►
From YouTube: 2022-08-11 meeting
Description
Instrumentation: Messaging
A
How's
the
life
on
the
east
coast
these
days.
B
B
A
I
remember
yeah
90
degrees
on
the
east
coast,
it's
different
than
90
degrees
on
the
west
coast.
It's
always
like
the
humidity
factor
there.
I
I
don't
know
how
it
just
it
just
destroys.
You.
A
Oh
yeah,
I
also
I
used
to
live
down
in
florida
as
well.
That
was
another
one,
and
it
was
like.
Oh
man,
like
lord.
A
B
Yeah
well,
it
was
just
just
right
next
to
my
house,
in
the
fells
nice.
B
B
A
B
Okay,
you
know
something
like
that
and
then
there's
usually
not
a
day
where
it's
below
32,
like
just
not.
B
Yeah,
that
was
actually
one
of
the
things
that
that
drove
problems
last
year
with
the
snowpocalypse
is
that
there
was
a
couple
days
where
it
was
actually
frozen.
A
Okay,
well,
I
think
we
could
probably
jump
into
it.
I
know
anthony's,
not
gonna
make
it
to
this
call.
Let
me
put
my
screen
here.
A
Cool
yeah,
we
can
jump
in.
Please
add
yourself
to
the
attendees
list.
If
you
haven't
already
and
anything,
you
want
to
talk
about,
add
to
the
agenda
and
we
can
kick
it
off.
Josh's
strikethrough
is
causing
problems,
start
off.
Look
at
the
metrics
sdk
milestone
81,
I
think,
is
yeah
still
what
it
is,
which
is
progress.
I
think
we're
we're
in
the
home
stretch
here.
A
I'm
hoping
the
this
isn't
a
long
tail,
but
let's,
let's
I
guess,
try
to
take
it
and
put
it
over
the
finish
line.
I
don't
think
there's
too
much
that's
in
the
way
of
blocking
that
we
don't
have
at
least
like
a
line
of
sight
on
how
to
resolve
so
yeah.
I
think
this
is
when
we're
in
a
good
state
project
board
itself,
I
think,
looks
pretty
accurate.
I
kind
of
want
to
go
over
what's
in
progress.
A
B
David
might
know,
I'm
not
a
hundred
percent
sure
like
I'm
not
too
familiar
with
the
open
census
portion.
Okay,
I
it
might
be
unblockable.
I
think.
A
It's
unblockable,
but
yeah
I
mean
also.
I
don't
think
anybody's
gonna
be
actively
working
on
immediately,
but
I'm
just
gonna
unblock
it
just
for
now
in
case
somebody
does
want
to
grab
it
and
if
it
is
blocked,
it
can
always
go
back
to
the
block
status.
B
A
Yeah,
could
you
could
you
add
it
to
this
issue
david?
Yes,
I
can.
I
think
that
that
would
be
a
good
thing
to
just
document
here
for
the
person
picking
this
up.
A
Do
you
need
a
link,
or
should
I
just
or
do
you
have
it
already,
have
it?
Okay,
yeah.
B
B
Yeah,
the
other
thing
I
wanted
to
ask
is:
is
there
was
any
other
blockers
on
the
pipeline
registry?
I
know
we
have
the
approvals
and
everything,
but
it's
also
a
large
block
of
code.
So
is
there
anything
outstanding
that
you
want
in
this.
A
B
B
A
B
So
the
short
answer
is
this
is
how
you
check
that
the
outputs
of
those
are
comparable,
as
you
put
them
into
a
map.
A
A
B
Which,
if
that's
the
case,
then
maybe
that's
the
approach
to
take
okay.
But
but
I
I
was
looking
into
3080
the
putting
the
type
constraint
on
there.
A
B
B
A
So
I
yeah
I
was
looking
at
this
pr
for
a
little
while
I
had
some
conflicting
ideas
about
it.
One
of
the
things
is
I
wanted
to
ask
like:
did
you
try
just
embedding
comparable
in
the
reader
type
itself.
B
A
You
can
my
second
concern
was
this:
is
it
seems
like
it's
starting
to
leak?
The
implementation
into
the
api
was
another
question,
but
I
also
was,
I
know,
there's
no
plans
to
allow
user-defined
readers,
but
if
there
are
in
the
future
they
need
to
be
comparable
in
the
same
way
that
we
need
to
have
comparable
readers.
A
So
I
was
like
okay,
I
guess
that
might
make
sense
in
the
future,
but
I
I
also
wonder
like
how
much
we
need
to
worry
about
something
that
isn't
in
the
specification
currently
like
to
provide
user
input.
So
I
was
a
little
on
the
fence
on
that
one
I
mean
I
wasn't
opposed
to
this.
