►
From YouTube: Package Maintenance Team meeting - Jan 14 2020
Description
A
B
A
A
D
B
A
A
E
A
B
D
Means
possible
that
the
NPM
will
make
that
RFC
once
they
have
made
sufficient
progress
on
the
registry
side.
I
don't
know,
but
I
yeah
I
mean
I
assume
they
would
invite
comment
on
the
usability
and
the
API
and
stuff,
but
we
haven't
heard
anything
from
them
yet.
But
that's
my
what
I
described
is
my
understanding
of
what
you're
likely
to
yeah.
A
E
Maybe
we
could
also
ask
them
to
do
if
not
an
RFC
process,
something
like
a
intent
to
implement
for
register
side
things.
Cuz
I,
think
you
know
some
of
these
things
cross
the
boundary
between
the
CLI
on
our
industry
and
it's
I
feel
like
it's
a
little
unfortunate
that
we
don't
have
more
insight
on
what
they're
intending
to
do
on
the
registry
parts
of
these
right.
A
And
I
yeah,
I
I
and
my
understanding
kind
of
was
that
at
least
from
talking
to
Darcy
was
that
they
were
planning
to
do
that
in
a
way.
We
already
see
that
detail,
so
I
think
it's
I
can
follow
up
with
him
just
to
say:
okay,
if
it's
not
an
RFC,
what
will
it
be
or
clarify
what
the
plans
are
in
terms
of
that.
E
Definitely
so
I
I,
don't
know
if
you
all
saw,
but
I
posted
a
link.
So
this
is
an
effort
that
Google
is
doing
so.
Ben
Coe
is
and
I
think
Ben
and
Ryan,
and
maybe
it's
Ryan's
project
Ryan
day,
but
basically
it
definitely
should
solve
whether
or
not
people
like
the
implementation,
details
and
whatnot
this
problem
for
at
least
open-source.
You
know
github
projects
so
I.
If
you
read
through
it,
it's
kind
of
like
a
release,
manager,
kind
of
thing
where
it
has
multi-factor
authentication
built
in
the
not
npm
permissions,
but
the
github
permissions.
D
Those
that
you
also
have
to
host
it
yourself
as
a
service,
and
we
do
which
to
store
the
NPM
credentials
so
like
great
for
the
to
me.
That
means
it's
not
great
for
open
source,
it's
great
for
enterprise
or
it's
great
for
like
a
collection
of
open
source
that
has
lots
of
resources.
You
know
like
the
foundation
or
something
but
well.
E
E
A
Think
it's
it's
quite
interesting.
It's
another
option.
Don't
think
that
you
know
if
there
was
no
option
from
getting
something
from
from
NPM
might
be
a
you
know,
something
that
we
might
look
at
in
terms
of
like
hey.
Is
this
the
best
we
can
recommend,
but
given
that
there
might
be
something
from
NPM,
it's
still
interesting
to
see
what
comes
out
of
that
not
having
to
run
a
service
at
all
would
make
it.
A
C
E
D
A
A
A
Sounds
like
knots,
okay,
so
the
next
one
on
the
agenda
is
document
the
current
top
ten
Express
issues,
I'm,
not
sure
Wes.
If
you
exactly
want
to
cover
that,
but
I
think
it
would
be
a
good
time
to
kind
of
cover
what
went
on
at
the
collaborator
summit,
slash
conference
and
sort
of
progress
there
in
terms
of
you
know
getting
the
triage
stuff
going
and
then
whatever
else
yeah.
E
For
sure,
so
the
triage
thing
we've
at
least
a
few
active
people
have
started
to
to
use
their
triage
role.
We
haven't
merged
the
PR
I
had
that
which
actually
has
the
full
documentation.
I
took
a
pass
at
editing
it
and
then
ended
up
doing
a
whole
bunch
of
other
things
and
never
finishing
the
last
edits
so
I'm
hoping
to
maybe
do
that
this
weekend
and
get
that
merged
up,
which
maybe
we
then
you
know
if
this
group
could
take
a
look
at
what
we
have
there
and
give
feedback.
