►
From YouTube: 2021-04-28 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
D
D
C
All
right,
I
think
we
can
start
with
the.
C
Prs
all
right,
this
came
up
in
a
few
reviews
about
being
consistent
about
the
separator.
I
think
this
may
be
a
issue
for
datadork,
but
I
think
we
wanted
to
be
consistent
here
is
that
right,
zach.
A
Yeah,
I
remember
this
coming
up
with
some
of
the
hotel
propagator
stuff,
but
for
hotel
clients
yeah.
I
think
this.
This
is
fine
to
move
forward
with.
E
There
will
be
only
one
problem,
but
probably
right
now:
it's
I
don't
think
it's
right
now,
it's
a
I
don't
know.
If
there's
any
place,
if
there
will
be
some
place
when
we
would
like
to
provide
multiple
paths
like
four
files,
then
theory,
comma,
is
a
legit
character.
E
E
G
C
C
Okay,
they
want
to
separate
the
version.
This
is
I
I
think
the
the
thing
that
we
need
to
be
careful
is
when
we
do
the
pull
from
upstream.
We
need
to
remember
to
reset
the
versions
properly
and
also
if
there
is
introduction
of
any
module
or
something
we
need
to
pay
attention
to
that,
but
other
than
that,
I
don't
think
that
there
is
any
concern
about
this
one
right.
A
Yeah,
probably
that
what
we
want
to
do
on
changes
when
taking
up
stream
changes
is
probably
just
one
add
a
step
for
the
upstream
to
make
sure
to
remove
any
changes
to
tracer
versions.cs
and
then,
as
a
last
step,
before
submitting
the
pr
run.
The
prepare
release
just
to
make
sure
that
any
changes
that
were
introduced
are
overwritten
by
the
current
version.
C
Yeah
yeah
yeah,
so
let's
get
when
we
get
there
index
is
extensibility
that
has
been
going
for
some
time
how
we
are.
C
Yeah,
so
let's
switch
from
draft
to
the
pr
and
people
take
people
that
want
to
take
a
second
look
in
deep
and
if,
if
everyone
is
okay,
then
we
move
ahead.
I
think
we
are
ready
to
take
out
the
draft
stops.
C
C
All
right,
I
I
didn't
look
at
the
issues
at
the
backlog.
If
somebody
is
on
top
of
them,
perhaps
robert,
do
you
wanna
guide
this
part.
B
B
E
C
Yeah
you
have
to
to
ping
someone
which
actually,
but
let's,
let's
get
you
to
this
automated
release,.
E
C
I
would
like
to
preserve
the
order.
Automate
really
is
because.
E
C
C
Okay,
automated
release,
we
do
have
the
the
one
the
pr
about
the
artifacts
was
that
merged
already.
Yes,
right.
I
E
E
C
E
C
C
D
A
D
A
I
didn't
see
this
issue
until
now,
so
they're,
both
still
in
use
it's
just.
We
had
previously
published
them
as
new
get
packages,
and
so
this
was
our
way
of
communicating
to
developers.
This
is
the
last
time
we'll
push
the
nuget
package.
You
don't
need
to
reference
it.
It's
going
to
be
brought
in
by
the
automatic
instrumentation,
so
the
contents
of
the
projects
are
still
valid.
Both.
E
A
The
asp.net
one
all
that
does
is
it,
provides
this
http
module
to
automatically
do
asp.net
instrumentation,
but
that
could
be
that
could
be
rolled
in
since
it
doesn't
need
to
be
by
itself
anymore.
E
D
H
C
Not
okay,
and
this
is
the
thing
that
we
mentioned
right.
I
read
up
about
the
pr
all
right.
We
cover
these
items,
so
then
we
get
zach
to
the
depend
about
prs.
A
So
I
want
to
provide
a
quick
background
on
on
the
datadog
side.
We
still
have
a
couple
of
those
ones,
I
think
maybe
the
liblog,
maybe
one
other
one,
so
we're
still
trying
to
work
on
it
in
the
background
of
updating
our
dependencies,
but
I
think
chris
brought
up
a
good
point
in
one
of
those
pr's
that
we
in
this
repo-
I
don't
know
if
it's
if
you're
going
to
be
upstreaming
some
of
these
changes,
while
we
figure
out
our
dependencies
and
resolve
them.
A
A
So
I
guess
my
my
question
is:
are
you
fine
with
keeping
this
and
making
just
keeping
upstreaming
this
while
we
figure
this
out
and
sorry
for
the
noise?
Or
do
you
want
to
strip
out
dependable
stuff?
If
you
don't
think
it's
going
to
be
really
necessary
right
now,
like
just
turn
it
off,
so
that
you
don't
keep
getting
the
this
noise
in
this
repo.
D
C
Yeah,
I
think
I
think
my
first
impression
is
in
line
with
what
chris
said
and
we
should
just
do
in
one
repo,
and
I
think
right
now
that
we
are
doing
regular,
pull
from
upstream.
C
We
we
should
do
just
on
on
upstream,
if
eventually
down
the
road,
then
we
we
are
not
doing
the
upstream,
then
we
we
need
to
add
this
here.
You
know,
but
as
of
right
now
I
think
it's
gonna
introduce
a
lot
of
noise
and
when
we
there
is
even
the
risk
of
things
like.
