
a
particular.
A
You
know
group,
whether
it's
a
cig
user
group
working
group
committee
that
hey
you're
are
you
alive.
Are
you
meeting?
Are
you
meeting
regularly?
Is
everybody
who's
listed
as
a
leader
in
your
group
still
like
active
and
responsive
in
it
and
just
kind
of
having
that
bat
poll
and
check
in
on
some
sort
of
cadence
I.
D
A
Are
you
suggesting
like
pushing
that
down
on
to
the
cigs
and
say
like
hey
so
from
like
steering
we
go
and
just
check
in
with
you
and
make
sure
that
you're
alive,
but
as
a
part
of
that,
you
know
as
leadership
of
the
cig?
Now
your
responsibility
as
part
of
that
roll
call
is
hey,
I'm,
gonna
go
and
like
list
off
here's
what
we
have
for
your
group
in
cigs
yeah
mo?
Is
that
still
accurate?
Do
you
want
to
go
and
update
your
owner's
files,
all
that
kind
of
stuff.
D
This
is
a
little
weird,
because
I
think
it
would
be
some
six
might
not
be
that
healthy
right.
So
if
you
say
that
it
might
go
into
a
vacuum
when
we
originally
did
the
creation
of
all
of
these
cigs
in
the
community
structure
that
we
originally
had,
there's
usually
some
person
on
the
steering
committee
that
was
working
with
the
SIG's
down
then
get
their
charters
up
in
place.
A
I
know
that,
like
our
current
governance,
Doc's
have
like
a
guideline
listed
out
like
we
do
have
a
guideline
on
what
constitutes
and
what
qualifies
as
user
group
I
think
it
probably
needs
revision,
though,
because
one
thing
that
came
out
of
the
like
the
provisioning
experience
for
the
the
VMware
users
one.
This
is
the
issue
that
Stephen
Wong
over
at
VMware,
had
opened
up
kind
of
about
his
experience.
A
The
the
thing
that
I'm,
not
necessarily
comfortable
about
comfortable
with,
is
that
it's
kind
of
like
a
lazy
consensus
to
spin
up
a
user
group
I
think
that
the
only
part
that
I
am
like
have
concern
about
just
because,
like
we
haven't,
had
a
whole
bunch
of
takers
on
spinning
up
a
user
group
and
what
that
really
means,
but
I
also
would
not
necessarily
want
to
get
out
of
control.
I.
Think
like
explicitly
like
you
know
whether
it's
you
know
in
this
case
steering
like
pulling
that.
Yes,
like
explicit.
A
E
D
H
I've
got
a
few
comments
to
add
on
the
history
of
what
went
down
with
user
groups.
One
of
it
was
that
the
cloud
providers
actually
were
holding
meetings
related
to
cloud
providers
that
were
drawing
users
asking
support,
questions,
submitting
feature
requests
and
when
those
cloud
provider
SIG's
got
folded
underneath
the
umbrella
of
the
cloud
provider.
H
But
you
know
that
was
part
of
the
history
with
why
that
user
group
section
of
the
SE
gwer
congruent
'add
to
allow
for
user
group
creation,
I
think
the
big
data
one
was
a
legacy,
one
that
just
named
themselves
a
user
group
before
an
official
process
got
documented.
So
they've
been
out
there.
A
lot
they.
E
H
Frankly,
I
think
there's
others
that
belong
arguably
in
the
category
I'm
a
co-lead
of
the
IOT
edge
working
group,
essentially
that
the
meetings
are
filled
with
users.
There
are
no
developers
and
it
owns
no
code.
I've
been
I've
sampled
machine
learning,
I
call
that
the
same
thing,
although
there's
so
little
activity
in
that
it's
tough
to
get
a
read,
but
some
of
these
working
groups,
I,
would
contend,
are
vastly
composed
of
users
and
I.
H
H
Would
it
make
sense
I
see
in
the
notes?
I
missed
the
beginning
of
this
meeting,
because
I
joined
late,
but
would
it
make
sense
to
be
in
the
CNC
F
instead,
maybe
because
with
well
I'd
say
maybe
with
regard
to
IOT
edge,
simply
because
it's
crossing
over
into
other
CN
CF
projects
in
addition
to
kubernetes
for
the
VMware
one
me
it
is
strictly
kubernetes
so
probably
know
my
opinion.
I
saw
in
the
notes.
Somebody
asked
a
question
of
what
was
the
state
so
with
the
VMware
user
group
were
just
about
to
get
started.
