►
From YouTube: 2020-05-28 Python 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
B
B
C
Calling
you
out
sorry,
it's
not
just
Thursday
afternoon,
it's
I'm
sure
all
sorts
of
times,
so
I
think
yeah
Thursday
Friday
morning,
maybe
for
some
people
too.
So
anyway,
happy
python,
sig
meeting
so
I
think
I
I
was
asked
to
drive
this
meeting
so
I'm
just
gonna
go
ahead
and
get
started
maybe
give
as
for
a
couple
people,
but
let
me
share
my
screen
and,
as
usual,
let's
see
I
believe
this
actually
does
what's
supposed
to
you.
So
yes
great!
C
C
So
I
think
maybe
well
we're
waiting
here.
Well,
there's
a
lot
of
people
I!
Think
in
here
now
great
I,
like
I,
guess:
I
just
had
a
side
question,
maybe
for
the
for
the
entrance
who
are
joining
us
like
Connor,
for
example
like
how
are
you
hurry
and
give
any
feedback
for
us?
Are
you
having
a
good
time
or
is
anything
we
should
improve
upon
I'm.
D
Gonna
turn
my
video
and
I'm
I'm
doing
pretty
good.
Personally
yeah
things
are
good
for
me.
I
would
say,
I
know,
I,
don't
know
if
he's
here,
but
Andrew
he's
kind
of
I
shouldn't
speak
for
him,
but
he
was
kind
of
frustrated
that
his
peers
are
taking
like
an
extremely
long
time
to
get
reviews.
So
I,
don't
know
if
there's
a
way
to
for
him
to
speed
up
that
process
at
least
or
like
what
what
we
should
do
to
get
them
reviewed
faster.
C
Yeah,
that's
a
good
one,
so
let's
I
mean
I.
Think
one
thing
we
can
try
to
do
is
just
kind
of
call
them
out
and
I
can
pull
in
Andrews
here
as
well
and
yeah
I
mean
I.
Think
in
general
we
we've
been
struggling
a
little
bit
with
that
right
and
we'll.
Maybe
it's
a
good,
a
good
segue,
the
the
challenge
stand.
We
were
just
discussing
this.
C
The
main
Tina's
mean
to
is
that,
in
order
for
us
to
merge
stuff
in
right,
we
need
at
least
two
people
to
who
are
in
the
approvers
list
to
actually
approve
the
PR
and
actually,
as
it
stands,
that
approvers
list
has
actually
gotten
a
little
slim
relatively
and
so
maybe
I'll
just
have
a
tangible
example.
Here.
Here's
Krista's
most
recent
poll
requests.
C
On
actually
updating
the
approver
and
maintained
errs
list
and
there's
actually
I
think
only
three
people
in
the
approvers
list
who
are
and
I
guess
we're
not
meeting
who
are
actively
reviewing,
says
Alex
Chris,
Diego,
Layton,
yeah,
that's
and
and
myself,
I
guess,
I'm
only
a
maintainers,
so
I
think
this
is
a
good
segue.
The
only
thing
we
can
really
do
the
kind
of
help,
speed
things
up
is
get
more
reviewers
or
give
people
more
time
to
review
and
it
being
an
open
source
project.
C
That's
felt
a
little
bit
difficult,
but
you
know
this
thoughts
here
is
to
actually
just
add
more
reviewers
or
more
approvers
or,
like
me,
being
still
like
review
a
PR.
If
you
write
a
PR
policy
so
or
review
to
PRI
like
right,
yeah,
so
I
guess
maybe
good
for
the
larger
group
like
I
guess
how
do
people
feel
about
that?
I?
Think
there's
been
a
lot
of
like
frustration,
maybe
not
implicit
like
explicitly,
but
around
the
review
times.
E
We
also
got
both
Aaron
and
James,
joining
on
our
side
through
looking
start
doing
reviews
and
we
got
both
of
them,
headed
to
a
purpose
like
just
just
a
heaven
in
the
last
couple
weeks
that
you
know,
we've
lost
a
bunch
of
a
perverse
and
like
I,
don't
have
as
much
time
as
I
did
instead
go
through
and,
like
a
previous,
so
I
think
we're
in
kind
of
a
lull
right
now.
