►
From YouTube: 2022-08-29 meeting
Description
cncf-opentelemetry meeting-2's Personal Meeting Room
A
A
Okay,
so
yeah
on
the
specification,
so
this
is
the
pr
that
is
blocking
the
release.
It's
a
reversing
of
a
previously
immersed
change.
Let's
take
a
look
we'd
like
this
to
be
merged
and
to
make
the
release
and
carlos.
I
think
you
suggested
that
I
also
revert
to
the
other
related
change.
A
I
don't
mind
doing
it.
If
that's
what
we
believe
is
the
right
approach.
I
don't
know
if,
if
others
have
any
opinion
on
this,
but
I'm
happy
to
do
that.
B
Yeah-
let's-
let's
maybe
discuss
that
tomorrow,
but
as
this
is
good
as
this
good
impact,
all
the
six
please
maintainers
take
a
look
at
that.
One
leave
your
comments.
I'm
happy
either
way.
B
I
just
think
that
one
of
the
changes
I
proposed,
which
was
reverting
everything,
would
be
slightly
better,
not
a
strong
position
and,
let's
discuss
that
tomorrow,.
A
Okay
sounds
good
so
on
the
logs
there's
this
pr,
which
is
about
adding
the
events
and
logs
api
to
the
specification,
the
the
draft
of
it.
Obviously,
it's
just
the
experimental
state
of
things.
A
It
has
a
few
approvals
formally
enough
to
get
meshed,
but
I
would
want
to
wait
for
more
approvals
there
before
it
is
smashed,
but
it's
close
to
being
accepted.
If
you,
if
you
care
about
this,
please
review
the
pr
on
proto
there
is.
There.
A
Is
this
discussion
around
the
stability
of
enum
names,
which
is
visible
on
the
wire
in
json
encoding,
which
is
one
of
the
options
you
can
use
the
that
the
name
of
the
enum
has
a
string
in
json
protobuf
encoding
or
you
can
use
the
numeric
value
of
it.
A
So
the
so
vogden
suggested
that
we
should
not
provide
any
guarantees
of
the
stability
of
the
num
names,
which
I
agree
with,
and
I
I
want
to
make
a
stronger
proposal
that
they
are
actually
prohibited
in
the
the
usage
in
otlpjs
and
we
only
allow
using-
or
we
only
standardize
as
part
of
the
otlpjs
and
specification,
the
use
of
numeric
values
for
enum
fields.
A
A
Okay,
that's
that's
all
on
the
proto,
let's
move
to
php
anyone.
I
I
have
a.
C
Yeah,
at
least
in
js,
I
know
we're
already
using
numeric
names.
That
was
a
switch
that
we
made
two
or
three
months
ago.
Maybe
so
it's
it's
conceivable
that
there
are
still
users
using
the
string
version
that
haven't
updated,
but
I
think
I
would
expect
that
most
have
updated
to
the
to
the
latest
version
with
numeric
identifiers.
B
A
D
Yeah
last
week,
during
the
gosig
meeting,
we
had
an
issue
where
the
meeting
notes
are
no
longer
accessible.
They
still
are
no
longer
accessible.
I
guess
as
well-
and
I
raised
it
in
the
maintainers
channel,
but
this
is,
I
think,
kind
of
a
systemic
issue
that
we
need
to
address
and
we've
talked
about
it
in
the
past.
I
think,
as
daniel's
kind
of
pointing
out
here,
the
the
ownership
of
this
is
is
by
a
single
individual.
D
Most
the
time
like
this
doc
right
now
is
owned
by
carlos,
and
I
don't
expect
carlos
to
go
anywhere
but,
like
I
don't
know
the
future
either
and
so
like
the
idea
here
is,
could
we
have
it
so
that
the
some
sort
of
open,
telemetry,
google
account
would
own?
These,
I
think,
is
like
the
key,
because
anytime
somebody
moves
a
company
or
they
change
their
permissions
or
something
like
the
notes
are
gone,
so
they
need
to
be
addressed.
D
So
I
think
that,
like
that's
kind
of
my
my
question
here
is,
I
don't
know
who
should
own
this?