I
guess,
but
I
see
what
you're
saying
also
that,
like
you
know
having
this
nil
concept
come
in
is
or
the
empty
is
not
really
great.
B
Like
it
there,
there
ends
up
being
a
lot
of
follow-on
problems
from
making
this
change,
and
one
of
the
one
of
the
things
that
I
would
like
want
to
point
out
is
once
we
settle
on
this
api,
we
can't
actually
update
that
right.
A
Right,
yeah
well
yeah
exactly
we
can
only
add
well
yeah.
We
can
only
add
to
it
right.
So
if
we
wanted
to
like
change
that,
I
think
that's
a
that's
a
good
thing
to
keep
in
mind.
So
if,
if
you
just
use
this
compile
time
check
here
in
like
the
file
level
scope,
would
that
address
the
issue.
B
Yes,
assuming
that
you
can
actually
call
a
function
for
the
key
of
a
map,
I
I
thought
that's
where
it
would
fall
down.
B
But
yeah
I
can
move
it.
I
can
remove
it
out
of
a
test
and
put
it
into
just
variables.
A
Like
it
works
so
yeah,
okay,
yeah
all
right,
maybe
that's
just
the
way
to
move
forward
on
that,
then.
If
that
makes
sense.
A
But
okay,
but
yeah
other
than
that,
I
didn't
see
anything
that
was
blocking
also
was
you
know,
a
lot
of
the
stuff
is
unexplored
so
like
like.
We
were
saying
last
time
like.
If
we
do
have
like
design
changes,
we
can
always
address
them
in
the
future.
So
I
think
that
this
is
worth
merging
at
this
point,
because
it
is
like
a
headline
blocking,
I
guess,
yeah.
A
The
only
thing
outstanding
was
this
which
I
didn't
resolve,
but
if
we
could
just
move
it
to
what
we
just
discussed,
I
think
if
that
should
be
ready
to
go
perfect,
okay,
cool
yeah.
That
was
one
of
the
ones
I
wanted
to
talk
about
as
well.
Also,
I
wanted
to
ask
you:
do
you
think
that
this
is
starting
to
get
into
the
territory
of
this?
But
I
don't
have
a
good
like
visual,
like
understanding
of
like
which
the
differentiation
between
these
two
issues
is.
Should
this
be
closed
in
favor
of
this?
B
So
it
might
have
just
kind
of
merged
in
together,
I
I'm
not
well,
yes,
the
pipeline
structure
is.
B
Yeah,
I
think
that's
probably
the
the
best
approach
is
that
and
the
issue
of
creating
meters
that
actually
create
something
can
be
a
just
piecemeal
of
the
the
sink
stub
the
async
sub
and
the
callback.
B
Like
that's
the
that's
the
next
step
is
these
two
here
and
3015
at
the
bottom
of
that
list:
30
15..
Okay,
so
should
this
be
closed,
I
think
that's
closed
by
30
44,
the
one
we
were
just
looking
at.
A
Okay,
sorry
30
42,
okay,
yeah.
B
Yeah,
if
you
actually
scroll
down
a
little
bit
on
the
right,
there
is
development.
If
you
add
it,
there.
A
Make
sure
close
it?
Okay,
all
right
yeah.
Sometimes
it
adds
it
here
or
something
I
don't.
I
don't
know
it
used
to
work
all
the
time
and
then
it
stops
but
okay
cool.
Actually,
then,
let's
just
update
this.
A
B
A
B
B
I
think
we
probably
needed
an
issue
there.
The
only
the
only
qualms
I
have
about
that
is.
This
will
most
definitely
change
like
if
we
act
on
this.
This
will
change
the
width,
reader
interface,
so
yeah.
A
I
am
a
little
worried
about
that,
because
if
a
user
is
able
to
add
their
own
reader
in
the
future,
like
I
I
say
that,
but
I
also
like
we've
talked
about
this
before,
like
I
cannot
conceivably
think
of
a
reader
that
needs
to
be
added
outside
of
the
periodic
in
the
manual
like
both
of
them
kind
of
handle
both
options,
but
maybe
there's
some
sort
of
like
wrapping
that
people
wanted
to
add.
A
I
think
said
like
we
can
always
use
the
reflect
package
to
check
comparability
after
the
fact
and
then
error
or
or
succeed,
based
on
that
that
value
of
the
the
past
interface
type.
So
I
think
the
api
could
could
handle
that
in
the
future.
So
I
don't
know
what
are
your
thoughts
on
that.
B
We
that
is
more
relaxed,
and
then
we
want
to
further
constrain
it
like
that
makes
it
a
lot
more
difficult
like
going
that
path
versus
the
constrained
version
to
the
less
constrained
version.
A
That
there's
an
api
change
like
I
get
it
like
if
you
allow
more
functionality
but
like
given
this
function.
