►
From YouTube: 2020-10-05 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
A
B
B
B
I
don't
know
I
was
just
kind
of
filling
in
the
agenda.
I
was
just
linking
the
two
prototypes
that
I
know
of
I'm
not
sure
I
know
I
know
you're
working
on
one.
Is
it
still
in
progress.
B
B
A
Oh
okay,
yeah.
I
think
we
did
too.
I
have
to
pull
requests,
but
I
think
they're
different,
we're.
I'm
making
major
api
changes
again
that
I
think
get
it
closer
to
the
actual
spec,
except
for
we
just
have
weird
spans.
So
we
can't
do
the
modifications
every
the
way
everyone
else
does
it,
which
is
annoying,
because
we
keep
them
in
a
shared
table,
but
so
going
through.
The
tracer
is
the
best
way
to
do
anything
like
set
attributes.
B
Yeah,
no,
I
think
that
makes
sense
and
in
some
ways
I
think
the
other
projects
will
move
more
towards
the
erlang
implementation
over
time
yeah.
B
So
so
I
think
that's,
that's
all
super
useful,
and
it
sounds
like
just
by
by
virtue
of
that.
A
lot
of
your
stuff
is
probably
on
racer
anyways,
which
was
kind
of
like
half,
though
half
of
this
prototype
was
pretty
much
everything
that
you
know
you
everything
you
want
to
do
that
operates
on
a
span.
It
goes
to
tracer.
You
don't
have
these
other
miscellaneous
namespaces
that
you
need
to
know
about.
A
Have
you
seen
my
I
assume
this
is
possible
in
ruby,
but
my
suggestion
elsewhere
about
not
having
to
get
a
name
tracer
by
automatically
like
macro
magic,
knowing
what
tracer
you're
you
should
be
in
based
on
the
file.
That's
running
the
code,
I
don't
know
if
you
have
the
ability
to
do
that
in
ruby,
I
mean
yeah
because
it
would
be
the
gem
name.
I
guess
wouldn't
it
and
I
don't
know
if
that's
available.
B
B
Of
ruby,
but
like
you
could
it's
like
you
can
figure
out
like
where
you
are
in
in
a
name
space
and
that
name
space
is
gonna,
be
like
open,
telemetry
instrumentation.
You
know
gem
name
like
instrumentation
library,
name
kind
of
thing,
and
if
you
could
rely
on
that
configuration,
you
could
come
up
with
a
reasonable
default
name.
B
A
B
Yeah,
I
I
think
this
would
be
definitely
easy
enough
for
you
to
automatically
name
the
tracer
for
instrumentation
and
then,
as
far
as
like
the
application
itself
goes.
It's
like.
I
did
kind
of
add
this
default
tracer,
which
is
you
know
it's
it's
there.
It's
you
know,
it's
name
is
default
so
like
it's,
it
is
kind
of
generic.
In
that
sense,
and.
B
It's
it's
helpful.
I
guess
like
in
this
situation.
People
were
talking
about
we're
like
well.
Sometimes
you
just
want
to
like
operate
on
the
span,
but
you
don't
have
a
tracer
for
some
reason
and
I'm
having
trouble
really
thinking
about
this
reason,
other
than
just
kind
of
like
the
end
user
for
open,
telemetry,
ruby,
but
whatever
the
reason
I
think
it
does
probably
show
up,
and
sometimes
you
really
don't
need
a
named
tracer
just
to
like
get
the
current
span
or
something
like
that.
A
The
only
place
I
can
think
that
it
really
shows
up,
I
think,
for
any
I
mean
if
the
user
pulls
up
like
in
a
shell,
an
interactive
ruby
shell.
They
might
they
not
only
are
they
not
in
like
a
specific
library,
so
getting
a
tracer
can't
automatically
figure
out
the
name
and
the
version
for
it,
but
they
also
probably
don't
want
to
deal
with
name
tracers
at
that
time,
because
they're
not
actually
they're,
just
fudging
around
with
stuff,
but
so
then
that
case,
like
a
default
tracer
makes
sense
to
be
able
to
grab.
A
B
Yeah-
and
I
guess
the
other
big
benefit
I
see
from
it-
it's
just
like
people
coming
from
like
open
tracing
and,
I
think,
probably
open
sense.
They're
just
gonna
be
used
to
like,
where
is
the
tracer
and
they'll,
probably
just
accidentally,
discover
this
default
tracer
and
start
using
it
and
then
realize
that
in
in
the
back
end,
they're
like
well,
I'm
getting
spans.
But
why
is
this
name
default
on
everything?
B
A
You
know,
I
think
it's
more
like
if
the
documentation
is
good
enough.
Anybody,
that's
instrumenting,
a
library
that
they
publish
and
share,
should
see
very
boldly
that
they
need
to
use
a
name
tracer
for
that
library
and
not
just
use
the
default.
So
as
long
as
the
documentation
is
clear
on
that
and
people
read
it
shouldn't.
B
Be
an
issue
yeah,
I
feel
like
it'll
at
least
kind
of
gloss
over
this
for
the
new
user,
who
otherwise
would
just
be
kind
of
like
frustrated,
because
I
feel
like
a
lot
of
people,
I
mean
yeah.
A
lot
of
people
are
confused
with
these
in
the
name
tracer,
I
know
like.
I
was
confused
when
they
like
showed
up
last
fall.
I
was
like.
Are
we
sure
we're
doing
this,
because
this
seems
really
weird
and
I've
kind
of
gotten
used
to
it
over
time
and
it
actually
kind
of
makes
sense?
B
B
A
B
B
A
A
B
Should
those
be
like
class
methods
on
tracer
or
should
they
be
instance,
methods
on
tracer
and
by
having
this
default
tracer
it
would.
It
was
easy
to
make
the
decision
that
hey
everything
can
just
go
on
tracer,
as
instance
methods.
I
don't
know
that
elixir
really
works
that
way.
So
if
they
yeah,
I
mean
what.
A
It
kind
of
like
we
have
a
tracer
variable
that
carries
all
the
information
like
the
the
the
name
and
version
and
what
module
to
call
for
in
the
sdk,
because
we
don't
necessarily
know
the
sdk
and
those
are
passed
into
the
tracer
module
calls.
So
it's
basically
the
same
thing
whether
or
not
you
have
to
pass
that
variable
to
the
function.
B
B
Well,
I
think,
in
your
case,
like
my
concern
with
like
dividing
those
things
between
the
class
and
the
instance
is
just
like.
When
you
look
at
the
source
code,
it's
fine.
It's
like
they're,
both
in
the
same
file.
They
both
kind
of
it,
makes
sense,
and
it's
probably
well
factored
but
like
for
the
user.
It's
like
the
call
path
is
actually
looks
quite
different,
especially
like
in
like
ruby,
for
example,
yeah
that
makes.
B
A
A
B
A
B
Yeah
now
there's
I,
I
think
you're
not
alone,
there's
been
so
much
so
many
changes
that
have
gone
in
in
the
past
couple
weeks,
like
I'm
still
trying
to
come
to
terms
with
everything
that
happened
and
not
sure
that
I
like,
I
have
a
feeling
that,
as
a
weekly
go
by
you're
going
to
like
come
across
things,
you're
like
what
the
hell
is
this.
How
did
that
get
there,
and
I
think,
there's
yeah.