►
Description
A
A
B
C
D
E
Not
a
whole
lot
for
me,
just
commenting
on
issues
and
PRS
as
usual
worked
on
the
event.
Mitter
wants
performance,
some
more.
I
did
find
edit
e
come
up
with
one
solution:
it's
compatible
with
the
existing
readable
stream,
but
it's
not
there's
some
performance
regressions,
but
so
but
anyway,
that
was
about
it.
For
me,
the
next
is
Trevor.
F
D
H
D
H
A
Being
occupied
with
travel
and
other
company
stuff
spent
a
way
too
much
time
with
Jenkins,
we
moved
the
release,
notes
off,
see,
I,
don't
know,
gesture
to
see
I
release,
not
know
Jesus
door,
and
that
is
more
lockdown
in
terms
of
security
and
we've
represented
provision
most
of
those
slaves,
so
they're
starting
from
scratch
for
most
of
them.
So
we
have
much
more
solid
security
guarantees
for
our
release
process
and
just
to
keep
the
integrity
there.
A
I
J
K
L
M
N
Yeah
working
on
this
a
flattened
proposal-
thing
that
will
probably
talk
about
a
little
bit
and
also
writing
some
compliance
on
a
mission.
Now
that
the
legal
committee
is
almost
done
with
the
recommendation
for
how
we
need
to
put
stuff
I'm
working
on
a
big
PR
kind
of
restoring
and
adding
copyright
and
licensing
information
to
the
projects,
next
is
electric.
O
P
So
I've
been
most
identifying
old
and
stale
issues
and
either
closing
them
or
reanimating
them.
Special
apology
shout
out
to
Ben
who
I've
been
add
mentioning
every
30
seconds
for
the
past
24
hours
and
I've
also
been
going
down
a
few
blind
alleys
and
dead
ends
doing
a
bunch
of
work
that
then
I
realized
he
ain't,
gonna
fly
and
last
but
not
least,
I
spent
some
time
this
morning
making
sure
that
the
present
list
and
the
stand
up
list
were
in
the
same
order
to
avoid
the
which
lists.
A
Yep
thanks
for
that
rich
and
thanks
very
much
taking
notes
in
the
doc
it's
great
to
see
activity
in
their
review
of
last
meeting.
We
we
pretty
much
only
do
it,
this
vtc
membership
learning
and
we
have
three
or
four
new
members
with
us
this
weekend
were
officially
numbers.
What's
he
eating
now
that
wasn't
last
week.
Actually
that
was
two
weeks
ago.
We,
we
didn't,
have
a
problem
meeting
last
week,
so
on
the
agenda.
Today,
we've
got
three
items:
we're
going
to
be
able
to
flick
through
the
first
two
fairly
quickly,
I
think
so.
P
I,
don't
know
that
I
have
much
to
add
to
what's
in
the
PR,
which
I
hope
most
people
looked
at,
but
we've
been
doing
some
work
for
a
while
and
we
have
a
charter
together
and
we
have
a
pretty
good
group
I
think
and
we
made
every
three
weeks
and
we
actually
do
stuff.
It's
pretty
exciting
and
I
would
like
to
move
that.
We
ratify
that
group.
L
P
L
Yeah
I
was
mostly
asking
if
they
were
going
to
be
on
board
through
the
regular
core
process
or
if
they
were
started,
I
going
to
get
like
on-boarded.
However,
the
docs
working
group
plans
for
like.
P
P
This
working
group,
the
Charter,
will
also
have
to
be
ratified
by
the
build
working
group,
because
previously
some
elements
of
tests
and
infrastructure
well
obviously
permit
test
infrastructure
fell
to
the
build
working
group
and
while
a
lot
of
it
most
of
all.
This,
though,
will
arm
this
is
either
really
does
or
is
perceived
as
more
than
just
butting
up
against
the
building
group,
but
I
think
we
have
I
think
we
have
brought
support
I'm,
not
worried
about
that.
But
ratification
here
today
would
not
be
sufficient
necessary,
but
not
some
a.
J
A
N
I
mean
it's
obviously
going
to
have
to
be
ratified
by
the
legal
committee
in
and
then
by
the
board,
but
we
we
have
enough.
We
have
enough
out
of
there
already
that
we
can
get
a
patch
together
and
one
thing
that
I've
been
doing
and
trying
to
put
this
tool
together.
As
I,
we
identified
a
bunch
of
files
that
actually
fall.