H
I've
got
a
poll
for
picking
a
meeting
time,
although
we
may
fall
into
the
old
time
for
the
old
VMware
cig,
but
the
poll
is
open
through
today
and
it
looks
like
we
might
have
our
first
zoom
meeting
under
this
umbrella.
This
week
we
do
have
a
session
slated
for
Q
con
Europe
and
I.
Do
have
people
telling
me
they're
coming
to
it
I
think
people
have
already
registered
in
the
skin
system,
so
it
does
appear
to
be
drawing
some
interest.
H
I
just
got
contacted
by
some
independent
group
in
Amsterdam
that
wants
to
hold
like
an
evening
social
as
well
and
invite
members
so
I
think
this
one
is
looking.
You
know
it's
the
first
one,
but
it
looks
like
it's
in
a
position
to
gain
some
traction.
I
know
in
the
cloud
provider
sig
the
people
from
the
old,
AWS
or
Amazon
I
forget
what
the
official
name
of
their
cloud
providers
say.
It
was
but
they've
made
statements
in
the
cloud
provider.
B
That's
going
on
without
it
necessarily
being
in
our
community
infra,
especially
now
that
the
like
I'm
attempting
to
propose
this
SIG
to
this
contributor
experience,
saying
and
one
of
the
things
I'm
gonna
try
to
do
is
better
educate
end-users
on
how
to
be
better
contributors.
So
I'm
wondering
if
that's
something
that
could
all
get
wrapped
up
together.
I.
A
Guess,
like
the
other
thing
that
we
should
define
and
like
another
kind
of
refinement,
if
we
continue
to
have
user
groups
under
our
umbrella,
is
like,
as
I
think,
was
Derek
to
mention
those
50
minutes
ago,
like
it's
kind
of
like
a
very
light
level
of
support
that
were
wanting
to
give
these
these
folks
like
hey,
we
want
to
give
a
place
for
you
to
congregate
and
and
talk
about
things,
but
that's
what
it,
because,
like
supporting
users,
isn't
core
to
what
we
are
doing
on
the
kubernetes
project,
we're
you
know
we're
a
lot
more
focused
on
code,
we're
a
lot
more
focused
on
contributors
and
features
and
supporting
those
bases.
A
Does
that
be
back?
What
will
make
us
as
a
project
better
so
whether
that
is
how
is
it
the
CNC
F
level
or
whether
that's
hope?
How
is
it
our
level
as
long
as
we
define
kind
of
like
what
that
light?
That
would
like
kind
of
light
touch
is
I
think
that's
beneficial.
It
also
kind
of
ties
in
with
a
thought
that
I'm
having
around
you
know.
A
We
recently
had
some
conversations
with
the
C&C
F
about
like
who
qualifies
for
maintainer
track
sessions
at
cube
con,
and
that
may
be
something
that,
like
we
explicitly
define
like
you,
can't
you're
a
cig
and
you
own
code.
You
can
have
a
maintainer
session,
but
maybe
user
groups
and
stuff
don't
qualify
under
that
same
umbrella
because
they're,
not
necessarily
maintained,
errs
of
you
know
of
Cabrera's
code.
A
H
My
observation
is:
if
you
look
at
your
sponsor
things
like
conferences,
you,
you
are
supporting
user
groups
and
the
case
study
sessions
are
some
of
them.
They
had
some
of
the
highest
attendance
at
cube
con
in
december
in
november
and
they've
been
going
on
for
years,
so
the
users
are
there.
Some
of
these
things
like
I,
say
some
of
them
are
officially
named
user
groups.
Some
of
them
are
de
facto
user
groups,
even
if
they're
called
working
groups-
and
this
has
been
going
on
for
years.
H
Some
of
these
sessions,
like
the
IOT
edge,
have
drawn
250
people
to
a
session.
The
users
are
showing
up
and
they
seem
to
be
getting
some
value
out
of
it.
I
think
that
you
want
a
scenario
where
the
you
know
and
not
every
contribution
to
kubernetes
is
code.
I
mean
these
users
can
contribute
in
the
forms
of
documentation.
H
E
E
E
G
E
E
Personally,
I
feel
like
it's:
users
are
going
to
need
to
meet
and
congregate
somewhere
and
so
I'm
not
trying
to
I,
don't
think
anyone's
saying
that
these
things
shouldn't
be
supported,
but
I
think
like
right
now
we
just
don't
have
enough
information
on
how
to
act
on
a
per
user
group
basis
so
like.
If
we
wanted
to
take
Paris's
proposal
on
a
health
feed
check
in
maybe
we
could
just
pose
the
questions
we'd
like
to
see
and
that
health
be
check
in
to
get
the
facts.
