►
From YouTube: 2021-06-28 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
C
D
Okay.
Let's
go
over
the
agenda,
so,
first
of
all
specification,
no
important
changes.
So
far
we
will
be
having
a
release
in
one
week
and
a
half
more
or
less
or
one
week,
yes
other
than
that
nothing
happening,
metrics,
making
progress
on
the
vpr,
please
whoever
filled
this.
C
Yeah,
so
so
we're
making
progress
on
the
sdk,
spec
and
also
there's
a
old
type
about
the
sampling
part
like
the
current
plan,
is
to
release
the
sdks
back
by
experimental
version
by
end
of
this
month,
which
I
I
think
we
won't
be
able
to
make
it.
There
are
at
least
two
or
three
outstanding
things
we
need
to
finish
so,
probably
will
delay
for
a
couple
weeks.
B
E
Java
I'll
chime
in
so
as
I
wrote
down,
josh
earth
is
starting
to
build
out
the
new
metrics
api
sdk
and
one
other
thing,
I'm
going
to
add
that
we're
moving
some
aws
modules
over
to
the
contrib
to
the
java
contributory
code,
so
removing
some
some
aw
stuff
out.
F
D
Anyway,
yeah
stay
safe
and
stay
fresh,
yes,
java.
G
D
I
Yeah
we'd
release
a
bug
fix
update
for
the
api
to
fix
a
circular
dependency
issue
that
only
affected
a
small
number
of
people,
but
we're
working
on
the
sdk,
rc
and
metrics
work
will
be
beginning
very
soon.
We
actually
have
an
engineer
at
dynatrace
that
will
be
dedicated
to
open
telemetry
metrics,
not
just
for
js,
but
he's
going
to
begin
by
focusing
on
js
so
hopefully
get
that
ramped
up
pretty
soon.
D
C
D
Yeah
yeah
right
so
it
looks
that,
based
on
the
meeting
notes
that
1.1.0
release
candidate
one
released
and
then
the
actual
1.1
stable
will
be
done
in
one
or
two
weeks.
So
that's
great
news
as
well.
D
This
release
will
address
the
majority
of
configuration
issues
when
used
with
direct
with
the
eye
without
open
telemetry
api
sdk,
taking
talking
talking
taking
a
dependency
on
nadi,
the
I
package
and
metrics.
Yes,.
C
D
A
Yeah,
no
major
updates
for
go
we're
working
towards
our
1.0
release
after
getting
out
the
rc
week
and
halfway
or
something
back
so
yep
fantastic.
D
Ready
to
hear
that
c,
plus
plus.
D
Lalith
here
or
somebody
from
the
c
plus
plus
c,
I
guess
not,
but
there's
1.010
release
candidate
3
planned
for
this
week,
which
adds
support
for
injecting
custom
error,
handlers
for
internal
components
and
semantic
conventions,
definitions
for
resources
and
traces
and,
as
previously
mentioned
in
previous
meetings,
they
are
looking
for
basel
experts.
So
if
you
know
anybody
in
your
company
who
would
be
willing
to
help
there,
please
please
do
so
ruby.
D
I
guess
an
update
is
weak.
What
about
swift.
J
Yeah
I
can.
I
can
give
a
quick
update
for
the
collector.
We
have
about
five
issues
in
in
in
flight,
which
are
kind
of
you
know,
undetermined
in
progress,
but
we're
making
good
progress
and
should
complete
the
tracing
1.0
issues
in
the
next
couple
of
weeks.
So
that's
that's
kind
of
where
we
are
right
now.
J
J
Yeah,
so
I
think
that
in
the
discussions
with
bogdan
and
tigrin,
the
agreement
was
that
you
know
once
the
must-haves
in
phase
one
and
the
must-haves
in
phase
two
are
completed.
Then
we
are
pretty
much
ready
for
at
least
the
tracing
core
collector
stability.
D
Very
good-
that's
that's
very,
very
nice
thanks
so
much
for
that
erlang
tristan
is
round,
because
no
so
no
updates
for
now.
Okay,
perfect!
Let's
now
move
on
to
the
rest
of
the
items,
I
put
there
an
item
regarding
clarification
or
tlp
supported
formats
in
each
sig.
This
is
something
we
discussed
in
the
previous
weeks
about
what
formats
should
be
supported,
and
there
was
a
proposal
made
by
by
this
group
that
h6
should
support
grpc
and
http
with
proto
as
a
default
format.
