►
From YouTube: 2021-03-12 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).
B
There's
a
conflict
in
my
house
and
I
just
someone's
sitting
on
my
lap
as
a
result,
I'm
in
a
mute.
B
C
B
That
I
have
a
one-on-one
with
josh
from
google
this
afternoon
to
talk
on
to
talk
about
data.
C
E
Last
time
like
carlos
and
I
chatted-
and
there
are
a
couple
follow-ups,
so
I
I
think
on
the
top
level
projects
we
already
have
all
the
like
the
important
milestones
outlined
and
identified
several
owners
for
the
convenience.
If
he
had
had.
I
wonder
if
you
could
give
access
to
matt
the
pm
from
microsoft,
so
he
can
start
to
put
things
in.
I
already
worked
with
him
to
get
I
like
the
product
tracking
for
metrics,
so
he
knows
how
to
do
that
and
and
for
the
metrics
data
model.
Josh
already
got
the
access.
E
I
mean
the
the
google
josh
already
got
the
access
on
the
project,
so
he
started
to
move
things.
I
think
we're
in
partnership.
Another
thing
I
think
carlos
mentioned
last
time
is
given
we
already
have
these
milestones.
That
has
a
timeline.
We
probably
don't
need
to
have
priority
and
there
is
a
general
consensus
I
want
to
know
like
people
here,
think
we
can
just
move
priority,
because
if
something
important,
we
want
to
do
that
in
a
certain
milestone.
We
should
just
move
that
if
it's
not
fitting
the
milestone,
we
should
just
move
that
out.
E
Priority
doesn't
make
sense
anymore
and
probably
the
the
ga
readiness
this
this
something
we're
still
struggling.
I
think
at
least
last
time
carlos
and
I
were
we
haven't-
figured
out
how
we're
going
to
deal
with
the
ga
tag.
So
I
want
to
get
what
what
g
tags
the
spike
issue
there's
a
like
like
allowed
for
ga
or
like
required
for
ga.
Currently
like
we
don't
like,
we
don't
try
to
use
ga
for
the
technical
side,
it's
more
like
the
marketing
terms.
E
I
wonder
if
we
should
change
that
to
communicate
clearly,
but
I
I
don't
have
a
good
option
here
and
I
think
just
removing
the
ga
tag
is
a
bad
thing,
because
we
already
spent
time
trying
to
categorize
things.
It
doesn't
make
sense
to
remove
that,
but
for
priority,
probably
simple,
just
go
and
remove
the
tags.
I
I
can
do
that
if
there's
a
consensus
here.
D
Priority
are
useful
if
you
have
longer
milestones.
So
if
you
are
short
milestones,
I
do
indeed
the
priority
it's
equivalent
with
the
milestone.
But
if
you
have
like
a
near
milestone,
then
priority
are
good
to
to
know
how
to
structure
the
work
over
that
year.
So
I
don't
know
if
we
go
with
model
of
shorter
milestones
where
yes,
priority
is
not
needed
or
we
go
with
longer
months,
but
I'm
fine
yeah.
E
F
Yeah,
I
think
I
think,
there's
some
just
related
issues
here
around,
so
I
totally
agree
for
these.
These
shorter
projects,
we
probably
don't
need
priority
like
like
priority,
is
like
what
what
are
we
currently
working
on,
like
that's
the
the
priority
that
matters
like
who's
been
assigned?
Something
versus
like
what
are
we
just
not
doing
right
now?
That's
how
we
show
priority,
but
there's
just
a
question
of
what
do
we
do
with
this
like
existing
backlog
of
stuff
right?
There
is
a
backlog
of
stuff.
F
That's
been
labeled
with
ga,
with
priority
two
and
not
most
of
that.
Work
doesn't
fit
into
the
these
new
initiatives.
We're
planning
on
working
this
year,
and
so
I
would
love
to
to
clean
house
on
those
issues
like
I
kind
of
feel
like
it's
bad
to
to
just
leave
them
open,
and
it
would
certainly
be
bad
to
leave
them
open
and
strip
all
the
tags
off
of
them
just
by
removing
those
tags
yeah
those
labels
yeah.
F
I
agree
so
I
that
that
seems
like
a
big
triage
effort,
but
but
I
think
it's
one
we
should
do.