If
this
should
be
a
governance
committee
or
a
technical
committee
or
or
me-
I
I
don't
know,
but
I
definitely
don't
have
permissions
to
create
a
google
account.
I
thought
there
was
a
google
account,
so
I
don't
know
who
to
talk
to
on
this
one.
C
Is
a
google
account?
I
believe
morgan
is
the
one
with
the
details
for
that
and
I
I
think
the
calendar
is
owned
by
that
account,
but
I
could
be
wrong
like
the
maintainer
vacation
calendar.
E
Yeah
you're
correct
there,
so
there
is
one
that
is
owned
by
the
gc
mailing
list
address
and
I
think
the
gc
has
some
way
to
obtain
the
credentials
for
it.
It
would
be
a
bit
cumbersome
to
always
have
to
find
someone
from
the
gc
to
create
the
meeting
nodes,
but
since
we
already
have
some
community
issue
and
community
pr
that
has
to
be
approved
by
the
gc
for
creating
music
and
working
groups,
I
think
that
would
be
feasible
to
just
have
this
as
part
of
the
process
that
they
create
such
a
document.
E
I
don't
know
if
there
is
any
more
scalable
approach,
but
that
would
be
one
one
possibility
and
then
they
would
also
have
to
go
through
all
of
the
existing
documents
that
are
out
there
in
the
wild
once
and
and
create
and
create
documents
for
them.
So
we
could
copy
the
history
over
so
that
we
don't
lose
them
like.
E
C
I
think
you
can
transfer
ownership
of
a
document
too,
so
it
doesn't
necessarily
need
to
be
like
copied
or
anything
like
that.
As
far
as
creating
meeting
note
documents,
it's
not
something
that
happens
all
that
often
so
I
don't
expect
that
to
be
a
big
bottleneck,
but
if
it
is,
we
could
always
create
essentially
three
empty
blank
templates
that
are
just
waiting
to
be
filled
with
something
yeah.
E
Yeah,
I
thought
of
the
same
thing
just
like
with
the
zoom
rooms
we
have
like
five
or
six
zoom
rooms,
and-
and
we
just
pick
some
of
them-
that
that
are
not
back
to
back,
but
that's
about
it.
And
if
you
have
a
pool
of
documents
to
pick
from
them,
then
it
would
be,
would
also
be
easy
for
people
that
just
do
some
ad
hoc
design
document
they
rename
it
and
and
then
use
it.
A
For
the
existing
meeting
nodes
documents,
if
we
know
who
the
current
owner
is,
we
should
probably
ask
them
to
transfer
the
ownership
to
the
to
the
telemetry's.
Google
account
whatever
that
is.
I
don't
know
even
what
that
looks
like.
I
guess
it's
something
that
is
owned
by
cncf
and
if
we
don't
know
who
the
current
owner
is
and
we
can't
locate
them,
we
just
make
a
copy.
I
think
that's
fine,
not
a
big
deal.
We
just
need
to
update
the
link
in
a
couple
places.
A
D
Yeah,
I
think
that's
what
my
understanding
is
is
if
we
have
an
account.
That's
that's
the
process.
The
only
thing
I
worry
about,
obviously,
is
going
to
be
like
the
situation
in
go
where
there
was
someone
who
we
don't
know
who
owns
the
account
or
owns
the
dock
and
as
far
as
I
can
tell,
they
are
not
responding.
So
something
happened
but
yeah.
I
think,
if
that's
that's
ideal,
for
what
we
want
to
do.
E
I
assume
you,
you
sent
this
request
for
access
already
right.
E
D
D
Yeah,
I
agree
I
I
reached
out
to
morgan.
I
there's
a
thread
I
resent
to
a
lot
of
people
and
to
no
avail
so
far.
I
think
there's
one
person
still
that
has
not
responded,
who
I'm
still
following
up
on
that
one,
but
regarding
the
path
forward,
how
do
we
plan
to
track
this
armin
or
daniel?
Is
there
like
an
issue
that
can
be
created
in
the
community,
repo
and
who's
going
to
take
ownership
of
it.
E
Community
issue
would
certainly
be
the
right
place
for
it,
and
then
then
you
could
probably
reach
out
in
the
in
the
gc
channel.
