►
From YouTube: Kubernetes WG Apply 20200303
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
B
A
A
A
B
A
C
A
A
B
B
B
A
Okay,
let's
keep
going
topology,
so
I
talk
to
Maria
she's
super
busy
with
some
internal
company
stuff.
So
she
doesn't
have
a
lot
of
time
to
do
that.
I'd
love
to
make
progress
on
that,
but
we
don't
have
anyone
to
actually
walk
on
this
either
so
I
was
I
was
trying
to
clean
up
some
of
the
tasks
and
look
at
what's
needed
and
I
think
we're
gonna
have
to
work
on
some
documentation
anyway,
which
are
part
of
this.
But
let's,
let's
suddenly
do
that
types
of
good
phrase.
C
A
I
think
oh
Jenny
said
something
nice.
She
has
made
something
very
close
to
that
recently,
so
a
different
feature.
So
maybe
we
should
move
the
code
that
some
of
the
oh
yeah
and
I
didn't
get
these
comment,
because
it's
pretty
much
saying
that
next
I'm
gonna
call
the
function
I'm
like
that's
the
entire
yeah,
so
we
should
probably
take
some
of
these
good
movie
to
you
chills.
We
can
Jenny
had
good
ideas.
I
had
a
good
idea,
so
we
could
merge
these
good
ideas
into
one.
You
French.
B
C
C
A
B
I
I
broken
it
in
weekend
and
yesterday
or
today,
push
the
changes.
Responding
to
your
comments.
I
think
you
look
at
it
right
now,
yeah,
so
the
big
blocker
now
should
be
the
pruning
stuff
which
I'm
still
not
convinced
when
we
discussed
that
removing
all
fields
from
a
set
and
on
on
map
item
and
lists,
yeah.
A
So
we
talked
to
his
Jenny
and
Jenny
was
supposed
to
look
at
it.
I
don't
know
if
she
took
if
she
has
had
the
time
to
do
it,
but
basically
we
thought
that
maybe
we
have
to
go
back
to
what
we
had
before
and
I
have
a
he
curse.
If
nothing
else,
if
maybe
we
could
make
a
yeah,
we
probably
should
do
that.
Yeah.
B
A
B
C
B
A
Okay
renaming
it
I
think
I
think
I
wanted
to
talk
to
him
in
person
about
it.
I,
don't
care
about
the
name,
operation,
success,
type,
I,
don't
know
if
it's
an
actual.
A
A
B
B
A
C
A
A
And
we'll
have
to
document
how
applied
change
is
the
manage
fields
based
on?
Was
it
applied
before
or
not?
Are
you
changing
anything?
Are
you
not
changing
anything,
but
it's
the
first
time
you
apply.
We
need
to
document
that
because
we
are
a
couple
of
these
agreements.
It's
not
obvious
and
me
and
Jenny
talked
about
it
yesterday.
I
don't
think
we
disagree,
but
there
was
multiple
way
of
seeing
this
coming.
B
A
A
So
right
now,
the
only
way
we
can
change
the
field
manager
is
in
Somerset
apply.
If
you're
doing
your
client
side
apply.
Oh,
if
you're
doing
any
other
command
touch
edit
create
whatever
you
can't
set
the
fill
manager.
We
don't
have
the
option
user
agent,
it's
always
going
to
be
in
felt
by
the
user
I
turn
by
the
API.
So
so
it's
always
going
to
use
control
I!
A
Think
it's
it's
not
the
best,
and
we
could
actually
address
this
issue
by
having
cuca
role
by
sending
the
field
manager,
maybe
not
give
the
option
to
customize
it,
but
always
send
the
field
manager
and
use
like
the
name
of
the
command,
so
Cukor
old,
something
and
fork
lying
sigh
to
play.
We
could
send
a
cooker
old
client-side
reply
and
at
least
if
you,
if
you
move
up
to
this
issue,
the
permits
that
the
guy
is
doing
a
client-side
apply,
the
manager
is
cooker
all
and
then
he's
doing
a
server-side
apply.
A
B
A
B
B
B
A
A
I
mean
we
would
use
the
we
would
keep
the
user
by
default,
but
for
Cooper
all
we
can
set
the
manager
so,
and
so,
if
you
have
an
old
version
of
cooker,
all
it's
gonna
set
cooker.
All
that's
not
the
end
of
the
world,
but
at
least,
if
you
have
a
newer
version
of
cooker
old
and
it's
gonna
set.
B
B
B
A
Yeah
119
is
probably
gonna,
be
the
version
about
actually
applying
I
feel
like
the
version.
We're
doing
right
now
is
about
tracking
manage
fields,
and
the
next
version
is
gonna,
be
about
planning
like
we
don't
tell
so
much
about
the
performance
of
a
play
right
now.
We
don't
care
too
much
about
the
experience
of
a
playing.
We
can
almost
do
about
tracking
fields
and
next
CDC
is
gonna,
be
about.
Let's
use
apply
for
real
action
apply
and
so
yeah
do
you
client
go
thing.
A
A
A
C
C
B
C
B
A
So
this
initiative
was
created
because
we
assume
that
the
schema
we
have
our
own
schema
and
we
believe
that
sometime,
our
schema
was
wrong
and
when
the
schema
is
wrong,
it
would
completely
block
the
process
which
we
don't
want
to
happen.
So
we're
like
okay,
let's
lugga,
now
all
that
the
schema
is
wrong,
so
we
can
fix
it
and
let's
not
block
the
process,
so
we
login
now,
but
we
don't
block
the
process.
We
just
don't
do
so
side
apply
things.
A
The
problem
is
that
now
this
happens,
because
the
validation
in
kubernetes
is
wrong.
Our
validation
is
right,
but
we
can't
change
the
validation
in
kubernetes
that
easily
so
yeah.
This
is
weird
okay.
We
need
to
somewhat
fix
the
validation
in
kubernetes
and
Trust,
and
we
I
think
we
can
mostly
start
to
trust
our
validation.