►
From YouTube: 2019-10-10 OpenTelemetry monthly governance meeting
Description
OpenTelemetry monthly governance meeting
A
B
B
F
F
D
D
E
D
D
F
D
F
I
D
You
know
you
can
apply
to
be
a
member
of
standing
and
get
an
exception.
We
need
to
find
numbers
the
three
members
that
github
or
an
including
the
candidate
themselves,
who
will
support
the
nomination
and
that
that
process
has
to
happen,
and
then
we
can
publish
the
list
in
some
way.
For
you
know,
folks,
to
consider
as
part
of
voting
is
that
right.
I
D
B
C
C
C
There's
like
a
baseline
of
permissions,
they're
not
available
to
the
public
around
like
really
trivial
things
like
adding
and
removing
labels
or
milestones
or
assignees,
and
that's
just
in
this
sort
of
like
background
radiation
of
irritation,
the
people
who
are
kind
of
involved
in
the
project
from
that
perspective,
so
we
are
interested
in
either
creating
like
an
or
guide
triage
role
or
expanding
the
approvers
role
to
do
this.
So
that's
like
the
practical
concern.
B
C
I
I
But
one
of
them
includes
things
like
labels
through
comments,
so
that
you
don't
have
to
give
away
administrative
privileges
to
the
whole
org.
To
be
able
to
do
some
of
this
stuff.
So
I
would
recommend
that
we
take
a
peek
at
that
and
see
if
it
is
something
that
can
be
adopted.
Wholesale
they've
tried
to
very
much
break
it
out
from
kubernetes,
but
it
still
has
a
lot
of
the
kubernetes
way
of
doing
things,
so
it
may
fit
or
it
may
not.
I
C
I
Are
people
without
who
are
not
primarily
code
contributors
who
have
those
permissions,
but
that
is
managed
through
the
social
structure
of
cig
contributor
experience
so
same
sort
of
idea
they
have
their
own
reap.
They
have
their
own
processes.
There's
a
lot
of
really
interesting
history
and
in
process
around
that.
So
that
might
be
a
good
spot
to
go.
Look
or
go!
Ask
questions
if
you
know
someone
who's
active
in
that
okay.
C
I
C
I
C
Like
extra
bit
of
structure,
where
we're
trying
to
have
this
sort
of
tiered
approach,
where
we
come
together
as
some
collective
and
make
some
decisions
and
we're
using
this
specification
processes
with
hashing
that
out
and
recording
it
and
then
we
one
of
them,
make
sure
all
of
that
then
getting
acted
upon
once
it's
agreed
upon
and
all
the
SIG's
and
then
there's
all
these
questions
around
like
well.
Where
are
we
at
in
these
different
groups?
So
that's
actually
the
core
practical
problem.
I'm
trying
to
solve
right
now
is
currently
getting
a
sort
of
high
level.
C
You
know
10,000
foot
view
of
the
backlog
and
getting
a
sense
of
like.
Are
we
behind
somewhere?
You
know:
when
can
we
confidently
say
something's
gonna
ship
is
leading
to
a
lot
of
the
managerial
types
to
kind
of
go
around
to
their
individual
engineers
and
like
poke
them
for
updates.
So
I
feel,
like
the
engineers
are
all
getting
like
constantly
poked
for
updates,
I'm
trying.
I
That
is
something
that
we
have
not
solved
well
inside
kubernetes,
because
there's
a
lot
there's,
not
a
lot
of
cross
special
interest.
Group
notifications,
slash
publications
of
status,
which
is
what
you
would
need
same
idea
here,
being
the
special
interest
groups
being
by
language
that
you
want
sort
of
updates
and
discussions
where,
where
where
they
are,
where
a
topic
is
cross-cutting.
I
But
it's
one
of
the
things
we
we
in
the
steering
committee
had
talked
about
Morgan
doing
a
monthly
summary.
Thank
you
posted
on
the
blog
saying
what
each
of
the
different
special
interest
groups
or
languages
in
this
case
are
doing
and
where
they
are.
So
that
was
our
start
of
an
attempt
to
that.
Do
that,
but
it
is
also.
There
does
need
to
be
some
one
sort
of
keeping
that
ten
thousand
foot
view
and
it's
tough
yeah.
C
C
So
interesting,
yeah
well
we're
giving
this
a
shot.
The
first
step
we
just
made
is
actually
trying
to
get
this
project
status
page
together
and
to
try
to
have
that
actually
be
driven
by
github
milestones,
but
then,
of
course,
like
all
of
that
stuff
actually
is
to
get
linked
up
correctly.