N
Be
heading
to
be
considered
yet
so
I
asked
what
we're
supposed
to
do
there
just
from
our
kind
of
in-house
counsel,
and
they
gave
a
pretty
good
recommendation
on
how
to
do
like
a
wind
files
are
essentially
do
a
license.
So
we
have
some
resolutions
there
as
well,
so
expect
a
really
really
big
PR
at
some
point.
A
Okay,
we'll
come
back
with
some
updates
on
that
as
they
have
any
the
next
one
is
Mike.
We
put
this
own
agenda
I.
Think
well.
Today,
flinton
projects
go
the
TC
and
structure
stuff.
That's
on
the
tee
som
REE
PO
number
59.
Can
you
tell
us
about
this
and
lacks
at
the
CGC
level,
so.
N
All
right,
this
is
there's
a
lot
of
context
that
happen
in
the
tsc
that
probably
hasn't
happened
here,
but
in
the
last
PSC
meeting
talked
a
bit
about
what
scope
of
the
TSE
should
be,
and
also
some
of
the
problems
that
we
have
in
terms
of
defining
what
something's
relationship
decor
is
what
the
structure
and
the
TC
isn't.
What
all
the
interdependence
you
are.
There's
a
lot
of
trouble
with
communication
right
now
between
all
the
different
moving
parts.
I
think
that
a
lot.
I
N
N
N
P
D
N
So
basically
there's
a
proposal
to
come
the
tsc
specifically
to
groups
and
subgroups
that
have
some
measurable
connection
to
core
development,
so
that
that
can
be
something
as
broad
as
our
website,
which
does
you
know,
99%
of
things
that
have
nothing
to
do
score,
but
it
also
happens
before
you
distribute
their
Jas.
So
it
definitely
does
need
to
be
integrated
accord
or
let.
E
N
N
So
this
obviously
has
to
be
ratified
by
the
tsc
in
the
CPC
and
any
affected
working
groups
that
are
of
a
sizable
scale
that
we
would
for
yourself,
I'm
curious
what
people
think
on
this
Collison.
This
is
probably
the
first
time
there's
a
lot
of
people
that
are
the
TSU
have
heard
about
a
lot
of
distance
I.
I
N
Manages
these
groups
in
like
a
heavy-handed
way
right
there
they're
autonomous
units,
but
the
problem
is
that
we
don't
really
know
what's
happening
in
them.
Unless
somebody
working
on
them
happens
to
be
in
this
meeting,
so
it
would
essentially
become
the
tss
responsibility
to
find
ways
to
communicate
what
that
working
group
is
doing,
whether
it's
a
roll
up
of
their
activity,
the
CGC
can
read
at
their
leisure,
so.
N
This
group
that
needs
to
know,
what's
going
on
in
benchmarking,
understands
that
the
way
that
the
charters
and
autonomy
work
would
basically
be
the
same
right
so
so,
right
like
the
CTC,
would
still
approve
a
charter.
That
was
delegating
something
some
of
responsibility
of
it
right.
It's
just
that
that
that
working
group
would
then
just
be
right
under
the
tsc
and
the
tsc
would
handle
making
sure
that
it
reports
properly
and
that
everything
gets
communicated
so
that
the
CDC
knows
what's
going
on.
O
N
Well,
not
necessarily
right
so
like
the
thing
that
the
CTC,
never
delegates
and
probably
never
will
is
authority
to
commit
things
to
core
right,
like
everything
that
gets
committed
to
core
is
under
the
CTC.
So
if
one
of
these
working
groups
has
an
escalation,
this
is
related
to
getting
something
in
decor.
That
escalation
would
still
go
to
the
CDC's.
I
H
N
H
There's
probably
a
handful
of
visa
can
move
up
website.
I
would
say:
okay
yeah
now
I
can
go
up
to
tsc,
it's
a
separate
repo.
It's
really
not
something
that
that
anyone
on
the
the
on
the
core
team
actually
deals
with,
but
for
things
like
the
build
work
group
or
the
documentation
work
group.
These
are
things
that
touch
the
domain,
repo,
all
right
and
it's
something
that
the
CTC
absolutely
needs
visibility
and
and
has
visibility
and
what's
happening.
D
N
Draw
that
line,
because
all
of
these
are
integrated
in
the
core
development
in
some
way,
but
there's
there's
just
a
spectrum
of
how
integrated
they
on
how
much
broader
their
scope
is.
I
mean
you
remember
what
at
that
thing
like
six
months
ago,
when
we
tried
to
actually
draw
like
something
like
an
org
chart,
where
we
tried
to
figure
out
what
the
dependencies
were
between
different
groups,
and
it's
like
just
look
like
this
big
web
of
a
mess.
