►
From YouTube: 2022-09-15 Governance Committee private meeting
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
B
B
B
Okay,
this
chain
is
an
oteps
change
suggests
as
a
standard
API
definition
to
query
Telemetry
data
stored
in
any
observability
back.
Oh
interesting,
that's
a
different
change
in
scope,
both
open
source
and
proprietary.
The
idea
of
having
a
standard,
Trace,
query
API
has
been
discussed
by
these
people
and
others
lengths
in
proposal.
193
interesting
has
anyone
else
seen
this
yet.
C
B
C
B
D
C
B
Yeah
gerasi
had
a
another
concern
here,
as
well
looks
like
about
just
committing
to
a
change
in
scope,
not
even
just
generally,
but
also
there's.
Also
no
one
signed
up
here
to
work
on
it.
Daniel
and
Yuri
I
tend
to
agree
with
you
as
well,
but
this
would
be
a
pretty
dramatic
change.
C
Yeah
I
mean
I,
just
don't
unless
I
I
didn't
read
too
much
of
the
discussion,
but
unless
there's
like
a
really
significant
engineering
commitment
along
with
this
proposal,
I
don't
know
if
we
have
the
scope
for
this
or
like
the
the
bandwidth
for
this.
C
We're
already
having
a
hard
enough
time
getting
metrics
done
and
moving
into
logs
and
events
and
such
like
that
there's
plenty
of
work.
We
still
have
to
do.
C
This
would
depend
on
buy-in
from
like
a
lot
of
external
people,
that
we
don't
control.
D
Yeah,
it's
also
I
mean
from
from
the
incentives
of
this
project.
I
mean
it's
not
as
obvious
value
proposition
to
me,
because
today,
this
sort
of
different
querying
capability
of
the
bracket,
this
kind
of
the
differentiator
for
various
vendors,
whereas
this
is
proposing
to
unify
that
and
you
would
into
laws
common
denominator.
That's
not
going
to
be
that
particularly
useful,
I,
think
and
and
so
I'm
just
like,
like
on
on.
It
seems
like
yeah
on
the
philosophy
of
that
whole
proposal:
I'm
not
sold
at
all.
A
B
Okay,
I'll
put
these
these
notes
here.
I
don't
address,
I
saw
you
reconnect
it
I,
don't
know.
If
you're
able
to
speak
was
the
plan
for
this
to
go
to
the
TC
at
some
point.
D
B
I
I
tend
to
also
agree
if
all
the
points
that
have
been
made-
I
I'm
not
super
enthused
about
this.
That
being
said,
if
there's
a
group
of
people
end
up
being
enthusiastic
about
it,
who
might
have
stand
in
their
way,
it's
interesting.
B
All
right
on
to
the
next
item
looks
like
gerasi
dropped,
I'm
guessing
he's
having
connection
issues
today.
The
other
item
was
also
from
Dressy.
Unfortunately,
because
he's
not
here,
but
elections
he's
looking
for
access
to
a
form.
B
I
believe
this
form
was
for
election
registration
from
last
year.
Does
anyone
know
who
owns
the
form
that
dress
a
link
to.
E
Oh
sorry,
I've
got
the
form
already.
E
Okay,
so
Ben
shared
with
me,
the
form
from
2020
I
think
and
I've
just
popped
it
into
2022.
So
perhaps
we
can
just
compare
what
I
created
with
the
one
that
you
have
and
and
see.
If
there's
anything
missing,
one
thing
that
I'm
not
sure
we're
gonna
have
is
this
survey.
E
There
is
a
mention
about
a
survey
on
the
2020
2020
election
form
and
I.
Don't
know
if
we
ever
want
to
have
one
I
think
we
haven't
discussed
anything
about
any
surveys
for
this
year.
E
Okay,
so
I
think
I
think
I'll
definitely
move
animations
about
this
survey,
because
I
mean
sounds
like
something
we
haven't
started
discussing.
Yet
it's
mostly
I
think
about
a
user
user
survey
actually
about
the
project
and
so
on,
but
I'll
just
remove
it.
Remove
the
mentions
from
it
and
go
ahead.
B
We've,
and
unlike
last
year
like
this
year,
we've
been
doing
a
fair
amount
of
and
I
say
we
don't
necessarily
by
myself,
but
I
know
that
the
end
user
working
group
and
others
have
been
doing
a
fair
amount
of
community
outreach
and
Gathering
feedback.
So
it
might
be
less
necessary
to
include
that
this
year.
E
Okay,
yeah.
We
still
have
time,
okay
and
yeah
I
guess
the
Forum
is
the
way
that
it
is.
