►
From YouTube: 2020-10-26 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
C
Yeah,
oh
yeah.
No!
I
think
that
was
two
weeks
ago
yeah
I
I
I
had
food
poisoning
I
assumed,
but
that
was
two
weeks
ago.
I'm
all
good
too
excellent.
C
Pro
tip,
if
anyone's
gonna
cook
a
lamb
roast
make
sure
you
cook
it
through.
C
I
I
have
a
I
cooked
it.
Sous
vide
and
I
actually
have
like
a
fancy
needle
probe
thermometer
that
you
can,
with
some
tape,
penetrate
the
sous-vide
bag
while
it
cooks,
I
was
watching
the
temperature.
The
temperature
itself
was
fine.
It
probably
just
didn't,
spend
enough
time
at
that
temperature
yeah.
I
took
an
eight-hour
recipe
and
was
trying
to
get
it
done
in
about
three
and
a
half
hours
and
pro
tip.
Don't
do
that?
C
Don't
do
that
because
you
and
one
of
your
mates
will
get
sick,
which
wasn't
a
whole
lot
of
fun
for
either
of
us.
I'm
sorry.
I.
C
B
C
C
And
just
fyi
for
everyone,
I
gotta
hop
off
in
13
minutes
for
a
customer
call.
So
for
me
it's
gonna
be
a
short
meeting,
but
I'm
not
sick.
It's
just
a
customer
call.
Hey.
D
E
Okay,
so
I
was
updating
this
this
morning
and
I'm
switching
up
the
format
a
little
bit
in
terms
of
tracking
or
reporting
on
the
issues
instead
of
just
reporting
on
the
stuff
needed
for
a
trace,
spec
freeze
exclusively
now,
I'm
just
going
to
give
you
some
numbers
and
we
can
dump
and
jump
into
maybe
a
little
bit
of
detail
if
you
guys
need
some
detail
on
p1
issues
overall,
including
metrics.
E
E
All
of
the
to
do
items
that
11
issues
are
metrics
labeled,
so
that's
the
current
status
of
where
they're
split
amongst
the
areas
of
the
the
work
in
progress
of
the
four
that
are
that
have
associated
prs.
Three
of
them
are
not
metrics,
so
this
is
kind
of
like
carry
over
things
from
perhaps
the
trace
freeze.
E
I
think
we
just
need
to
nail
down
specifically
how
we're
going
to
lock
down
this
freeze.
We
don't
have
to.
I
don't
know
whether
we
need
to
discuss
that
here
or
the
spec
meeting
specific
meaning
tomorrow,
but
there
we
just
need
to
come
to
resolution
on
those
p
once
and
then
everything
will
be
cleared
for
non-metrics
issues.
E
Do
we
have
any
questions
on
on
any
of
those
issues
or
no
okay,
I'll
go
on
to
there's
an
fyi.
The
blog
post
morgan's
put
out
last
week
trace
specification
release
candidate
ga
planning
mentions
the
timeline
we've
been
discussing
at
the
maintainer's
meeting.
Specs
of
meeting
lays
out
a
path
for
what's
to
come.
E
What's
expected,
based
on
our
estimates
and
our
progression
of
how
we're
locking
down
the
trace,
spec,
the
metrics
spec,
and
also
the
implementation
and
release
of
all
the
languages,
so
these
are
general
broad
timeline,
no
specific,
like
on
you,
know,
november
10th,
or
something
like
that
specifically
this
date,
but
just
lays
out
the
timeline.
E
So
I
put
the
link
there
in
case
people
want
to
see
the
summary
of
all
that
and
related
to
that.
The
next
coming
up
next
coming
the
next
upcoming
timeline
for
implementation
of
the
trace
in
the
context
tables
of
compliance
matrix.
I
just
want
to
get
an
update
on
the
timeline
of
where
we
are.
Last
week
we
had
put
down
estimates
from
the
different
six,
the
language
six.