E
We
need
to
know
how
to
act
and
that
that
can
be
like
the
concrete
tasks
we
take
out
of
this.
So
like
what
are
the
five
questions
we
want
to
collect
and
then,
in
that
messaging
we
could
send
out
information.
That's
like
if
you're
working
group
we
want
to
know
what
your
terminal
state
is.
If
you
don't
have
a
terminal
state
we're
thinking
about,
maybe
making
user
groups.
That's
have
a
thing
yeah.
H
I
wasn't
even
aware
that
working
groups
were
supposed
to
have
a
terminal
state
I,
don't
remember
that
when
associated
with
the
IOT
edge-
and
it
makes
no
attempt
to
own
any
code-
yes
I
think
maybe
some
of
these
labels
were
like
casually
applied
like
even
labeling
the
thing
maintainer
track.
How
much
thought
went
into
that?
So
a
logical
exercise
using
a
word
that.
G
H
F
A
I'm,
just
gonna
jump
in
like
we're
I'm
gonna
time
bought
this
particular
discussion.
I
think
we've
got
kind
of
the
main
points
and
like
for
me
explicitly
like
+1
to
be
particular
time
for
Derek
is
listed.
There
I
think
that,
starting
with
information
gathering
on
our
the
current
state
of
our
working
groups
and
our
user
groups,
and
are
they
meeting
what
their
current
goals
are
and
kind
of
getting
them.
You
know
some
questions
out
and
asking
them
to
respond
back
to
them.
A
I
think
that's
a
great
kind
of
first
step,
and
then
we
can
kind
of
figure
out
on
a
case-by-case
basis
with
the
right
fit
for
these.
Should
they
be
working
groups
user
groups
should
they
move
into
the
CNCs
all
that
kind
of
stuff
I
think
we've
got
kind
of
a
pretty
concrete
definition
around
what
should
be
a
sig,
but
it
gets
a
little
bit
fuzzier
when
we
move
kind
of
beyond
the
definition
of
sig.
So
you
know
like
I,
am
definitely
plus
one
on
the
action
has
been
lifted
and
reports.
H
On
the
working
groups,
I
think
already
exist
because
they've
fallen
under
the
same
rules
of
reporting
to
the
community
meeting
as
SIG's
did
so.
I
know
that
my
working
group
has
been
reporting
for
over
a
year
at
the
community
meetings.
The
decks
got
posted
in
those
notes,
and
you
might
already
have
some
data.
G
Yeah
I
had
some
connectivity
issues
to
begin
and
so
I
couldn't
I
could
not
understand
what
are
the
benefits
of
moving
working
groups
out
of
the
kubernetes
community
to
see
mcf
and
what
are
the
benefits
for
them
if
they
will
move
to
C&C?
If
my
specific
concern
is
the
cnc
of
user
groups
or
designed
for
Dempsey
CFN
user
community,
which
is
the
community
specifically
for
the
cnc
FM
users,
so
the
paid
members
who
have
joined
us
as
as
the
members
but
with
the
extra
title
as
the
end
users.
G
E
For
what
I
was
trying
to
memorize
I
was
basically
saying
we
don't
have
the
information
to
make
a
factual
base
recommendation
right
now
and
so
having
a
full
list
of
presidents
and
cf6
like
it's
not
in
front
of
me
having
the
list
of
user
groups
wasn't
in
front
of
me,
but
just
it
seems
like
the
concrete.
Next
thing
we
could
do
is
just
figure
out
what
is
the
vitality
of
each
user
group?
What
is
the
terminal
criteria
for
a
working
group
which
is
the
definition
of
the
working
group
and
then
from
there?
E
Maybe
recommend
working
groups
go
to
user
groups,
but
I,
don't
think
any
one
of
us
is
in
a
position
to
say
user
groups
go
away.
I
was
just
trying
to
call
it
that
we
don't
have
the
facts,
and
so
we
should
just.
The
next
item
should
be
to
go
gather
those
facts,
so
hopefully
no
one's
being
construed
as
that's
saying,
there's
a
final
outcome
or
anything
it's
just.
Let's
gather
the
data.
G
E
What
I
would
find
useful
is
if
there
are,
if
there
are
new
cigs
being
formed
under
the
CN
CF
umbrella
that
are
not
visible
in
TS
e
cigs
list,
so
like
cig
runtime
that
got
form
under
CN,
CF
I
think
that's
relatively
new
if
there
are
other
ones
in
the
works.
For
example,
if
there
was
a
big
data
one
or
there
was
a
an
edge
one
or
anything
like
that,
I
think
it'd
be
useful
to
like
have
that
least
knowable.