Assuming
that
you
have
some
some
internal
channel
for
discussion
to
find
some
gc
member
with
access
to
the
google
account
to
share
it
with
the
others
and
then
to
to
drive
the
topic
or
you
can
apparently.
D
So
daniel
is
that
something
that
you
can
create
the
issue
or
do
you
need
me
to
create
the
issue?
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
not
drops
because
thursday
is
coming
around
and
I'd
like
to
have
the
gc
owning
our
sig
notes.
At
this
point
I
currently
own
them
and
I
don't
think
that's
you
know.
I
want
to
get
resolved.
C
Yeah,
I
can
create
an
issue-
I
guess
I'll
I'll,
send
it
to
you
in
slack
after
I
create
it
just
so
you
can
fill
in
if
there's
any
specific
details
about
the
the
go
incident
that
you
want
to
add.
D
Okay,
all
right
perfect.
That
sounds
good.
A
Okay,
anything
else.
What
else
do
we
need
to
discuss.
E
Just
one
more
thing:
are
we
all
fine
with
using
this
gc
account,
or
is
there
any
better
approach?
One
could
think
of
for
me.
I
think
it
sounds
fine
if
htc
member
logs
into
it,
to
the
account
the
entire
gc
will
be
stamped
because
it
will
send
some
new
sign
up
alert
sign
in
alert
to
that
milling
group.
But
I
I
guess
you
don't
bother
as
much
and
it
I
think
the
mailing
list
is
handled
by
the
cncf.
At
least
I
would
hope
so
so
we
should
always
retain
access
to
it.
D
I
mean
I
so
personally,
don't
like
it.
Whatever
is
easiest,
I
I
mean
the
thing
that
the
end
goal
is
that
we
need
to
have
some
sort
of
cncf
or
open
telemetry
specific
account
owning
these
like
if
we
want
to
create
another
account,
I'm
okay
with
that.
As
long
as
the
gc
handles
the
credentials
there,
then
they
have
to
manage
two
accounts
as
well.
So
I,
I
guess
I'll
just
leave
that
up
to
the
gc
to
figure
out
whatever
they
want
to
do.
E
F
And
not
to
throw
spainer
in
the
works,
but
I
think
we
also
need
to
have
a
plan
to
deal
with
trolling
or
malicious
modification
of
these
documents,
since
they
are
world
editable
right.
You
know
we
had
an
incident
recently
with
a
webinar
that
was
being
handled
on
one
of
our
zoom
instances
where
the
link
was
out.
People
came
in
and
we're
trolling
there.
E
Yeah,
I
think,
if,
if
some
of
the
maintainers
have
edit
access
or
co-ownership,
they
could,
in
case
of
that
revert
the
document
and
then
change
it
to
suggestion
only
access
until
it's
it's
calm
again
and
the
trolls
have
left,
but
other
than
that
it
would
be
nice
if
we
could
retain
the
word
editable
documents,
because
I
think
it
helps
the
the
collaboration.
Since
everyone
can
jump
in
and
and
put
down
some
meeting
notes
and
in
the
gender
items.
F
F
C
D
I
think
that
might
also
include
a
need
for,
like
a
google
group,
then
because
or
not
I
don't
know
depends
on,
I
guess
somehow
you
want
to
maintain
access
if
a
maintainer.
A
C
Right,
but
at
the
I
think,
anthony's
point
is
valid,
that
we
should
think
about
that
in
advance.
So
if,
if
the
maintainers
are
added
as
collaborators
or
whatever
the
the
term
is
for
the
document,
then,
if
somebody
is
being
malicious
in
a
meeting,
they
can
very
quickly
change
it
to
comment.
Only
access
right
right
without
having
to
worry
about
you
know
they
already
have
the
permission
to
do
that.
Yep.
C
Okay,
I'll
create
the
issue
in
the
community
and
contact
the
gc
and
we'll
go
from
there.
The
go
meeting
is
on
thursday,
correct
tyler,
correct
I
mean.
D
E
Yeah
some
people
on
github
they,
instead
of
using
the
star
button,
they
use
the
fork
button
to
have
a
copy,
and
maybe
someone
made
a
copy
of
the
meeting
notes
as
well.