So
that's
the
part
where
we're
starting
to
notice
like
from
a
human
standpoint,
there's
some
humans
who,
like
value
this
output
more
than
others,
because
they're
the
ones
looking
at
it.
I
I
So
I
actually
dropped
a
link
in
here.
There's
an
article
that
talks
about
it's
called
machines
can
do
the
work,
the
story
of
kubernetes
testing,
CI
and
automate
automating.
The
contributor
experience.
It's
actually
a
really
good
article
that
talks
about
how
which
pieces
of
which
thing
allow
or
which
pieces
of
the
tooling
allow
different
services.
In
this
case,
I
do.
D
D
Than
the
currents
that
our
product
admins
is
the
concern
about
adding
someone
who
has
like
the
github
permissions
to
do
a
lot
of
damage,
but
then,
like
understand
permissions,
to
only
do
a
couple
of
things.
Is
it
concern
about
that
that
they're
going
to
accidentally
go
and
like
delete
something
or
that
they're
going
to
like
go
rogue
and
like
wreak
havoc
on
the
project,
or
something
like
that
like
I'm,
just
like?
D
If,
for
instance
like
there
were
a
lot
of
people
who
want
to
become
members
of
the
project
and
there's
a
you
know,
there's
like
an
official
list
of
requirements
to
become
maintainer
or
to
prove
her
over
give
and
say
and
like
that
work
could
be
done
by
a
lot
of
people.
It's
not
like
hard
for
human
being
to
do
that,
audit
of
like
their
contributions
and
so
on.
I,
don't
really
understand.
The
objection
is
that
is
it
really
concerned
that
someone's
going
to
deliberately
damage
the
project
or
just
stuff.
C
D
C
I
mean
I
have
a
lot
of
faith
that
if
you
tell
people
this
is
your
job.
This
is
what
you're
allowed
to
do.
This
is
what
you're
not
allowed
to
do
and
alike,
but
I
am
curious,
whether
it's
like
people
have
some
like
lived
experiences
like
bad
experience
in
the
past
and
they're.
Trying
to
like
not
me
create
that
experience
for
themselves.
C
J
Yeah
I
can
talk
about
it,
so
I'm
totally
fine
with
triage
general
and
in
fact
we
discussed
the
odd
general
before
saying
that
we
should
definitely
have
people
who
whose
task
is
like
who
wants
to
do
like
maintenance
and
like
helping
with
issues
and
helping
with
managing
the
project.
So
it's
totally
fine
with
me
and
we
have
this
language
membership
documented.
We
really
like
you
I
think
months
ago,
talked
about
the
r0,
so
the
problem
is
TR
across
every
project
automatically.
J
I,
don't
want
this
back
in
this
issue
and
then
somebody
else
is
putting
it
inside
a
milestone
when
maintainer
who
doesn't
want
it
I'm,
like
some
meters,
maybe
walking
about
that
someone.
Maybe
just
annoyed
and
I:
don't
tell
anybody
and
then
just
leave
so
I
want
to
avoid
any
possible
conflicts.
So
there
is
a
clear
path
to
became
a
pro
Grand
Theater
in
every
repository,
so
I
suggest
to
whoever
want
to
be
cheeky
and
just
go
to
this,
maintain
and
like
talk
to
him
and
like
get
approval
get
into
the
triage
zero.
B
C
C
G
Think
personally,
I
think
in
general
and
TPMS
inside
the
company
they
have
a
different
role
than
open
source
and
I.
Don't
know
if
we
want
to
make
the
open
source
community
of
a
corporation
where
managers
will
decide.
This
is
your
priority
because
whatever
I
say
I'm
telling
you
that
this
is
your
priority.
Yeah.
B
J
J
With
a
machine
power
to
do
whatever
they
needed,
so
any
person
or
like
any
companies
that
want
to
join
this
project
doesn't
have
to
join
governance
first
and
then
Adam
became
a
maintainer.
They
just
need
to
be
came
and
maintained
in
a
sense.
I
have
enough
autonomy
to
influence
the
projects
the
way
they
want
so
like.
J
D
C
The
thing
I'm
looking
to
enable
is
more
just
like
the
Scout
rule
of
like
there
are
people
involved
in
the
project
in
general,
maybe
even
not
a
special
role,
but
just
like
almost
saying
like.
Maybe
everyone
gets
triage,
a
role
across
the
project
and
you
just
say
like
look
you're
joining
open
telemetry.
This
whole
project
you're
not
just
on
this
one
sig.
So
that
might
be
where
you
have
like
extra
responsibilities
but
like
everyone
should
be
trying
to
make
this
place
like
a
cleaner
place.