E
If
there's
a
way,
we
can
turn
that
into
a
document
that
we
could
then
promote
to
other
groups.
You
know
that
would
be
great
because
so
far
it's
been
working
out.
Well,
you
know,
I
think
just
having
the
couple
people
there
to
paying
the
authors
of
PRS
or
original
reporters
of
issues
has
gotten
a
lot
more
engagement
from
them
on
some
like
oftentimes.
It's
just
closing
the
issue
or
whatever.
But
so
that's
that's
super
helpful
and.
E
Yeah,
so
so
that
that's
going
well
I
do
think
the
I
would
love
it
if
somebody
could
pitch
in
on
the
pkg
pkg
j/s
status
board
at
some
point,
because
I've
been
slacking,
I
haven't
been
slacking,
I've
been
too
busy
to
finish
working
on
that
and
right
now,
the
lists
in
the
Express
status
board
is
actually
out
of
date
because
the
it
was
taking
too
long
to
index
everything.
So
it
needs
to
like
we
need
to
either
like
do
partial
indexes
or
something
so
that
it
doesn't
timeout
the
github
action.
E
I
can
manually
rerun
it,
but
I.
You
know
I
again,
I've
been
busy
with
other
things
and
a
chance
to
so
so.
The
there
are
new
issues
that
have
been
tagged
that
aren't
showing
up
in
the
in
that
list,
but
that
again,
like
I,
said
it's
just
a
matter
of
you,
we
can
manually
run
it
locally
and
then
push
the
changes
to
the
page.
A
A
E
I
think
there's
a
few
different
approaches
we
could
take.
Some
of
them
could
be
really
easy,
but
whether
they
fully
solve
the
problem
or
not,
I
I'm,
not
sure
the
general
thing
is
that
when
it
times
out
right
you
just
like
you
don't
really
right
now
because
of
the
it's
not
keeping
track
of
it.
It
doesn't
know
when
it
was
the
each
item
or
repo
is
less
indexed.
So
I
think,
like
one
really
simple
thing
would
just
be
on
success.
E
Save
that
off
so
that
when
you
next
load
up,
you
can
just
sort
by
the
oldest
last
indexed
and
start
there
and
I
think
that
would
probably
be
like
a
couple
hours
work,
maybe
less
there's,
but
that's,
maybe
not
the
most
robust
solution,
I
think,
there's
probably
other
ones
so
I
think
we'd
probably
want
to
discuss.
Maybe
in
that
repo
and
then
before
we
implement
but
yeah,
it
could
be
pretty
quick.
A
A
E
Don't
think
there's
much
else
really:
oh
well.
Okay,
I
guess
I
should
quickly
mention
I.
One
of
the
outcomes
of
the
the
collab
summit
was
starting
out
a
server
web
server
framework
team.
One
of
the
discussions
we
had
as
we
were
you
know
saying:
let's
put
this
together
is:
can
we
just
get
Express,
5,
complete
and
out
the
door
so
the
top
issues
there
irie
documented
the
last
couple
things
that
need
to
happen
before
Express
5
goes
out.
A
E
A
E
A
I'm,
just
rough
numbers,
that's
good
enough,
I,
think,
okay
and
then
you've
got
this
or
the
other
piece
on
that
anything.
Any
other
major.
There's
the
the
pier
to
update
the
the
triage
process,
which
already
talked
about
we've,
got
people
engaged.
Anything
else
really
is
a
major
next
step.
Other
than
to
you
know,
see
how
it
works
out.
E
No,
there
is
discussion
on
whether
or
not
so
we
have
a
new
governance,
doc
PR
that
I
opened,
which
will
be
for
the
open,
Jess
application
and
I
guess
we
should.
