►
From YouTube: WG Component Standard 20200428
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
Okay,
good
morning,
everyone
welcome
to
the
tuesday
april
28th
working
group
component
standard
reading.
I
think
we
have
one
thing
on
the
agenda
today.
A
Which
is
this
pr
about
maybe
moving
feature
gates
to
staging,
alternatively
in
component
base?
For
some
reason,
this
has
been
like
a
popular
thing
that
a
number
of
people
have
brought
up
recently
independently.
A
A
A
I
think
that's
a
little
higher
level
than
what
component
base
is
intended
for,
which
is
sort
of
just
the
bare
minimum
expected.
You
know
for
framework
machinery
for
every
component,
not
necessarily
the
definitions
of
the
the
features
in
in
various
components.
B
B
Our
documentation
does
not
surface
which
components
implement
which
feature
gates,
and
I
think
that
this
is
something
that
needs
to
change.
Maybe.
A
I
think
this
has
been.
This
was
confusing
to
me
in
the
past
and
I
think
it's
been
confusing
to
a
lot
of
people,
which
is
that
the
expectation
around
feature
gates
was
that
if
you
were
setting
a
feature
gate,
you
should
just
set
it
on
every
single
component
in
the
cluster
the
same
and
just
assume
that
the
ones
that
implement
it
are
doing
the
right
thing,
because
it's
a
cluster
level
feature.
This
is
fair
to
me.
I
mean,
I
think,
that's
a
fine.
B
Yeah,
I
think
it's
it's
helpful
from
a
configuration
standpoint
right
to
be
able
to
pass
a
global
feature
gate
right,
that's
something
that
is
good
ux
from
a
tool
that
helps
manage
the
system,
but
it
is
strange
right
like
to
not
have
any
discoverability
of
the
feature
support,
yeah
yeah.
I
think
it
components
should
have
at
least
some
method
of
advertising.
A
Sorry,
doesn't
it
come
out
in
the
help
text?
Maybe
it
does
not
all
components
use
the
built
it
like.
There's,
there's
a
flag
registering
helper
in
future
gates.
I
think
that
some
components
use,
but
it
forces
you
to
use
it.
It's
not
compatible
with,
like
the
the
component,
config
sort
of
layering
backwards
compatibility
layering
stuff.
A
B
I
I
believe
that
that's
what
I
ended
up
reaching
for
when
I've
had
to
deploy
feature
gates
before
is
to
look
to
see
if
the
component
talks
about
what
it
does,
but
it
would
just
be
less
frustrating
if
at
least
those
docs
were
published
somewhere
so
that
I
don't
have
to
go
get
those
binaries
before
I
know.
If
I
can
do
something.
B
I
some
of
the
other
frustration
I've
experienced
here
is
just
I'm
not
really
personally
a
huge
fan
of
the
way
our
website
is
organized
now
in
comparison
to
how
it
was
before.
B
Be
honest
before,
like
projects
used
to
have
their
docs
like
all
together,
this
was
not
great
because
things
with
overlapping
categories
were
in
multiple
places,
but
now
all
of
the
cat,
it's
categorically
munged
and
installer
docks
are
like
all
in
the
same
place
and
it's
difficult
to
determine
when
you
search
for
something.
If
it
applies
to
what
you're
trying
to
do.
A
A
B
A
A
Right,
yeah
and
that's
that's
typically
tied
to
kubernetes
version,
so
yeah,
I
guess
without
the
I
mean
the
the
way
to.
A
A
B
A
Yeah,
I
I
that
which
sort
of
raises
an
interesting
question
of
whether
in
the
future
feature
gates,
should
actually
just
be
a
type
like
each.
You
know
either
it's
a
centralized
like
this
is
the
feature
gate
struct.
A
A
But
maybe
so
that's
that's
where
it's
like,
so
I
feel
like
component
based
it's
it's
a
fine
line
with
with
feature
grades
right
on,
like
one
hand,
yeah
it's
like
supposed
to
be
this
cluster-wide
thing,
that's
like
in
every
core
component.
On
the
other
hand,
component
base
is
kind
of
defined
as
like
what
you
need
to
build
a
component,
not
necessarily
like
the
features
defined
for
the
components.
A
B
For
a
another
party
implementing
proxy,
which
is
something
that
people
do,
then
you
know
it's
a
the
coup
proxy
related
feature
gates
like
how
do
they
implement
those.
A
A
B
Don't
see,
I
I
think
we
could
use
like
comment
style
annotations
or
something
yeah,
the
doc
generation
portion
of
it.
B
A
There's
this
whole
whole
thing
now
about
how
you
know
features
should
either
make
it
to
ga
or
be
removed,
and
the
the
rules
write
about
alpha
and
beta
features
are
different
than
ga
features.
So
if
we
have
a
ga
version
of
api,
it's
sort-
it's
it's
sort
of
like
called
out
currently
like
okay,
but
the
feature
gates
part
can
change
and
each
feature
gate
has
its
own
semantics
of
whether
it's
supported
or
not.
B
I'm
actually
not
educated
on
that
so
you're.
So.
A
A
Right
and
I
think
the
fields
live
might
live
forever.
I
I
don't
think,
because
we
we
had
one
field
that
was
like
named
differently
or
something
pretty
sure
we
deprecated
something
it
might.
We
might
have
done
it
within
within
the
span
of
a
single
release
cycle,
so
we
might
have
been
able
to
rip
it
all
out
before
it
showed
up.
I
can't
remember,
but
yeah.
I
think
that
was
the
idea
was
that
as
long
as
it
was
gated-
and
we
can
actually
just
look
this
up
in
the
api
convention
stock.
B
Nodes
have
annotations,
and
things
like
that,
so
it's
a
bit
weird
to
not
try
to
use
that
extension
mechanism,
but
because
it's
not
like
you,
don't
have
options
for
passing
values.
You
know
when,
like
passing
arbitrary
things,
we
have
other
map
fields.
A
B
A
B
A
B
Exactly
it
would.
A
It's
not
a
it's,
not
a
fatal
error
for
to
to
get,
or
it's
not
a
fatal
error
to
not
get
gates
that
you
would
be
able
to
recognize.
B
A
A
A
So
anyway,
I
think
the
the
question.
The
the
core
problem
was
how
to
make
feature
gates
more
discoverable
for
users
right
yeah,.
A
So
maybe,
let's
focus
on
that?
I
don't
know
if
it's,
if
it's
a
docs
issue,
I
guess
there's
two
problems:
there's
one
how
to
make
it
more
discoverable
to
stuff's
moving
out.
So
how
does
it
like
if
it's
a
core
component
moving
to
staging?
How
does
it
get
access
to
this
without
importing
kk.
A
B
B
We
lgtm'd
the
ld
flags
override.
I
remember
correctly
for
the
version
library
somebody
popped
in
last
week.
I
believe-
and
I
just
wanted
to
check,
do
you
know
what
I'm
talking
about?
No,
it
was
just
a
little
bit
up
yeah.
If
you
go
to
the
wg
component
standard
chat,
then
oh,
there
was
kublet
flags
for
the
cloud
provider
and
then
there
was
oh
wow.
Yes,.