►
From YouTube: 2020-11-12 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).
B
D
D
D
Yeah
I
like
to
plan
ahead,
but
maybe
not
that
much
so
the
notes
from
last
week
have
the
wrong
date
on
them
or
something
today's
the
12th.
Oh
I
see
so
this
agenda.
Okay,.
E
I
was
just
copying
the
template.
What
we
had
before
so.
D
D
No
he's
not
okay,.
D
A
A
E
Yeah,
I'm
getting
a
lot
of
questions
internally
about
ga
and
so
wondering
how's
that
going
and
like
in
terms
of
updated
timeline.
Are
we
expecting
to
land,
yeah,
ted,
morgan.
F
Yeah,
so
I
don't,
I
don't
think
we
have
a
definite
timeline
for
ga,
I
think
for
a
release
candidate,
like
we
published
that
blog
post
a
few
weeks
ago
and
we're
working
towards
getting
the
metric
spec
locked
as
well
as
getting
release
candidates
out
for
the
sdks
for
tracing
that'll,
be
followed
by
release
candidates
for
tracing
and
metrics.
F
B
No,
I
just
wanted
to
proxy
this
request
from
spec
meeting
another
day
we
need
to,
like
everybody
wants
to
get
a
sense:
how
to
promote
ga,
because
j
will
be
very
strange.
We
will
get
traces
but
not
j
metrics,
and
we
need
to
understand
how
we
need
talking.
F
A
B
Yeah
I
was
trying
to
convey
like
we
have
this
upcoming
traces
ga,
but
it's
not
gaga
it's
kind
of
like
spec,
lock
and
the
question
was:
how
do
we
talk
about
it?
What
would
be
like?
I
think,
it's
more
marketing
questions
and
technical
questions,
but
this
is,
I
mean,
morgan,
you
remember
on
on
the
oh,
it
was
ted,
I
think,
on
the
spec
meeting
this
week.
The
decision
was
that
we
need
to
ask
governor's
committee
and
we
need
to
ask
yeah.
G
So
if
you
all
didn't
catch
the
email,
I
did
send
out
a
document
discussing
this,
so
I
put
my
proposals
in
there.
If
people
could
review
that,
that
would
be
really
great.
I
realized
I.
G
So
put
that
into
the
meeting
notes:
if
people
can
just
click
through
on
that
and
have
a
look,
I
don't
know
that
we
need
to
spend
time
on
this
call
going
over
it.
I
would
just
recommend
people,
people
read
this
and
and
respond,
and
I'm
welcome
for
edits.
So
it's
in
edit
mode.
Please
add
your
own
comments
on
there
with
your
own
names
to
see
daniel's
already
done
some
of
this,
and
we
can
have
it
in
a
synchronous
discussion
about
it.
D
E
D
File
was
supposed
to
kind
of
like
have
similar
things,
I'm
totally
fine
killing
it.
We
should
probably
like
kill
it
when
we
put
this
thing
out
there,
so
there
aren't
two
things
that
are
meant
to
capture
this
kind
of
granularity,
but
I
do
think
like
something
like
this
is
pretty
badly
needed.
That
was
basically
what
my
agenda
item
was
at
the
end
of
the
thing
I'll.
D
Just
I
think
we'll
go
on
time
for
it
today,
but,
like
this
project
needs
like
more
than
blog
posts,
I
think
to
communicate
commitments
to
timelines
and
it's
really
hurting
us.
I
think
as
a
project
like-
and
it's
I'm
sure
everyone
basically
agrees
about
that,
but
we
don't
have
like
an
organizational
mechanism
to
deal
with
it,
and
I
think
that
feels
almost
as
pressing
to
me
as
the
lack
of
a
document.
D
But
since
this
is
already
done
ted,
I
think
like,
let's
like
get
it
on
the
website
as
soon
as
we
can
or
whatever,
but
let's
also
kill
the
thing
I
did
before,
which
is,
I
think,
way
out
of
date
at
this
point
anyway,
but
I
would
like
maybe
next
week,
if,
if
we're,
I
guess
we're
talking
with
the
atlanta
foundation
person,
but
the
week
after
that,
or
maybe
I'll
make
an
issue
on
github.
D
I
really
want
to
establish
like
a
some
organizational
construct
to
manage
the
the
timeline
for
or
open
telemetry
in
general,
beyond
just
the
tc
or
the
gc,
as
it
doesn't
seem
to
be
really
working
like.
I
just
don't
think
that
we
don't
have
a
timeline
for
some
pretty
important
things.
A
A
Maybe
we
just
need
to
communicate
it.