E
You
know
in
order
of
two
weeks,
three
weeks,
two
weeks,
three
weeks
that
was
one
week
ago,
but
just
trying
to
get
some
specifics
on
when
to
expect,
perhaps
the
the
next
releases
of
these
to
come
that
have
implemented
all
the
items
in
the
tracing
context
propagation
table
of
the
compliance.
This
is
the
table
that
I've
been
going
by
and
this
morning
I
only
just
did
a
quick
breakdown.
E
We
don't
have
to
do
a
breakdown
every
single
one
of
them,
but,
for
example,
java
putting
an
estimate
of
three
weeks
in
order
to
tackle
the
implementation
of
these
two
tables
of
the
table.
There
are
11
unknown
in
the
trace,
since
seven
unknown
in
the
context
prop
unknown
means.
I
counted
an
empty
box
as
like.
I'm
not
sure
whether
it's
implemented
or
not
could
be
implemented
could
not
be
implemented.
This
java
column
column
has
not
been
updated
in
a
while,
so
I
suspect
some
of
them
are
are
plus
signs,
which
means
it's.
E
You
know
its
implement
is
good
to
go,
but
they
are
identified
just.
E
Right:
okay,
I
I
did
see
that
the
table
had
some
updates
and,
like
one
of
the
tables
was
removed,
I
think
the
errors
table
was
was
nixed
and
then
I
saw
some
pr's
coming
in
or
to
update,
but
python
was
updated
and,
like
maybe
some
more,
some
of
the
other
languages
were
updated,
but
bogdan
are
there
any
other
updates
to
this
table
before
we
can
use
this
table
as
a
as
a
tracking.
E
G
G
E
G
E
Okay,
but
just
to
finish
that
up
java,
like
done,
there
are
three
35
identified
as
done
or
plus
signs
in
the
trace
table.
E
Six
in
the
context
prop
so
like,
let's
just
general
idea
of
like
where
at
least
it
was
last
left
off
in
terms
of
the
implementation
so
but
I'll
be
looking
to
this
in
order
to
report
on
next
week's
maintainers
meeting
as
to
the
progress
of
the
implementation
and
in
the
different
stakes
towards
the
trace
in
the
context
tables,
if
there's
a
better
way
to
track
this,
I'm
open
to
suggestions-
and
I
mean
I
can
adhere
to
that
in
order
to
make
things
easier
but
feel
free
to.
Let
me
know.
E
All
right,
moving
on
the
last
item
that
I
had
to
bring
to
the
table
was
open,
telemetry,
ga
planning.
So
we
had
a
a
very
productive
issue,
scrub
meeting
on
friday
and
then,
following
on
that
going
over
the
items
of
the
other
high
level,
things
that
we
desire
for
ga.
So
specifically,
we
we
scrubbed
and
updated
this
table
to
track
just
overall
general
progress
of
things.
E
That's
not
necessarily
spec
related
but
like
cross
cuts
across
all
the
different
languages
so
like
this
was
meant
as
a
matrix
as
well
cutting
across
all
the
different
languages
about
documentation,
integration,
station
performance,
testing,
et
cetera,
et
cetera.
E
So
I
have
an
update
on
the
owners
which
and
then
links
towards
either
issues
or
google
docs
that
track
it.
What
we
discussed
at
the
meeting
on
friday
is
that
I'd
like
to
track
this
in
the
spec
repo
in
much
the
same
fashion,
that
we've
been
tracking
spec
issues,
but
just
have
like
an
overall
issue
that
it'll
be
very
easy
to
then
gather
context
linking
to
other
github
issues.
E
Then
other
languages
can
link
to
that
issue
and
I
can
see
the
link
towards
there
and
see
how
things
are
are
attracting
that
way.
