►
From YouTube: Kubernetes Steering Committee 20201207
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
All
right
well
welcome,
again
to
the
december
7th
kubernetes
steering
committee
meeting.
We
have
four
of
our
seven
esteemed
members
and
we
might
get
a
fifth
as
the
meeting
goes
on
so
at
least
quorum.
Two
talk
through
topics,
anything
that
requires
a
vote.
We
will
have
to
wait
till
we
have
at
least
five,
so
we
had
a
number
of
topics
on
today's
agenda
that
we
can
run
through
the
first.
I
don't
know
if
someone
wants
to
give
some
context
here.
A
Unfortunately,
I
missed
the
election
retro,
but
with
the
first
was
talking
about
some
questions
that
came
out
of
that
retro,
particularly
around
what
we
can
do
to
improve
diversity
within
our
own
body
here.
So
I
don't
know
paris
is
this
something
I
see
your
name
here?
Is
this
something
that
you
wanted
to
raise
or
talk
through
now,
or
maybe
someone
has
some
more
context.
B
Sure
I
just
saw
the
question
this
morning
and
wanted
to
put
sort
of
a
quick
idea
that
I
had,
which
was
it
seems
like
steering
fee
like
we
get
a
lot
of
nominations
and
the
folks
that
win
are
typically.
B
You
know
core
maintainers
chairs
the
people
that
have
been
doing
the
work
already
kind
of,
and
I
really
think
that
in
order
for
us
to
improve
that
funnel
to
us
that
we're
going
to
have
to
improve
the
funnel
below,
and
that
would
encourage
people
to
turn
over
meaning
like
if
they've
been
in
the
role
for
four
plus
years,
to
maybe
turn
that
over
to
see
if
other
people
would
be
interested,
because
if
we're
just
going
to
continue
to
have
everything
stay
the
same,
you
know
we're
not
going
to
get
any
different
results.
B
So
unless
we
have
quotas
and
then
we'll
just
have
quotas
and
then
folks
that
will
be
really
pissed,
because
those
people
weren't
necessarily
doing
the
work.
So
that's
just
that
was
kind
of
my
thoughts.
There.
A
A
We're
maybe
my
first
thought
on
this
is
when
we
extend
the
work
group
annual
reports
out
to
the
sigs.
Maybe
that's
a
good
forum
to
see
if
we
could
provide
an
avenue
for
turnover,
but
were
there.
C
C
Folks
want
to
add
to
this
item,
didn't
actually
get
discussed
in
the
retro.
It
was
punted
to
this
meeting
because
it
was
the
like
last
item
to
discuss.
A
D
D
I
was
gonna
say
I
think
we
should
like
similar
to
what
paris
said,
but
if
we
have
people
in
mind
who
could
be
good
candidates,
we
should
try
to
get
them
into
these
meetings
and
start
engaging
with
them
so
like,
instead
of
them
taking
the
initiative,
we
take
the
initiative
and
reach
out
to
them
and
get
that
conversation
going
because
that'll
help
during
election
time
too.
D
C
My
sorry
by
one
concern
there
would
just
be
potentially
not
like,
if
would
be
like
if
they
aren't
elected,
would
there
like?
I
don't
want
to
say
bad
feelings
about
it,
but
you
know
it
can
also
potentially
be
seen,
as
you
know,
grooming
for
the
role
and
a
out
of
band
endorsement.
If
that
makes
sense,.
C
D
C
C
D
Oh,
I
agree.
I
don't
think
we
should
try
to
pick,
but
when
we
reach
out,
I
think
we
should
be
mindful
that
the
demographic
that
we
reaching
out
to
is
diverse
itself.
E
Yeah,
I
tend
to
think
that
there's
generally
a
shortage
of
people
who
are
willing
and
able
to
help
with
community
type
things,
and
so,
if
we
want
to
draft
people
to
help
not
not
even
necessarily
as
like
a
this,
is
grooming
for
steering
or
like
we
promise
you'll
be
elected.
Obviously
you
can't
promise
that,
but
just
from
like,
if,
if
you
appreciate
this
community-
and
you
want
to
help
like
here's,
an
area
to
help
and
as
a
side
effect,
you
get
visibility
and
people
know.