You
know
in
on
more
channels
than
just
having
the
project
board
there.
D
I
agree
that
we
have
that
I
think
morgan
was
absolutely
correct
when
he
said
that
we
don't
have
a
date
for
ga
yeah.
I
just
think
that's
sort
of
inexcusable.
I
mean
like
the
project
board
and
andrew.
Please
have
some
sort
of
like
upper
bound,
like
ga
will
happen
before
july,
1st,
2021
or
whatever
you
know
like.
There
should
be
some
day
where,
like
it
will
happen
before
then
bit
that's
the
kind
of
thing
I'm
talking
about.
D
J
E
And
now
like-
and
this
isn't
like
this
is
meant
to
be
a
critique-
it's
just
more
like
the
perception
from
outsider.
People
are
like,
I'm
gonna
still
hold
off
on
using
hotel,
and
also
that
means
like
we
can't
like
going
to
incubation
status.
It's
like
it's
not
going
to
be
a
compelling
story
without
it.
F
A
Yeah
I
mean
I
really
like
the
idea
ben
suggested
of
having
a
road
map.
At
least
you
know
it's
high
level
milestones
and
and
maybe
just
having
another
project
board
that
gives
that
view
right,
because
it's
easy
to
modify
and
yet,
at
the
same
time,
it's
link
linkable
from
everywhere.
G
The
main
thing,
honestly
is
that
we
can
do
is
we
can
clarify
the
language
around
this?
That's
part
of
the
issue.
If
we've
been
very
loose
about
what
these
things
actually
mean
right,
we
don't
we're
saying
we're
going
to
ga,
but
we're
not.
We
don't
even
know
what
that
means.
So
the
first
thing
we
have
to
do
is
actually
strictly
define
all
of
these
terms
and
then
bring
that
to
the
maintainers
and
get
them
to
sign
off
on
it.
So
that
that's
the
thing
we
can
that
we
can
show
action
on
this
week.
G
Once
we've
done
that,
then
things
are
tightening
up
enough
working
with
andrew
who's
been
project
managing
the
whole
thing
from
a
high
level.
It
should
be
possible
at
this
point
to
start
drawing
some
more
concrete
expectations
around
when
deliverables
are
going
to
hit,
and
the
third
thing
I
will
mention
is
I
we
need
participation
in
a
user
research
effort,
just
usability
study,
you
might
call
it
before
we
hit
rc
on
this
stuff.
That's
the
one
thing
I
want
to
be
really
firm
about.
G
I
don't
get
the
impression
we're
dog
fooding
our
own
stuff
sufficiently
for
me
to
feel
comfortable
like
slapping
a
long-term
support
guarantee
on
this
stuff
until
at
least
in
some
constructive,
you
know
organized
fashion,
we
at
least
like
dog
food,
including
spaces.
So
I'd
like
to
make
sure
that's
on
the
roadmap
as
well.
G
But
I'm
happy
to
to
put
this
in
stuff
together
into
a
timeline.
I
can
work
with
with
andrew
and
morgan
on
that,
but
yeah,
let's
get
the
let's
get
the
terminology
cleared
up.
K
Yeah
I
100
agree
about
terminology.
I
I
have
had
the
problem
in
my
sig
meetings,
pretty
regularly
that
people
just
don't
know
what
we're
prioritizing
and
when
and
when
due
dates
are,
and
things
like
that.
You
know
there
was
a
total
lack
of
clarity
on
like
what
ga
even
meant
until
very
recently.
So
I
think.
D
D
I
don't
know,
just
make
a
decision
about
things
being
good
enough,
or
whatever
I
mean,
I
think,
ted
you're
right
that
they're
probably
not
good
enough
right
now,
but
but
I
think
we
don't
have
a
bdfl
in
open
telemetry,
which
is
a
good
thing,
but
given
that
we
don't
have
that
person,
someone
does
need
to
be
able
to
make
decisions
about.
D
Just
I
don't
know
trade-offs
between
quality
costs
and
time,
and
things
like
that,
and
I'm
not
it's
not
clear
to
me.
If
someone
has
that
authority,
I
know
the
tc
does,
but
the
tc
is
not
an
individual.
So
it's
like
this
shared
responsibility
that
might
end
up.
No
one
wants
to
be
the
bad
guy
or
something
like
that.
Is
that
an
actual
problem
or
just
a
theoretical
problem?
No.
G
It's
not
a
problem
at
all.
