►
From YouTube: 2021-08-30 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
B
Hey
tom
yeah,
I
mean
you,
do
you
joined
just
now
or
you
were,
I
mean
because
I
just
rejoined
and
earlier
you're
not
there.
So
probably
I
think
maybe
some
some
problem
with
the
meeting
link.
Still,
I
think.
B
A
B
B
B
A
I
think
in
the
last
wednesday
he
mentioned,
he
will
complete
that
very
soon,
probably
the
same
day,.
B
A
Because
he
mentioned
he
almost
completed
choices,
that's
and
resources,
that's
a
major
part
yeah.
Then
others
are
left
for
review,
but
that
one
that
should
not
take
too
much
time.
B
Okay,
I'll
do
one
thing
I
think
I'm
still
not
able
to
share
the
screen,
but
let
me
let
me
probably,
what
can
can
you
just
share
the
screen?
Probably
we
can
discuss
there
if
you
can
open
the
issue.
B
A
B
So
I'm
not
able
to
see
it.
So
basically,
I
think,
let
me
let
me
paste
it
here,
the
in
the
agenda.
Node,
probably
we
can
go
through
that
together.
B
So
I
wanted
to
talk
about
this
one
of
the
issues
which
josh
has
created
yeah.
I
can
see
now:
okay,
yeah,
yeah,
okay,
so
that
yeah
there's
the
first
first
issue
here.
B
Yeah,
so
basically,
if
you
see
here,
we
we
basically
take
span
context
as
an
input
while
creating
a
span.
If
there
is
a
parent
span,
we
take
the
span
context
of
the
parent
span,
but
the
api
says
that
it
should
not
be
the
span
or
the
span
context.
It's
just.
It
should
just
be
the
context
which
wraps
that
which
wraps
the
parent.
B
Yes,
so
that's
the
so
I
mean
last
time
also
when
I
was
doing
the
similar
kind
of
review.
Before
our
I
mean
I
did
a
review
of
that
compliance
matrix.
I
also
observed
this
issue.
A
B
B
Okay,
the
problem
is,
one
thing
is
that
it
can
break.
If
we
remove
spam
context,
the
existing
clients
or
the
customers
who
are
using
it,
it
will
break
it
and.
B
A
B
Yeah
I
I
totally
agree.
We
definitely
need
to
support
context
for
sure,
but
I
was
just
thinking
if
we
don't
remove
it,
just
just
go
up
just
go
over.
It
says
that
if
just
go
to
the
description
go
up
to
the
description
of
this
here,
it
says
the
api
must
not
accept
spam
or
spam
contacts.
As
parent
I
mean
I
was
just
thinking
that
we
may
take
exception
that
we
definitely
add
a
full
context,
but
don't
remove
a
span
context,
so
we
support
either
of
these
that
way.
B
B
A
B
It's
not
a
big
change,
I
mean
internal,
I
think
I'm
still,
okay,
external.
We
don't
have
any
track.
Who
is
using
it
yeah,
but
definitely
we
are
still
not
1.2.
So
we
are,
we
can
break
the
api.
We
would
say
that
we
still
can
break
the
api
being
not
still
not
1.2,
though
we
are
rc.
So
we
should
not
be
doing
that.
B
B
A
B
B
A
I'm
wondering
why
do
they
keep
this
or
the
spec
to
ziplining
to
make
this
spec
compliant.
B
I
don't
know
probably
this
got
missed
out.
I
think
I
I
know
that
there
was
no
audit
happen
for
dotnet,
because
this
audit,
this
audit
thing,
starting
only
once
dotnet,
was
1.0,
then
to
do
that,
so
I
think
they
kind
of
somehow
they
didn't
fall
into
that
category
of
doing
audit
and
somehow
it
got
missed
out
that
looks
like,
but
nobody
is
noticing
it.
A
B
But
yeah
I
mean
if
we
decide,
I
think
we
can
agree
now,
whether
we
should
do
it
if
we
want
to
do
it
only
if
we
have
to
support
only
spam
spam
context
only
context,
probably
we
can
agree
now
and
probably
we
can
take
this
change.
It's
a
breaking
change,
but
I
think
that
that's
better
to
do
that.
In
that
case,.
A
A
B
B
B
B
A
B
Interaction,
api
should
not
be
part
of
propagation,
but
then
he's
saying
something
else
also,
so
it
was
not
very
clear
to
me
that
what
exactly
is
the
scope
he's
expecting
in
this?
Whether
we
should
move
the
get
context
and
set
context
from
propagation
to
trace,
or
there
is
something
else
also
is
something
okay,
so
we
support
both
implicit
context
and
explicit
context.
A
A
B
B
B
A
B
B
B
There
was
some
I
didn't
open
slack
also
for
some
time,
but
there
were
some
discussions
on
in
slack
for
how
to
build
open,
telemetry
and
its
dependencies,
and
people
are
struggling.
So
I
saw
some
of
the
external
teams
are
struggling
to
do
that,
and
probably
not
part
of
this
1.0,
but
I
think
somehow
we
have
to
start
looking
into
that
vc
package
thing.
Also
that
will
help
out.
I
mean.
A
B
Yeah
well
then,
I
think
that
would
be
something
good,
definitely
important
for
easy
customers.
I
think,
because
I
see
lots
of
customers
struggling
to
use
it
I
mean
so
they
are
fighting
enough,
will
not
not
use
open
telemetry,
but
how
to
build
the
dependencies
for
them.
For
these.
A
A
B
A
What's
what
is
that
called
overlay
right,
the
profile
we
have
that
in
our
repo?
So
maybe
we
can.