Let's
say
we
take
an
update
here
and
it's
not
taking
up
stream
or
vice
versa,
and
then
we
have
conflicts.
You.
C
C
So
my
take
is
that
we
should
disable
this
for
now
in
in
the
open,
telemetry
repo,
any
divergent
opinions.
B
C
I
B
C
Okay,
so
let's
disable
that
on
on
the
open,
telemetry
repo
and
for
now
we
we
get
any
the
updates
done
from
upstream.
Can
someone
open
item
for
that
and
take
care
of
that
any
volunteers.
C
E
I
want
to
bring
one
thing
personally,
but
I'm
just
a
new
approver,
but
personally
I
think
that
david
and
rasmus
are
both
doing
a
lot
of
work
and
I
don't
know
what
are
other
opinions,
but
for
me
it
will
be
worth
to
give
them
approve
approvals,
at
least
so
that
they
can
do
some
stuffing
issues,
etc.
B
C
I
I
I
think
it's
it's
a
good
idea
and
we
we
should
check
also
the
the
participation
you
know
kind
of
we
need
to
have
the
people
that
are
approvers
participating
on
the
project.
Also,
you
know,
so
we
need
to
be
sure
that,
like
some
time
ago,
I
pinged
mike
for
for
him
to
because
he's
an
approver,
but
he
hasn't
been
working
on
the
on
the
project.
So
I
pinged
him.
C
So
he
did
some
reviews
and
I
think
we
should
kind
of
be
sure
that
the
people
listed
there
participate
in
the
project.
C
So
I
think
I
think
erasmus
is
is
showing
already
work
and
and
david,
but
I
I
would
like
to
wait
a
couple
of
weeks
and
then
we
put
rasmus
and
david
as
approvers.
Also
on
the
on
the
river.
A
Yeah,
that
sounds
good.
Do
you
have
an
idea
of
how
many
is
there
a
sort
of
upper
limit
you
think
of
how
many
approvers
that
you'd
want
to
have
on
this
repo?
I'm
not
sure
how
these
kind
of
community
projects
tend
to
work.
I
I.
C
Think,
as
as
the
project
kind
of
grows
and
proportional
to
the
size,
you
know
if
you
look,
for
instance,
for
the
collector
contribute
that
there
is
a
lot
of
components.
There
is
a
bunch
of
people
that
are
responsible
for
areas,
so
they
don't
review
everything,
but
there
are
small
areas
that
they
review
and
then,
if
you
look
to
that
list,
the
number
is
huge.
I
think
if
you
put
out
together,
you'll
be
like
20
or
30,
but
each
one
is
responsible
for
a
small
area.
C
I
think
around
here.
This
is
a
gas.
You
know.
I
think,
having
like
around
10
or
12
that
are
participating
is
a
is
a
good
thing
and
then
also
we
can
start
also
direct
people
to
specific
areas.
So
people
are
committed
to
review
and
help
with
some
areas,
but
not
the
whole
infrastructure.
You
know
the
whole
project.
C
Yeah,
okay,
robert
this,
this
answer
discovers
the
things
that
you
want
to
regarding
the
approvers
and.
E
Yeah-
and
I
also
think
that
having
a
lot
of
approvers
in
theory
should
help,
but
I
do
not
think
it's
it's
the
same
for
the
maintainers.
I
think
that
the
maintenance
should
be
a
very
small
number
like
free
maximum
four,
because
maintainers
has
also
a
lot
of
like
privileges
on
like
at
probably
you
have
administrator,
so
it's
even
safer
if
this
group
is
limited
and
it's
also
easier
for
you
to
take
decisions,
if
you.
C
Are,
for
example,
free
yeah?
I
I
I've
been
using
as
one
of
the
maintainers
I've
been
using
the
the
privilege
to
merge
stuff
from
the
rhythms,
for
instance,
from
the
markdown
files,
but
every
time
that
I
do
that,
I
feel
kind
of
I'm
doing
something
wrong.
You
know
like.
A
G
G
C
G
Just
mark
that
yeah
yeah,
I
think
so
far,
I
did
that
for.
C
A
flick
test
that
failed
kind
of
different
tests,
failing
some
on
the
last
upstream
and
basically
the
rest
was
our
markdown
fires.
By
the
way,
this
is
was
something
that
I
was
expecting
azure
pipelines
to
behave
in
a
way
that
didn't.
C
I
asked
it
to
move
the
docks
to
under
the
docks
folder,
because
my
hope
was
that
no
ci
is
going
to
be
run
for
that,
but
actually
ci
keeps
running,
even
if
you
just
change
files
under
that
docs
folder,
and
I
I'm
not
that
familiar
with
azure
pipelines,
but
it
seems
that
that's
not
enough
to
prevent
ci
for
our
markdown
files.
C
C
But
we
have
the
path
specified
on
on
the
file
that
guides
the
the
ci
run.
You
know,
so
I'm
not
sure-
and
this
is
one
problem
that
we
do
have,
because
this
account
was
given
to
us
via
the
folks
on
the
sdk
and
last
that
I
checked
with
seizure.
We
didn't
have
the
the
the
access
to
admin
on
our
azure
pipeline
site
so
right
now
there
is
no
admin
there.
C
C
Okay,
anyone
I
want
to
bring
anything
up
yet.