The
the
community's
been
very
strictly
focused
on
what
is
required
for
ga
and
what
isn't
and
has
been
very
good
about
cutting
cutting
away
anything
that
that
isn't
required
and
staying
focused
on
those,
so
we're
seeing
a
lot
of
velocity
as
a
result
of
that,
but
part
of
it
is
frankly
like
where
a
lot
of
what
you're
seeing
right
now
is
some
last
minute
churn,
because
people
are
really
starting
to
use
these
interfaces
and
realizing
that
there's
like
stuff
about
them
that
they
want
differently.
G
So
that's
why
they're
like
refactoring
the
interfaces
in
go
and
java
right
now
they're
trying
to
to
get
in
all
of
these
ergonomic
changes
before
before
slapping
some
kind
of
long-term
support
guarantee
on
it.
Now
I
do
think
we
can
move
from
to
this
middle
step
of
putting
out
release
candidates
once
we've
gone
through
this
round
of
finalizing
the
things
in
the
compliance
matrix,
which
is
another
thing
you
can
look
at
in
the
spec.
G
That's
where
everyone
actually
is
on
a
more
fine
grain
level
than
just
alpha
beta
so
that
that
stays
up
to
date.
Very
well.
So
you
can
track
progress
there,
so
it's
basically
going
to
be
that
make
sure
this.
This
api
doesn't
suck
and
then
put
out
a
release
candidate
and
once
the
release
candidate
is
out
there.
That
is
when
I
think
we're
going
to
see
a
lot
of
adoption.
I
agree
with
morgan
on
that
front.
F
F
F
So
it
sounds
like
the
next
steps
are
ted
like
I've
already
reviewed
your
doc,
but
we
we
start
once
the
gc
and
tc
have
reviewed
it.
Then
we
share
that
with
the
community
just
to
clarify
all
the
terms
and
what
we
think
is
required
for
our
c
and
ga
and
then
the
second
step
is.
We
need
to
put
a
stake
in
the
ground
for
certain
dates
and
say:
like
you
know,
we
will
rc
this
year
or
we
will
ga.
You
know
before
a
certain
date.
Next
year,
you're
laughing.
G
G
If
we
go
with
that
language,
yes
and
then
do
rc's
for
tracing,
and
so
we
can
start
talking
about
that
stuff
and
likewise
doing
a
round
of,
like
you
know,
user
research
like
last
last
usability
last
call
for
that
like
come,
come
try.
It
right
now
start
using
it
right
now
and
give
us
feedback
like
so
there's.
There's
a
drum
beat
that
we
can
do
leading
up
to
ga.
It's.
A
It's
also
ted
that
I
feel
that
you
know
again
another
way
of
being
able
to
identify
a
clear
ga
target
is
by
labeling
components
that
are
changing
as
experimental
and
and
actually
actively
moving
it
out
of
the
core
components
and
tagging
them,
because
it's
okay
for
an
open
source
project
to
have
experimental
components
all
the
time
and
and
again
scoping
very
clearly
what
ga
really
means.
G
Yeah
yeah,
I
agree
it's
just
getting,
there's
this
like
core
stuff
around
the
the
tracing
and
then
around
metrics,
where
you
know
like
that.
That
stuff
has
to
has
to
be
in
there
and
get
done,
but
I
agree
like
that.
We
will
have
a
way
to
add
logging
and
all
these
other
things
and
make
incremental
improvements
to
the
api
and
it'll
still
be
open
season
on
improving
the
sdk
under
the
hood.
I'm
not
worried
about
breaking
changes
there.
G
So
yeah
I'm
willing
to
to
commit
to
to
pivoting
to
what
ben
mentioned
here
around
starting
to
be
more
active
and
vocal
about
explaining
where
the
project
is
at,
because
I
do
think
you're
going
to
see
see
it
shape
up
pretty
quickly,
but
it's
certainly
tracing
you're
going
to
see
shape
up
by
the
end
of
the
year
and
I'm
getting
asked
questions.
I'm
also
giving
a
presentation
right
now
at
gophercon.
G
That
is
pre-recorded.
So
that's
why
I'm
slightly
distracted
as
I'm
getting
questions
very
similar
questions
in
a
discord
channel
as
we
speak.
J
J
G
Yeah
and
I'll
continue
to
shop
them
around,
but
I
do
have
a
basic
like
document
that
people
can
can
follow
to
to
try
open
telemetry
out,
give
us
feedback
and
then
submit
through
a
form,
so
I've
been
shopping
that
around
to
the
various
sigs
but
yeah.
My
ask
is
that
member
companies,
you
know,
try
to
rustle
up
some
people
internally.
