►
From YouTube: 2019-10-15 .NET SIG
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
A
A
A
A
B
C
You
yeah
mainly
working
on
morons
specification
topics
right
now,
so
mainly
around
questions
regarding
increases
and
objects,
propagate
us
and
span
processes
and
exporters
all
the
way
down
and
working
on
samples-
and
you
know
just
proof
of
concepts
in
different
languages,
so
not
too
much
amount
of
penetrates
with
so
we're.
Currently
working
on
different
languages
and
I
have
to
switch
heads
here
a
little
bit.
B
From
my
site,
I'm
done
a
couple
of
peers.
We
do
have
I,
guess
better,
but
not
final
story
for
configuration.
There
is
a
PR
from
James
Newton
King
Sergey.
Well,
then,
please
have
a
look
of
you
interested.
This
is
how
we
will
be
precise,
didn't
acquire
dependency.
Injection
I,
don't
see
yet
now
what
I
will
be
working
on
next
week
in
a
pond
tonometry
space
I
will
find
something.
I
have
a
couple
of
suggestions.
B
Dorne
is
not
here
right.
Okay,
so
I
will
talk
to
him.
We
I
had
a
couple
of,
or
maybe
even
more
than,
a
couple
of
cases
when
I
work
on
something
or
I
already
have
a
pure
and
people
send
the
PR
the
same
thing.
So
we
can
have
some
established
process
that
well
before
you
submit
your
PR
starts
working
on
something
you
check
that
if
somebody
is
assigned
to
this
task
or
if
there
is
a
PR
open
already.
A
C
C
C
The
basic
motivation
was
to
really
associate
produced,
spend
at
us
with
a
face,
because
we
didn't
have
that
in
the
first
place
and
I
think
there
was
one
issue
or
they
are
not
an
issue
which
that
suggested
to
just
have
a
mandatory
component
ID
on
all
you
spend
data
and
that
seemed
kind
of
we
had
to
rely
on
throwing
fermentis,
because
this
gets
forgotten.
You
can
guarantee
that
all
implementers
will
do
that
in
all
cases.
B
B
B
C
C
This
is
more.
The
intention
is
more
or
for
exported
tremendous
like
like
ISIL
penetrates.
You
want
to
make
sure
that
an
export
doesn't
impact
our
back-end
with
focus
or
potentially
harmful
data,
or
just
data
that
is
isn't
good
enough
from
a
data
quality
perspective
that
we
want
to
filter
it
early
early
on
and
they're
in
the
opposite,
so
the
data
doesn't
even
go
on
the
wire
right.
B
A
It
makes
sense,
bismillah
I
think
it
may
be
happening
on
both
sides
and
same
for
samplers.
The
same
comment
on
simplicity:
are
we
have
a
sampling
interface
defined
for
very
early
on
when
before
span
is
created,
but
then
some
people
want
to
sample
in
later
on
a
pipeline
when
spans
orgy,
like
populated
this
data
or
Spanish,
sent
to
a
crater,
so
I
think
in
the
same
situation.
So
you
can.
You
will
need
to
filter
as
early
on
as
possible,
but
then
you
also
have
a
couple
bills
later
in
the
stage
yeah.
C
Yeah
sure
I
mean
we.
We
can
go
in
that
direction,
but
I
don't
have
high
hopes
that
this
will
be
something
we
can
get
in
for
version
one
probably
so
we
were
looking
for
something
that
would
would
help
us
and
us
the
benefits
that
is
and
I
think.
Other
members
have
probably
the
same
concerns
by
there.
That
year
was
made
through
a
spec,
but
yeah
I
mean
I
can
see
your
point.
How
this
is
a
little
bit
of
work
around
or
let's
say,
there's
some
emergency
mechanism
at
export
xi
and
we
could
have.
A
Welcome
the
way
it's
written
right
now
it
doesn't
let
you
expert,
like
future,
an
expert
or
either
because
they
then
have
tasted
information.
So
you
have.
C
A
B
It
seems
we
need
to
start
working
on
metrics
or
in
distributed
context.
I
think
we
are
pretty
much
done.
The
stretching
part
there
are
few
things
left
like
something
needs
to
be
revised
completely
and
there
are
I
think
few
smaller
items,
but
other
than
that
metrics
on
distributed
context
are
like
missing
total
here,
I.