►
From YouTube: 2021-10-28 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
B
C
C
No
then
I
was
looking
at
the
the
invite
has
like
the
two
seven
17
people
on
it
or
something
like
that.
C
To
be
incoming
and
outgoing
governance,
but
it's
it's!
The
tc.
E
D
E
I
don't
know
sega.
I
thought
that
we
were
going
to
be
discussing
the
list
that
ben
had
sent
out.
E
E
G
B
J
I
K
K
But
but
I
still
get
questions
from
hr:
how
this
person
has
this
self-help
and
and
yeah?
It's
a
it's
a
continuous
battle,
but
we're
not
gonna
they're,
not.
I
H
There
had
been
some
discussion
of
doing
the
gctc
thing,
but
then
we
decided
to
push
that
out,
which
makes
sense,
so
I
I
thought
it
would
be
helpful
for
this
crowd
to
go
through
the
exercise
that
I
propose
that
people
are
okay
with
it.
I
I
hope
it
it
results
in
the
not
like
a
you
know.
I
would
like
there
to
be
a
little
bit
of
debate
about
it.
If
we're
doing
it
correctly.
H
I
I
just
think
that
we've
worked
well
together
for
a
while
now
and
there's
a
bit
of
a
changing
of
the
guard,
so
I
thought
it'd
be
helpful
if
we
could
kind
of
set
the
next,
I
mean
the
next
gc
has
a
ton
of
overlap
with
this
gc
anyway,
but
I
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
if
we
could
record
kind
of
what
we
think
the
actual
kind
of
priorities
or
problems
should
be
with
the
product.
H
The
project
I've
put
in
the
zoom
chat
a
link
to
my
spreadsheet
kudos
to
alolita
for
going
in
there
and
filling
stuff
out.
I'm
more
interested
in
getting
this
left
column
sorted
right
now
than
in
getting
everyone
to
add
their
votes,
because
the
votes
will
change
as
we
add
stuff
to
the
left
column.
But
I
just
feel
like
there
have
been
some
issues
that
have
been
on
our
radar
for
a
while.
H
We
haven't
actually
really
taken
like
a
great
deal
of
action
to
fix
them,
and
I
I
guess
my
hope
for
this.
Like
I
don't
know,
maybe
this
election
will
prompt
us
to
like
actually
do
some
stuff
to
like
address
these
issues
in
hopefully
in
short
order,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
on
the
same
page,
but
what
the
priorities
should
be.
So
that's
my
kind
of
prologue.
C
I
I
do
have
one
suggestion,
and
one
of
the
priorities
you
have
is
have
a
gctc
sync
once
a
month
to
me.
That
seems
not
as
much
like
a
priority
as
much
as
like
an
action
item
that
would
come
out
of
a
priority,
so
I
would
change
that
to
something
more
along
the
lines
of
improved
communication
between
you
know:
governance
levels
of
the
project,
because
it
also
applies
to
maintainers
to
tc
and
maintainers
to
approvers
and
and
things
like.
E
H
Yeah
I
mean
I
changed
it
to
like
problem
to
address
or
something
like
that
or
a
priority.
I
I
agree
with
you
and
there
is
a
little
bit
of
overlap
here
right.
It's
like
having
more
sinks
there
might
help
with
some
of
the
other
issues
that
we're
talking
about
stuff
like
that,
so
maybe
we
could,
if
it
works,
we
could
spend
the
next
four
minutes
until
10
after
the
hour,
just
like
literally
adding
stuff
here,
you
know
no
bad
ideas.
H
That
sort
of
thing
and
take,
I
think,
daniel's
suggestion
is
a
good
one
to
focus
on
on
priorities
and
not
tactics,
and
then
we
can
look
at
the
list
and
and
vote
and
then
we
can
kind
of
debate
where
we
there's,
probably
some
equivalence
classes.
We
can
debate
our
priorities
within
those.
Does
that
make
sense
yep.
H
H
H
H
Okay,
I
think
we've
we've
made
it
to
10
10.
great.