So
this
is
specifically
what
I'm
asking
for
is
we
have
a
github
project
in
the
spec
repo
and
a
github
label
in
the
spec
repo,
that's
able
to
identify
issues
that
I
can
create
to
represent
each
one
of
these
items,
and
then
I
can
have
like
a
breakdown
of
every
single
one
of
the
languages
with
a
checkbox
within
the
issue
right
and
then
I
can
have
a
something
like
this.
E
You
know
to
do
in
progress
done
as
a
report
back
to
maintainers
or
the
the
community
in
general
as
to
how
we're
progressing
across
all
these
other
high
level,
ga
targeted
items.
E
I
can
work
after
this
meeting
for
details
on
creating
this
project
earlier,
but
I'd
like
to
try
to
shoot
for
this
by
next
week.
So
that
way
we
can
have
some
tracking
on
this
as
well
again,
if
there's
any
other
better
way
to
attract
this,
I'm
open
to
suggestions.
G
I
think
this
is
good.
I
also
was
thinking
this
morning
to
propose
something
in
the
tc,
and
I
was
thinking
to
allocate
one
tc
member
for
every
api
sdk
and
maybe
maybe
they
go
over
all
of
these
things
as
a
another
way
to
sanity
check
everything
I
don't
know.
If
I
I
want
to
hear
opinions
from
others,
but
I
was
thinking
to
to
do
to
do
this.
E
Proposal
you're
saying
sanity
check
on
the
is
this
the
spec
compliance
level,
or
is
this
like
on
all
items
on
the
open,
telemetry,
ga
planning.
A
A
The
question
was
the
bogdan's
proposal
right
that
this
tc
members
are
assigned
to
language
as
the
case
to
do
some
sanity
checks.
Yeah
just
have
another
pair
of
eyes
that
goes
over
the
implementation
and
checks
the
the
goes
over
the
checklist
of
the
implementation
versus
what
is
expected
to
be
implemented.
H
I
But
yeah,
I
think
that's
a
great
idea,
yeah,
I
think
from
the
rest
side.
That
would
be
appreciated
if
someone
just
gets
more
pair
of
eyes,
especially
from
the
tc
or
other
other
maintainers.
J
Yeah
yeah,
I
I'd
probably
second
that
as
well
for
the
go,
but
the
caveat
being
that
maybe
it
could
be
a
a
pull
method
instead
of
a
push,
if
that
makes
any
sense,
because
I
don't
think
that
I
have
a
really
good
concept
of
whether
like
we
are
ready
to
be
evaluated
or
not.
So
maybe
there
could
be
a
checklist
saying
that,
like
I've
already
evaluated,
could
you
come
and
double
check
me.
J
Sorry
that
was
a
really
bad
yeah
yeah,
so
the
maintainer
says
like
we're
ready
to
get
evaluated.
You
know
if
we
get
somebody
to
double
check
us.
Okay,.
A
Okay,
yeah,
I'm
personally
happy
to
help
with
that,
but
provided
that
maintainers
want
that,
because
it's
going
to
be
a
significant
time,
commitment
to
actually
have
a
look
and
understand
at
the
implementation
of
a
language
with
which
I'm
not
familiar
right.
If
I'm,
if
I'm
involved
in
the
sig,
that's
one
thing
right:
it's
probably
smaller
effort,
but
if
I'm
not,
then
it's
much
bigger
effort.
So
I'd
only
want
to
do
that.
If
you
guys
want
me
to
do
that
so
happy
to
do
that.
If
you
ask
for
that.
F
My
only
I
don't,
my
only
concern
is
evenness
of
language
understanding
across
the
tc
and
how
language,
idioms
etc
like
how
much
how
much
back
and
forth
is
it
going
to
require.
A
F
D
Maybe
this
is
helpful,
so
I've
actually
been
doing
this.
I've
been
funneling
my
feedback
through
the
team
at
lightstep.
Just
so
I
don't
have
to
track
a
bunch
of
issues,
but
I'm
not
familiar
with
say
java
and
python
and
javascript's
changed
a
lot
since
the
last
time.