Maybe
we
can
schedule
a
special
session
to
to
deal
with
that,
because
I
think
it's
it's
a
lot
of
work
and
going
forwards.
I
think
we
need
to
have
these
things
tend
to
build
up.
F
Is
people
are
like
here's,
a
good
idea
and
we're
like
that
is
a
good
idea,
but
but
we're
not
going
to
work
on
it
right
now,
and
so
we
label
it
like
p2,
not
for
ga
or
like
allowed
for
ga
or
something
like
that,
but
that
effectively
means
we're,
not
we're
not
really
going
to
do
it,
and
so
I
think
my
question
is
like
do
we
want
to
just
kind
of
close
all
of
these
issues
out
and
in
the
future
just
say
if
it's
not
something
that
we're
gonna
work
on.
F
We
just
say
sorry
about
this
issue
like
open
it
again
later,
that's
not
great,
but
having
like
a
bunch
of
issues.
Pile
up
in
the
background
also
isn't
great,
I'm
just
wondering
where,
where
should
we
stick
things
that
we
think
are
genuinely
good
ideas
that
that
we
we're
not
going
to
address
or
things
where
it's
like?
If
someone
wanted
to,
they
could
do
this,
but
we're
not
going
to
prioritize
it.
We
need
to
just
figure
out
that
bucket.
E
Yeah,
so
so
one
thing,
I'm
I'm
thinking,
although
I
haven't
seen
any
like
like
oss
products
using
this,
but
I
wonder
if
you
think
this
is
crazy
or
not,
so
I
wonder
if
we
can
have
a
separate
github
repo
that
they
just
have
one
readme
file
explaining
to
people
hey.
This
is
the
the
wish
list,
or
this
is
like
the
users
away.
So
if
you
have
any
feedback,
it's
not
a
bug.
If
it's
a
spec
bug,
you
should
go
and
file
an
issue
on
a
spec
repo,
but
anything
that
you
wish
to
have.
E
We
don't
want
to
have
a
long
list
of
everything
in
the
issue
on
the
spec
report,
so
go
there
and
and
search
if
there
are
other
folks
asking
the
same
thing.
If,
yes,
you
give
you
upvote
and
periodically
we'll
reveal
them
and
take
the
top
things
and
try
to
tackle
that
from
the
community
and
those
things
we
don't
give
promise
it's
just
a
wish
list
and
you
can
create
whatever
you
have.
E
F
The
otep
repo
could
be
could
be
used
for
this
because
that's
basically
like
like
what
that
is
right.
Like.
F
D
So
yeah,
I
think
I
think
we
should
move
more
things
to
the
discussions.
That's
one
option,
but
also
moving
them
to
attempt
doesn't
solve
the
problem.
We'll
just
have
400
issues
there.
What
what
do
we
solve
right?.
E
So
I
think
we
can,
if
we
have
a
readme
about
how
people
hey,
if
you
have
a
feature,
request,
come
to
the
old
tab
and
and
search
for
the
issue.
If
you
see
something
that,
like
other
folks,
are
asking
for
the
same
thing,
you
give
your
uploads
and
we'll
just
periodically
like
every
month.
We
look
at
the
the
votes
and
take
the
top
things
and
we
decide
whether
we're
going
to
respond.
If
there's
only
like
one
people
asking
for
specific
things,
no
nobody
else
is
supporting
them.
Then
we
wouldn't
even
look
at
that
issue.
F
Like
if
you
thumbs
up
the,
if
you
thumbs
up
the
the
top,
the
the
original
post,
not
the
comments,
but
if
you
thumbs
up
the
original
post,
that's
an
up
vote.
Something
like
that.
E
F
Yeah
yeah
that
sounds
sort
of
like
recreating
what
with
discussions
do
but,
but
I'm
down
with
that,
I
mean
we
should
also
maybe
count
down
votes
but
yeah
good
point.
You
know
I
I
think
something
like
that's
reasonable.
I
agree
with
with
bogdan
that
it
doesn't.
It
doesn't
fully
eliminate
the
problem
of
stuff
piling
up
somewhere,
but
either
we
have
a
place
where
people
can
express
things
they
they
wish
they
had
or
or
we
don't.