I
don't
know
what
do
you
all
think
it
might
make
sense
before
we
start,
should
we
ping
jurassic
if
he
is
available
to
join
us
or
next
week?
You
know,
I
I
don't
mind
him
joining
us
at
all,
but
in
some
ways
I
thought
it
might
be.
So
I
mean
I'd
initially
propose
this
to
be
something
that
the
outgoing
gc
would
do
or
something.
H
And
I
don't
want
to
bring
it
like
repeat
all
the
context
for
him.
If
that
makes
sense
to
you
all,
so
I
thought.
Maybe,
if
it
works,
we
can
go
through
my
kind
of
hacky
mechanism
to
kind
of
weight,
our
votes
and
and
we
can
just
all
scan
this
list
spend
five
minutes
kind
of
allocating
and
then,
after
that,
I
think
we'll
have
some
clarity
in
what
we
actually
need
to
debate
does.
Does
that
make
sense
or
yeah.
E
F
H
Maybe
we
should
actually
now
that
you
mentioned
it
constants.
Possibly
we
can
kind
of
dedupe
a
bit
too,
because
the
weighting
mechanism
doesn't
allow
for
that.
So
all
right,
then,.
H
Also,
if
anyone
doesn't
like
my
process,
don't
be
shy,
I'm
just
trying
to
make
this
efficient,
but
I
don't
feel
strongly
about
how
we
do
this
so
all
right,
so
increased
number
of
qualified
maintainers.
I
think
that's
pretty
clear.
F
H
Oh,
this
is
not
a
good
idea,
I'm
not
gonna
do
this,
should
we
just
should
we
just
can.
H
What
I
was
gonna
yeah
here,
I'm
just
gonna-
make
this
one.
I'm
gonna
gray
this
out.
If
that's
okay,
just
to.
H
The
same
issue
is
that
fine
yep
create
an
end
user
board.
Are
there
others
that
are
like
this?
D
For
the
previous
one,
there
is
a
recognition
of
contributors
item
that
you
can
put
under
increased
number
of
qualified
maintainers.
I
think
I
mean
it's
related,
but
not
exactly
the
same.
H
Which
number
of
rows
I
saw
that
just
26
26,
so
thank
you.
Do
people
agree
that
that's
the
same
sort
of
thing,
I
think
of
that
as
being
a
bit
different.
I
think
of
this
as
being
more
about,
like
I
mean
just
making
it
fun
to
be
part
of
the
community.
D
Related,
it
might
be
a
mechanism,
but
it's
different
yeah.
H
Yeah,
okay,
accountability
mechanism
for
meeting
roadmap,
yeah
good
question
constance-
I
I
kind
of
didn't
specify
when
I
wrote
that,
in
the
spirit
of
not
yeah
trying
to
solutionize
too
much
but
I,
but
if
we
think
this
is
a
priority,
I
think
we
probably
spent
a
lot
of
time
discussing
that.
F
Yeah,
I
think
just
the
one
thing
is
like
I
guess
if
we
could
just
summarize
a
little
bit
like
because,
like
we
can't
necessarily
like
people,
don't
get
like
you
know,
bad
marks,
or
something
like
that.
So
like
is
there
depending
on
how
we
can
how
we
want
to
enforce
it
like
it
depends.
I
guess
how
much
I
guess
I'd
want
to
vote,
because,
like
there's
only
so
much
else
that
we
can
do
since
we're
all
yeah.
F
H
Okay,
improved
communication:
this
seems
related
to
oh,
that
this
is
a
rewording
of
the
having
the
periodic.
J
H
Got
it
determine
wider
cncf
involvement?
Do
we
want
to
attach
that
to
this
graduation
thing.
C
F
J
F
There's
the
observability
tags,
and
after
that
we
should
also
maybe
think
like
because
we
have
this.
You
know
like
our
motto
of
being
like
like
kind
of
a
freebie
for
all
the
other
ones
and
like
we
might
want
to
start
actually
making
efforts
of
like
reaching
out
to
projects
like
hey,
like.
Are
you
ready
to
start
open,
adopt
like
adopting
open
telemetry
like
getting
those
things
out
there.