I
used
it
for
all
these
new
crazy
async
await
keywords,
but
trying
to
actually
just
put
an
example
together
that
kitchen
synced
just
a
client
server
that
used
every
feature
that
an
end
user
would
use.
D
I
feel,
like
I
uncovered
a
variety
of
things,
including
things
like
you
know,
documentation
that
wasn't
there
as
like,
I'm
not
a
language
expert.
I
was
still
looking
for
like
basic
docs,
and
that
was
missing.
So
that's
a
thing
a
non-expert
can
find,
and
in
some
cases
it
was
stuff
that
was
honestly
a
little
half-baked
or
even
kind
of
confusing,
for
example,
baggage
and
pythons
a
little
confusing
without
an
explanation.
D
D
So
just
a
simple
client
server
example
that
tried
went
down
the
list
of
every
feature
and
just
added
it
in
there,
so
that
you
could
just
see
them
all
encode
in
one
spot
would
potentially
flush
out
some
of
this.
So
I
I
would
plus
one
that
be
being
useful.
I
don't
know
that
necessarily
has
to
be
the
tc
members
who
do
it,
though
they
are
obviously
people
who
are
familiar
with
the
spec
and
can
identify
whether
or
not
some
something's
out
of
line
there.
D
But
I
do
wonder
whether
or
not
we've
done
enough
internal
kind
of
use
it
in
anger,
sort
of
vetting
that
our
end
users
are
going
to
be
doing
so.
Something
like
this,
I
think,
would
be
useful
in
general,.
D
If
it's
helpful,
we
could
make
it
like
a
group
push
per
language
too,
rather
than
piling
it
on.
You
know
the
maintainers
just
have
like
python
week,
node
week
rest
week
or
something
like
that,
where
we
all
kind
of
pile
on
and
try
to
try
to
check
out
that
that
language
when
it's
when
it
feels
like
it's
in
a
state,
it
would
like
that
kind
of
review.
G
I
was
thinking
about
tc
for
the
the
reason
you
mentioned.
They
are
familiar
with
specs
one
thing,
and
secondly,
secondly,
it's
it's
also
easier
to
to
put
something
on
people
with
the
with
the
responsibilities
already.
G
When
trying
to
find
new
people
so
easier
to
put
this
on
the
dc
members
and
give
them
more
work
to
do,
but
definitely
will
be
useful
to
do
by
anyone.
That
being
said,
I
I
don't
understand
the
concern
that
some
people
are
not
going
to
be
familiar
with
with
idiomatics
on
a
specific
language,
but
but
somehow
I
don't
think
the
way
is
like
this
review
should
not
be
an
authority
review.
It's
like,
even
even
if
somebody
does
not
understand
that.
Maybe
maybe
the
the
reason
why
somebody
does
not
understand
something
is
yeah.
G
It
may
be
that
they
are
not
familiar
with
the
language,
but
the
other
one
may
be
that
the
the
thing
is
not
informative,
ignorantly
in
a
clear
way
or-
or
something
like
that.
So
there
are
ups
and
downs
to
to
have
somebody
with
a
bit
less
knowledge
about
the
language
trying
because
they
may
find
some
weird
things.
Yeah.
A
D
I
will
warn
you
it's
a
lot
of
work
right,
it's
easy
to
forget
how
much
work
is
involved
in
setting
up
programming
environment
in
a
language
that
you're
new
to.
I
found
that
actually,
the
vetting
is
pretty
straightforward,
but
getting
your
environment
going,
of
course,
is
like
a
task
right,
yeah
yeah,
so
the
more
people
we
could
get
involved,
the
better.
Maybe.
D
F
Well,
I
would
definitely
vote
strongly
against
that
as
a
maintainer.
I
barely
have
time
to
keep
up
with
what
I
need
to
keep
up
with
when
I'm
going
to
have
to
learn
a
new
language
and
environment.
D
D
More
of
this
I'm
happy
to
take
that
on.
