►
From YouTube: 2022-09-13 meeting
Description
cncf-opentelemetry meeting-2's Personal Meeting Room
A
B
A
B
A
So
cjo
would
not
be
attending
the
evening
meetings
for
like
the
next
two
months
or
so
I
think
he
has
like
some
other
conflicting
meetings
at
the
same
time.
So
yeah,
that's
the
update
from
him.
C
C
C
C
Yeah
mike
goldsmith,
I
think
I
think
that's
his
name
but
4pm
uk
is
like
middle
of
the
night
right.
A
A
A
Okay,
I
think
I
guess
we
should
start
now.
So
I
put
the
both
the
items
on
the
agenda
here,
so
we
should
be
doing
the
next
release
soon.
I
think
we
can
start
with
the
first
beta
or
like
we
already
had
two
alpha
releases,
and
there
are
a
few
changes
that
we
definitely
want
to
go
in
as
part
of
it.
A
C
The
up
down
counter
stuff
is
in
there.
C
And
regarding
that
I
was
wondering
if
well,
I
guess
the
runtime
metric
factor
is
just
stable.
So
would
we
be
interested
in
publishing
a
version
of
the
runtime
metrics
package
from
the
contrib
repo,
with
the
up
down
counter
support,
like
a
beta
version
of
that.
C
C
Have
astronomy,
but
I'm
just
asking.
I
know
that
I
think
some
folks,
I
think
some
vendors,
that
that
distinction
matters
between
a
gauge
and
an
up
down.
C
Also,
I
have
those
two
pr's
out.
There
is
two
different
options
for
how
to
run
the
release
process
off
of
the
tag
that
you
give
it.
It
might
be
worth
I'd,
be
curious
to
have
assuming
you're
doing
the
release.
Dude
gosh,
like
I'd,
be
curious
to
have
you
try
one
of
those
methods
and
see
how
it
works
for
you.
C
C
A
Did
not
see
the
prs,
but
the
difference
in
both
of
them
yet,
but
I
I
remember
one
of
them
was
like
you
can
use
the
same
tag
like
you
can
have
the
one
release
which
will
have
both
the
tag.
Names
right.
That
was.
Was
it
this
one
or
there's.
C
It
was
the
other
one.
Cj
had
commented
on
it
a
little
bit.
A
Yeah
yeah,
I.
C
A
A
look
as
well,
I
think,
yeah.
Before
we
do
the
next
release.
We
can
like
settle
down
on
one
approach
and
we
also
have
to
do
special
tagging
for
the
even
source
logging
and
I
think
the
log
emitter,
because
we
expect
them
to
move
to
contrary
people
and
we
want
them
to
follow
like
a
contrib,
repost
style
tag.
A
C
A
C
C
A
Okay,
I
think
I'll
go
through
this
before
I
like
ask
you
if
I
like,
when,
if
I
have
questions
and
like
I
would
have
questions
for
sure,
but.
A
I
think
we
have
sean
on
the
call
so
sean.
Would
you
be
okay
with
releasing
another
version
of
runtime
once
we
release
the
next
beta
release,
which
will
have
the
up
down
counter
instruments?
Yes,
I
was
planning
to
do
that,
but
I'm
not
sure
of
the
timeline.
That's
gonna
happen.
A
Okay
yeah,
so
if
we
would,
we
are
targeting
the
end
of
this
week,
but
if
that
doesn't
happen
no
later
than
next
week
like
end
of
next
week,
okay,
you
know
so
yeah
I'll
be
on
vacation
to
the
end
of
next.
A
B
A
Week
I
can
do
that.
Okay,
if
there's
no
yeah
yeah
sounds
good
yeah
and
also
about
the.
A
Okay,
I
added
this
one
thing
here,
so
I
think
we
fixed,
like
the
contrib
repo,
had
copied
all
those
helper
files
and
classes
long
ago,
because
some
of
the
instrumentation
libraries
wanted
to
use
that
allocation
free
way
of
it
enumerating
over
stuff.
A
So
I
wanted
to
ask
like:
should
we
be
worried
about
or
the
same
for,
contra
people
packages?
I
don't
think
a
lot
of
them
are
using
the
where
we
have
that
reflecting
issue,
but.
A
B
A
Yeah-
and
I
was
wondering,
if
there's
nobody
using
that
particular
method
which
you
fixed
in
this
pr,
then
I
guess
we
don't
we
can.
We
don't
have
to
do
anything
but
yeah,
like
I
think,
there's
I
was
doing
some
like
after
some
basic
searching.