We
can
start
linking
and
showing
people,
and
if
we
decide
to
do
a
survey,
we
can
just
change
the
formulator
on.
E
Yeah,
all
right
so
on
the
previous
discussion,
I'm
sorry
I'm
having
Corrections
today.
That's
why
I'm
the
cameras
off
and
so
on
on
a
previous
discussion
about
the
issue
that
I
linked
I'm
also
not
sold
on
the
idea
of
having
a
specific
specification
for
a
query
backend
or
for
aquarium
API.
E
But
it
is
something
that
I'm
that
I've
heard
from
different
people
in
different
occasions
for
different
purposes,
the
classic
case
and
I
think
the
one
that
actually
started.
This
whole
discussion
was
on
for
kiali
and
Kali
is
like
a
an
observer
or
a
dashboard
or
a
visualization
tool
for
istio,
and
they
want
to
integrate
with
disrupted
tracing
tools,
for
instance
the
problem
they're.
E
Having
is
it's
it's
hard
to
implement
a
query
API
for
Tempo
and
then
for
a
Jager
and
then
for
Zipkin
and
then
for
whatever
result,
they're
in
in
what
they
are
looking
for,
is
one
API
they
could
use
that
would
work
for
all
of
the
tracing
backhands.
It
doesn't
mean
that
this
API
has
to
support
everything
from
every
from
from
everyone
and
I
think
just
the
basic,
the
common
things
that
we
all
have
or
or
that
all
the
projects
have
would
be
sufficient
for
them.
E
I
heard
this
week
about
some
someone
else,
and
apparently
people
are
looking
for
API
apis
that
return
otlp
instead
of
Project
Specific
data,
and
this
is
also
would
be
a
way
of
you
know.
So
why
is
Project
X
all
the
API
and
not
returning
data
in
their
own
formats
but
otlp
instead,
so
why
don't
we
just
go
one
step
ahead
and
Define
one
in
such
apis,
so
that
other
projects
can
have
a
sooner
output.
E
My
main
concern
with
this
proposal,
as
it
is,
is
that
nobody
from
Temple
nobody
from
Jager
nobody
from
Zipkin
is
showing
up
and
saying
I
want
to
implement
something
like
that
or
even
vendors
right.
So
we
don't.
We
haven't
seen
anyone
from
WhatsApp
data
dog
in
anyone
saying
we're
gonna
support
this,
it's
just
one
user
or
one
one
company.
That
is
saying
we
want
to
use
this.
So
we
are
investing
engineering
time
to
make
a
proposal
and
we
hope
that
people
are
joining
us.
B
Okay
and
we
we
had
some,
there
were
some
smaller
ones-
dressy,
while
you're
having
connection
challenges
that
we
we
went
over
as
well
I'm
just
about
the
impact
on
the
project,
scope,
I.
Think
amongst,
like
the
five
of
us
at
least,
sounds
like
there's
a
lot
of
skepticism
or
caution
being
thrown
here.
B
Has
the
TC
discussed
this
at
all?
There
was
a
question
that
came
up
earlier
from
I.
Think
Yuri
or
Daniel
like
like.
Has
the
TC
even
talked
about
this,
or
did
this
just
come
I'm.
E
E
Now
this
PR
that
they've
opened
is
quite
new
I
think
they
opened
yesterday,
but
it
is
a
result
of
a
discussion
that
is
happening
now,
so
it's
more
than
just
for
people,
but
I
haven't
seen
again
anyone
from
any
any
interest,
router
tracing
projects,
committing
to
any
efforts
and
doing
that
and
I
even
left.
E
A
comment
on
the
I
think
on
the
pr
saying
that
you
know
if
we
don't
see
any
any
commitments
from
any
of
those
companies,
we're
just
spending
resources
like
time
that
we
don't
have,
we
could
be
spending
elsewhere,
the
energy
and
anyway.
So
that's
the
status.
A
E
So
what
will
be
then?
The
message
for
I
mean
I
brought
this
to
the
GC,
because
they've
asked
for
the
GC
to
make
a
decision
or
to
be
informed
and
to
have
a
discussion
about
that.
So
that's
why
I
brought
as
a
as
an
item
first
to
discuss
today.
So
you
know
the
community
asked
for
for
our
opinion
on
that
yeah.
B
C
I
I
think
that
the
gc's
opinion,
whether
it's
yes
or
no
or
whatever,
is
not
a
binding
opinion
in
this
case,
your
recommendation.