But
hopefully,
if
we
add
more
people
to
approvers
will
start
moving
faster
I.
B
Also
feel
like
personally,
like
I've
I've,
been
reviewing
a
lot
and
like
it's
just
like
this,
the
sheer
amount
of
pull
requests
that
we
have
open.
It's
just
you
know
it's
kind
of
hard
with
like,
especially
if,
like
other
people
are
kind
of
working
on
other
stuff
and
like
they
have
their
own
priorities
like
like
I'm
generally
reviewing
like
everything
that
I'm
seeing
like
even
if
I
didn't
have
that
much
experience
in
it
before
I,
go
ahead
and
learn
it
and
I,
don't
know
it's
like
the
list
is
just
ever
ending.
C
Yeah,
that's
a
little
bit
tricky
I!
Guess,
yes,
maybe
so
yeah
I
think
Layton
noted
that
you
are
reviewing
a
lot
of
PRS
and
I.
Think,
like
you
know,
called
you
others.
One
of
the
people
who
have
approver
status
and
I
know
that
you're
actively
reviewing
him
yeah
I
mean
it
seems
like
the
only
way
we
could
handle
this
from
an
organizational
standpoint
is
to
have
actually
more
people
doing
the
reviews
than
writing.
Prs.
C
F
Yeah
I
mean
that
different
sounds
reasonable.
I,
just
don't
want
to
over
connect,
so
I'm
not
sure
how
much
time
I'll
have
to
actually
spend
on
the
pison
repository
in
general,
but
definitely
I
can
I
can
try
and
allocate
a
bit
of
my
time,
but
just
got
a
review.
Yeah
I
think
like
so
how
can
we
I
actually
missed
out
of
this
meeting?
Sorry,
you
saying
I
think
that
you
there's
not
many
there's
not
many
people
on
the
approvers
listed
another.
C
A
D
D
One
other
thing
I
somewhat
wanted
to
mention,
was
like
so
I've
tried
to
put
some
effort
into
reviewing
things
and
I
noticed
a
lot
of
the
time,
mainly
because
I
don't
have
in
that
context,
that
for
Pierre's
I
understand
like
they
usually
just
look
good
to
me,
which
isn't
a
very
helpful
review
and
for
the
ones
that
I
don't
really
understand.
I,
don't
feel
like
I
have
enough
context
to
actually
write
a
good
review,
and
so
that's
kind
of
the
struggling
I'm
having
with
their
goods
to
reviewing
peers
myself
Sarah.
E
Yeah
I
think
we're
gonna
have
this
problem
in
general
right
like
for
I,
think
now
all
three
engines
and
I
was
like
the
host
so
learn
enough
about
the
repo
it's
a
weave
like
meaningful
reviews
to
hoping
is
the
like.
This
will
get
better
in
a
couple
weeks,
but
now
we
got
is
like
a
lot
of
people
that
are
new
and
at
the
same
time,
several
people
leaving
so
we're
just
kind
of
at
the
spot.
C
Yeah
and
I
think
like
I
guess,
maybe
in
some
transparency
for
myself,
I
know
Andrew
in
particular,
he
was
focusing
on
sort
of
the
cloud
trace
and
cloud
metrics
integrations
and
the
reason
I
actually
chose
to
deprioritize
them
in
my
head,
mainly
because
they
were
kind
of
specific
to
like
Google's
exporter
right
and
typically
and
like
I
feel
like
there's
like
Layton
owns
like
the
Azure
exporter.
You
know,
I
like
to
here's
got
the
data
dog
won,
so
I
guess
I
prefer
someone.
C
You
know
to
your
point
Connor
with
more
expertise
in
that
particular
like
service
to
own.
Doing
more
of
that
review
and
I
guess.
One
weakness
here
is
that
we
don't
have
I
guess
I
mean
it
seems
like
there's
a
fair
amount,
people
from
Google
here
who
could
speak
to
the
cloud
tracing
cloud,
monitor
ones,
yeah.
B
It's
a
use
case
point
I
felt
exactly
the
same
way
like
all
of
Andrews
PRS
that
wasn't
really
related
to
the
you
know.