C
D
E
D
H
This,
I
think,
is
very
self-explanatory.
Just
you
know
focus
on
graduation
and
think
of
that.
As
a
as
a
goal
for
the
gc
is
that
fair
constance,
you
wrote
that
right,
oh.
E
F
I
can
view
it
a
little
bit
as
like
the
things
that,
like
liz-
and
I
were
talking
about
like
you
know
how
the
questions
keep
on
coming
up
of,
like
is
hotel,
stable,
stuff
there
and
we
keep
on
needing
to
you
know,
have
like
one-off
meetings.
It's
like
a
little
bit
of
like
us,
viewing
ourselves
as
a
product.
We
need
to
like
clean
up
that
type
of
like
the
marketing,
yeah
and
stuff
like
that.
So
that's
how
I
interpret
this.
H
Yeah
I
mean
I
didn't
write
this,
but
I
have
to
admit,
I
think
it's
a
pretty
good
idea
and
we
have
like
I
mean
if
we
were
an
open
core
project
run
by
a
single
company.
H
This
would
be
like
miles
ahead
of
where
it
is
right
now
and
I
think
it's
sort
of
cute
that
we're
so
principled
and
it's
a
technology
first
project,
but
also
kind
of
dumb,
in
the
sense
that
it's
really
hindering
adoption,
and
it's
like
probably
one
percent
of
the
effort
we're
putting
into
the
technology,
is
just
to
like
communicate
about
it
better.
So
I
get
that
and
I
don't
think
it's
the
tc's
responsibility
to
do
this.
So
I
guess
it's
sort
of
ours
right,
yeah,.
H
M
J
K
Members,
so,
instead
of
having
gc
members
writing
bunch
of
blog
posts,
we
should
probably
try
to
like
give
them
these
items
and
and
they
should
handle
all
these
things.
K
Maybe
maybe
they
will
become
a
day
once
we
once
we
start
more
more
of
this
effort.
I.
M
C
Stuff,
I
almost
wonder
if
we
should
have
on
the
website.
Like
you
know,
if
we
were
a
company,
we
would
have
a
jobs
page.
Maybe
we
should
have
a
you
know
similar
that,
but
it's
not
a
job.
We
won't
pay
you,
but
hopefully
you're
already
being
paid
by
someone
things.
We
might
run.
E
I
think
I
think
it's
just
it's
a
question
of
you
know
getting
more
folks
involved.
Who
are
you
know
in
that
area
like
program
managers
and
others?
You
know
who
are
interested
in
actually
participating.
I
mean
kubernetes.
Does
that
and-
and
there
are
a
lot
of
folks
who
are
actually
in
marketing
and
stuff
who
actually
join
in?
Do
that
thing?
So
we
could.
We
should
do
the
same.
H
Okay,
ensure.
H
E
L
Part
of
line
six.
H
E
Yeah,
I
I
wrote
it
and
yeah
it
does
part
of
the
same
row
six.
I
think.
H
H
Okay
record
decisions
taken
on
all
levels
and
by
all
levels
we
don't
just
mean
within
the
gc,
we
just
mean
across
the
project.
C
C
That
we
need
a
more
formal
like
voting
process
and
you
know,
recording
formal.
You
know
just
for
communications
as
much
as
anything
else.
Yeah.
M
E
M
D
Think
I
hear
feedback
like
a
little
bit
opposite.
I
I
mean
processes
there
and
what
is
approved
is
approved,
but
then
the
problem
is
that
same
decision
being
rehashed
on
every
single
meeting
and
then
some
other
core
contributor
comes
and
yeah.
E
H
Yeah
and
for
certain
decisions,
I
think
this
plays
into
the
road
map
issue
too,
where
I
you
know
not
that
people
are
conflict,
diverse
or
something,
but
I
think
when
we
don't
have
a
clear
consensus,
sometimes
it
can
be
difficult
to
know
who
the
decision
maker,
actually
the
single
decision
maker
actually
is
for
some
of
these
items
I
mean
that
that
it
varies.