So
let
me
just
make
a
list
in
the
maintainers
notes
now
and
I'll
collect
this
up
in
other
meetings,
but
I'm
going
to
put
this
at
the
bottom,
which
is
like
language
test
drives.
We
want
to
call
these
test.
Drivers
wanted.
K
K
K
E
All
right,
so
we
got
another
item
from
trask.
J
Yeah
the
cncf
took
over
last
week
took
over
payment
for
paying
for
the
circle
ci,
and
so
the
the
first
thing
that
they
asked
was
an
update
on
the
on
migrating
to
github
actions,
and
I
know
it's
maybe
something
with
you
know
some
some
a
lot
of
the
repos
have
done
it.
I
think
the
last
ones
I
looked
at
that
were
hadn't
start
hadn't,
migrated
or
hadn't
started
migrating
at
least
are
go
collector
and
javascript.
J
If
I
was
right,
I
just
looked
quickly,
and
so
you
know,
I
think,
we'd.
You
know
the
the
there's,
obviously
more
important
things
to
be
doing
for
ga
for
those
projects.
I'm
certainly
not
going
to
push
for
that
to
be
a
priority,
but
did
want
to
give
the
cncf
was
asking
for
an
update
sort
of
on.
You
know
long-term
plans
there
for
the
remaining
repos.
H
So
attract
again,
I
gonna
have
an
update.
We
and
you
know
we
migrated
helped
migrated,
helped
migrate.
Some
of
the
repos.
You
know
where
the
maintainers
were
willing
to
github
actions
from
circle
ci
and
we
do
have
an
accurate
matrix
right
now
of
you
know
what
reapers
are
not
in
circle
ci
and
what
is
in
github
actions.
Would
that
help?
With
that
information,
how
we
can
say
I
can
certainly
post
an
issue
with
that
detail
and
ted
and.
J
Yeah
yeah,
I
used
this
your
your
matrix
to
to
figure
out
which
ones
were
remaining,
and
I
mean
we
need
to
update
the
matrix
because
the
java,
both
of
the
java
repos
well,
they
haven't,
turned
off
circle
ci,
yet
actually
the
job
sdk
did
but
yeah
the
I
I
I
looked
quickly
and
I
think
the
only
ones
that
didn't
have
any
git
have
actions
work
going
on
where
the
the
go
collector
and
javascript.
H
J
As
a
maintainer
for
the
go
repo,
I'm
kind
of
wondering,
what's
the
timeline
for
the
ask
on
this
one
and
just
like
them,
it
sounds
like
there's
a
money
issue,
so
that
usually
drives
things
pretty
quickly,
but
I
was
just
kind
of
wondering
if
we
have
understanding
of
that,
there
hasn't
been
a
specific
ask.
I'm
happy
to
you
know.
J
Basically
you
I
mean
yeah,
I'm
happy
to
go
back
with
the
message
that
you
know
in
the
in
you
know,
after
ga,
so
in
a
year
we're
gonna
migrate,
the
last
three
repos
and
see
what
just
yeah
yeah.
I
can
only
speak
for
go
obviously
but
yeah
that
was
kind
of
like
our
our
stand
on.
This
is
like
it
looks
like
a
good
idea
and
seeing
some
of
the
success
cases
and
some
of
the
other
repos.
J
It
looks
like
that
it
could
serve
us
well
as
well,
but
it
wasn't
prioritized
work.
Currently,
I
guess
was
the
current
idea.
A
J
The
bigger
issue
is
the
the
size
of
vms
that
you're
allowed
to
use.
J
H
J
To
get
it
to
survive
on
that,
which
is
why
I
ended
up
funneling
that
pain
for
that
through
my
employer
from
the
from
the
get-go.
G
Have
you
seen
anyone
using
github
actions
for
performance
testing
because
that's
probably
something
that
the
collector
needs-
and
I
don't
know
if
that's
possible,
with
github
actions.