Cloud
exporter
like
he
talked
to
me
like
many
times
before,
even
putting
out
the
PR
like
asking
me
like
what
the
design
is
like
what
he
should
do
and
like
I
was
I
was
very
vocal
about
these
things,
because
I
actually
understood
and
like
you
know,
had
more
of
a
say
in
these
topics.
D
E
B
C
I
think
okay
I
think
yeah
I
could
I
could
give
it
the
same
treatment
that
I've
been
giving
today
the
dog
which
is
quick
brush.
You
know,
make
sure
that
there's
tests
and
then
expect
people
you
know,
expect
the
owner
of
that
domain
to
kind
of
have
good
good
enough
context
to
help
other
things.
A
C
Okay,
yeah,
I
think
you
know
what
they'll
do
is.
If
it's
a
process
thing
again,
I
will
I
will
I'll
be
the
stamp
machine.
I
think
would
like
this
expectation
that
we
probably
need
someone
with
more
context
on
this,
on
the
stack
specific
exporters
to
to
provide
I,
think
more
of
a
quick
review
review
and
like
I
guess,
I'll
note
here
right,
like
I'm
looking
at
two
of
the
exporters
here
and
both
I
think
have.
C
Actually
let
me
go
look
a
little
bit
closer
yeah
okay.
So
there
was
there's
I,
think
one
person
who
reviewed
cloud
trace
and
then
cloud
monitoring
yeah,
it's
fine.
We
can't
even
take
this
as
a
side
conversation,
but
actually
no
one's
reviewed
cloud
monitoring,
yeah,
it's
weather
in
the
in
the
sig
or
like
at
Google.
C
F
C
Sounds
good
cool,
okay,
so
sorry
I
hope
we
have.
You
know
a
little
bit
of
action
there
and
I
think
to
your
point,
Connor.
Well,
we
are
trying
to
aggressively
kind
of
review
them.
I
know
alex
has
been
reviewing.
Pr
is
basically
like
all
the
straight
last
week
and
I've
been
trying
to
review
like
I,
think
I
reviewed,
like
15
or
so
over
the
past
week
as
well,
so
I
think
we're
just
catching
up
on
a
backlog,
so
yeah.
D
C
Cool
so
segue
and
I
guess,
like
maybe
good
segue
from
this
conversation
the
next
one,
in
the
same
vein,
that
we
probably
need
more
approvers.
So
if
anyone
you
know,
can
even
carve
out
some
amount
of
time
like
I,
think
even
a
couple
hours
to
help
us
become
an
approver
I
helped
a
couple
hours
a
week.
That
would
help
us
a
lot
I
think
and
help
the
whole
community
here.
C
In
the
same
vein,
we're
also
kind
of
doing
a
call
for
for
maintainer
x'
as
well,
and
so
for
some
just
people
who,
just
as
a
quick
summary
of
the
distinction
between
a
program,
maintainer
approvers,
are
one
of
the
people
who
who's
approvals.
I
guess
for
lack
of
a
better
word
count
towards
allowing
the
pr
to
be
merged
and
the
maintainer
kind
of
is
responsible
for
for
merging
them,
as
well
as
responsible
for
releases
and
also
theoretically
responsible
for
kind
of
the
larger
vision
of
of
that
particular
instrumentation
as
well.
C
So
you
know
I
think
the
pros
I
can
throw
out
there
is,
you
know,
a
great
responsibility
to
kind
of
pick
up
good
for
career
growth,
maintaining
and
like
a
project
on
this
level.
Like
you
know,
open
telemetry,
as
the
last
quarter
has
been
the
second
most
active
ciencia
project
in
terms
of
commits,
and
so
it's
a
really
cool
thing
to
put
on
your
list
of
accomplishments.
I
think
you
maintain
the
con
there
is
that
there
is
a
there
is
a
cost
in
terms
of
one's
time.
C
We've
got
Alex,
we
just
pulled
Alex
in
a
couple
weeks
ago
and
he's
been
doing
a
a
fantastic
job,
but
I
think
we're
looking
for
three
to
four
maintainer
Zhai,
just
to
kind
of
ensure
like
health
of
the
the
sig
long
term,
so
the
project.