D
However,
there
were
some
latest
comments
of
contributors,
saying
that
please
please
well,
there
was
somebody
saying:
please
just
keep
it
the
way
it
is
now
because
at
this
moment
we
only
required
six
to
implement
one
of
the
three
formats.
One
is
enough,
and
then
there
was
somebody
saying
please
go,
let's
go
with
jrpc,
so
I
was
wondering
if
you
guys
have
any
opinion.
D
We
had
some
concern
that
maybe
javascript
only
wanted
to
support
the
json
one,
the
json
format,
but
based
on
the
fact
that
you
guys
have
the
three
the
three
of
them.
We
are
fine,
so
this
is
more
about
deciding
for
the
rest
of
the
c6,
because
I
don't
think
everything
has
all
of
the
three.
You
know
these
formats
implemented.
G
I
D
No,
that's
fine
that
that's
actually
the
perfe.
You
know
the
best
case
scenario,
but
I
guess
that
other
stakes
don't
want
to
don't
want,
or
they
don't
have
enough
cycles
to
to
do
all
the
work
to
support
the
three
of
them.
B
A
H
This,
oh
sorry,
go
ahead.
No,
it's
fine!
So
my
two
cents
on
this
is
jason
is
unstable.
So
that's
probably
the
least
preferred
unfortunately,
and
I
know
there,
there
are
some
good
reasons
to
have
that
stable,
but
nobody
prioritize
that
work.
So
I
would
say
if,
if
I
were
to
choose
in
terms
of
priority,
I
would
prioritize
the
grpc
and
http
proto
on
top
like
before
the
jason
one
because
of
the
stability
instability
problem.
D
B
Yeah,
I
agree
with
you
carlos
and
I
think
the
cross
section
of
people
that
are
going
to
be
using
new,
unstable,
open,
telemetry,
libraries
and
grpc.
That's
like
those
two
concentric
circles
are
pretty
filled.
C
C
H
Yeah,
if
we
have
somebody
from
google,
maybe
it's
a
good
feedback
to
hear.
But
for
that
reason
maybe
maybe
we
should
we
should
prioritize
http
first,
I
don't
know
it's
just
a
suggestion,
even
though
I
really
love
the
grpc.
G
We
can,
I
can
make
a
pull
request
with
the
following
formulation:
that
sdk
must
implement
at
least
one
of
them
or
glp,
grpc
or
http,
and
should
implement
both
of
them
that's
backward
compatible.
That
reflects
the
current
reality
that
doesn't
force
maintainers
to
do
anything
at
once,
because
that's
already
fulfilled
by
the
whole
languages
and
but
still.
H
D
Okay,
let's
do
that
yeah
thanks
so
much
for
that
then
yeah
on
that.
On
a
related
note,
if
somebody
wants
to
champion
on
making
the
json
http
part
stable,
that
could
be
great.
I
would
try
to
get
some
resources
here
it
at
lightstep
to
do
that,
but
I'm
still
trying
to
get
that.
You
know
like
to
get
some
actual
cycles
from
that.
But
if
somebody
wants
to
help
please
or
we
can
work
together
or
something
because
I
think
it's
important
to
make
that
finally
happen.
D
Okay,
oh
yeah.
Next
one
bob.
B
H
Anyway,
you
know
her
feelings:
less
meetings
are
better,
so.
J
I
I
think,
given
that
we
have
a
tuesday
meeting
for
the
spec
sick,
I
think
we
can
cancel
this
one.
H
Next,
it
will
be
the
same
discussion
about
the
tuesday
meeting
by
the
way.
Alolita
I
know
amazon
is,
is
not
giving
you
three
days,
but
a
bunch
of
companies
have
holiday
tuesdays,
yeah.
D
H
Okay,
so
let's
let's
then
keep
tuesday,
knowing
that
some
of
the
people
may
miss
anyway
because
of
the
fourth
of
july.
But
that's
it.
D
I
D
Fantastic,
then,
all
right,
so
I
will
cancel
this
meeting
on
the
calendar
after
this
call,
I
think,
that's
all,
that's
it
no
more
items
for
today
you
want
to
discuss.
I
know
that
book
that
you
want
to
go,
but
for
the
rest
of
the
crew.
Do
you
want
to
discuss
something
or
happy
to
go
for
your
coffee?