H
Yeah,
it
should
be
bugged,
we
are
doing
some
performance
testing,
but
again,
we've
done
that
for
the
collector
in
in
a
small
snapshot
of
scenario,
scenarios.
A
G
H
G
A
Yeah
we
asked
for
that.
We
asked
for
the
ask:
is
there
I
will
find
the
issue
and
I
believe,
mithri
had
the
credentials
before
he
left
for
creating
the
machine,
so
we
will
need
to
look
into
that.
J
Yeah
for
the
for
the
gosig
that
sounds
good
for
us
we'll
try
to
prioritize
it
sooner
rather
than
later,
but
I
think
it's
setting
the
expectations
the
way
that
you
defined
it.
H
And
for
the
go
repo,
we
can
help,
you
know
with
the
the
actual
work
and
then,
as
long
as
we
have
reviewers
from
our
containers,.
J
That
sounds
great
as
well
we're
just
short
on
hand.
So
if
we
yeah.
H
H
I
C
D
So
there's
my
mute
button
yeah.
So
this
is
a
couple
reminders
related
to
cubecon
coming
up.
If
people
haven't
heard
we're
going
to
have
our
first
big
official,
open,
telemetry
event
called
open
telemetry
community
day
we're
trying
to
make
this
more
much
more
like
an
unconference
with
lots
of
breakout
rooms
and
discussion.
D
We've
already
got
a
lot
of
sign
ups
and
it
would
be
super
great
if,
as
many
core
open
telemetry
people
could
attend
that
as
possible.
So
that's
my
number
one
ask
if
you
haven't
gotten
a
ticket
for
kubecon
and
ocd,
please
please
go
get
one.
It
would
be
great
to
see
you
there
and
beyond
that
we're
also
going
to
be
having
like
a
maintainers
panel
etc.
So,
if
you
wouldn't
mind
signing
up
if
you're
interested
in
being
part
of
one
of
those,
you
can
get
a
hold
of
austin.
D
So
that's
that's.
Ask
number
one.
If
you
want
to
be
on
the
maintainers
panel,
just
contact
austin
at
lightstep
and
the
other
bit
is
just
trying
to
make
sure
that
we've
got
the
basic
documentation
collected
up
for
the
new
doc
site
on
the
the
open,
telemetry
io
website.
It
would
be
great
if,
by
the
time
we
hit
our
community
day,
you
know
if
we
managed
to
get
the
the
basic
docs
up
there.
D
The
comms
groups
put
a
project
together
to
keep
track
of
that.
So,
if
you
wouldn't
mind
having
a
look
at
that
stuff
for
the
the
language
that
you
work
on
is.
G
This
is
this:
are
these
issues
or
whatever
tracked,
where
it
may
be
good
to
have
them
in
the
java
repo
for
java
in
the
python
buffer
python?
I
think
they
are
tracked
in
this
repo
which
most
likely
people
are
not
gonna
watch.
So
can
you
put
a
close
reference
issue
or
somebody
create
a
cross-reference
issue
in
the
in
the
repo
itself,
just
for
the
maintainers
to
make
sure
they
see
this
and
they
they
track
these.
F
Would
it
be
possible
to
not
use
the
acronym
ocd
for
this?
Please
sure,
sorry,
it's
a
otcd.
Let's
do
that.
G
G
The
other
thing
is
during
this
day
I
have,
I
asked
austin
to
create
a
generic
panel
for
maintainer,
not
necessarily
maintenance
for
companies
and
stuff
about
the
entire
project,
and
I'm
right
now
the
only
maintainer
I
was
asking
tigran
to
also
be
there,
and
I
will
talk
to
austin.
But
if
anyone
else
wants
to
be
on
that
panel
that
I'm
right
now,
the
only
participant,
please
ping
me
or
austin,
and
we
can
figure
out.
I
would
like
to
have
probably
three
or
four
people
you
know
just
to
to
cover
more.
