►
From YouTube: 2021-06-09 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
B
A
A
So
from
from
the
roberts
upstream
pool,
we
have
the
question
about
licensed
copyright
notes.
I
think
we
are
not
clearly
yet
100
how
that
should
be
solved.
So
perhaps
let's
hold
off
on
merging
that
until
we
are
clear,
but
I
I
linked
something
there
and
I
think
you
bring
nikita
right
robert
to.
B
C
B
C
Yeah,
I
don't
think,
there's
any
issues
right
now.
I
think
yeah
I
I
thought
it
was
just
gonna,
be
an
issue
with
like
how
are
we
gonna
be
modifying
that
for
openometry
and
whatnot,
because
you
know
all
that
stuff
is
expected
to
be
in
our
repo
and
so
we're
just
sort
of
keeping
up
with
our
our
own
open
source
policies
there.
So
if
that
works
for
this
repo,
then
I
I
don't
mind
doing
that.
A
Cool
cool,
so
just
just
to
be
true:
can
you
merge
the
end
api
because
then
it
kind
of
I
think,
becomes
very
clear
to
everybody
that
we
are
okay
with
that
because
you
are
from
data
dark.
So
if
you
click
the
merge
button,
I
think
it's
it's
kind
of
clear
that
we
had
agreement
on
that.
A
All
right
this
week,
I
was
not
in
the
maintainers
meeting,
but
seizure
pinged
me
afterwards,
because
there
was
a
question
about
usage
of
the
sdk
on
auto
instrumentation
and
actually
the
question
had
two
sides.
One
side
is
kind
of
how
we
are
dealing
with
a
problem
that
java,
auto
instrumentation
is
having,
and
actually
we,
although
we
are
not
dealing
with
that
right
now,
we
do
have
a
proposal,
that's
basically
to
control
who
loads
the
sdk
in
the
plc.
A
So
in
the
plc
it
became
clear
to
us
that
we
have
this
option
about
not
loading
the
sdk
and
let
the
application
bootstrap
the
sdk
and
we
just
add
instrumentations
and
the
other
is
kind
of
how
we
could
do
that.
And
then
I
pointed
them
through
the
poc
and
the
conversations
that
we
have
be
having
at
the
poc
season,
and
I
had
a
a
chat
on
slack
and
I
presented
yesterday
kind
of
my
answer
to
the
dot
net
sig
about
where
we
are
with
that.
A
I
think
then
it
is
important
to
have
everyone
in
the
same
page.
Kind
of
we
are
experimenting
with
that.
So
far,
things
are
looking
good
and
if
things
go
well,
then
we
need
to
kind
of
do
a
plan
to
to
do
this
change
right.
So
I
think
these
are
the
next
steps
and
seizure
that
leads
the
net
sdk.
He
was
very
motivated
to
see
if
we
need
some
help.
We
do
have
kind
of
space
to
do
changes
on
the
sdk
to
satisfy
the
needs
here
on
auto
instrumentation.
A
You
know
so
they
they
didn't
say
if
they
have
a
resource
for
that,
but
depending
what
what
we
need,
they
will
be
willing
to
take
these
changes
and
do
at
the
sdk
directly
as
needed.
A
So
in
this
regard
I
think
then
the
next
big
thing
becomes
for
us
to
talk,
not
big
thing,
but
the
the
thing
to
talk
is
about
the
poc,
and
I
think
that
the
main
thing
right
now
is
to
kind
of
create
build
on
top
of
the
sample
app
there,
but
build
kind
of
trying
to
build
the
corner
cases
both
for
core
and
framework.
A
So
we
need
to
have
stuff,
like
the
console
app,
that
we
have
there
using
a
package
that
references
old
version
of
a
system
diagnostic
source
and,
if
the
workarounds
that
we
test
and
try
before
really
working
on
on
this
kind
of
more
corner
case
issues
and
after
we
do
that
validation.
I
think
erasmus
is
doing
right
now
core
and
then
we
have
to
see
who
can
do
the
the
framework
tests
after
that.
A
But
after
we
have
that,
then
I
think
we
can
put
the
findings
with
the
important
the
important
thing.
You'll
be.