Rather
so,
if
you're
interested
I
think
maybe
talk
to
Alex
Chris
awry
I
mean
we
may
reach
out
to
you
as
well
like
outside
of
this
public
discussion,
see
if
there's
any
opportunities
there
so.
C
B
I've
read
some
of
the
stuff
you
wrote
in
like
yeah,
thanks
for
reviewing
a
lot
of
it
makes
sense
in
terms
of
I
guess
priority
right
now,
like
since
the
like,
metrics
specs,
like
version
point
four
is
out
I.
Think
I
would
try
to
do
that.
First,
before,
like
going
back
to
views
so
like
I'll,
be
visit
revisiting
like
all
of
your
comments
and
there's
a
bunch
of
changes
that
I
still
need
to
do
that.
B
C
Okay,
no
that's
fine
too,
and
I
guess
you
know.
Some
of
my
questions
pertain
I.
Think
to
more
than
just
Python
in
particular.
So
I
was
wondering.
Is
that
is
the
metric
still
sick
kind
of
the
right
place
to
kind
of
bring
up
these
discussions
or
should
I
talk
in
like
the
specification
or
is
it
or
the
views?
Oh
tab.
E
Views
that
would
be
perfect
and
I
think
this
is
like
the
last
thing
trying
to
additional
metrics
is
to
like
get
this
ice
at
birth.
The
the
metrics
is
like
they're
spending
a
lot
of
time
now
on,
like
semantic
conventions
and
like
the
representation
of
variations
in
LTP
and
so
I.
Think,
like
word
like
Josh
on
the
whole
sig
is
they're
not
thinking
about
views
yet,
but
we
know
we
still
need
some
way
to
configure
barriers,
and
so,
if
we
have
like
a
good
prototype
in
Python,
this
will
probably
all
turn
into
the
spec.
E
A
C
B
C
Sounds
good
an
interview
and
if
you
guys
catch
wind,
that
this
is
a
conversation,
that's
picking
up
again,
I
think
around
the
view
stuff,
like
let
me
know
and
I
kind
of
want
to
do
it
on
those
conversations
now
that
I
have
some
context.
I
would
you
know,
love
to
kind
of
weigh
my
thoughts
in
sure
cool.
B
I
know
a
Chris
Creighton
issue
for
the
with
the
update
for
the
two
metric
specs
I
made
a
comment
like
someone
wanted
to
take
it,
however,
I
feel
like
it's
a
pretty
massive
task.
I
think
I'm
going
to
follow
sweet
into
what
the
Go
Go
did.
We're
likely
split
up
into
various
components,
and
so
I'm
probably
gonna
like
to
do
that
and
create
separate
issues
so
that
people
who
are
interested
in
like
learning
more
about
metrics
can,
like
you,
get
their
feet
wet
because
the
changes
are
relatively
straightforward.
It's
just
that.
It's
quite
time-consuming,
yeah.
E
B
C
B
C
C
C
Okay,
so
you
know
again
great
time
to
pull
in
PRS
that
you
want
to
discuss
here
so
I'm
just
going
to
go
down
the
list
here-
deadly,
oh
yeah,
so
this
one
I
did
a
quick
call
out.
This
is
me
wanting
to
change
the
API
of
trace
again
Layton.
Thank
you
for
your
review.
I
am
gonna,
look
at
your
comments
and
try
to
address
them
soon
and
then
I
think
only
one
more
reviewer
and
I
see
I
see.
Maybe
Alex
is
gonna
review
this,
but
if
anyone
wants
to
that
would
be
great.
C
So
I
think
the
change
here
is
relatively
simple.
This
is
introducing
an
API
first
flush
for
some
of
the
spam
processors
is
part,
I
believe
of
the
API
itself,
but
wasn't
implemented
completely,
and
so
now
it's
been
added
and
I
think
like
I,
you
know
accidentally
maybe
bolted,
on
additional
work
here
by
requesting
that
there's
a
distinction
between
a
synchronous
and
an
asynchronous
multi
scram
processor,
but
the
end
of
the
day.
C
That's
basically
what
this
work
is
is
implementing
this
first
flush
function
that
ensures
that
all
spans
are
flushed
and
then
specifically
adding
it
to
this
multi
spam
processor,
whose
responsibility
is
to
aggregate
one
or
more
spam
pressors
spam
processors,
whose
responsibilities
are
to
flush
those
spans
to
one
or
more
exporters,
so
yep,
just
to
call
out
this
code
is
not
there's
a
lot
of
discussion
around
it.