G
A
A
E
Trying
to
I
think
the
only
question
is
seems
like
we
want
to
follow
up
on
one
five
three,
and
so
maybe
just
if
we
can
get
some
volunteers
to
see
that
to
complete.
You
know
if
the
issue
had
an
owner
yet
but
I
didn't
get
something
out
to
the
group
here
to
review
and
asking
are
we
good
with
this
health
check
roll
call,
information
gathering
so.
D
E
A
A
So
there's
the
other
item
in
our
agenda
is
to
kind
of
look
through
a
backlog
before
we
end
up
doing
that.
I
just
wanted
to
open
it
up.
If
anybody
has
anything
else,
pressing
that
they
would
like
to
raise
to
the
group
before
we
want
to
just
go
through
our
backlog
and
make
sure
that
things
have
owners.
Assignees
things
are
prioritized
etcetera.
G
A
A
B
Think
that
there
may
have
already
been
a
PR
and
flight
for
this
go
to
sig
of
roles.
If
the
first
bullet
said
something
but
I
would
say,
meet
Erin
s.
Second
bullet
meet
regularly,
at
least
for
30
minutes
every
three
weeks,
except
for
November
and
December
alright.
And
then,
where
did
we
put
report
activity
arretez
one
two?
Three,
four:
five:
okay
yeah.
So
this
can
be
closed.
D
A
This
is
something
that
I
found
concerning
and
I
wanted
to
make
sure
it
was
track
and
not
lost,
but
we
haven't
really
done
anything
with
it
right
now,
where
the
CI
for
our
fork
was
torn
down,
because
there
were
some
problems
with
it
and
it
wasn't
maintained
properly,
but
that
should
there
be
something
in
the
future,
that's
like
concerning
from
a
security
point
of
view,
and
we
need
to
get
it
properly
tested.
We
don't
have
CI
to
do
that
right
now.
A
A
A
A
The
at
was
just
the
thing:
I
was
a
mix
of
both
like
both
technical
resources
and
people,
resources
to
maintain
that
that
CI
right
now
so
he
said
there
just
was
a-
was
a
lack
there.
I,
don't
I'm,
not
sure
like
there
was
also
looking
at
clear
boundary
as
far
as
owners.
It
was
kind
of
like
an
ad-hoc
thing
that,
like
a
few
Googlers,
had
access
to
and
maintained
for
a
while,
but.
A
A
Sorry
I
was
just
gonna
say,
like
I,
think
the
reason
that
I
opened
up
this
issue
here
is
because
there
wasn't
a
clear
owner
that
was
going
to
take
control
of
like
okay.
This
is
your
responsibility
as
far
as
like
a
group
within
kubernetes
to
make
sure
this
happens,
I
don't
think
we're
at
the
point
of
like
soliciting
volunteers
for
it,
because
it
needs
ownership
first,
and
the
thing
that
I
found
at
the
time
was
basically
like.
Psc
was
like
this
and
test.
F
A
F
A
Technical
bits,
I
think
there
are
folks
that
we
can
like.
We
can
figure
that
out
as
far
as
like
the
technical
implementation
of
it,
I
think,
at
least
from
a
steering
standpoint
like
at
least
having
an
owner
and
for
me
the
the
like
most
logical
owners
for
this
piece
of
infrastructure
or
either
we
say
cig
testing
you.
A
Yes,
it
is
a
responsibility
of
yours
to
maintain
this
infrastructure,
please
work
with
PSC
and
the
imprint
working
group
and
that
kind
of
stuff
to
make
sure
that
we
maintain
that,
because,
right
now,
that's
the
testings
responsibility
for
regular
testing
infrastructure.
The
other
way
to
do
it
would
be
go
to
the
PSC
and
be
like
you're,
the
main
users
of
kubernetes
security,
CI
testing
and
that
cool
stuff.
A
It's
your
responsibility
to
make
sure
that
it's
like
it's
happening
and
it's
up
and
it's
running
and
please
go
and
coordinate
with
cig
testing
and
the
infor
working
group
to
make
sure
happens
because
it'll
be
like
a
coordination
between
a
couple
different
groups
to
make
it
happen.
But
it
definitely
means
like
a
specific
owner
like
the
buck,
stops
with
this
group
to
make
sure
that
it's
up
and
running
yeah.
F
F
They
should
be
the
primary
people
responsible
for
this,
at
least
from
a
coordination
point
of
view,
and,
like
you
said,
we
can
always
get
technical
help
from
different
teams,
including
the
kits
infra
stuff
to
to
make
things
work.