I
think
there's
only
one
project
which
is
mass
transit
instrumentation,
which
was
using
some
allocation
free
way
of
enumerating
over
tags,
but
yeah.
A
So
yeah
about
that
blanche
actually
is
trying
to
understand
like
what
I
didn't
clearly
follow
like
how
to.
B
B
A
I
I
think,
like
I
didn't,
do
a
thorough
search,
but
like
from
what
I
remember
mass
transit,
I
I
think
only
mass
transit
was
the
only
back
project
which
was
using
this.
So
let
me
see
if
I
can
quickly
find
something
else.
A
Oh
yeah,
I
think
I
don't
think
any
every
project
that
sets
this
to
true
uses
all
of
the
files,
but
this
was
just
a
way
for
them
to
like.
Have
a
simple
configuration.
Yeah.
B
A
B
A
B
B
B
A
Okay,
yeah,
I
think
I'll
start
with
that
I'll
first
try
to
find
out
which
projects
actually
end
up
using
a
activity
helper,
so
it's
just
activity
helper
or
enumeration
helper
as
well.
We
want
to
see
both
of
these.
I.
B
Think
the
fix
is
in
the
numeration
helper,
but
the
call
sides
come
from
the
helper
extensions
okay.
So
if
you
remove
helper
extensions,
you
can
remove
either,
but
if
you
remove
the
numeration
helper,
anything
that
links
in
the
helper
extension
will
just
automatically
blow
up
and
compile
anywhere
yeah.
So
it's
a
it's
a
better
test
to
remove
kind
of
the
top
level
call
sites.
A
Okay,
so
any
other
questions.
C
A
I
I
haven't
really,
I
don't
think
I
I
never
knew
I
don't
know
if
we've
like,
I
think
we're
still
upset
about
it.
That's
what
I
would
assume.
I
don't
think.
We've
made
anything
conclusive
on
it.
Yet.
A
A
C
B
B
C
Yeah
yeah,
I
agree.
I
hear
you
yeah
it's
this,
it's
this
one
yeah
this!
This
is
the
one
where
we
we
had
an
f5
target
and
we
removed
it,
and
so
basically
now-
and
we
haven't
heard
anybody
squeak.
B
B
Why
don't
we
tomorrow
bring
up
with
the
dotnet
runtime
team,
because
the
official
guidance
is
still
as
far
as
I'm
aware,
you
should
target
ned
stand
or
two
to
have
the
widest
like
net
of
your
support,
I
think
that's
still
the
official.net
guidance
so
shouldn't
we
break
with
that.
I
don't
know.
Maybe
we
should
talk
to
them
about
potentially
changing
the
official
guidance.
I
know
that
there's
like
nowhere.
It
said
that
that
standard
is
deprecated
or
I
don't
even
know.
If
there's
a
plan
that
says
like
when
it
will
be
end
of
support.
A
B
So
I
think
all
that
happened
is.
It
became
a
warning
and
not
an
error.
Okay,
yeah.
We
can
wait
and
see
what
happens
when
dominant
seven
drops,
because
I
kind
of
agree
with
alan
and
his
new
relic
numbers
that
there's
way
more
people
using
3.1
and
there
were
anything
before
so
when
people
realize
that
a
lot
of
the
official
packages
now
have
weird
support
for
31
net
standard.
B
C
Yeah
sure
I'd
be
interested,
I
mean
I'd,
probably
just
be
a
fly
on
the
wall.
I'm
definitely
interested
in
hearing
guidance
straight
from
there
straight
from
the
expert.
B
C
Post.Net,
seven,
you
know-
maybe
maybe
the.net
eight
time
frame-
is
a
better
time
frame
to
be
thinking
about
this,
and
as
far
as
that,
like
asp.net
core
package,
you
know
it's
still.
It's
still
a
release
candidate
for
the
foreseeable
future
and,
furthermore,
like
the
semantic
conventions,
especially
for
metrics,
may
still
shift
a
little
bit
for
that
package.
We
can
always
backpedal
on
our
decision
to
remove
targets
from
that
package,
if
need
be,
and
so
it
may
just
be
a
good
strategy.
Just
can
continue
sitting
on
this
problem.
A
Yeah,
okay,
I
think
let's
ask
the
daughter
team
tomorrow
about
this
or
like,
I
think,
that's
also
a
good
suggestion.
Maybe
if
we
wait
till.net
eight,
then
the
guidance
changes
or
we
never
know.