Certainly,
but
the
code
itself
is
not
it's
not
that
scary,
it's
adding
a
sound
processor
is
adding
a
synchronous
version
that
will
flush
in
multiple
threads.
C
So
you
know
oh
yeah
and
I
guess
it
does
add
the
first
flush
to
the
spam
processor
itself
to
enable
flushing
and
then
the
unit
tests
so
I
know
that
we're
not
limited
on
people's
time,
but
just
requests.
If
we
get
this
one
done,
this
is
kind
of
one
of
the
few
PRS,
that's
actually
older
than
April
and
so
I.
Think.
If
we're
actually
sorry,
this
one
is
April
family.
C
C
Next
PR
is
instrumentation
for
celery,
so
I
guess
Mauricio
was
the
one
who
initially
filed
this
PR
and
I.
Think
J
goes
here:
cool,
hey,
Diego,
I,
think,
quick
question
on
this.
One
I
left
some
requested
changes
primarily
just
around
the
version
string,
but
I
recall
that
you
mentioned
that
the
celery
maintainer
was
kind
of
on
here
or
one
of
the
celery
maintainer
x'
like
what
are
your
thoughts
in
terms
of
kind
of
waiting
for?
Did
they
already
leave
a
lot
of
comments
here?
It
doesn't
look
like
they
did
so
I
guess.
G
I,
don't
really
know
if
it's
worth
waiting,
if
the
feedback
that
they
have
is
something
that
could
be
added
in
another
PR.
You
know
I
feel
like
this
is
this
is
work
that
looks
like
it's
functioning
and
I
know.
I
was
trying
to
get
some
things
some
celery
instrumentation
going
on
my
in
mm-hmm.
That's
nothing
would
be
better
than
nothing
at
this
point.
Okay,.
C
C
Yeah,
okay
sounds
good
all
right,
so
that's
good
I
mean
it's
good.
To
hear
that
to
hear
you
need
celery
instrumentation
that
provides
I
think
a
little
bit
more
of
an
impetus
to
get
this
version
or
quickly
so
I.
Think
with
that
feedback,
I
I'm,
I'm
gonna
propose
I'll.
Do
a
quick
thing:
wait
day
battle
here,
back
she's
gonna
go
ahead
and
do
the
approval
and
get
stuff
merged
in.
A
C
C
C
H
Good
sorry,
I
was
gonna,
say
leaving,
assign
me
an
issue
you're
supposed
to
be
following.
This
is
the
right
approach,
so
I
just
wanted
to
put
like
a
draft
PR,
so
you
can
discuss
it
right
now,
so
it's
basically
just
to
flush
flush
metrics
on
the
on
exit
sort
of
like
was
done
for
a
spam
processor.
But
the
thing
is
like
the
issue
that
instead
of
doing
the
exporter-
but
it
looks
like
all
of
the
like
badging-
is
done
in
the
metric.
Yes,
where
is
it
meter
for
the
meter
yeah
yep?
B
C
B
C
B
F
C
I
think
Chris
gave
some
context
on
this
earlier
and
I'm
not
sure
he's
out
right
now.
So
I
think
that
it
was
supposed
to
be
an
action
item
on
the
maintainer
zuv
six
to
actually
collect
those
and
I
guess.
Forgive
me.
I
personally
have
not
attended
the
sig
maintain
his
meeting
yet
so
yeah
I
guess
what
kind
of.
C
C
So
I
think
it
is
on
the
maintainer
is
to
actually
come
up
with
that
and
come
back
with
the
GA
strategy.
My
last
I
think
we
spoke
about
this
a
week
two
weeks
ago
and
there
hasn't
been
any
plans
around
like
explicit
plans
around
GA.
Although
you
know
metrics
are
certainly
part
of
that.
So
I
think
maybe
let's
take
that
as
an
action
item
and
I'll
talk
to
Chris
and
Alex
and
be
out
flying
and
see
if
we
can
come
back
with
a
story
for
the
for
larger
group.
So.