Yes,
that
said,
I
think
that
we
should
wait
at
least
until
all
of
the
GC
members
have
had
like
half
the
GC
isn't
here
right
now
and
the
GC
will
potentially
have
different
membership
in
a
month.
C
You
know
I'm
not
saying
that
we
shouldn't
do
anything
right
now,
but
it's
worth
considering
yeah
I
I
think
that
we
should
at
least
give
time
for
the
other
GCU
members
to
see
the
proposal,
though,
and
then,
if
we're
going
to
say
anything,
that's
like
this
is
the
opinion
of
the
GC
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
vote
on
it
right.
E
Yeah
I
think
there
are
two
questions
or
two
two
ways
of
seeing
the
question
that
we
may
want
to
answer
so
the
first
one
is:
if
we
had
unlimited
resources,
would
such
an
API
be
still
in
the
vision
of
the
project,
so
is
it
I
mean
if
we
open
open
tele.io,
we
see
what
is
the
vision
of
the
project
and
it
includes
generate
and
blah
blah
blend
and
export
data.
Now
one
user
kind
of
tongue-in-check
said
export
from
from
a
vendor.
E
A
So
so,
by
the
way,
export
of
the
the
data
is
different
than
querying
of
the
data
because
it
can
be
used
for
exporting
of
the
data
and
a
bunch
of
cloud.
Vendors
are
already
using
otlp
to
export
Telemetry
data
from
their
backend,
but
that
doesn't
necessarily
mean
querying
the
data
it's
exporting
like
exporting
all
the
data
yeah.
E
It's
important
data
from
the
back
end.
You
know,
so
it's
a
different
way
of
seeing
the
word
export
like
I
want
to
export
data
from
these
specific
vendor.
From
this
specific
tool,
I
think
I
mean
again
again,
I
think
that
the
comment
was
kind
of
telling
tick,
but
it
it
does
deserve
an
answer
and
I
think
I
think
we
all
had
the
word
export
in
a
different
sense
or
in
different
contexts
when
we
wrote
that
statement
on
the
website,
but
it
can
be
seen
in
a
different
light.
C
Yeah
but
I
agree
with
Bogdan
that,
even
if
you
do
interpret
export
to
me
and
exporting
data
from
a
vendor,
a
query
like
a
standardized
query,
API
and
language,
it.
C
B
C
The
Envision
to
argue
for
this
I
would
say
we
say:
high
quality
ubiquitous
and
portable
Telemetry
I
would
say
that
this
would
impossibly
improve
portability,
but
I
think
it's
a
really
weak
argument
and
honestly
I.
You
know
I'm
only
saying
that,
for
the
sake
of
completeness
I,
don't
really
even
believe
it
yeah.
A
And
and
if,
if
any
project
good
for
standardizing
something
like
this
I
bet,
that
would
be
somebody
like
rafana,
which
is
which
they
they
are
well
positioned
to
to
kind
of
Define
a
query
language,
because
you
have
a
dashboard
you
you
want
to
standardize
on
querying
stuff,
but
that's
that's
separate.
We
are
not
in
that
position.
C
C
E
Yeah,
so
speaking
from
from
two
different
perspectives,
so
for
one
from
employee
and
as
a
former
Jaeger
maintainer,
we
had
talks
about
having
a
a
trace
query
Pi
in
the
past
four
years,
and
there
is
something
from
from
grafana
Temple.
E
That
is
a
trace,
trisky,
well,
I
think
it
is
called
that
is
similar
to
prompt
well,
that
is
similar
to
the
low-key
party
language
luck,
whoever
I
think
it's
called
and
I
I
would
say
that
I
would
prefer
to
have
an
implementation
that
is,
that
has
been
used
in
a
specific
project
to
be
commonly
standard
rather
than
have
a
standard,
and
then
ask
for
other
projects
to
implement.
D
By
the
way,
on
the
procedural
point
about
whether
it's
a
TC
or
GC
issue,
I
think
one
thing
that
was
raised
on
the
discussion
was
that
it's
kind
of
a
question
of
extending
the
charter
and
not
just
a
technicals
or
decisions.
So
for
that
reason
that
might
be
a
GC
position.
That's
important
here,
because
yeah,
it's
really
it's
like.
We
don't
have
a
back
end.
D
So
what
we
I
would
be
kind
in
some
sort
of
like
a
standardization
body
for
vendors
for
the
yeah,
it
seems
like
very
out
of
scope
and
I
I
feel
like
people
are
I
understand
the
the
use
case
that
they
have,
but
they
they
may
be
trying
to
kind
of
monetize
this
well
in
a
good
sense.