Kids
just
look
impossible.
Basically,.
F
F
G
Draw
the
line
that
seems
like
a
poor
argument
to
make
a
very
sweeping
change.
I
like
move
everything
to
another
to
the
other
side.
Like
you
know,
let's,
let's
make
an
effort
here
and
you
know:
okay
website
probably
makes
sense
bill.
Probably
doesn't
you
know
what
do
we
think
about
benchmarking
and
you
know
move.
O
H
H
G
H
N
N
D
D
N
Csc
would
probably
end
up
changing
if
we
put
a
bunch
of
new
stuff
on
very
right,
so
that's
and
and
honestly
so
there
isn't,
with
the
exception
of
me
and
I,
don't
really
like
have
time
to
participate.
I'm
probably
gonna
be
back
away
quite
a
bit
in
this
meeting,
there's
not
people
that
are
like
very
active
in
the
website
in
evangelism
in
the
actual
translation
communities
in
some
other
ones,
I'm
forgetting
I
see
I
don't
even
know
actually
there's
two
minutes.
Yes,
occasionally
fruits
to
keep
my
head
around.
O
I
I
N
H
So
you
have
to
make
a
very
good
point
about
most
of
these
being
more
informal
teams
than
actual
working
groups.
I
notice
that
that's
particularly
true
for
things
like
HTTP
and
especially
true
for,
like
you
know
the
LCS
but
I,
I'm
wondering
if
for
a
handful
of
these,
if
it
just
doesn't
make
sense
to
clean
up
the
work
groups
and
just
make
them
these
informal
teams,
so
for
anything
that
we
have
going
on
under
core
instead
of
saying
you
know,
the
first
saw
being
hey.
H
N
H
N
D
H
Lts
King
has
its
own
repos.
It's
without
being
out
chart
working
groups.
H
So
yeah
I'm,
just
wondering
if
that's
actually
a
way
forward
here,
is
that
the
working
groups
themselves
or
yeah
they're
chartered
by
did
the
tsc
anything.
That's
on
this.
The
TC
side
would
just
be
a
team
and
not
an
actual
chartered
work
group,
which
may
mean
unchartered
some
of
the
the
groups
that
are
there
I
good
that
make
sense
it
just
me
or
not.
Have
it
as
an
HTTP
working
group.
This
have
a
team.
O
N
Have
a
team
if
there
wasn't
like
enough
people
there
and
integration
in
the
core
to
be
on
the
CDC,
so
I,
don't
think.
There's
like
a
problem
in
communication,
say
between
LTS
and
core,
but
I
do
think
that
there's
a
problem
with
communication
about
what
is
going
on
in
core
to
the
public
and
to
the
rest
of
the
community
and
a
big
problem
with
some
of
these
other
groups
in
there
to
UK
shin
with
the
rest
of
the
organization.
O
Yes,
could
you
maybe
summarize
those
problems
and
maybe
we'll
try
to
find
solutions
for
each
one
of
them
and
see
if
this
construction
is
really
the
best
solution
forward?
Also,
the
TSE
is
trying
to
figure
out
its
mission
and
mission
of
the
foundation,
and
it's
also
a
subset
of
this
group
of
people,
so
they're
also
too
busy
for
their
own
mission
right,
so
giving
them
an
extra
burden
of
ensuring
that
all
these
communication
happens
is
not
just
going
to
happen
because
of
a
structural
change.
Well,.
N
A
Now
as
we've
added
members
to
the
CTC,
we've
not
added
a
corresponding
membership,
but
you're
welcome
to
join
the
meeting
and
there'll
be
details
on
the
on
the
issue
that
I
post
today
for
that
meaning
about
how
you
can
join
see
what
we
join
for
discussion
tomorrow
and
otherwise
engage
with
the
issue
over
there.
Is
there
anything
at
pressing
on
this
that
anyone
wants
to
mention
now
before
we
close
up
special
on
these
particular
thing
that
can't
be
dealt
with
on
github
or
tomorrow?
F
A
H
A
Okay,
any
concerns
before
we
move
on
no
okay,
let's,
lastly,
we'll
go:
try
a
QA
again
with
people
listening
on
a
live
stream
and
on
IRC
what
channel
did
I
say
no
dev.
So
if
there's
anyone
in
no
dev
on
freenode,
that
is
listening.
We'd
love
to
hear
from
you!
If
you
have
any
questions
or
comments
we
can
engage
with,
will
leave
this
open
for
a
few
minutes.
I'm.