►
From YouTube: Kubernetes WG Apply 20190115
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
C
D
B
A
A
Decided,
maybe
change
if
you
want
to
change
the
American
Center
yeah.
We
had
a
very
quick
discussion
with
Cheney
about
if
we
want
to
change
the
content
type
and
if
you
want
to
change
the
way
we
are
going
to
do
the
apply
now
it's
the
time
to
and
but
then
we
decided,
we
don't
have
to
give
it
a
fixed
conversion.
By
going
to
have
daughter
yeah,
we
had
a
problem
with
the
conversion
networking
and
this
is
fixed
it.
We
don't
care
anymore,
yes
up
here
and
then
on
the
conversion.
Oh
no.
A
A
So
we
don't
have
a
testable
if
we
go
through
extension,
you
one
better
one
deployment
to
ABS
be
a
absolute
one
deployment.
This
is
the
use
case
that
kept
failing
pause,
but
we
still
iced
that
make
sure
that
it's
working,
because
what
we
had
to
go
from
one
group
extension
be
one
but
I
want
you
another
group,
everyone-
and
we
didn't
have
like
the
mechanics
to
do
that.
A
A
A
B
C
B
C
B
E
A
Problems
makes
your
handler
for
children,
okay,
so
I.
We
have
a
test
now
for
bright,
which
goes
through
the
entire
workflow.
You
have
a
conflict,
you
can
resolve
the
country
and
close
everything.
So
that's
working!
Well,
we
don't
have
that
post
see.
Are
these
so
I
tried
a
new
test
pathologies?
Obviously
it's
it's
fading
very
terribly
it's
crashing
because
we
don't
have
the
models,
the
open
API,
which
means
since
we
don't
have
the
open
API.
We
can
create
a
type
value
or
typed
object,
but
all
the
operations
we
do
out
there
not
intact
objects.
C
A
A
A
Makes
sense
because
okay
yeah
and
we
don't
want
to
change
older
code
to
say
hey,
do
you
have
a
schema?
Don't
you
have
a
schema?
Maybe
do
something
different.
We
want
to
keep
this
the
same.
The
mulch
could
transform
to
a
set.
Everything
is
built
to
use
a
schema.
We
don't
want
to
change
this
code,
ideally,
so
what
we're
going
to
do
is
that
will
create
a
schema
based
on
the
object,
and
so
then
we
can
probably
only
got
no
schema
right.
A
A
B
A
I
think
we'd
have
to
so
here's
the
thing,
that's
a
good
question
and
we
have
to
think
about
that.
We
have
two
objects
and
they
might
look
very
different,
but
they
need
the
same
schema
to
be
merged.
So
what
we'll
probably
do
is
that
will
generate
schema
for
one
will.
Skim
generate
schema
for
the
other
object
and
then
we'll
probably
melt
the
cheese
key
map
together
to
decide.
What
is
the
the
schema?
A
These
two
objects
Lybian,
so
it's
gonna
be
sort
of
tricky
and
also
we
need
to
be
careful
about
convulsion,
because
an
object
can
be
converted
from
one
person
to
another.
What
happens
in
these
case?
What
do
we
need
to
mount
the
schema
together
again?
I?
Might
not
we
don't
know
for
sure.
B
A
A
A
A
B
I'm
not
sure
for
me
to
happen
with
over
a
new
schema
without
user
feedback
or
having
to
force
it.
Well,
okay,
if
nothing
changes
okay,
but
if
we
save
the
schema
just
overriding,
it
might
be
dangerous
because
I
know
I,
know,
I
know
a
lot
of
people
who
sends
broken
objects
all
the
time.
It's
very
tough
like
that.
Yeah.
A
D
A
B
A
B
E
E
A
E
E
A
A
Yeah,
so
we
need
to
talk
to
think
maybe
about
the
interaction
between
the
two
like
what,
if
they
apply,
sometimes
we
apply
and
sometimes
with
the
curl,
sometimes
with
the
new
apply
and
sometimes
the
old
apply.
Do
we
actually
care
so
much
about
this
use
case
like
maybe,
we
should
really
consider
these
documents.