F
We
have
a
place
where
people
can
express
things,
they
would
say,
had
stuff's
gonna
pile
up
there
and
I
think
that's
kind
of
fine.
It's
just
like
it's
just
nice
to
have
that
not
not
in
the
spec
repo.
I
feel
like
the
spec
repo.
I
would
love
it
if
we
called
that
down
to
to
just
stuff
that
was
relevant
to
things
we
know
we
are
working
on
so
that
when
people
come
to
the
spec
repo,
they
can
really
get
a
sense
of
like.
D
But
also
there
has
to
be
a
way
for
people
to
propose
new
things,
even
though
you
cannot
work
or
staff
which
you
need
to
allow
people
to
propose
new
things.
Yes,
yes,
that
may
be
maybe
discussions.
We
recommend
people
to
open
a
discussion,
the
proposal
and
if
it
gets
enough
votes
and
the
champion
to
do
this,
we
transfer
it
as
an
issue-
I
I
don't
know,
but
we
need
to
have
a
clear
process
for
defining
bugs,
like
bugs
defining
feature,
requests
or
proposals.
So
these
are
kind
of
the
yeah
that
I.
F
See-
and
I
just
I
just
I
guess,
I'm
saying
if
it's
new
features
and
proposals
that
should
go
in
oteps
like
like,
like
I
don't
think
we
should
have
the
backlog,
I
get
that
people
are
gonna
like
post,
an
issue
in
the
spec
repo
and
if
we're
like
that
is
cool,
that's
actually
not
relevant
to
the
initiatives
we're
working
on
right
now.
Can
you
move
it
over
to
the
otep
side.
D
But
but
but
think
about
somebody
asking
to
add
one
semantic
version
convention
to
an
existing
whatever
something
just
one
field.
Do
you
want
them
to
do
an
attempt
for
that?
No,
I
feel
I
feel
we
are
getting
too
too
much.
F
I
think
we
let
me
back
up
a
bit.
I
think
we
need
at
least
one
more
project
in
the
spec
repo
to
handle
like
the
general
backlog
we
have
like
we,
we
do.
We
have
these
initiatives
right,
but
there's
also,
like
you
say,
there's
gonna
be
people
coming
in
with
like
small
one-offs
that
are
maybe
worth
dealing
with
like
hey.
Can
we
add
this
like
convention?
Can
we
like
do
this
thing
and-
and
we
should
like
prioritize
and
track
that
work
as
well,
so
it
doesn't
get
lost.
F
I'm
just
saying
for
this
stuff,
where
we're
like
we're
we're,
not
gonna,
actually
realistically
triage
and
act
on
this
issue.
You
know
in
anything
like
the
short
term.
F
Those
I
would
like
to
just
have
them
go
somewhere
else.
Maybe
it
is
a
third
repo?
Maybe
it's
not
oteps,
maybe
it's
like
you
know,
wish
list.
F
C
D
F
D
Point,
but
I
don't
know
I
I
don't
know
how
to
do
it,
maybe
maybe,
as
I
said,
maybe
just
be
more
aggressive,
but
but
there
are
a
bunch
of
one-off
things
like
add
this
field
or
something
like
that
which
I'm
not
feeling
comfortable
to
add
it
right
now.
I
would
like
more
people
to
vote
on
that,
but
so
so
to
sure
that
they
are
they
need
that
field,
because
sometimes
it's
not
my
expertise
at
all.
But
if,
if
people
are
proving
that
they
need
that,
but.
F
But
you're
willing
to
pay
attention
to
it
right
now.
I
think
that's
that's
the
thing
for
the
stuff
that
comes
in
we're
like
look.
We
do
not
have
the
bandwidth
to
pay
attention
to
this.
It
sounds
like
a
good
idea,
but
like
we
don't
we're
not
gonna
focus
on
having
a
discussion
about
this
stuff
right
now,.
E
E
F
Yeah-
and
it
just
would
be
nice
if,
like
the
list
of
issues
and
pr's
in
in
the
spec
repo
were
like
these-
are
things
we're
committing
to
to
like
getting
through
versus,
like
look
and
just
being
able
to
tell
people
like
look,
rather,
I
want
to
avoid
this
situation
where
we're
saying
like.
Oh,
that
sounds
nice
but
later,
and
then
we
just
leave
it
open.