There
was
some
discussion
on
whether
or
not
the
triage
or
description
and
role
in
the
org
should
be
added
as
part
of
the
governance
again
I,
don't
know
if
that's
something
that
anybody
has
opinions
on
or
or
wants
to
help
figure
out,
but
that's
the.
A
Only
I'm,
just
thinking
like
the
analog
to
no
js'
I,
think
that,
like
the
places
where,
like
in
our
governance
or
related
documents
that
might
impinge
on
that
is,
is
that
that's
where
we
define
who
and
how
people
get
access?
So
it's,
like
you,
know,
collaborator.
The
governance
says
like
collaborators:
are
the
people
with
the
access
to
the
repo
and
here's,
how
you
become
a
collaborator
right
and.
D
A
D
E
Yeah
that
makes
sense
yeah,
maybe
I,
should
just
make
that
change.
The
problem
is
I.
We
have
like
a
bunch
of
things
in
motion
and
since
actively
right
now,
I'm
the
only
one
committing
to
them
there.
I
don't
want
to
make
put
too
many
roadblocks
in
front
of
merging
them.
I'd
rather
margining
complete
thing
and
then
get
to
the
next
step.
Absolutely.
A
E
A
A
A
A
A
A
E
A
E
A
A
E
C
C
C
A
E
A
A
Of
like
weekend,
where
happen,
you
know,
I
think
people
will
be
happy
to
try
and
amplify
it
as
well,
but
and
that's
a
that's,
a
great
way
if
there's
something
to
follow,
but
sometimes
just
reminding
people
like
hey,
these
are
the
key
things
versus
it
showed
up
in
your
your
screaming.
You
missed
the
kind
of
thing.
Oh,
it.
E
E
E
So
this
is
the
Twitter
account
I
registered,
so
go
ahead
and
give
that
a
follow.
Well,
can
you
follow
without
it
being
I've
got
too
many
things
on
my
plate,
so
I've
been
skipping
back
and
forth
between
things
and
I
didn't
complete
any
of
it.
So
I'd
like
to
get
this
Twitter
thing
sorted
out.
So
let
me
yeah
I'll
add
this
to
my
to
do
list
and
since
you
can't
follow
it
yet.
A
E
A
E
Okay,
oh
you
know
what
let
me,
let
me
add
one
other
thing
onto
this
since
we're
since
we're
still
in
the
Express
topic.
Can
people
take
a
look
at
this
discussion
so
I
want
to
add
a
new
thing,
so
this
would
be
like
we'd
have
triage
nurse
the
TC
members,
and
then
this
would
be
sort
of
a
maybe
intermediary
role.
So
it'd
be
this
cap
captains
for
the
different
projects.
E
We
have
this
in
practice,
but
not
codified
anywhere
I'd
like
to
get
people's
opinions
on
this
and
then
get
people
who
care
to
try
to
you
know
work
up
toward
being
captains
of
the
different
repos
and
I
think
this
would
be
possibly
another
thing
that
we
could
add
to
the
list
of
recommended
project
structures
or
something
in
the
future.
If
people
like
the
idea
right.
C
So
is
this
may
be
an
opportunity
as
like
a
springboard
for
the
some
of
these
high-impact
projects.
To
have
like
a
governance
model
to
follow
is
like
for
Express
when
it
gets
really
big.
You
have
so
many
repos
being
able
to
kind
of
add
owner's
code
owners
in
a
sense
to
scale
that
out
I'm,
not
sure
how
big
expresses
to
other
impact
projects,
but
yeah.
E
I
think
I
think
that
would
be
well
so
yeah.
There
was
a
few
things
I
think
you
said
there
so
I
think
this
is
a
model.
I
think
is
interesting
for
projects
which
are
structured
like
Express,
where
there's
umbrella
org,
that
has
a
governance,
but
then
each
individual
repo
really
is
its
own
domain
and
I
think
that
for
express
this
is
trying
to
make
that
explicit
in
the
government's.