E
Oh,
this
person
is
helpful
and
I
I
think
that
I
would
echo
what
paris
said
about
like
the
people
who
tend
to
do
well
in
being
chosen
to
represent
the
community.
Are
the
people
who
are
participating
and
representing
the
community
in
sort
of
informal
ways
or
in
other
roles
and
so
bringing
a
broader
group
of
people
into
roles
where
they
can
have
visibility
and
represent
the
community.
I
think,
is
a
good
way
to
improve
that
pipeline
and
nikita.
I,
like
your
idea
about
it,
doesn't
have
to
come
through
the
like
sig
lead
funnel
like
that.
E
That
is
a
good
path,
I
think,
but
even
if
there
are
projects
that
we're
wanting
to
do
as
steering
and
we
need
hands
like
drafting
people
to
do
that
and
then
saying
here's
this
thing
we
did,
and
here
are
the
people
that
helped
thanks
a
lot.
We
appreciate
that.
A
Yeah,
so
I
I
guess
for
myself,
I
I
agree
with
paris,
and
I
think
this
is
a
unique
to
steering
problem
and
it's
something
that
all
levels
of
community
need
to
act
upon
and
strongly
agree
with
the
the
feeder
pools
as
a
vehicle
to
improve
this
and
or
continue
to
ensure
it's
improved
over
the
life
of
the
project.
A
So
I
guess
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
use
the
next
topic
around
work
group
reports
and
maybe
how
we
extend
them
to
sigs
as
a
seating
into
this
or
as
a
as
a
nice
way
to
maybe
talk
about
how
we
can
actualize
this
topic,
but
paris.
You
obviously
requested
10
minutes
on
the
work
group
reports
for
yours.
B
I
wanted
to
talk
about
a
couple
things.
Actually
I
wanted
to
talk
about,
like
obviously
one
with
the
current
state
is
with
with
our
working
group
ones,
but
then
number
two
because
we're
like
I
know
time
is
so
weird.
I
literally
woke
up
this
morning
and
was
like
oh,
my
gosh
january
is
literally
right
around
the
corner
and
we
told
I
mean
we
have
the
the
everything
in
place
that
we're
supposed
to
kick
off
all
the
sig
stuff
in
january.
So
that's
why
I
was
like
whoa.
B
We
might
need
10
minutes
here,
so
I
did
a
ton.
I
don't
know
if
I've
told
you
all,
but
I've
been
doing
a
ton
of
just
like
back
channel,
not
channel.
It's
like
the
wrong
word.
That's
the
wrong
word
back
like
research
out
of
band
based
on
the
annual
reports
like,
for
instance,
I've
been
interviewing
a
ton
of
apache
pmcs
because
they
do
quarterly
reports
and
I've
been
interviewing
like
a
ton
of
end
users
and
things
like
that.
B
As
far
as
like
what
what
they
would
find
interesting
out
of
the
reports-
and
I
got
a
lot
of
really
great
feedback
that
I
wanted
to
share
with
you
all
it's
gonna.
I
was
gonna
collate
it
into
an
actual
digital
copy.
B
But
right
now
it's
like
all
in
my
all
in
my
notebook,
because
I
did
it
mostly
last
week,
but
some
of
the
things
that
I
heard-
and
I
also
talked
to
some
of
the
working
group
organizers
as
well,
because
I
was
looking
over
the
working
group
reports
and
I
was
seeing
kind
of
some
of
the
same
commonalities
and
stopped
me
if
you
all
have
seen
these
two,
because
I
mean
it's
only
a
small
group
of
us
so
feel
free
to
interrupt.
B
But
some
of
the
calling
out
commonalities
that
I
was
seeing
from
the
working
group
reports
was
we
just
weren't
getting
a
lot
of
information
and
in
some
cases
we
were
almost
kind
of
pulling
teeth
and
it
was
really
hard
to-
and
I
don't
say,
pulling
teeth
as
far
as
like
waiting
but
pulling
teeth
as
far
as
like
what
we
were
trying
to
get
from
that,
because
I
think
what
we,
what
we
are
trying
to
do
is
get
just
a
really
clear
picture
and
have
folks
tell
us
a
story
with
you
know
each
one
of
those
bullets
and
I
think
we
were
getting
like
kind
of
you
know.