The
sort
of
like
the
standing
of
open
telemeter
is
a
project,
whereas
it's
not
necessarily
in
the
charter
of
the
project
to.
C
C
I
agree
that
it
may
be
a
question
of
expanding
the
charter.
I
would
say:
Bogdan
mentioned
something
earlier,
that
we
don't
have
a
back
end,
so
we
would
not
be
implementing
it.
While
that's
true
I,
don't
think
that
that's
necessarily
a
reason
to
block
this
or
to
say
no,
because
you
could
make
the
same
argument
about
all
kinds
of
other
sort
of
Standards
bodies.
I
mean
we're
not
a
standards
body,
but
the
w3c,
for
example,
doesn't
have
a
web
browser
and
that
doesn't
prevent
them
from
from
making
standards.
D
C
I
mean
it
might
be
a
better
fit
to
make
a
new
cncf
project,
obviously
that's
a
way
more
difficult,
Road,
and
that,
if
you
tell
the
con
that
whoever
is
proposing
this,
you
know
feel
free
to
make
your
own
project.
That
may
not
be
what
they
want
to
hear,
but
that
may
be
a
better
fit
honestly,
even
if
all
of
the
same
vendors
end
up
being.
C
To
it
from
you
know,
I
don't
know
positioning
standpoint,
it
might
make
more
sense.
E
E
Secondly,
we
don't
we
don't
agree
that
such
an
API
would
belong
to
the
vision
of
the
project
in
the
only
long
term,
but
we
also
don't
block
this
this
effort
from
happening
if
it's,
if
it's
basically
Happening
by
the
community
and
have
implementations
or
relevant
implementations
on
external
projects
that
can
make
use
of
that
I
mean
once
there
is
such
an
API
not
hosted
or
not
not
with
without
our
blessing.
But
given
such
an
API
would
be
happy
to
consider
using
that
as
a
standard.
E
If
there
is
enough
Community
using
that,
both
from
a
user
perspective
and
from
from
implementation
from
you
know,
projects
and
vendors
is
that
accurate.
C
The
other
GC
members
and
I
haven't
really
looked
that
closely
at
this
proposal.
So
I
would
say
that's
my
my
initial
feeling
is
exactly
what
you
just
said,
but
over
the
next
week,
I
will
make
sure
to
remove
the
proposal
more
closely.
Unfortunately,
I
will
not
be
here
next
Thursday
but
another.
If
my
opinion
changes
drastically,
which
I
don't
think
it
will
I'll
make
sure
to.
Let
you
guys
know
perfect
honestly.
E
All
right
I'll
try
to
summarize
what
we
discussed
here
on
on
the
item,
the
only
issue
there,
unless
anyone
of
you
would
want
to
summarize
on
my
behalf.
E
E
That's
data
that
I've
that
I've
gathered
across
all
documents,
blog
posts
and
and
everything
that
I
could
find
about
elections,
but
I
feel
like
there's
some.
There
are
a
few
things
missing
and
if
you,
if
you
know
what
they
are,
let
me
know
or
just
create
the
issues
as
yourselves
and
yeah.
C
There
was
a
election
like
tracking
issues
similar
to
this
last
year.
As
far
as
I
remember,.
E
E
I
found
one
that
I
found
the
the
announcement
one
with
the
one
that
listed
everyone,
that
is,
that
is
allowed
to
vote,
and
there
is
another
one
that
links
to
that
one.
So
those
are
the
two
issues
that
I
found,
but
yeah
I
think
the.
E
There's
one
created-
and
there
is
one
that
please
created-
those
are
the
two
that
I
formed
from
last
year:
yeah
all
right
so
based
on
the
items
that
I
have
based
on
on
information
that
I
have
right
now.
The
next
step
would
then
be
to
get
the
voter
role
and
and
I
I
have
a
the
soft
soft
schedule,
soft
appointment
with
Elise
to
get
to
understand
how
this
water
role
is
obtained.
B
E
All
right,
okay,
so
in
any
case
I
have
we
are
we're
probably
going
to
do
that
as
a
do
it
together
in
a
couple
of
weeks,
but
I
was
wondering
if
I,
if
I
would
be
able
to
figure
it
out
by
myself.
It
looks
like
unless
I
make
a
description
by
myself.
I
won't
be
able
to
figure
that
out
so
I'll
just
wait
for
those
couple
of
weeks.
B
E
I,
don't
have
it
from
the
top
of
my
head,
but
on
one
of
those
issues
they're
on
the
tracker,
there
is
a
schedule:
okay,
I'll
find
it
I
think
it
is
the
seventh
and
eighth
of
October.
So
we
have
less
time.