But
then
for
the
like
greater
impact
of
what
happens.
What
the
package
mean
is
working
group
works
to
promote
to
other
big
ecosystems
packages.
C
Because
I've
just
observed,
like
one
that
really
comes
to
mind,
is
like
webpack,
which
just
has
like
a
enormous
like
ad
hoc
community
and
I
noticed
a
while
ago,
I'm
not
sure
who's
after
joining
the
GS
foundation.
Again
this
you
know
this
could
just
be
an
example
by
notice
that
I
think
four
really
critical,
plugins
and
packages
they
created
like
the
web
pack
contribs
or,
of
course,
that
I
think
entailed
like
some
sort
of
ownership
change,
but
yeah
I,
guess
in
terms
of
just
seeing
what
other
prior
art
there
is
out
there.
C
You
know
different
models
of
the
are
architecture.
Zmei
require
different
governance
models,
but
you
know
Express
webpack,
which
are
this
other
big
ecosystem,
like
projects
that
you
know
either
have
their
own
ideas
or
could
benefit
from
the
experience
of
other
projects
in
similar
situations.
I
absolutely.
E
Agree
and
I
would
love
to
see
the
prior
art
on
that.
If
you
have
any
good
links,
definitely
I
would
like
to
read
through
those
and
see.
If
there's
you
know
again-
and
this
is
where
the
package
meetings
working
group
I
think
is-
is
really
well
situated
to
try
to
bring
all
of
that
together,
so
that
you
know,
maybe
we
could
give
a
list
of
like
if
you're
trying
to
set
up
your
project
governance,
here's
models
that
have
worked
for
other
things.
A
Yeah
I
just
comment
today:
I
mean
I,
think
it
it's
in
line
with
what
some
other
projects
have
done
as
well
like
as
Owen
mentioned
in
terms
of
code
owners
and
actually
having
it
formalized
or
documented,
as
a
good
thing
that
so
that
people
see
ok
like
I,
don't
have
to
go
I'm,
not
you
know
it's
something
like
an
intermediate
step
towards
the
TCE
or
it's
a
place
where
I
could
say.
Oh
I'm,
gonna
pick
off
a
smaller
project.
Understand
that
to
take
a
response,
you
know
some
responsibility,
which
is
definitely
good.
C
I
guess
just
real
quickly
so
like
this,
like
the
issue
that
you
have
here,
wes
is
there
anything
similar
in
terms
of
an
issue
for
governance
and
package.
Maintenance
would
be
baby
wanna
either
use
this
as
a
spike
and/or
an
example
and
see
how
it
works.
Here,
start
an
issue
and
package
maintenance
about
governance
or
minutes
at
all.
Little
premature
well.
E
I
think
so,
I
think
the
role
of
the
of
our
package,
millions
working
group
is
more
to
take
the
different
things
from
the
community
and
pull
them
together
to
make
it
easier
for
future
or
new
groups
looking
to
pick
their
model
in
this
room.
This
would
be
for
governance,
so
I
don't
think
we
would
apply
this
to
the
package
min
screwed
more.
We
would
just
maybe
make
a
blog
post
and
say
here
are
some
some
governance
models.
If
you're
you
know
setting
this
up,
we
might
not
need
to
do
it
alone.
E
Here's
some
examples
because
again,
like
I
wrote
this
I
spend
my
time.
Writing
this
thing.
It'd
be
much
better
if
we
had
a
thing
that
was
just
like
Oh
copy
and
paste
this
from
the
package
maintenance
working
group
who
keeps
it
up
to
date
and
with
you
know
best
practices,
we've
learned,
you
know
so
that
it
makes
it
easier
on
the
the
next
group.
C
A
C
I
guess
your
comment
about
prior
are
I
guess.
Would
anybody
be
opposed
to
a
issue
in
package
maintenance,
bring
up
the
discussion
of
governance
model
or
maybe
someone
could
do
some
research
look
at
web
pack,
looking
Express
look
at
others
and
then
just
they
sort
of
says.