B
Sometimes
one
word
responses
or
yeah
here's
my
charter
kind
of
links.
So
one
of
the
things
that
I
noticed
actually
is.
We
have
the
like
the
about
you
section
at
the
very
top
and
let
me
actually
pull
this
I'll,
actually
pull
it
up.
I
won't
pull
up
a
report,
I'll
pull
up
a
template,
so
one
of
the
things
that
I
saw
was
that
since
we
have
the
you
and
you're
in
your
position
and
you're,
you
know
whatever
the
like
the.
How
are
you
kind
of
doing
at
the
top?
B
B
So
one
of
my
ideas
was:
why
don't
we
flip
it
and
put
the
you
you
stuff
at
the
very
bottom
and
then
put
all
of
the
the
meat
and
potatoes
of
the
report
at
on
the
on
the
top,
where,
like
kind
of,
we
really
want
to
dig
in
and
then
the
other.
The
other
points
that
were
people
were
bringing
up
was
the
you
and
your
section.
B
We
might
want
to
take
a
completely
different
approach
on
that,
because
it
doesn't
seem
to
really
jive
with
what
we're
trying
to
get
out
of
the
report,
and
it
sounds
like
we
just
need
to
think
about
some
other
way
to
make
us
more
in
tune
with
the
chairs
and
the
organizers,
because
I
really
now
that,
like
we've
gotten
the
reports
back
in,
I
do
think
it
makes
more
sense
for
us
to
focus
much
more
on
the
groups
themselves
and
then,
instead
of
the
persons,
I'm
what
I'm
still
trying
to
get.
B
Where
is
yes
here
we
go
well,
actually
we
could
have
just
gone
for
the
other
one.
I
did
put
the
questions
there
too.
So
here's
the
like,
you
know
you
hit.
We
hit
them
with
the
you
and
your
role
very
first,
and
this
is
like.
When
did
you
become
chair
when
you
enjoy
the
role,
and
I
heard
from
a
lot
of
like
a
lot
of
chairs
and
working
group
organizers,
they
did.
They
just
felt
very
uncomfortable
period.
B
So
the
one,
the
first
change
that
I
wanted
to
propose
to
you
all
I
mean.
Obviously
we
can't
necessarily
vote
in
this
meeting.
I
don't
know,
can
we
do
it?
Five
of
us
one,
two,
three
four
five
is
a
take
this
off
and
replace
take
this
off
completely
and
replace
it
with
the
with
the
line
so
like
up
here
in
the
checklist,
it
would
say
something
like
I'm
just
going
to
like
you
know,
do
a
little
prototype
here.
It
would
say
something
like.
B
Blah
blah
blah
blah,
so
that
would
be.
That
would
be
the
change
for
this
right,
and
then
that
means
the
chairs
would
solely
focus
on
the
meat
and
potatoes
in
here
and
then
obviously
for
working
groups
of
meat
and
potatoes
in
here.
The
other.
The
other
feedback
that
I
got
is
a
kind
of
a
two
another
sort
of
twofold.
B
In
the
same
in
the
same
breadth
is
we
didn't
really
tell
people
how
much
to
put
into
this,
so
I
was
going
to
have
instructions
here
that
says
that
we're
expecting
dev
stats,
graphs
we're
expecting
or
you
know,
we're
expecting
links
to
keps.
B
You
know
like
pretty
much
show
them
and
I'm
almost
kind
of
curious
if
we
should
like
do
one
as
sort
of
a
example
and
just
to
kind
of
like
emulate,
what
we're
trying
to
find
and
what
we're
trying
to
get
out
of
this,
so
that
other
groups
can
kind
of
see
that
so
and
then
the
reason
the
twofold
there
is.
I
was
asking
some
end
users
as
well,
and
end
users
were
actually
asking
about
things
that
we
present
at
the
community
meeting.
B
But
the
community
meeting
stuff
is
pretty
much
like
what
end
users
are
looking
for,
and
I
think
that's
a
lot
of
our
issues
with
end
users
too.
So
I'm
getting
the
like
the
the
community,
the
community
updates
out
to
end
users
and
like
figuring
out
how
like
how
and
what
information
needs
to
go
where
I
think
should
maybe
be
a
priority
for
us
for
2021.