What
are
the
workarounds
what's
needed
for
the
workarounds
and
what
scenarios
are
not
going
to
be
covered?
You
know,
so
we
already
know
that
there
will
be
no
net
core
2.1,
because
the
sdk
doesn't
cover
that.
But
the
question
that
we
are
trying
to
answer
is
there
is
anything
in
core
3.1
that
we
can't
cover.
There
is
anything
in
dotnet
452
that
we
can't
cover
with
the
workaround
or
we
need
something
special.
C
Are
we
expecting
to
support
like
donut
framework?
I
guess,
do
we
have
a
minimum
level
of
donate
from
work
set
right
now?
I
assume
that
we
we'll
be
automatically
instrumenting
like
asp.net,
like
nbc5
applications
and
yeah.
I
guess
like
the
latest
asp.net
packages.
A
Yes,
yes,
I
I
think
if
we
look
to
down
level,
what
I
think
is
four
five
two
is
the
lowest
for
the
framework
and
and
core
side
is
3.1.
That's
the
minimum.
You
know
got
it
so
I
I
know
that
upstream
covers.net
core
2.1
and
I
think
it's
still
covered
as
net
core
3.0
that
won't
be
covered.
If
we
go
the
sdk
route,
you
know
because
the
sdk
doesn't
build
for
that.
There
is
no
system
diagnostic
for
those
down
level.
A
And
I
think
I
got
to
everything
that
I
want
to
cover
so
zach.
If
you
have
these
chronically
scenarios
kind
of
some
application
that
comes
to
mind,
please
let
us
know
on
there
is
lack
and
we
try
to
cover
with
this
test
using
the
poc.
C
Okay,
yeah
the
the
ones
that
come
to
mind
immediately,
especially
with
the
question
of
sort
of
the
assembly
closures
like
leaking
out.
Somebody
closures
from
our
instrumentation
assemblies
is
maybe
having
two
applications
running
on
the
same
iis
application
pool,
and
you
know
maybe
one
is
configured
to
use
the
sdk
and
one
is
not
and
just
seeing
how
that
interacts.
A
Yeah,
I
think
that
that
is
a
very
good
case,
and
that
is
some
because
iis
is
a
pretty
big
beast
and
there
are
a
bunch
of
scenarios.
I
think
we
should
choose
carefully
what
are
gonna
target.
I
don't
know.
For
instance,
these
are
get
operations,
but
they
are
different.
Like
soap
requests,
for
instance,
they
they
are
different,
they
are
different
beasts
right
and
they
still
people
using
soap
requests,
but
on
the
other
hand,
I'm
not
sure
if
it's
worth
for
us
to
cover
in
this
validation.
A
You
know
if
somebody
has
some
ideas
about
that
feel
free
to
to
let
us
know,
but
in
principle
I
would
say:
friends:
soap
is
not
worth
doing
the.
A
All
right,
I
I
I'm
just
noticing
the
silence.
If
folks
don't
bring,
oh,
we
have
to
go
over
the
the
the
bugs.
I
always
forget
that
part,
because
I've
been
focusing
on
the
other
stuff.
B
First
of
all,
because
for
us,
dca
status
may
not
be
so
easy
because
we
have
a
lot
of
you
know
we
do
not
have
one
sql
pipeline,
that's
one
for
one.
One
reason
why
this
is
maybe
not
worth
doing
and
the
code
cough
we
do
not
like
a
lot
of
code
is
tested
using
integration
tests,
so
I
think
it
might
give
a
false
sense
that
the
code
is
not
tested
or
the
other
way
we.
B
A
I
think
we
just
need
to
check
if
it's
something
that
open
telemetry
is
asking
as
a
general
from
our
ripples.
So
then,
maybe.
B
I
think
it's
not
because
I
have,
I
think,
double
checked
if
with
java
instrumentation,
because
I
think
they
have
the
exactly
same
concerns,
but
they
can
double
check
it
right
now,
so
they
have
only
built
and
they
do
not
have
the
test
as
well,
because
for
them
also
they're
testing
most
of
the
stuff.
Using
this
integration
test.
B
Okay,
okay,
so
this
one
is
done
next,
one
is
the
code
ql
scanning
and
right
now
I
put
even
at
net
because
it's
not
working
right
now
properly.