I'd
rather
say
like
that
sounds
nice,
but
later
can
you
file
it
over
in
the
later
repo
and
then
like
from
that
thing?
We
can
we,
we
can.
F
You
know
periodically
like
pull
stuff
from
or
something
like
that.
I
don't
know
we.
F
It's
just,
I
think
it's
worth
thinking
about,
because
it's
difficult
for
us
to
have
a
bunch
of
open
issues.
I
think
it's
hard
for
us.
D
So
so
I
I've
never
I
I
did
not
use
too
much
discussions,
but
if
we
put
them
in
discussions,
I
think
discussions
have
this
plus
minus
stinky
and
if
it
gets
to
to
a
certain
plus
you
will
be,
we
can
sort
by
the
number
of
pluses
that
it
has
something.
So
I
don't
know
if
you
can
put
a
label
with
proposal
in
the
discussion
and
if
it
gets
an
amount
of
classes,
then
we
we
kind
of
say
this-
is
when
we
pay
attention.
D
F
Yeah
yeah
that
that
that
works
too,
just
saying
like
look,
did
move
this
to
discussion.
We're
not
going
to
do
it
right
now
and
then
you
know
the
community
has
has
some
voting
power
yeah,
but
you
can't
downvote
discussions
which
is
unfortunate
exactly.
D
F
D
E
F
D
F
Yeah
I
mean
I
don't
know
I
I
if
we
can
have
a
downvote.
I
prefer
it
just
I'm
just
thinking
of
like
prior
projects,
where
you
say
no
to
things
like
like
in
node
there's
this
constant
brigading
of
people
demanding
the
node
project,
fork,
javascript
and
add
async
or
await,
and
we
just
had
to
say
like
no
over
and
over
again.
F
But
if
you
had
like
a
discussion,
you'd
have
like
a
thousand
upvotes
on
this
thing,
but
there's
also
like
10
000
people
in
the
node
community
who
are
like
no,
we
hate
it
and
it
would
be
nice
to
be
able
to
like
downvote
stuff
into
oblivion.
Yeah.
D
F
I
don't
know
I
don't
discussions.
Let
me
see
github
discussions
down
vote.
This
is
the
thing
I
think
there.
E
F
E
I
think
you
want
to
try.
I
can
give
a
download
and
tell
jonathan
or
just
playing
wrong.
F
F
F
F
No,
just
you
know,
there's
like
just
like
github
org
like
stuff
like
hey,
can
you
give
me
access
to
x
or
you
know,
create
a
repo
or
like
blah
blah
blah
I
get.
I
get
people
regularly
ask
me
for
various
admin
things.
You
add
me
to
the
calendar
or
whatever,
but
it's.
A
C
F
E
F
Yeah
yeah
anyways
just
perfect
example
like
how
do
we
give
matt
access
to
these
things?
He
should
be
given
like
a
global
triager
label.
Right,
like
that's
the
thing
he's
missing,
so
we.
D
Can
do
that
yeah
file,
an
issue
in
the
community
and
say
that
you
want
to
do
that
and
yeah.
F
But
I'm
just
saying
like
these
are
tasks
I
could.
I
could
respond
to
these
tasks
and
do
them
and
then
you
wouldn't
have
to,
but
as
long
as
I
don't
have
the
ability
that
I
could
just
tell
people,
it's
not
my
problems.
Yeah.
F
C
F
F
We're
gonna
get
I've
noticed.
I
don't
know
why
this
is,
but
I
have
noticed
people
will
will
post
rants
or
weird
things
in
there
that
maybe
they
wouldn't
open
as
an
issue.
But
you
know
whatever
we'll
have
to
deal
with
that.
It's
just
gonna
be
interesting
when
this
project
eventually
gets
trolls
like
at
some
point,
we'll
be
public
enough,
that
we
get
trolls
and
I'm
curious
to
see
how
things
like
discussions
stand
up
to
to
that
kind
of
behavior
but
anyways
whatever.
F
What
else
do
we
need
to
talk
about
so
this
was
important
like
I
think
the
next
step
will
be
to
have
a
session
where
we
actually
close
out
a
bunch
of
these
issues
and
maybe
move
some
of
them
to
discussions
just
to
like
drop
from
266
issues.