Signature
is
not
like.
You
can't
change
this
after
the
fact
like.
B
A
B
Well,
pipeline
registry,
needing
him
in
the
maps,
but
also
the
fact
like
at
some
point.
We
we
want
to
merge
like
like
big
picture,
is
we
have
all
of
these
instruments
that
get
transformed
by
views
and
we
need
to
eventually
merge
the
data
into
some
collection
of
like
scope,
level
of
both
reader
level
and
then
eventually,
like
other
scope,
level,
arguments
right,
yeah,
because
one
reader
doesn't
necessarily
see
the
same
set
of
instruments.
Ultimately
that
the
other
does
that
another
one
does.
A
A
B
Let's
create
an
issue
tentatively,
have
it
as
part
of
the
alpha
just
to
decide
whether
or
not
we
want
the
comparability
as
part
of
our
api,
and
then
the
next
steps
after
that
is
to
either
do
something
along
the
comparability
lines,
or
just
accept
that
it's.
A
Well,
so
I
would,
I
would
rather
not
include
this
in
the
alpha
release.
Just
given
it's
not
a
part
of
the
specification
like
currently.
I
think
that
we
need
to
ensure
that
our
readers
are
comparable
and
I
think
we
can
do
that
with
what
we
talked
about,
but
the
reason
we
want
to
add
this
is
if
we
we
start
to
allow
user
readers,
and
so
that's
something
I
think
we
want
to
discuss
in
the
beta,
because
it
would
be
opening
up
the
feature
set
for
future
compatibility.
A
A
Okay,
all
right,
would
you
like
me
to
do
that,
or
is
that
something
you
can
do.
A
Yeah
I
create
an
issue
close
this
and
then
just
track
the
track
that
in
the
beta
milestone,
okay
and
that's
something
you're
going
to
do
aaron
yeah.
I
can
take
that
okay,
awesome.
A
A
The
other
thing
that's
in
progress
is
the
otlp
metrics
transforms
it's
a
big
pre-pr
I'd
like
to
make
the
caveat
that
you
know.
400
lines
of
this
is
a
ghost
zone,
but
it
still
doesn't
bring
that
number
down
to
a
really
small
number,
and
so
just
a
you
know,
I
I
feel
for
you.
If
you
have
suggestions
on
how
to
reduce
this,
I
I'm
happy
to
put
this
in
piecemeal.
A
It's
pretty
straightforward,
because
all
it's
doing
is
actually
transforming
and
the
I
tried
to
structure
the
tests
so
they're
a
little
bit
more
concise
but
yeah
again.
If
you
have
suggestions,
I'm
willing
to
resubmit
this
something
something
smaller.
A
I
also
don't
know
if
it's
worth
resubmitting
it,
it's
just.
You
know,
I
think,
maybe
just
taking
a
few
sessions
to
go
through
it
but
yeah.
So
that's
on
the
agenda
or
in
the
review
needed
column.
The
changes
to
instruments
unique
uniqueness
and
pipeline.
I
think
this
is
done.
A
There
was
a
formatting
thing
here
which
I
looked,
and
I
think
this
is
copying
the
fact
there's
no
line
break
above
it.
So
I
don't.
I
don't
know,
there's
there's
formatting
things
here
that
are
just
nitpicks,
but
I
think
this
is
ready
to
merge
as
well
aaron.
I
don't
know
if
you
have
anything
else,
you
wanted
to
wait
on
this
one:
okay,
yeah.
We.
A
Looks
accurately
in
progress
our
to
do
looks
accurate.
I
was
looking
at
doing
some
documentation
work
as
well.
I
will
assign
myself
if
I
do
actually
pick
it
up,
but
I
think
that
we're
we
have
a
line
of
sight
towards
the
end
like
I
was
saying
at
the
beginning
of
this.
A
So
like
we're
doing
pretty
well
the
only
other
things
I
guess
are
these
example
codes,
which
we
are
still
waiting
on
a
full
sdk
implementation
to
to
get
some
output,
so
we
can
verify
the
output,
but
other
than
that,
I
don't
think
that
we
have
any
big
hurdles
in
front
of
us.
So
I'm
excited,
I
guess
that's
the
summation
on
that
one.
Okay!
A
Well,
cool
with
that.
I.
B
Do
have
a
question,
though,
go
ahead
timeline.
Last
week
you
said
month
month
and
a
half
estimated
timeline
you
still
hold
to
that.
A
As
mine,
but
the
yeah.
A
I
can
I
can
say
that
I'm
going
to
continue
the
the
current
level
of
engagement
with
this
that
I
have
in
the
past,
like
there's
nothing
coming
up
in
the
in
the
year
in
that
month
and
a
half,
so
I
don't
see
why
my
involvement
would
go
down.