I
think,
but
that
in
some
cases
I
think
has
slowed
down
our
progress
like
if
we
had
like
we're
waiting
for
consensus.
Sometimes
does
that
sound
like
reasonable.
C
Yeah
but
then
there's
also
a
lot
of
decisions
that
are
not
like
not
captured
by
the
otec
specification
process
at
all
like
it
when
somebody
is
promoted
to
be
a
maintainer,
for
instance,
that's
just
kind
of
like
an
informal
vote
of
the
tc,
that's
not
recorded
anywhere
or
anything
like
that.
I
think
yep.
You
know
we
need
more
formal
processes
for
those
types
of
decisions.
Yeah.
M
I
mean
I
I
guess
I
just
want
to
emphasize.
I
feel
like
people
often
claim
they
want
more
process
when
the
problem
is
actually
just
attention
and
people
power,
and
my
strong
impression,
with
the
spec,
the
otep
process
and
getting
maintainers
to
to
encourage
more
contributors
is
a
is
a
bandwidth
problem,
not
a
not
a
lack
of
process.
K
By
the
way
talking
about
processes,
I
want
to
remember
everyone
that
we
try
to
add
a
process,
for
example,
to
mark
libraries
as
ga
that
you
may
remember
the
the
pr
that
I
have
and
everyone
was
against
having
more
processes.
So
I
I
I'm
not
sure
that
people
actually
want
more
processes
in
open
source.
So
I
think.
F
F
K
F
E
H
L
H
F
Almost
seems
like
it
should
be
rephrased
into
like
investigating
what
is
actually
stopping
people,
because
it's
not
recording
I'm
sorry
yeah.
I
guess
I'm
more
to
make
your
point.
I
view
it
as,
like
some
people
say
it's
recording
and
some
people
say
like
there's
almost
a
process
issue,
so
we
don't
actually
know
what
problem
we're
trying
to
like.
We
don't
know
how
we
want
to
solve
it,
so
we
need
to
figure
out
what
is
the
actual
problem?
First.
C
What
if
we
reword
it
to
improving
downward
communication
of
decisions
that
are
made
so
like
when
the
gc
makes
a
decision,
the
maintainers
need
to
know
or
when
the
tc
makes
a
decision
the
maintainers
need
to
know
and
when
they
make
a
decision.
The
contributors
need
to
know.
D
Yeah
I
wrote
it
and
it
was
different
intent
in
terms
of
mostly
like
if
somebody
didn't
attend,
like
one
of
the
like
at
one
time,
it
was
like
four
metrics
meetings
and
decision
was
made
on
one
of
the
metrics
meeting
and
then
rehearsing
another
one
and
rehearsed
another
one
and
people.
D
Talking
about
that
kind
of
for
more
and
because.
E
If
you
don't
understand
yeah
I
mean
I
agree
with
sega,
because
if
you
don't
attend
one
meeting
and
the
decision
was
taken,
it's
not
you
have
to
kind
of
reconstruct,
because
the
meeting
notes
aren't
good
enough
to
capture
the
detail.
E
D
Yeah,
it
works
for
me
yeah.
E
E
H
C
Go
ahead,
21
duplicates
that
one
then
no,
not
21..
There
was
one
that
was
like
improved
communication
between
different
levels.
13,
sorry
right,
that's
kind
of
those
are
definitely
if
they're
not
duplicated
they're,
at
least
related.
E
Yeah
they're
related,
but
it's
definitely
the
same
similar.
C
H
Okay
got
it
so
now
we
have
both
minimize
and
maximize
meetings.
C
Maybe
we
combine
these
into,
we
need
to
decide.
C
Are
going
to
be
a
synchronous
meeting,
you
know
whether
we
want
to
do
communication
that
way
or
whether
we
want
to
do
it
asynchronously
over
slack
and
like
what
are
we,
which
one
do
we
encourage
to.
F
E
Yeah
or
or
you
know,
what's
what's
the
hierarchy
because
today
the
hierarchy
that
is
informally,
followed
by
most
contributors
is
comment,
create
an
issue
comment
on
an
issue.