Would
you
mind
if
I
would
it
be?
Okay,.
A
I
was
gonna
say
it
sounds
like
you're
volunteering,
and
that
sounds
great.
You
know
in
terms
of
this
specifically,
it
would
have
been
like
we
probably
need
to
vet
it
a
little
bit
more
on
the
Express
side
before
we
would
pull
it
back
and
say
hey.
This
is
what
we
recommend,
but
what
you
just
described
is
is
is
a
very
good
thing
to
say:
okay,
can
we
go
out
and
look
at
any
of
the
others
and
if
you've
got
the
cycles,
yeah
I
think
it's
a
great,
very
much
very
much,
plus
one
cool.
C
I
yeah
I'll
get
it
started.
Like
I
said
we
might,
it
might
take
a
while
to
mature
it
into
something
that
the
working
group
can
adopt.
But
as
we
have
these
conversations,
if
we
have
these
things,
we
want
to
put
that
information.
Someone
will
have
a
central
place
as
it
comes
up
then
at
some
point,
yeah
get
to
a
point
where
we
have
something
useful
over
time:
okay,.
A
C
A
It
would
be
very
valuable
for
this
group,
you
know
if
you
come
back
and
say
here's
the
research
I
did.
This
is
what
these
different
projects
are
doing
us
just
understanding
that
as
a
significant
benefit
on
its
own.
So
that's
a
great
first
step,
and
hopefully
it
leads
to
the
other
steps,
but
even
without
that
super
useful.
C
Just
one
last
question:
while
we're
here
not
to
necessarily
play
favorites
or
anything
but
I
guess,
would
it
be
an
appropriate
step
to
use
like
I
guess,
open
jazz
project
is
a
place
to
start
I.
Imagine
those
are
some
of
the
biggest
projects.
So
if
anybody
has
anything
established,
it
would
be
a
good
place
to
start
or
in
terms
of
a
sample
size,
I
guess
so.
E
We
we
have
some
some
work,
that's
already
sort
of
been
done
toward
that
that
question.
If
you
take
a
look
in
the
issues,
maybe
I
can
find
the
specific
issue
we
had
outlined
way
early
on
in
this
process
of
setting
this
group
up
a
three-stage
process
for
how
we
would
roll
things
out,
and
it
was
like
pilot
packages
high-impact
packages
and
then
general
access
or
open
enrollment
yeah.
A
E
Packages
which
we
haven't
really
done
a
lot
with
MQTT
yet,
but
then
the
high-impact
packages,
which
is
I,
think
what
you're
talking
about,
which
would
probably
be
I,
think
we'd
want
to
source
the
open,
Jess
foundation
packages.
For
that
stage
you
know,
obviously
that
was
opened
in
January
of
2019.
So
one
year
ago
we
we
set
this
plan
and
I
think
we
still
kind
of
are
considering
ourselves
in
the
pilot
phase,
but
I
think
it'd
be
reasonable
to
start
maybe
doing
the
high-impact
stage
stuff
as
well.
I,
don't.
A
A
E
A
This
so
I
think
it
would
be
I.
Think
part
of
your
point
is:
we
should
probably
include
MQTT
in
that
list
Owen
just
because
we
did
say
that
was
gonna
be
our
second
pilot,
and
so
you
know
understanding
the
governance
on
that
front
is
probably
a
good
thing
and
then
140
143
my
impact
packages
right
and
I.
Guess
it
was
the
this
would
be
the
other
we
we
didn't
generate
this
list
yet
did
we
well.
B
A
A
C
E
Great,
definitely,
and
and
and
don't
hesitate
to
open
up
issues
just
to
say
hey.
This
seems
like
an
inch
the
idea
to
me
that
you
know
it's
not
noise.
It's
it's
good
conversations.