B
B
So
that's
why
I
think
we
should
really
think
about
for
for
2021,
as
we
go
into
the
new
year,
is
what
exactly
we
want
to
hear
from
the
chairs
and
what
we
need
from
them,
because
I
think
and
then
asking
for
this.
This
specific.
You
know
this
thing
like
now
that
we've
gotten
all
the
repo
like
some
of
the
reports
in
and
we
can
like
get
like
a
yearly
kind
of
like
a
snapshot
like
some
of
this
stuff.
Like
I
said
it,
it
should
be
on
a
quarterly
basis
and
not
necessarily
an
annual
basis.
B
I
don't
know
I
don't
know
how
helpful
this
is
going
to
be.
Is,
I
guess
all
I'm
saying,
because
all
the
stuff
that
we've
gotten
back
so
far
in
my
opinion
hasn't
been
helpful.
So
I
guess
I'm
just
trying
to
make
this
valuable
for
everybody
involved,
because
right
now
I
guess
tldr
from
that
like
whole
10
minute
rant
is,
I
don't
think
it's
valuable
for
anyone.
D
B
B
Yes
and
yeah,
like
I
said
I'll,
add
I'll,
add
my
actual
lengthy
notes
too.
But
what
do
y'all
think
about
that
like
like?
We
can
even
break
it
down
into
like
what
do
you
think
about
the
you
and
your
role
section.
C
So
I
do
very
much
like
the
idea
of
turning
that
into
like
a
one-on-one
meeting
or
just
general
conversation
yeah,
because
it's
a
lot
easier
to
tease
out.
You
know
potential.
You
know
potential
things
that
you
know
some
might
not
necessarily
want
to
write
down
or
put
into
a
permanent
record.
E
I
think
the
inside
about
like
separating
out
the
two
things
like
we
have
a
doc.
That's
like
public
things
about
the
sig
and
health
and
like,
and
then
there's
this
like.
So
how
are
you
doing
and
yeah
like
everything's
good?
Are
things
bad?
Like
is
life
crazy
for
you
right
now?
Are
there
people
like?
Do
we
need
to
run
interference
somewhere
like
yeah
and
that's
a
that's,
a
really
different
kind
of
thing
and
having
both
of
those
in
the
same
dock
is
just
like.
I
don't
even
know
what
this
dock
is
anymore.
Yeah.
B
B
You
know
privately
and
like
work
on
the
report
and
like
send
us
any
like
the
private
notes
about
it,
but
I
think
we
should
really
celebrate
that,
like
you
know
coming
together
and
talking
about
it
as
like.
As
a
like,
you
know
little
micro
communities
rather
than
bury
that
and
like.
I
think
we
should
just
rise
that
what
do
y'all
think
about
that.
D
A
Question
in
paris
to
just
refresh
my
mental
cash,
so
we
we've
gathered
all
the
reports
off
the
mailing
list.
At
least
I
think
we
got
through
everyone,
I'm
trying
to
recall
where
we
said
the
final
reports
would
be
published
and
then
thinking
back
to
this
topic
between
the
you
and
your
role
versus
just
the
body.
As
a
group
like,
I
could
see
how
the
you
and
your
role
section,
if
it
just
lands
in
some
permanent
github
searchable,
google
location,
yeah
thing
that
you
want
versus
the
this
is
the
body.
B
We
say
that
they
will
pr
it
in
hold
on
to
the
community
repo
somewhere
in
their
directory
in
the
community
repo
somewhere.
In
one
of
these
bullets,
I
don't.
E
C
B
Well
hold
on
I'm
going
to
tell
you
right
now,
I'm
just
going
to
find
the
dang
bullet
hold
on
community
community
repo
there.
It
is
so
once
reviewed
and
follow-ups
are
completed.
The
liaison
will
ask
the
organizers
of
the
group
to
submit
a
pull
request
to
that
group's
documentation
in
the
community
repo,
and
then
I
guess
you
would
just
give
it
a
final
lgtm
from
there
so
yeah.
I
guess
between
now
and
like
end
of
the
year,
let's
get
all
of
our
working
groups
to
to
just
submit
something.
Even
if
it's
not.
E
Out,
if
everything
that's
going
to
be
part
of
the
dock
is
public
to
begin
with,
and
we
have
example
things
which
are
like
what
caps
do
you
have
in
flight?