If
the
issue
nobody
responds
on
the
issue,
go
to
the
sig
meeting
or
go
and
ping
the
maintainers
on
slack.
So
that's
that's
kind
of
the
informal
process
today
that
the
project
follows,
but
it's
not
very
effective.
C
Yeah
most
end
users,
and,
and
you
know,
community
members
are
not
going
to
be
on
the
slack
or
at
least
not
regularly.
E
C
H
L
H
D
I'm
sorry,
unfortunately,
I
have
a
conflict.
I
only
thought
it
would
be
30
minutes.
It
was
really
nice
to
work
with
all
you
bye-bye.
I
I
will
be
around
so
yeah.
M
H
H
I
mean
there's,
certainly
some
overlap,
but
I
I
mean
I
just
think
of
this
as
being
like
a
almost
a
well
geographic
diversity
issue
right,
it's
like
if
you
live
in
australia,
being
a
hotel
sucks
right
now
or
japan
or
whatever
I
mean
it's
like
anywhere
in
that
side
of
the
world
sucks
and
that's
the
problem,
so
it
seems
like
it
should
be
isolated
in
my
mind
from
the
distribution
of
decisions.
Does
that
make
sense.
E
H
Yeah,
but
I
will
make
these
two
right
and
I
made
ted's
one
even
less
visible.
This
is
a
joke:
transparency
on
assets,
own
permissions,
etc.
Who
wrote
that
I.
E
I
think
maybe
sergey
did,
but
I
I
mean
again
it's
having
distributed
permissions
and
at
least
three
people
you
know
having
and
it
being
published
some
places
that
people
can
even
ask,
because
I
mean
today
by
default
any
questions
I
have.
I
can
ask
morgan
because
that's
the
person
I
know
will
know
but.
H
M
J
H
Are
we
clear
with
this,
though,
can
we
move
on
yeah?
Yes,
so
I'm
gonna,
so
there's
measurement
and
improvement
of
diversity
are
related.
Do
you
want
to
fold
this
into
a
single.
C
Yeah,
so
I
wrote
the
the
measure
and
evaluate
one,
and
I
think
that
the
obvious
outcome
I
was
hoping
from
that
is
to
improve.
So
those
seem
like
two
different
steps
of
the
same
process.
H
Okay,
how
about
this,
and
then
we
can
just
spray
this
one
out.
Does
that
work
that
works?
For
me,
this
one,
I
think,
is
sort
of
straightforward
to
understand.
Did
the
person
who
wrote
this
want
to
clarify
anything
about
it?
I
assume
this
means
like
to
say
you're,
an
official
hotel
distribution.
You
have
to
check
these
boxes.
That
sort
of
thing.
M
H
M
This
is
a
thing
we
picked
up
and
put
down.
I
think
it
mostly
concerns
the
collector,
in
particular,.
E
Yeah
and
and
and
again
this
is,
you
know,
ted-
and
I
have
discussed
this
when
you
know
over
time
and
and
I
think
that
there's
great
value-
and
you
know
establishing
a
more
more
often
documented
process
for
that,
because
you
know,
like
we've,
been
improving
our
build
tools,
for
example,
for
the
collector
and
and
regularizing
the
whole
process
right.
So.
M
It's
one
of
those
things
that
it's
extra
work
for
us
to
do
now,
but
it's
one
of
those
things
that
we
will
regret
not
having
done
after
something
happens
that
we
feel
is
like
implicitly
in
violation
of
ron.
J
E
Again,
anybody
who
has
distributions
downstream-
which
many
of
our
you
know
teams
do,
would
be
good
good
to
have
a
conformance
program.
It's
very
similar.
It
could
be
also
very
similar
to
what
prometheus
is
trying
to
do
with
the
compliance
tests
that
they
got
announced
with
linux
foundation,
for
example,
yeah.
H
Gonna,
I
really
want
to
make
sure
we
don't
run
out
of
time.
So
I
think
we
understand
what
this
means.