G
You
know,
since
those
the
people
have
access
to
to
to
maybe
give
some
of
this
stuff
a
try,
because
I
want
to
avoid
this
situation
where
we
make
an
rc
and
then
suddenly
discover
we
want
to
like
make
a
bunch
of
changes.
I
I
want.
I
want
that
work
to
get
as
front
loaded
right
now,
as
as
much
as
we
can.
J
Yeah
now
typic
is
scheduled
after
thanksgiving,
I
think
so.
Yeah
anyway,
do
we
need
do
we
want
to
go
to
the
next
topic
constance?
Did
you
get
your
answers.
J
Okay,
cool,
so
next
topic
is
about
license
for
web
repository
for
website
suggestions
to
change
to
cc
by
like
common
creative
commons
license,
and
I
see
no
problem
with
that.
So
if
everybody
agree,
we
will
just
go
ahead
with
that
and,
like
I
mean
so
awesome
to
go
ahead.
I
asked
chris
from
cncf
and
he
said:
okay.
J
So
I
have
next
topic
is
I
think
andrew
asked
whether
we
should
start
removing
older
recordings
and
suggestion
is
to
recall,
like
start
deleting
recording
after
six
months.
I
personally
don't
understand
why
we
would
do
that,
but
yeah.
If
you
want
to
read
the
discussion
really
quick.
Basically,
the
discussion
is
under
the
suggestion
that,
since
our
record
is
kind
of
not
professional
and
we
don't
edit
them,
we
don't
have
like.
J
We
may
have
some
embarrassing
moments
that
people
may
not
want
to
store
in
history
forever,
so
suggestions
to
start
removing
videos.
At
some
point
I
don't
know
like
how
to
pick
the
date.
I
mean,
for
instance,
our
retrospective
on
election
last
meeting
may
be
very
interesting
in
one
year,
but
I
mean-
and
I
don't
generally
see
any
reasons
to
remove
recordings.
J
Unless
somebody
will
ask
for
it,
it
will
just
it's
extra
work
and
I
mean
if
you
speak,
spoke
up
on
meetings
and
you
already
became
a
public
person
like
if
you
ask
questions
on
conference.
You
already
recorded
yourself
forever,
so
I
don't
know.
A
D
Yeah
I
I've
opened
that
issue
a
number
of
times
almost
commented
and
didn't
a
couple
of
times.
I
appreciate,
I
think
the
goal
partly
is
like
okay.
If
the
recordings
are
just
people
who
can't
go
to
the
meeting-
and
they
just
want
to
watch
on
their
own
time,
then
absolutely
we
can
archive
after
six
months,
but
the
gc
should
not
be.
I
mean
the
gc
at
least
should
be
a
couple
of
years.
D
I
think
like
because
of
just
the
thing
you
said,
like
I'm,
going
to
look
at
that
election
recording
next
year
and
we
have
to
like
figure
out
the
new.
You
know
the
new
process
or
whatever.
So
that
makes
sense.
I
just
think
if
someone
says
something
embarrassing,
they
should
have
the
right
to
request
that
it's
taken
down,
and
I
don't
know
I
mean,
like
that's
fine-
I
mean
I
I'm
sure
people
occasionally
say
embarrassing
things
and
I
don't
have
an
issue
with
that,
but
it
just
seems
like
a
weird
default.
It's
my
two
cents.
D
K
M
K
The
sig
docs
all
have
like
at
the
top.
This
meeting
is
being
recorded.
Maybe
we
just
add
in
addition
to
that
header,
a
link
that
says
like
if
you
need
a
piece
of
a
recording,
changed
or
something
or
for
questions
open
an
issue
on
the
community
repo.
Just
to
make
it
clear
that
we
can
fix
issues
like
this.
If
they're
brought
to
our
attention.
D
Than
I
should
but
like
I
think
part
of
the
inspiration
for
this
may
have
been
the
next
thing
that
sergey
put
up
about
twitter,
but
I
I
think
another
thing
was
I
there
was
a
meeting.
I
wasn't
at
that
someone
had
their
microphone
unmuted
and
it
was
just
embarrassing
I'll
just
leave
it
at
that.
It
wasn't
like
nothing.
It
was
just
embarrassing
and
I
would
totally
expect
them
to
want
that
taken
down.
D
I
would
have-
and
you
know
it's
kind
of
it's
just
like
you
know,
10
year
old
level,
humor
just
but
like
it
just
should
go
down
you
know.
So
I
think,
though,
a
lot
of
them,
probably
something
like
that.
Frankly,
where
no
one's
gonna
object
to
it.
It's
just
embarrassing.