But
you
know
if
we
don't
even
know
it's
broken,
you
know
there's
and
we
are
not
on
the
PSC,
so
we
won't
even
know
what
they
need
right.
A
I'm,
okay,
with
that,
like
assigning
like
hey
PSC,
this
is
a
responsibility
we
need
you
to
take
on
for
at
least
like
boning
and
coordinating
keeping
this
infrastructure
up,
and
if
you
need
resources
from
other
groups,
then
like
please
core
mate
with
them.
If
you
have
problems
like,
let
us
know
but
saying,
PSC
doesn't
like
now
a
document
responsibility
of
yours
to
make
sure
this
is
up
and
running.
B
Really
Christophe
go
back
there.
What
there
was
something
that
needs
to
be
addressed
on
one
of
the
last
issues
that
we
just
skipped
over
I
thought
it
was
I
thought
it
was
about
the
community
meeting,
what
I'm
putting
the
link
in
the
in
chat.
So
you
have
it
so
you
can
share
it
on
your
screen.
I
thought
it
was
about
the
sig
of
contradiction
with
the
Thursday
community
meeting
and
it's
not.
It
was
actually
because
I
was
digging
around
because
of
the
community
meeting
stuff.
B
That
I
saw
this
problem
as
well,
and
the
problem
right
now
is
that
the
first
set
of
bullets
number
tubule.
It
says
that
SIG's
meet
regularly,
at
least
for
30
minutes
every
three
weeks
except
November
December,
but
then
scroll
down
a
little
bit.
Oh
sorry,
slack
scroll
down
a
little
bit
and
then
it
in
the
organizational
management
section.
It
says
that
snakes
meet
bi-weekly
on
zoom',
so
one
is
telling
SIG's
that
they
need
to
meet
once
every
three
weeks
and
the
other
one
is
saying
that
they
need
to
meet
bi-weekly.
A
My
initial
gut
says
every
three
weeks
is
fine.
That
gives
SIG's
flexibility
to
reschedule
bump
things
around
not
meet
the
fifth
week
of
a
month
and
I.
Don't
think
anything
is
necessarily
lost
by
saying
like
every
three
weeks
except
November
in
December,
so
I'm
like
plus
one
to
the
first
point
as
opposed
to
enforcing
bi-weekly.
Oh
yeah,.
B
A
A
A
D
B
I
A
F
A
A
D
A
Yeah
I
know
that,
like
from
the
from
the
github
administration
team
that
is
under
contributes,
we
have
been
doing
this
for
incubator,
getting
everything
weaved
out
of
incubator
and
either
into
casings
or
into
kubernetes
retired,
but
where
we
haven't
looked
at
doing
that
for
the
main
org.
But
that
may
be
thing
about
weekend.
We
can
look
at
doing
next
and
if
there's
any
yeah.
D
I
think
it
occurs
across
I,
said
community
star
work,
so
it's
like
across
incubator,
across
communities
proper
or
across
the
number
of
the
sub
elements
that
are
there.
So,
like
you
know,
if
we
took
on
audit
to
include
this
it's
much
bigger
or
we
can
empower
the
people
that
are
working
at
a
can
work.
D
A
Think
the
big
thing
is,
we
just
didn't
force
them
like
then,
to
folks
an
incubator
like
when
we
initially
introduced
case
eggs.
We
just
said,
like
you,
want
to
keep
living
an
incubator
like
there's
no
need
to
move
now,
and
then
it
was
just
finally
getting
to
a
point
of
like
okay.
No,
we
don't
need
to
maintain
two
org.
This
is
kind
of
silly
like,
let's
just
either.
A
Yeah,
like
it's
not
that
difficult
to
run
like
I
I,
look
for
it
and
see
like
who's,
just
been
inactive
like
what
what
repos
do
or
do
not
have
a
lot
of
activity
and
like
shouldn't,
you
still
stick
around
here
that
that
part
is
definitely
very
easy,
as
far
as
which
ones
should
move
to
things
versus
stay
in
the
in
the
main
word,
I.
Think
fact:
it's
just
slightly
trickier
because
yeah
there's
there's
there's
history.
There.
A
So
at
this
point
we
are
now
over
time,
I'm
going
so
I'm
going
to
cut
everything
off
there.
Thank
you
so
much
for
buddy
for
coming.
If
you
have
further
questions
or
comment,
you
can
reach
out
to
the
steering
committee
by
email
or
by
us
slack.
Those
addresses
for
both
are
in
our
steering
committee
meeting
notes
thanks
everyone
for
joining
and
we'll
see
you
next
time
we're.