You
know
if
there
is
prior
work
already
done
and
it
will
chime
in
with
likes
and
stuff.
So
you
know
an
issue
can
always
be
closed.
C
A
A
So
the
next
thing
on
the
agenda
is
next
steps
on
support
levels
and
package
to
Jason,
so
I
think
on
that
front
we've
you
know
we
basically
got
agreement
on
what
we
want
to
promote
I.
Think
if
I
remember
correctly
and
people
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
one
of
the
key
next
steps
was
to
update
the
tool
in
pkgs
to
you
know
reflect
what
we
finally
decided
and
support
kind
of
our
recommended
usage.
And
then,
after
that
we
were
going
to
start.
The
evangelization
process.
Is
that
what
people
remember.
A
E
Like
Roe,
isn't
there
some
don't?
We
still
need
because
it
doesn't
look
like
we
really
addressed
like
what
are
the
changes
after
having
added
the
funding
field
that
we
need
to
make
to
it,
did
we
address
that
cuz
right?
Isn't
the
idea
that
we
now
would
instead
of
listing
the
funding
URL,
we
would
actually
reference
the
funding
URL.
A
E
E
D
The
current
funding
fields,
its
the
ports,
there's
like
a
string
shorthand
or
an
array
or
no
sorry,
the
string
shorthand
or
an
object
and
the
string
when
it's
just
a
URL.
The
object
can
have
a
type
field
or
a
URL
field.
The
type
field
is
kind
of
unused
it
gets
displayed,
but
like
I'm,
not
even
sure,
if
it's
that
useful
so
like
what
probably
is
needed
is
some
package
that
encapsulate
slike.
Given
this
funding
field
value,
what
is
the
inferred
type
of
it?
D
D
D
You
know
the
alternative,
however,
since
these
objects
I
think
can
be
anything.
What
we
could
do
is
have
an
ID
in
the
support
thing
in
like
a
given
in
whatever
we
want
to
attach
a
funding,
a
piece
of
funding
information
to.
We
could
have
an
ID
there
and
we
could
put
the
support
ID
in
the
funding
field,
object
and
that
way
kind
of
it's
like
inverse.
It's
probably
not
ideal,
but
it
still
allows
a
unique
link
to
be
created.
D
You
know
you
could
have
like
a
funding
field
object
could
have
like
support
items
or
something
and
it's
an
array
and
it
can
take
any
number
and
then
that
would
have
all
the
IDs
and
that
way,
once
you've
found
the
support
item
you
wanted.
You
would
then
go
quickly,
scrape
the
funding
field
and
pick
out
the
ones
that
applied
so
that
that's
the
only
way.
It's
can
see
it
really
working,
but
I
don't
see
any
obstacles
to
making
that
happen.
So.
A
Is
it
that
you
think
we
it's
coming
down
to?
What
do
we
need
to
change
there
or
not?
You
know
not
necessarily.
What
do
we
need
to
change
in
the
funding
field?
What
do
we
need
to
change
there
before
we
want
to
push
that
forward?
One
thought
that
just
came
to
mind
was:
could
like
we've
got
defined
types
right.
Could
we
make
a
new
type,
the
NPM
funding?
D
D
Like
that's,
that's
that's
what
I
was
saying
is
we
would.
My
recommendation
would
be
to
get
rid
of
all
funding
information
in
the
spot
in
the
support
field
stuff,
except
make
sure
that
each
like
support
item
that
would
otherwise
have
contained
funding
information
has
a
unique
identifier
added
to
it
somehow
an
object
key,
for
example,
instead
of
an
array
of
support
items
and
then
that
unique
identifier
we
can
come
up
with
a
extension
to
the
funding
field
that
can
point
back
to
that
support
identifier,
and
then
we've
achieved
the
same
linkages
of
information.
D
We
just
decouple
and
like
it
using
database
normal
form
language.