K
Okay,
so
yes
guys,
I
know
this
is
not
a
specification
call
and
I'm
not
here,
to
give
or
provide
or
encourage
a
discussion
on
these
items,
but
there's
there's
a
few
items
that
we
really
need
eyes
on
looking
looking
forward.
One
of
them
is
a
third-party
propagator's
change.
To
revert
it
back
to
the
initial
stage,
which
is
which
means
that
hotel
maintainers
won't
have
to
work
on
third
party
propagators
alolita
will
work
on
a
follow-up,
but
that's
initial
change.
K
So
please
review
that
then
there's
the
hotel
trace,
sampler,
which
I
added,
because
we
needed
that
for
the
next
one,
which
is
hotel,
something
priority.
It's
super
simple.
I
think
I
was
trying
to
keep
it
simple,
armin
and
john
and
a
few
other
people
already
reviewed
that,
but
please
check
it
out.
We
need
this
trade
sampler
one
to
fix
the
sampling
priority,
which
is
the
next
one
which
is
required
for
ga.
At
this
moment,
the
next
one
is
attribute
pluralization
guidelines
marching
marching
from
from
spring
created
a
pr
for
that.
K
I
surround
some
other
conventions.
I
I
think
we,
this
is
not
super
important,
but
since
we
already
have
a
pr
thing,
we
should
try
to
facilitate
it
if
possible
and
finally,
the
one
from
christie
I
know
mueller
about-
do
not
have
a
type
for
spank-wrapping
spam
context.
You
know
this
is
probably
the
last
important
one
there's
already
reviews
for
that
one
and
I
I
have
the
impression
that
since
it
was
open
last
week,
we
should
merge
it
by
the
end
of
the
day
today,
but
it
needs
more
eyes.
K
So,
please
we
don't
want
to
merge
things
without
people
being
aware
of
what
has
been
happening
so
yeah.
Please
take
a
look
review
that
comment
and
if
there's
something
pending,
we
can
discuss
that
tomorrow.
G
K
Yeah
yeah,
I
think
that
yeah,
the
last
one
I
I
shared
with
your
feeling,
but
I
don't
want
to
yeah
to
force
things
yeah.
Let's
wait.
If
we
get
enough
approvals,
which
would
mean
like
eight
and
from
deep
people
from
very
different
six,
then
we
can
probably
merge
it
already
today,
if
not,
let's
wait
but
yep
anyway.
In
any
case,
please,
for
you
guys.
G
Okay,
last
one
I
don't
know
who
added
it,
but
I
see
ted
carlos
tristan
somebody.
K
It's
what
we
yeah
it's
what
we
had
mentioned
about
cross
cross
reviewing
and
the
list
that
proposed
like
who
who
would
like
to
volunteer
to
do
this.
So
this
is
not
something
we
need
to
discuss.
I
think
that
right.
D
Right
so
this
is
just
the
besides
tc
members.
If
we
want
to
get
just
like
a
general,
let's
try
out
the
different
languages
thing
going.
I
can
try
to
try
to
organize
something
like
that
or
and
maybe
I'm
just
kind
of
making
up
as
I
go
along,
but
maybe
we
can
sort
of
dog
pile
in
different
languages
or
just
ask
individuals
to
try
another
language.
So
if
you
feel
like
you
have
cycles
to
play
with
the
language
other
than
the
one
you're
working
on,
that's
just
the
main
question
here.
G
Idea-
maybe
maybe
maybe
we
should
then
not
necessarily
put
the
tc
members
in
charge
of
this,
but
one
thing
that
we
can
do
is
is
form
a
group
of
two
or
three
people
and
maybe
facilitated
by
the
tc
one
of
the
tc
members,
even
though
just
as
a
facilitator
as
the
way
how
we
do
it
in
specs
and
just
make
sure
that
the
the
tc
member
schedules,
maybe
a
meeting
or
to
to
give
feedback
and
so
on,
and
makes
sure
that
people
that
are
assigned
to
these
groups
are
actually
delivering
and
working
on
this.