But.
C
I
do
understand
your
concern
about
like
it's
like
the
the
engineering.
The
managers
come
from
another
world
and
like
do
we
want
them
to
like
fully
manifest
in
this
world,
or
should
we
just
conjure
them?
You
know
in
some
kind
of
like
stage
pentagram
where
they
don't
have
like
direct
access
to
them,
but.
G
C
To
be
clear,
like
my
perspective,
where
I've
actually
had
trouble
is
the
opposite,
where
the
project
and
engineering
managers
I've
worked
with
unit
at
prior
places,
talk
about
lights,
that
no
one
controls
me
at
light
step
prior
praises.
I
have
had
this
issue
where
I've
noticed
that
if
the
managers
are
like
totally
divorced
from
the
project,
if
they're
not
looking
at
the
public
backlog,
then
what
they
do
is
they
make
their
own
private
backlog
just
so
they
can
stay
sane,
but
then
they
start
feeling
like
if
they
move
things
around
in
this
private
backlog.
C
That
somehow
makes
things
happen
in
the
real
world
and
then
their
engineers
get
caught
in
the
middle.
So
that's
actually
in
a
funny
way.
I
think
we're
both
like
trying
to
prevent
something
similar
around
managers,
exerting
some
kind
of
weird
control,
but
we've
maybe
just
had
like
different
background
and
where
that
control
has
been
problematic.
I.
I
We
haven't
really
in
communities.
We
haven't
really
solved
the
product,
slash
project
management
component
of
this
very
well
different
things.
Do
it
differently.
We
have
tried
really
hard
to
teach
traditional
product
managers,
how
this
can
work
inside
open
source
and
that
has
usually
lent
itself
to
wailing
gnashing
of
teeth
and
despair
on
every
every
component.
But
it's
so
obvious.
I
just
do
this,
and
then
you
all,
don't
you
get
upset?
Oh
my!
So
it's
it
is.
I
There
are
a
few
product
managers
that
I
have
seen
who
wants
to
go
in
and
participate,
and
do
this
I've
seen
a
lot
of
people
who
came
from
engineering
who
like
to
say,
project
managed
as
a
you
know,
I
will
groom
this
and
garden
because
it's
safe
and
easy
and
a
simple
thing
well
I
think
about
something
else
and
they
seem
to
do
better
in
that
space.
So
maybe
we
try
to
cultivate
those
yeah.
C
Anyways
I
think
going
suggesting
for
now
is
probably
like
a
fine
way
to
do
it.
You
know
I
do
have
like
highfalutin
Scout,
rule
ideas,
where
maybe
everyone
should
have
this
permission,
and
thus
everyone
would
be
response
to
have
the
responsibility
and
we
might
just
have
like
a
better
community.
But
that
sounds.
C
D
Any
one
of
the
hundreds
of
people
that
canceled
on
the
tree
can
just
delete
that
channel
with
no
it's
completely
revocable.
It
just
kind
of
blew
my
mind
anyway.
I
mean
we're
all
us
at
a
time.
In
this
meeting
we
don't
have
time
to
bring
up
a
new
topic.
I
would
be
amazing
if
we
could
move
this
forward
at
all,
I
mean
I.
C
Happening
at
the
moment,
vessel
Asia
the
suggestion
if
I
can
pick
up
what
I
think
is
the
most
agreement
is
there's
currently
an
approver
role.
The
language
on
that
role
was
expanded
to
say,
hey.
This
role
is
also
for
people
who
want
to
do
triage
work
and
project
management.
You
just
sign
up
for
this,
but
the
requirements
for
that
role
right.
D
C
Strictly
around
you
need
to
make
a
bunch
of
PRS
and
reviews,
and
things
and
I
was
wondering
whether
that
could
be
rearranged
to
be
something
a
bit
more
about
like.
If
the
maintainer
x'
think
this
person's
a
fine
approver
like
they
can
literally
just
make
the
person
approver
or
like
it's
just
easier
for
that
to
happen.
But.
D
D
Makes
more
sense
to
me
for
it
to
be
like
a
separate
thing
with
the
subset
of
the
approver
stuff
that
you
know
can
have
some
flexibility
for
the
main,
the
maintainer
x',
to
decide
who
is
appropriate
for
that
or
something.
But
it's
it's
just
about
like
implementing
well-defined
processes
that
cannot
be
literally
automated
by
a
bot
like
that's
sort
of
the
scope
of
it.