What
are
your
dev
stats
like?
What
are
you
worried
like
I
feel
like
it
could
even
start
as
a
pr
instead
of
starting
as
a
doc,
and
that
would
then,
when
it
looks
good,
it's
like
great
done
emerging.
B
Yeah,
well
the
one
so
the
one
cool
thing
that
we
have
like
so
the
one
cool
thing
about
the
apache
process
that
I've
actually
heard
good
things
about,
believe
it
or
not,
because
I
was
like
I
really
honed
in
on
like
how
people
felt
about
things.
I
know
that
sounds
weird
but
like
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
this
wasn't
a
lot
of
work
on
people
and
that
they
felt
like
it
was
valuable
and
a
useful
amount
of
their
time.
B
So
that's
why
I
really
wanted
to
talk
to
people
already
doing
like
reporting
on
a
regular
basis.
So
I
said,
like
you
know
it:
does
the
private
tags
make
sense
to
you?
Is
that
worthwhile?
Do
you
feel,
like
you
actually
write
those
things
to
the
to
the
board?
I
mean
in
their
case
it's
a
board,
so
they
said
yes,
I
mean,
and
but
some
of
them
most
of
them
said
that
those
like
the
you,
the
you
questions
were
weird,
but
they
actually
said
that
they
do
take
advantage
of
the
private
tags
and
the
private
tags.
B
I
think
even
the
data
protection
group
at
one
point
used
when
at
first
with
me
as
a
liaison,
and
they
used
the
private
tags
a
lot
when
they
were
talking
about
sig
node
and
how
they
couldn't
necessarily
get
any
anyone
from
signo
to
help
them.
So
I
think
the
private
tags
might
actually
help
us
in
that
regard,
but
I
also
kind
of
agree
with
you
that,
if
we're
asking
certain
things
that
it
should
be
public,
but
I'm
still
trying
to
figure
out
that
like
how
can
we
get
some
of
that
really
juicy
info?
B
And
you
see
in
like
a,
I
guess
subjective.
Do
you
see
in
the
like
actual
like
where
we're
gonna
actually
help
out,
but
now
that
we've
also
talked
about
like
hey
setting
up
private
time
with
your
liaison?
Maybe
that's
a
part
of
the
process
as
well,
where
it's
tell
us
everything
that
you
would
tell
us.
That
would
be
in
private
tags
if
that
makes
sense.
B
So
that
means
that
we
would
just
have
to
make
sure
that
the
liaison
absolutely
has
this
this.
Whatever
this
check-in
meeting
is
like
and
meaning
like
so
clearly,
the
meeting
would
have
some
structure.
I
guess
maybe
the
first
15
minutes
is
about
you
and
then
the
next
15
minutes
is
about,
like
everything
that
you
wanted
to
say
about
the
sig
stuff
that
you
didn't
feel
comfortable
in
the
pr.
F
A
I
think
everything
was
good
here.
I
guess
I'm
not
hearing
any
like
large
disagreements
on
anything.
It
seems
like
each
of
us
has
an
action
now
to
go
and
catch
up
with
our
working
group.
Is
there
any
more?
We
want
to
cover
on
this
topic
today.
B
Yeah,
no,
not
really,
I
guess,
just
to
keep
us
up
to
date
with
the
year.
I
guess
like
just
just
to
follow
up
with
what
you
said
get
folks
to
let's
just
check
things
in
at
this
point
I
mean
a
if
they're
a
if
they're
factually
correct,
of
course,
but
b
like
even
if
it's
not
the
most
wonderful
thing
ever
like
I
said
just
so,
we
can
get
some
artifacts
in
and
then
we
can.
You
know
iterate
from
there.
E
B
Yeah
yeah,
no
and
that's
why
I'm
like,
I'm
so
glad
that
we
really,
we
really
did
take
a
good
approach
with
rolling
this
out
with
just
a
small
percentage
of
folks,
so
instead
of
like
having
37
groups
like
what
are
you
talking
about?
So
that's
all.
I
wanted
to
say
thank
y'all.
A
All
right:
well,
I
think
that
was
about
10
minutes,
so
you
have
we're
a
good
judge
on
time,
too.