B
I
don't
know
if
you
have
saw,
but
basically
after
something
yeah,
I
don't
know
why.
But
basically
some
sometimes
this
code
fuel
analysis
works.
Sometimes
it
does
not.
It
has
some
auto
built
magic
script
and
I
don't
know
if
it's
changing
from
time
to
time
or
not,
because
right
now
here
is
working,
but,
for
example,
on
my
barge
started
to
fail.
A
B
A
B
A
I
I'd
say
that
the
c
plus
plus
stuff
and
and
to
be
fair-
I'm
not
very
I'm
not
familiar
with
this
stuff,
but
until
the
at
least
the
c
sharp
is
stable.
There
is
no
point
in
doing
the
the
c
plus
plus
right.
B
A
A
B
B
Yes,
so
I
just
noticed
that
some,
the
usage
empty
is
not
up
to
date,.
A
Yeah,
that's
what
you
do
sooner
so
before
bed.
A
Yeah
the
trouble
here
is
that
we
to
test
this
kind
of
stuff.
We
need
the
wrapper
and
set
up
the
environment
right
so
a
sharepoint
unless
it
changed
at
least
as
far
as
I
remember
it's
not
that
trivial.
B
And
these
two
have
been
added
by
me
as
part
of
my
pr.
So
these
are
the
tests
that
I
have
basically
ignored,
but
I
know
maybe
zach
knows
something
more,
why
they
may
be
failing.
A
Yeah
this
this
we
need
to
address
soon
right,
so
either
we
decide
but
to
disable
the
test
or
fix
it,
but
it
should
be
address
soon.
A
B
Basically,
this
one
is
a
new
test,
which
is
basically
right
now
is
failing
after
the
the
the
muslim
thing,
the
sort
of
dubstin
upstream
sync,
and
this
one
is
basically
already
failing
on
master
on
the
main
graph.
Sorry
and
it
magically
started
to
face.
So
I
assume
this
one
can
be.
I
don't
know
somehow
related
to
the
ms
build
update,
which
was
like
a
few.
I
don't
know
weeks
ago,
as
far
as
I
know,
and.
B
C
I
don't
have
any
additional
like
info
or
I
can.
I
can
look
into
it.
I
I
don't
have
anything
on
the
top
of
my
head.
That
would
point
to
the
the
fix
the
origin
tag
send
traces.
I
don't
have
any
suspicion
as
to
what's
wrong
there.
The
some
of
those
smoke
tests,
those
ones
they
may
just
be
flaky.
We
tend
to
have
some
issues
with
some
of
those
reproductions,
but
either
way
I
don't
have
an
answer
right
now.
B
Okay,
you
can
always
try
to
fly,
so
we
just
put
it
before
the
beta
just
to
have
it
quite
high.
A
Yeah
yeah
yeah
just
one
thing
when
I
look
at
last
week,
because
I
noticed
this
two
new
dotnet
5
switch,
perhaps
we
should
put
those
on
the
integration
paths.
You
know
the
blame
hang
and
put
a
timeout
in
general
for
tests
no,
at
least
for
me,
to
find
the
issues
robert.
That
was
pretty
helpful
when
I
saw
that
I
just
basically
used
the
command
line
and
let
it
run
you
know
so.
B
C
C
B
A
So
so,
in
that
sense,
it's
going
to
be
covering
the
future
without
a
need
for
us
to
do
to
use
these
new
streets.
If
I
understand
what
you
guys
are
saying
or.
C
We
we
might,
we
might
want
to
add
the
switch,
but
right
now
I
guess,
if
we're
going
to
be
upstreaming
soon,
then
you
can
consume
the
nuke
and
then
we
can
maybe
apply
it
there
after
that
change
and
then
see
how
see
even
how
the
nuke,
how
you
guys
want
to
use
it,
because
I
know
we're
still
sort
of
doing
a
side
by
side
slowly,
turning
off
the
old
and
using
just
the
new
pipelines,
so
we
haven't
even
fully
made
the
transition.
Yet
so
it's
sort
of
a
place.
C
We
can
apply
it
to
both
places
if
we
want
to
add
that
flag,
but
we're
still
in
the
we're
still
transitioning.