I
that's
what
I'm
I'm
trying
to
make
sure
we
establish
that
and
then
but,
but
we,
I
think,
that's
clear
right,
yeah.
Yes,
yes,
and
then
I
wrote
this
one.
I
think
it's
obvious
what
the
issue
is.
We've
talked
about
it,
a
bunch
this
next
one.
H
I
also
wrote
the
governance,
the
contrib,
etc,
ecosystem
and
or
not
I
mean
I
actually
would
personally
like
to
not
have
hotel
govern
the
ecosystem
of
stuff,
but
we
have
things
kind
of
donated
to
hotel
contrib.
At
times
we've
discussed
it
in
the
past,
but.
G
H
Makes
me
nervous
just
given
the
potential
scope
creep
of
just
things
under
the
hotel
umbrella,
and
that
seems
like
a
governance
issue
to
me.
So
again,
I'm
not
trying
to
debate
it,
but
people
understand
what
that
means.
I
assume,
and
then
I
also
wrote
this
one
this
one
I
do
want
to
discuss.
I
think
for
those
who
are
actually
in
the
gc
calls
and
tc
calls.
H
I
feel
like
it's
somewhat
clear,
that
we're
actually
being
pretty
good
about
not
trying
to
paint
out
any
particular
vendor
or
organization
or
whatever,
but
I
think
there's
a
persistent
issue
with
folks
who
are
not
in
that
conversation,
especially
these
private
calls,
even
though
they're
recorded
of
there
being
some
sort
of
you
know
cabal
or
something
like
that.
There
are
ways
to
address
this
formally
that
you
know
we
haven't
taken,
I'm
not
sure
if
it
is
something
we
should
take
seriously
or
not
as
like
a
priority,
but.
H
Well,
I
mean
I,
I
would
argue
that
some
of
the
issues
we
had
as
prometheus
kind
of
fall
into
this
category.
So
it's
not
necessarily
a
vendor.
I
mean
I
think
prometheus
is
not
a
vendor,
it's
an
organization,
but
I
think
there
is
a
lot
of
like
there's
a
lack
of
trust
that
developed
there,
which
I
think
we've
mostly
gotten
through,
but
like
just
great
but
that's
an
area
where
I'm
like,
I
think,
from
a
gc
standpoint.
H
We
could
have
had
mechanisms
in
place
to
make
people
feel
heard
earlier,
or
something
like
that
to
alleviate
some
of
these
concerns.
So
that's
what
I
was
thinking
about,
I
don't
know,
take
it
or
leave
it,
but
and
then
tech
help
for
maintainers.
I
didn't
write
this
one.
Any.
H
Okay,
and
is
this
a
gc
or
tc
thing.
E
Is
that
an
communications
thing.
C
Well,
so
I
didn't
write
it,
so
I
don't
know.
Maybe
it
was
sergey
and
I
don't
know
exactly
why
he
wrote
that
in
there,
but
I
can
say
myself
as
a
maintainer:
there
are
lots
of
tasks
around
like
documentation
and
build
tooling
and
stuff
like
that.
That,
like
are,
you
know,
would
be
nice
if
there
were
resources
available
like
people
with
expertise
in
these
subjects.
That
can
help
us
out,
particularly
tech.
Writing,
I
think,
is
something
that
a
lot
of
the
sigs
struggle
with.
C
So
it
would
be
nice
if
there
were
resources
available.
For
that.
I
don't
know
if
that's
what
it
meant,
but
that's
the
way.
I
interpret
that
yeah.
H
Okay,
great,
so
I
think
with
that
I
would
propose
that
we
spend
like
the
next
five
minutes,
just
like
allocating
your
1.0
worth
of
vote
across
these
things
and
and
then
we'll
see
kind
of
what
comes
up
just
for
my
sanity,
I'm
going
to
do
that
and
then
yeah.
You
know
whatever
don't
cheat
off
your
neighbor
or
something
like
that.
Do
your
own
work.
J
Can
you
can
we
switch
to
100
instead
and
do
that
like
a
running
sum
at
the
bottom,
for
each
person
to
add
up
200?