Paris,
all
right.
So
moving
on
our
next
topic,
we
have
to
talk
through
about
next
steps,
for
I
guess
I
called
it
operationalizing
or
previously
merged
policy
on
website
guidelines.
A
E
I
think
when
bob
was
talking
with,
was
it
tim
on
okay?
They,
I
think
he
had
actually
been
wanting
to
restructure
how
the
announcement
stuff
worked
mechanically
for
a
while
anyway,
and
it
just
hadn't
hadn't
happened.
So
I
think
the
mechanic
will
probably
be
the
files
that
feed
into
announcement
banner
content
stuff
will
be
in
a
folder
and
we
can
put
the
right
approvers
reviewers
on
that
folder,
and
I
think
he
even
wanted
to
have
like
the
scheduling
bits
there.
E
C
He
he
plans
on
working
on
it
again.
He
was
out
of
the
like
out
for
a
bit,
but
it
is
on
his
radar.
E
So,
between
those
two
things,
the
just
putting
it
into
the
right
directory
and
then
having
the
dates
associated
with
the
content,
I
think
that
covers
what
we
need
and.
A
A
Okay,
given
that
that
seems
to
be
all
progressing,
is
there
anything
more
that
we
want
to
bring
up
with
respect
to
usage
of
the
website
as
a
communication
vehicle,
or
we
feel
like
once
this
activity
completes.
We
are
in
a
in
a
in
a
good
spot.
E
I
think
we're
in
a
good
spot
and
we
can
see
like
what
the
demand
is,
if
there's
x,
number
of
conferences
a
year
or
x,
number
of
whatever's
a
year
like
we
discussed
before.
I
don't
think
this
is
going
to
be
a
super
frequent
thing.
If
it
becomes
a
super
frequent
thing,
then
we
can
reevaluate
and
say
like
hear
all
the
standing
approvals
and
like
we
can
reevaluate.
If
it
turns
into
something
frequent,
I
guess,
but.
A
Just
those
you
know
only
watching
the
recording
but
not
or
only
listening,
recording,
but
not
watching
the
video
feed,
it
seems,
like
the
the
administrative
aspects
of
the
policy,
seems
to
be
handled.
A
Fine,
so,
okay,
that's
good.
Moving
on
to
our
next
set
of
topics.
Then
there
were
three
pr's
that
we
linked
out
for
meeting
review.
I
think
my
recommendation
is
that
we
can
follow
up
on
this
async,
but
is
there
anybody
who
wants
to
take
a
moment
to
make
any
announcement
about
either
these?
Otherwise,
I
guess
after
the
meeting
we
would
just
ensure
we
do
our
homework
and
and
review
the
three.
D
I
had
out
of
them
and
yeah
nothing
too
specific
about
that.
Just
a
sec
follow
up
would
be
good.
A
A
All
right-
and
the
last
topic
here
is
cncf
updates.
Who
wants
to
speak
to
that.
B
We
are
officially
kicking
up
the
maintainer
circle
and
yes,
this
is
applicable
to
all
of
us
in
this
room
because
it
is
going
to
be
a
sort
of
a
play
if
you
will
off
of
executive
leadership
circles-
and
you
know
all
the
things
that
your
bosses
have
out
there-
that
they
get
together
and
go
play
golf,
but
the
most
important
part
is
linking
up
with
their
peers
to
talk
about
really
hard
situations
that
you
can't
necessarily
pick
up
a
book
for,
and
I
think
that
that's
a
huge
gap
that
we
have
with
our
leaders
here
is
because
there's
really
nowhere
to
get
that
info
outside
of,
like
you
know,
listening
to
other
cube
contacts
and
stuff
like
that,
that
might
have
that
information.
B
So
we're
going
to
start
a
regular
camaraderie
group
plus
we
don't
have
contributor
summits
anymore,
I
mean
don't
we
do.
We
obviously
are
having
one
with
discord,
but
I'm
talking
about,
like
you,
know,
contributor
summits
with
the
hallway
where
we
can
like
kind
of
talk
to
each
other,
and
I
mean
actually
like
spread
amongst
the
cncf
projects,
not
even
just
necessarily
kubernetes
like
we
were
getting
in
person.