G
So
more
like
ensuring
that
this
process
this
process
happens.
I
I'm
very
happy
to
do
this.
I
think
we
should
start
maybe
a
spreadsheet
per
language
and
assign
start
assigning
a
tc
member
and
couple
of
people
that
want
to
really
do
the
work
and
the
tc
member,
as
I
said,
is
not
responsible
for
more
than
just
facilitating
that
the
thing
happens.
J
On
this
note
as
well,
we
have
some
new
engineers
here
at
new
relic
who
are
kind
of
on
boarding
into
working
with
open
telemetry,
and
I
didn't
know
if
we
wanted
to
restrict
this
to
only
maintainers
involved
in
this,
because
some
of
these
people
could
probably
be
pretty
helpful.
Just
wondering
what
your
thoughts
on
that
I
I.
G
Think
we
should
have
a
maintainer
for
sure,
but
other
than
one
maintainer,
not
a
maintainer
from
other
language.
We
should
have
in
this
group
of
feedback
a
maintainer
from
the
whenever
we
review
goal.
For
example,
tyler
should
be
there
just
to
answer,
questions
and
stuff
if,
if
they
are
needed,
but
for
people
that
are
giving
the
feedback
we
we
can
have
from
anywhere,
it
doesn't
have
to
be
a
maintainer
yeah.
D
I
mean,
hopefully
you
can
be
a
new
person
and
get
into
one
of
these
languages
and
try
it
out
right,
like
that's,
that's
kind
of
the
goal
so
but
yeah,
because
we
have
some
core
people
around
who
understand
whether
something's
on
or
off
spec.
So
I
think
that's
like
the
two
there's
like
two
goals.
Is
it
on
spec
and
two?
Is
it
like?
Is
it
working
and
you
know,
is
there
there's
something
missing
if
a
new
user
tries
to
to
make
use
of
this
feature?
J
Okay,
that
sounds
good.
Is
there
going
to
be
just
like
a
like
a
worksheet,
or
something
like
that
to
show
like
each
language
like
for
the
new
users
that
want
to
kind
of
come
and
validate
like?
Is
there
something
that
they
can
use
to
reference?
That,
or
is
this
kind
of
more
a
free-form
jazz
sort
of
thing.
D
Yeah,
I
think
we're
gonna
you
we
can
use
the
the
compliance
matrix
essentially
and
it'll
be
going
down
the
compliance
matrix.
So
so
I
think
that
would
be
the
list
of
check
boxes.
You
can
turn
that
into
a
set
of
check
boxes
for
here's
all
the
features.
You
should
try
in
this
language
and
see
if
you
can
work.
G
Let's,
let's
maybe
discuss
more
details
during
the
specs
meeting,
one
of
the
specs
meeting,
where
we
have
the
entire
community,
not
only
maintainers,
but
here
the
only
thing
that
we
wanted
to
make
sure
is
maintainers
are
comfortable
with
helping
with
this
and
and
this
will
help
the
maintenance.
G
That's
good.
The
last
bullet
point
any
tc
member
has
the
full
power
of
the
organization.
N
Oh
that's
great
thanks
for
letting
me
know.
I
just
had
the
question
because,
on
the
python
side,
we're
looking
to
trigger
workflows
across
repos,
so
it'd
be
nice
to
have
a
personal
access
token
that
belongs
to
the
open,
telemetry
org.
That
way,
we
can
just
set
that
up
as
a
secret
in
the
replays
and
trigger
workflows.
That
way.
G
Okay,
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
have
a
token
that
is
able
for
everything
or
you
want
to
have,
for
example,
if
you
want
to
do
the
contribute
to
core
and
core
to
contribute
triggerings
most
likely
you
you
want
to
to
simply
have
a
specific
token
for
that
report,
not
for
the
entire
org
setup,
but
like
limit
the
scope
of
the
access.