A
J
Okay,
so
we
we
can
post
a
guidance
with
some
commitment
to
edit
videos,
but
I
don't
know
who
will
be
doing
this
work
so
we
will
need.
I
think
it's
going
to
be.
D
Incredibly
rare
that
anyone's
actually
going
to
ask
for
it,
I
would
I
mean,
I
think
it's
fine
to
just
say,
like
you
know,
ask
someone
who
has
youtube
privileges.
It's
probably
someone
on
the
gc
or
something
to
do.
E
M
K
J
D
Maybe
it's
clear,
I
didn't
even
know
that,
for
you
thank
you
for
giving
me
to
upload
the
gc
video,
okay.
I
I
think
just
like.
I
would
rather
avoid
having
any
sort
of
form
of
policies
like
what
is
constitutes
reason
for
removal
and
then
just
leave
it
at
gc
discretion,
because
if
it's
very
rare,
then
I
think
we
can
right.
J
Okay
and
I
posted
this
twitter
link,
I
don't
know
what
was
the
story.
I've
been
on
this
meeting
and
I
don't
remember
anything
offensive.
So
anybody
knows
the
story.
Anybody
has
any
concerns
raised
to
them.
K
What
two
weeks
ago
this
was
in
gitter,
I
think
there
was
a
link,
it's
an
imager
link
in
the
in
the
agenda.
That's
why
it
may
not
be
obvious.
K
J
Yeah,
I
just
worry
that
we
will
start
getting
like
bombs
on
recordings
and
that's
what
cncf
like
kubernetes
projects
started
fighting
with,
and
once
they
had
some
spammers
and
people
trying
to
do
crazy.
They
tighten
up
how
meetings
can
be
started,
who
can
start
the
meetings
and
who,
whom
like,
who
have
the
host
privileges?
So
I
I'm
really
like
waiting
for
this
moment
to
happen
and
if
it
will
happen
like
everybody's
life
will
became
harder,
but
I
hope
it
wouldn't.
K
This
is
the
the
link
if
you're.
K
Was
the
name
of
the
person
yeah?
It's
the
name
of
the
user
and
the
avatar
of
the
user?
And
I
remember
we
were
talking
about
it
because
getter
does
not
have
any
moderation
tools
available
of
any
kind
at
all
other
than
deleting
messages,
and
this
user
is
also
not
a
member
of
our
community
they're,
just
a
drive-by
poster.
F
K
I
haven't
seen
them,
but
you
know
that
doesn't
mean
they
haven't
posted
yeah.
Okay,
I
noticed
that
you
know,
because
a
getter
profile
is
also
a
github
profile.
I
remember
at
the
time
I
looked
at
their
github
profile
and
there
it's
a
fairly
new
account,
but
they've
also
contributed
to
another
open
source
project.
K
Out
of
censorship,
yeah
yeah,
I
had
the
same
assumption,
so
it's
obviously
pretty
delicate.
How
do
you
handle
things
like
that?
But
with
gitter
in
particular,
we
have
very
few
tools
available
yeah.
K
F
F
So
yeah,
the
challenge
of
slack,
is
we'd,
have
to
move
to
the
cncf
slack
instance.
So
we'd
get
channels
on
it,
but
we
wouldn't
be
a
dedicated
slack
instance
for
us.
Maybe
that's
okay.
I
don't
know,
but
I
I
think
we're
all
willing
to
accept
that
it's
just
previously,
when
we've
had
a
discussion,
we've
wanted
to
hold
off
until.
H
E
A
Yeah,
that's
that's
fine.
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
for
the
specifically
for
the
first
topic,
which
is
the
dev
stats
and
the
fair
use,
I
will
I'm
working
on
a
doc
and
and
again
I'll
just
add
the
link
to
the
issue
and
and
again
everything
else
is
fine.
That
dead
answered.
Some
of
my
questions
I
had
on
the
other
area
bogdan.
What
was
your
question
specifically
on
the
community
day
again,
I
was
interested
in
you
know
more
folks
who
are
newcomers
to
the
project
joining
in.
A
So
that
was
my
primary
concern
and,
and
just
you
know,
more
participation,
open,
open
participation
on
the
project.
L
So
I
think
I
think
I
will
raise
this
issue
next
next
time
when
everyone
is
here
most
likely
unless
you
are
very
curious
about
this,
but
I
I
think
I
will
hold
on
it
until
next
week
when,
when
we
have.
A
Yeah
sounds
good
yeah.
We
should
definitely
discuss
it
more
because
I
think
that
I
even
I
had
some
comments
so
happy
to.