I
think
it's
easier
to
manage
this
way
just.
H
H
E
And
we're
just
voting
on
the
the
main
items
right.
E
H
Negative
interesting
question
that
I
think
not.
C
Since
sergey
voted
before
he
left
should
we
leave
his
votes
there.
H
H
Missing
liz
and
sarah's
vote,
which
is
sort
of
a
bummer,
but
I
think
this
there
are
some
like
equivalence
classes
here,
so
this
maintainers
thing
seems
like
the
clear
winner.
H
What
I
was
thinking
is
that
maybe
we
would
divide
this
into
I'll
share
my
screen
again
like
a
couple
of
yeah
equivalence
classes.
I
guess
so
this
one
is.
H
H
Grouping
this
into
like
so
this
is
the
one
that's
over
two,
these
yellow
ones
are
over
one,
and
then
these
these
are
the
ones
that
are
over.
You
know,
0.5,
I
mean
sorry,
my
colors,
my
color
choices
are
literally
arbitrary,
so
this
seems
like
the
clear
winner
road
map
and
this
messaging
stuff
seem
like
the
in
my
mind's
somewhat
clearly
like
in
this
next
group,
and
then
you
have
to
go
quite
a
bit
further
down
to
get
to
like
the
next
level
of
possible
priorities.
D
E
H
C
The
gray
ones
will
end
up
all
over
the
place:
oh
yeah
they're,
all
at
the
bottom.
That's
that's
fine.
Yeah.
E
H
Okay,
well,
it
didn't
change
the
outcome
at
all.
So
so
I
actually
think
this
is
more
conclusive
than
I
was
expecting
when
we
started
this.
Given
the
number
of
things
here
but
like
I
was
hoping
that
we'd
end
up
with
like
a
fairly
clear
top
three
list,
and
I
think
we
sort
of
did-
I
just
don't
think
the
gc
can
pursue
like
six
priorities
or
something
like
that.
But.
H
Okay,
are
there
any
things
anything
more
to
discuss
on
this
front?
I
don't
want
to
waste
people's
time,
but
I
actually
feel
pretty
satisfied
by
this
in
terms
of
what
I
was
trying
to
accomplish.
C
I
wonder
if,
in
the
interest
of
line
number
15
there,
whether
we
should
condense
these,
you
know
at
least
the
ones
that
you've
colored
there
into
like
an
ordered
priority
list
and
have
a
blog
post
about
like
the
changing
of
the
guard
with
the
new,
the
new
gc
and
what
our
priorities
will
be
for
the
next
year
or.
H
So
well,
as
bogdan
suggested,
I
think
we
should
just
assign
that
to
them
and
then
then
we'll
do
it
yeah
then
we'll
do
it.
No,
I
think
it's
a
great
idea.
I
mean
this
is
a
recorded
call,
so
we
can
even
link
to
the
recording
but
yeah.
That
makes
sense,
I'm
happy
to
do
it
and
send
it
out
for
review.
If
people
want,
I
think
the
spirit
of
it
would
just
be
like
yeah.
You
know
we've
been
working
together
for
a
while.
H
These
are
the
things
that
are
kind
of
top
of
mind
for
us
that
we
we
would
suggest
that
gc
focuses
on
in
the
next.
You
know
in
this
next
term
or
whatever
we're
calling
it
and
yeah
without
further
ado.
Here's
the
list.
C
E
Yeah
yeah
daniel,
so
I
mean
this
is
a
follow-up
right
to
our
announcement,
blog,
which
I'll
post
just
now
shortly.
H
Oh
constance,
by
collaborate,
do
you
want
to
just
do
it?
It's
all
you
I
mean
I'm.
F
F
I
M
M
E
C
F
I
K
Okay,
should
we
have
an
extended
at
least
a
gc
lead
like.
K
I
I'm
sorry,
why
don't
I
mean
I
think
I
can
just
create
a
slack
channel
right
now,
right.
E
H
We'll
be
sending
out
our
annual
the
annual
fund
constantly
sending
you
a
letter
asking
for
a
donation.
We
need
some.