I
guess
if,
if
you
all
would
commit
to
the
same,
like,
I
think
that
timeline
is
still
reasonable.
In
my
eyes,.
B
So
that
puts
it
just
before
kubecon,
by
the
way,
really
oh
yeah
a
month
and
a
half
would
be
beginning
of
october.
Okay,
kubecon
is
the
end
of
october.
A
All
right,
so,
let's
try
to
do
that.
I
think
that's
a
great
idea:
okay,
yeah!
Let's,
I
think
that's
that's
a
worthy
call!
This
it
for
man.
Time
flies
when
you're
having
fun.
I
know
when
we
first
started
this
project.
I
never
thought
it
would
take
this
long,
but
that's
how
code
development
goes.
Yeah!
Okay,
let's,
let's
do
that?
A
Okay,
I
will
actually
I'll
take
that
as
an
action
item.
I
don't
think
in
the
milestone.
You
can
put
a
date
so
I'll
try
to
put
a
date
in
there,
which
is
again
a
fabricated
number,
but
it'll
be
a
published
fabricated
number
at
that
point.
A
Okay,
next
on
the
agenda
is
a
pr
from
josh
revising
the
metrics
instrumentation
for
the
runtime
options.
I
haven't
taken
a
look
at
this
yet
at
all
I'm
busy
with
the
skate
development,
but
it
looks
like
there's
some
back
and
forth.
It
is
requested
that
people
go
take
a
look
at
it.
It's
only
440
lines,
so
I
think
it's
worthwhile,
especially
since
this
instrumentation
is
just
going
to
be
using
the
api.
A
I
don't
think
there's
any
blockers
on
the
sdk
here,
so
yeah
I'll
try
to
take
a
look.
If
you
have
time,
please
take
a
look.
A
Next
jamie,
the
hotel
go
launcher,
design,
doc,
still
updates
and
based
on
the
feedback
of
this
still
in
progress,
I
can
pause.
I
think
I
saw
jamie
on
yeah
if
you
want
to
add
something
yeah,
just
primarily
that
I
haven't
updated
the
doc
I
haven't
had
a
chance
to
get
to
the
dock,
specifically
in
the
last
week,
internally,
we've
been
kind
of
working
on
some
things
with
our
like
honeycomb
specific
package
and
like
right
now,
there's
kind
of
an
idea
of
having.
A
I
think,
a
few
folks
try
it
out
right
now
as
like,
like
a
separate.
Obviously
it's
not
in
like
a
contrib
right
now,
but
the
idea
being,
can
we
start
seeing
some
of
the
obvious
rough
edges
too,
as
we're
working
through
it,
but
the
design
dock
I
have.
I
know
david
had
put
a
pretty
thorough
comment
on
there
of
some
ideas
around
it,
and
I
know
we
had
feedback
from
last
week
that
we
talked
about
things
of
what
it
is.
A
What
is
what
it
isn't
and
so
kind
of
talking
about
it
a
little
bit
internally
but
haven't
had
a
chance
to
really
put
words
onto
paper
and
update
the
doc
as
such,
so
just
kind
of
wanted
to
make
sure
everyone
kind
of
knew
it's
still
being
worked
on
just
there
isn't
something
to
to
really
look
at
okay,
yeah.
Thanks
for
the
update
as
everyone
on
the
call
can
commiserate
with
you
like
work
gets
busy
so
totally
understands
yeah,
but
yeah.
A
A
Okay,
that's
it
for
the
listed
agenda
looks
like
a
little
bit
of
a
light
meeting
today.
I
didn't
know
if
anybody
has
something
else,
they
want
to
talk
about.
That's
not
on
the
agenda
pause
here.
A
Okay
and
maybe
any
user
stories,
I
do.
A
From
last
week,
david,
I
was
sharing
internally
that
cubelet
story
and
people
were
amazed.
They
were
not
aware
that
it
was
going
on
and
then
they
saw
they're
like
this
is
going
to
be
incredible,
so
yeah
it's
it
was
work
well
appreciated,
cool
yeah,.
B
B
Anything
after
1.0,
so
I
think
one
yeah
0.1.
Okay,
that's
that
week
we
didn't
go
to
like
0.22
for
about
20.
You
know,
okay,.
A
B
A
A
Well,
cool,
I
think,
with
that
we
can
probably
end
it
here.
I
do
want
to
say,
like
I
really
like,
especially
looking
at
all
the
work
that
we're
doing
in
the
metro:
testica
value
everyone's
contributions
to
the
to
the
city,
so
it's
very
much
appreciated
and
very
really
happy
to
be
a
part
of
it.
So
thanks
everyone
yeah,
and
I
think
with
that
we
can
jump
off
but
yeah
same
place
same
time
next
week,
otherwise
see
you
all
asynchronously,
bye,.