►
From YouTube: 2022-05-31 meeting
Description
cncf-opentelemetry meeting-2's Personal Meeting Room
A
A
A
B
Yeah
not
too
bad.
I
need
to
get
my
bike
tuned
up.
The
weather
is
actually
getting
nice
enough
here
to
get
out
and
start
riding
again.
It's
been
nice
enough
like
a
month,
but
I
remember
last
year
it's
like.
I
definitely
like
need
to
adjust
the
brakes
and
everything
I
had
like
just
enough
pull
to
actually
like
stop
it's
it's
getting
dicey.
A
Yeah,
my
bike's,
actually
in
that
situation,
turns
out
in
cape
town
when
the
weather
gets
worse,
you
kind
of
resort
to
exercise
as
a
means
of
socializing
yourself,
because
there's
nothing
really
to
do.
B
D
There
was
a,
I
think,
a
a
planned
two-hour
session
where
hotel
maintainers
showed
up
and
talked
through
issues,
and
it
turned
it
either
was
planned
for
two
hours
and
turned
into
four
hours
or
the
person
of
the
two
people.
I
know
who
went
to
that.
One
was
told
it
was
two
hours
and
it
turned
out
to
be
four
hours
and
it
was
like
a
packed
room.
D
D
It's
a
boat
in
austin
texas.
Is
that
the
one
you're
talking
about
here,
yeah
yeah,
I
think,
there's
a
virtual
component
as
well,
not
entirely
certain
I
might
be
able
to.
I
gotta
go
revisit
the
timing.
I
knew
I
couldn't
travel
for
it,
but
I
might
be
able
to
do
virtual.
B
All
right,
it's
it's
about
that
time.
Maybe
more
people
are
coming,
but
if,
if
so,
they
can
trickle
in
I'm
sure
nobody
will
miss
much
with
this
spec
sig
recap.
I
guess
before
we
get
into
that.
This
is
the
thing
the
hotel
community
day
june
20th
I
feel
like
this-
is
like
piggybacking
on
some
other
conference.
That's
happening,
but
maybe
I'm
wrong
is
it?
Is
it
kind
of
like
a
co-located
with
something
else.
D
B
Something
cool:
well,
let's
go
ahead
and
maybe
jump
into
the
spec.
Sig
recap
I
don't
know,
there's
not
a
bike
setting
going
on
not
on
this
topic.
So
much
there's
a
little
bit
of
discussion
on
there's
this
events,
api
otep.
B
B
Worth
a
read
through
and
just
comments
on
on
anything,
I
think
it
basically
talks
about
getting
an
event
emitter.
That
is
the
main
thing
and
then
the
api
for
an
event.
Emitter.
E
Question
for
you,
you
said
it
builds
on
the
logs
api.
What
logs
api,
though,
because,
as
far
as
I
was
understanding,
we
were
hotel
was
only
providing
a
logs
like
low
level
sdk.
Is
this
a
new?
Is
the
idea
here
that
it's
a
new
user
facing
api,
but
using
the
logs
sdk?
Is
that
the
idea,
or
is
it
also
going
to
be
like
this
is
an
event
sdk
and
not
an
immense
api?
B
E
B
Yeah,
I'm
not
totally
sure
how
user-facing
this
is.
I
did
kind
of
read
through
these
bullet
points
like
who
requires
an
events
api
so
like
the
motivations,
at
least
from
the
people.
Opening
this
otep
are
roam
events,
so
client-side
real
user
monitoring,
kubernetes
events,
ebpf
events,
a
few
other
event
systems,
so
I
I
think
people
are
definitely
the
people
who
are
proposing.
This
are
proposing
it
to
solve
some
problems
they
have.
B
So
I
would
assume
users
would
probably
we
probably
would
expose
this
to
users
if
it's
something
we
expect
them
to
use.
I
don't
know
if
it's
like
explicitly
stated
just
yet.
B
B
Turning
into
a
bike
shed,
a
bike
shed
that
I
did
not
feel
qualified
to
be
listening
to,
like
was
definitely
a
conversation
for
the
adults
table,
and
it
was
about
the
the
exponential
histogram
implementation
and
apparently
some
histogram,
that
the
prometheus
community,
my
impression
was,
they
haven't
fully
like
released
it
yet,
but
it's
something
that
they've
been
working
on
and
there's
some
like.
B
B
Yeah,
I
think
there
was
no
easy
easy
fix
to
this,
so
people
were
definitely
going
to
think
about
it.
Talk
about
it,
some
more
and
come
up
with
some
proposals
for
how
to
smooth
all
that
over,
but
that's
like
the
best.
The
best
summary
I
can
give
you
of
this.
B
This
question
was
asked,
but
I
don't
think
we
really
got
to
it
due
to
due
to
time,
and
the
question
was
like
who
is
maintaining
these
semantic
conventions
for
the
aws
sdk.
B
Truvacrom,
I'm
sure
I'm
saying
that
wrong,
but
he
has
been
around
asking
a
lot
of
questions.
So
if
we
have
questions
about
aws,
this
might
become
somebody
who
is
worth
reaching
out
to.