It
would
like
normalize
the
funding
information
and
the
support
information
to
different
places,
but
we
would
still
have
we
could
still
make
it
such
that
they're
linked,
because
the
funding
field
objects
can
be
extended
with
any
keys.
We
want.
E
E
A
E
A
D
Exactly
right
and
we
could
I
mean,
however,
we
want
to
design
that
right
hand
side
that
you
just
described
the
simplest
could
be
sure,
a
string
that
must
be
a
unique
identifier
or
the
action
doesn't
even
have
to
be
just
an
identifier
string
that
if
you
use
that
value
and
look
through
the
funding
field,
any
funding
objects
that
have
that
string
in
an
ID
field
or
supports
field,
or
something
are
then
linked
to
that.
Backing
item
yeah,
yeah
right
well,.
D
A
D
E
D
A
A
A
This
references
to
the
funding
field
right
so
I
mean
that's
I,
think
that
was
kind
of
where
I
was
going
like.
If
we
had
an
option
to
make.
Instead
of
this
strain,
you
could
have
a
reference
to
the
funding
field
and
so
where
it
makes
sense
to
like
you
know
if
it's
company
and
you
want
to
actually
put
the
URL
for
your.
You
know
your
company
website.
A
D
A
E
E
Then
the
next
step
after
that
would
be
update
the
tool
with
the
new
C,
and
this
is
where
they
will
have
to
look
at
what
the
tool
does.
Cuz
I
think
it's
just
a
JSON
schema
validator
effectively
right
now,
yep,
which,
since
this
I'm
pretty
sure
the
way
I
set
it
up,
is
it's
only
validating
what
would
be
in
the
support?
Key,
not
the
whole
package
Jason.
So
if
we're
referencing
outside
we'd
probably
need
to
to
change
that
a
little
bit,
but.
D
Right
and
then,
and
that's
where
I
mentioned,
we
may
also
want
a
separate
tool
like
that
validates
and
normalizes
the
funding
information,
and
if
that
tool
existed,
I
could
very
I
could
do
my
best
to
advocate
for
NPM
itself
using
it
so
that
we're
using
the
same
tool
like
that
logic
already
exists
in
NPM,
so
you
could
probably
just
extract
it,
but
and
then,
and
then
we
have
kind
of
the
beginnings
of
an
ecosystem
of
tooling
around
this
stuff,
and
you
know
single
sources
of
truths
and
so
on.
The.
A
Only
other
thing
I'd
like
to
throw
in
there
is
like
we
talked
about
putting
it
into
the
final
versus
drafts.
Do
we
think
you
know
I'm
wondering
if
it
makes
sense
to
say
okay,
we
merge
in
the
change
related
to
the
funding
field.
Does
it
make
sense
to
sort
of,
then
you
know
talk
about
it,
promote
it
as
a
hey,
give
us
your
feedback
in
parallel
with
working
on
the
tools,
as
opposed
to
like
hey
here's,
the
final
version
and
the
tools
before
we
go
out
and
ask
for
any
broader
input.
I.
D
A
E
E
I
mean
this
I,
don't
know.
I've
read,
I've
read
this
obviously
many
many
times
now
and
sometimes
still
I'm
like
I'm
like
well
yeah,
it
looks
generally
good.
I
still
haven't
put
it
in
a
project
other
than
that
support
or
package
itself.
You
know,
I
think
the
working
with
it
will
be
the
feedback.
We
really
want
to
see.
Yep.
A
Okay,
so
I
just
wanted
to
get
clarity
on
that
which
I
think
it
is
it's.
Basically,
we
want
some
tooling
before
we
go
out
for
more
feedback,
so
I'm,
just
in
the
minutes
reorganizing
what
we
got
so
basically,
our
next
steps
are
referenced.
The
funding
proposal
feeds
tweaked
to
reference
tweaked
to
reference
to
funding
proposal
fields.
I
used
to
be
a
couple
of
funding
input
from
the
sport
field.
Links
will
be
reference
to
the
funding
field.