B
So
all
of
us
are
invited
to
the
first
maintainer
circle,
which
is
december
17th.
The
invite
will
go
out
to
the
maintainers
at
cncf
list,
there's
also
a
maintainer
circle
on
slack.
I
would
love
for
you
all
to
tell
your
groups
about
this.
I'm
also
going
to
email
kdeb
about
this
once
we're
set,
but
we're
so
close.
B
Our
first
topic
is
on
burnout
and
time
management.
We
actually
do
have
a
kubernetes
speaker
talking
and
giving
a
personal,
a
personal
sort
of
fireside
chat
about
it,
and
then
we
also
have
an
academic.
That's
done
extensive
research
in
the
area
with
wikimedia
maintainers
and
their
burnout.
So
please
join
us.
That's
it.
B
At
least
once
a
month,
if
not
every
other
week,
that's
what
we're
gonna
figure
out
with
the
demand,
because
I
just
don't
know
I
mean
I'm
thinking
we're
going
to
have
at
least
10
people
there,
but
we
could
have
2
000..
I
don't
know,
but
the
other
deal
is
that
they're
interactive
sessions,
meaning
like
it's,
not
somebody
lecturing
you
that's
you
know.
I
think
you
y'all
should
know
that.
I
hate
that.
That's
why
I'm
always
apologizing
for
my
rants.
B
So
I
know
this
will
be
like
breakout
rooms
and,
like
you
know,
maybe,
like
you
derek
and
jordan
and
like
I
called
you
derek
and
jordan
and
bob
like
y'all,
are
in
like
a
meet
up
like
a
breakout
room.
Talking
about
you
know
some
personal
experience.
You
have
with
time
management.
Something
like
that.
So
I
think
it'll
be
really
worthwhile
for
folks,
at
least
to
you
know
make
you
feel
not
as
alone.
Hopefully.
A
Yeah,
I
look
forward
to
checking
out.
I
don't
know
like
I'll
be
honest
with
y'all
like
covid's
been
a
long
2020
for
me
personally,
and
I
mean
I'm
still
sitting
here
thinking.
I
look
forward
to
hopefully
2021
making
this
not
the
only
way
that
we
can
get
together,
but
the
the
secondary
way
we
can
get
together.
So
I'm
I'm
still
holding
out
hope
that
this
will
just
be
oh.
B
B
I
want
honestly
I
wanted
these
to
be
on
to
be
fair,
honestly,
like
this.
This
whole
concept
came
in
january
before
pre
pandemic,
so
I
I
had
the
thoughts
of
rolling
this
out
at
coupons
and
then
also
doing
it
once
a
month
over
the
phones
just
to
keep
our
you
know
to
keep
that
bond
going
if
you
will
that
we
have
from
kubecon
to
kubecon,
so
that
was
that
is
the
intention.
So
I'm
on
your
100
on
your
page.
A
One
day,
there'll
be
something
where
we
can
get
together
as
human
beings
and
not
just
the
pictures
on
the
screen.
So
I
think
that
wraps
up
today's
agenda,
it
seems
like
we
each
have
some
action
items
to
go
and
at
least
review
the
prs
I
had
call
outs
and
then
to
work
with
our
working
group
to
help
facilitate
their
annual
report
getting
merged.
A
D
A
Have
a
positive,
20
21
if
we're
we're
not
in
touch
before
then
so
anything
else
that
folks
want
to
raise
today.
Otherwise
we
can
adjourn.
E
E
A
Take
the
who'd
like.
E
To
take
the
the
baton,
sorry
next
meeting
is
the
21st.
I
will
be
working
on
the
21st,
I
don't
know
who?
Who
else
will
I
have
a
feeling.
B
B
C
I
actually
have
one
last
minute
item
update
for
the
contributor
awards
this
year
right,
we've
gotten
like
30
people
nominated
for
and
most
of
them
aren't
people
that
have
gotten
awards
before
a
lot
of
people
like
our
names
that
you
know
aren't
you
know
I
don't
want
to
say
no
and
but
like
a
whole,
lot
of
new
people
are
in
there
excellent.
C
B
A
All
right,
very
cool
with
that,
I
guess
we
can
adjourn
and
you
all
have
a
good
rest
of
the
day.
Bye,
bye,
y'all,
fail.
Take.