Down
to
you
know
the
stuff
that
we
think
is
reasonable
and
then
kill
off
those
those
tags
that
we
don't
want
anymore,
like
the
ga
tags
yeah
and
that
that
would
be
a
nice
cleanup.
E
One
one
thing
like
the
google
josh
and
I
have
been
doing
so.
We
look
at
all
the
the
spec
issues
that
that
has
a
matrix
tag.
Yeah.
E
Api
spack
or
data
model,
as
long
as
it's
metrics,
we
we
decide
whether
riley
will
take
care
of
that
or
josh
will
take
care
of
that.
So
make
sure
anything
on
the
metrics
space
will
not
have
any
gaps.
I
believe
logs
are
handled
because
there's
a
clear
longer
ownership,
the
other
products
cementing
convention
tracing,
I
figured
there's.
No,
I
know
bogdan
has
the
opinion,
but
I
I
I
think
the
ownership
part
is
where
the
problem
is.
F
We've
got
a
number
of
people
who
are
you
know,
approvers
and
stuff,
for
that
you
know
I'm
on
that
list
too.
So
I
think
we
need
to
figure
out.
It
would
be
great
if,
like
assigning
issues
to
people
meant
they
had
to
go
deal
with
them
or
assigning
prs
to
people
if
they
had
to
go
deal
with
them,
and
if
no
one
has
actually
been
tapped
to
do
it,
don't
just
like
blindly
assign
it
to
someone,
but
we
can
use
assignees.
E
I
think
the
problem
is,
if
you
look
at
the
issues,
I
currently,
I
think,
there's
a
consensus.
If
the.
If
the
issue
has
a
like
related
to
logs,
then
tigran
will
be
responsible.
I
know
I'm
not
going
to
look
at
the
logs
issue
because
I
have
other
focus,
but
it's
matrix
I'll,
look
at
that
and
josh
will
look
at
that.
So
we'll
make
sure
there's
no
case
like
like,
like
both
josh
and
riley,
were
saying:
no,
we
don't
know
what
that
issue.
E
E
D
E
What
I'm
all
for
it
yeah,
I
I
think
so
and
and
I'm
I'm
willing
to
give
some
clarity
there.
But
meanwhile
I
I
think
it's
not
a
blogging
issue.
For
example,
we're
just
saying
all
the
metrics
issue
will
be
gifted
to
josh
and
riley.
I
think
we
don't
need
to
clarify
that
just
go
and
do
the
work
today,
and
then
we
can
take
time
because
I
I
think,
trying
to
clarify
the
process
itself
is
going
to
take
some
time
and
there's
no
need
to
block
here.
D
I
I'm
perfectly
fine
to
assign
all
the
issues
to
you.
Don't
get
me
wrong
and
I
personally
find
if
you
solve
all
of
them.
It's
not
the
point.
It
was
more
or
less
for
me
the
fact
that
if
we
come
with
owners
for
every
file,
I
don't
know
what
to
expect
from
them,
and
I
don't
know
what
it
means
in
terms
of
commitment
from
them.
E
Oh
yeah
yeah
that
part
I
agree
with
like
I'm
not
pushing
for
you
see
that
pr
is
there
it's
a
little
bit
stuck
it's
fine,
I'm
not
pushing
for
that.
I
I
think
we
have
a
consensus.
We
can
probably
try
in
the
experiment
experimental
thing
here.
Coming
back
I
mean
the
the
owner
of
the
the
issue
tags
like.
If
the
issue
is
tagged
with
log,
should
we
expect
tigran
to
take
care
of
all
of
them
or
he
say
no,
no,
like
there's
no
expectation
like
don't
make
that
assumption
currency
is
not
clear
right.
E
We
could
have
something
like
like
all
the
issues
that
people
filed
outside
the
community.
At
least.
We
would
make
sure
that
they
have
some
some
tag
that
can
categorize
things
and
once
they
got
the
issues
categorized,
it
would
go
either
to
rightly
bulk,
then
tigran
or
someone,
and
if
the
issue
is
not
categorized
like
there's
no
tag
at
all,
we
expect
there's
like
one
percent,
then
the
issue
would
go
to
carlos
or
tag
as
long
as
we
have
that
that
clarity,
I
I
think,
we're
able
to
work
more
efficiently.
Currently,
there's.