B
B
And
then
yeah,
I
guess
the
last
thing
is.
B
D
E
B
Yes,
I
think
always
a
good
call
out.
C
Yeah
regarding
the
sqs
by
this
one,
so
aniv
opened
it,
but
he
is
no
longer
a
walking
inspector.
He
ended
the
last
week,
so
I
guess
I'll
be
responsible
to
to
have
it
merged.
So
I
met
sam
on
the
messaging
sig
on
a
thursday
and
he
discussed
the
the
issue
about
this
pr.
The
concerns
that
we
had
so
I
just
want
to
be
sure
that
if
you
have
any
questions
or
concerns
or
if
you
don't
feel
comfortable
with
merging
it,
as
is
then
I
want
to
know.
B
Yeah,
so
I
think
we're
very
interested
in
in
accepting
and
merging
this
in
some
form.
I
think
we
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we're
doing
the
right
thing.
So
I
think
that's
why
that's
why
there
has
been
as
much
discussion
as
there
has
been
on
this,
and
I
know
that
sam
decided
to
show
up
at
the
messaging
site
just
to
kind
of
clarify
a
couple
of
things.
C
So
I
think
the
concern
was
if
we
should
allow
to
have
a
parent-child
relationship
between
the
process,
fans
and
the
producers
which,
like
there's,
been
a
lot
of
discussion
around
it
in
the
messaging
scene
like
it's,
it's
convenient
for
users,
but
it's
really
warm
like
logically,
and
it
creates
a
lot,
a
new
batch
of
issues
that
we
should
consider
so
yeah.
B
B
So
yeah
I
wish
I
wish
sam
were
here
to
actually
fill
us
in.
I
know
he
he
did
give
us
a
summary
in
the
slack.
That's
the
end
of
last
week,
but
based
on
this
last
comment,
it
sounds
like.
B
It
sounds
like
we
should
review
this,
as
is
right
now
this
implements
the
the
linking
happens
via
links,
and
I
think
the
question
was
on
a
number
of
the
other
things
that
we
have
in
hotel
ruby.
We
kind
of
have
this
like
child
or
none
option,
but
it
also
seems
like
that
is
kind
of
like
not
fully
sanctioned
through
the
messaging
seg,
but
there
they
understand
that
that
is
complicated
and
are
coming
up
with
some
some
way
to
handle
that.
B
E
I
agree
that
was
one
of
the
outcomes
of
what
sam
shared
was
that
we
can
take
this
as
is,
and
then,
if
we
feel
continue
to
feel
strongly
as
saying
about
adding
those
options,
it's
relatively
easy
to
do
and
a
follow-up.
D
Cool
which
one
does
it
create
today
it
creates
child
children
or
links
links.
I
believe.
C
So
the
issue
here
is
that
when
sqs
receive
messages,
it
always
does
it
in
a
batch
right
right
also,
does
it
as
an
rpc,
so
we
have
like
a
single
span
for
the
receive
for
the
entire
batch
and
then
a
set
of
processing
spans
underneath
and
if
we
create
the.
If
we
that
the
process
will
be
the
child
of
the
producer,
then
we
lose
the
link
to
the
receive.
C
E
Right,
it's
just
speaking
of
someone
who
worked
on
this
a
little
bit
with
other
messaging
systems
for
ruby.
In
that
circumstance
it
may
make
more
sense
to
have
the
to
to
maintain
the
receiver
the
receive
span
and
then
have
that
be
the
explosive
association
like
not
every
job
queue
works
in
that
way.
So
in
some
job
queues
it
makes
a
lot
more
sense
to
have
the
different
options
and
in
sqs
it
may
not.
But
you
know
we
can
always
provide
the
option
to
have
people
decide.
E
You
know
and,
like
I
said
in
a
follow-up
vr,
we
can
provide
that
option.
So
if
people
do
want
to
throw
away
the
receive
spam
but
want
it
linked
from
the
producer,
you
know
that's
something
we
can
implement
afterwards.
That
makes
more
sense
for
job
cues,
like
you
know,
sidekick
for
example,
but
you
know,
like
you
said
here:
it's
always
in
a
batch,
so
it
may
be
different
and
that's
okay.
We
have
different
options
for
different
things.
B
Cool
all
right,
so
it
looks
like
we
can
kind
of
move
forward
with
this,
as
is,
is
there?
Is
this
work
gonna
be
easy
enough
for
you
to
take
over
amir.
E
Hey
matt,
I'm
I'm
walking
the
dog
and
I'm
away
from
the
computer,
but
could
you
assign
the
pr
to
me
and
I'll
finish
a
review
on
it
right
after
I
get
back.
C
E
E
E
E
B
Cool
yeah
good
to
know
if
there
aren't
any
other
burning
questions
we
can.
You
can
end
this
early.
If
something
comes
up
that
you
wish,
you
would
have
mentioned
just
bring
it
up
in
the
slack
and
I'm
sure
we
can
continue
some
discussions
there
otherwise
sounds
good
bye,
bye,.