H
H
This
is
such
an
important
time
for
open
telemetry,
like
especially
like,
if
we
focus
in
terms
of
doing
the
outreach
at
KU
condoms,
their
ability
summit
right
and
that's
where
we
need
so
much
of
the
community
involved
like
how
are
you
thinking
about
that
strategically
because
like
if
we
like
I've
honestly,
if
we
don't
do
well
at
this
coop
con,
like
so
I
I
guess,
like
in
terms
of
side
note,
is
like
I'm
cuckoo
con
co-chair
next
year
and
like
once
that
Dan
brought
up?
Is
that
he's
like?
H
Are
we
gonna,
be
replicating
open
tracing
and
like
it's
kind
of
like
it's
one
of
those
things
that
are
we
bringing
it
out
of
ink
we're
gonna,
bring
it
out
of
staging
air
sampling
incubating
there
next
week?
It's
one
of
those
things
are
really
excited
about,
but
it
seems
like
one
there's,
no
communication
between
open,
telemetry
and
CNCs
and
also
like
how
do
we
make
sure
that
the
engineers
that
are
finally
gonna
hear
but
open
telemetry
are
not
gonna.
I
H
Should
be
at
least
like
we
could
see
if
we
get
like
third
I,
don't
know
who's
holding
the
intro
to
observability
and
the
deep
dives
and
that's
usually
like
a
good
place,
because
that's
what
we
did
in
terms
of
like
for
no
work
like
we
had
an
intro
and
deep
died
for
envoy
yeah.
Definitely
like
even
a
booth
or
something
like
that.
That's
where,
like
I,
don't
know.
J
Told
it's
been
workin
and
one
maintainer
struck.
It
kind
of
request
so
maintain
you
struck.
I
am
I,
am
saying
my
district
is
all
about
introducing
people
into
project
and
trying
to
get
them
on
board.
So
it's
more
like
hands
on
experience
and
there
is
like
two
pieces
like
intra
and
more
technical
discussion.
Yeah.
J
H
J
C
Separately,
I
would
like
to
do
an
unconference
I've
tried
to
do
more
of
this
at
Q
Khan
in
the
past
Constance,
and
it's
mostly
been
cute
Khan
is
itself
such
a
giant
kata
Mari
ball
of
nonsense
that
trying
to
to
do
anything.
That's
like
too
concentrated
around
like
oh,
this
is
they'll,
be
like.
Let's
get
all
the
open,
telemetry
people
to
meet
each
other
in
person
and
like
do
a
thing
means
like
everyone
now
has
to
buy
like
a
fifteen
hundred
dollar
ticket.
H
Unfortunately,
York
doesn't
get
as
much
presence
as
North
America,
and
it's
like
this
is
our
first
time
where
we
can
actually
like
start
selling
a
project
and
actually
say,
like
start
ignoring
open
tracing
like
yeah.
We
need
to
focus
on
this
as
the
next
project
for
CNCs
and
like
if
we
don't
build
a
momentum
at
coop
con
in
North
America,
and
this
in
the
two
months
we
actually
don't
have
like.
It's
gonna,
be
really
hard
to
sell
that
in
the
next
year,
because
I
don't
know
what's
been
around
for
year
and
a
half.
D
Extremely
unconcerned
about
ciencia,
approving
of
openness,
nominee
I've
been
tracing
entire
kind
of
leadership,
for
that
thing
is
involved
in
open
telemetry
so
like
it's
definitely
going
to
flow
into
this
project,
like
that's
a
sure
thing,
and
the
CNC
I've
actually
brokered
this
entire
project,
really
I
mean
there's
once
to
establish
the
initial
meetings
between
consensus
and
open
tracing
false
and
have
been
incredibly
enthusiastic
about
making
this
happen.
So
I'm,
not
really
a
lot
of
you
brought
up
a
whole
bunch.
B
D
So
I'm,
not
sure
why
you
are
seeing
you
seem
concerned
about
it
getting
into
incubation
status
in
cm
CF,
and
you
may
know
something
I
don't
know,
but
I'm
not
totally
sure
what
the
concern
from
the
TOC
would
be
around
that
like.
If
you
can
be
more
specific,
as
that
you're
worried
that
if
we
kind
of
languish
or
something
that
that
it
just
won't
that
they
will
say.
Oh
this
doesn't
happen
in
momentum
or
something
I.
Just
don't
understand
what
that
concern
is
so.
H
It's
not
like
it's
not
like
concern
of
like
if
it's
happening
someone.
It's
the
word
that,
like
it's,
the
if
the
timing
of
it
right
like
if
we
get
out
of
incubating
before
koukin
North
America,
that
actually
gives
us
a
lot
of
traction
in
terms
adoption
of
the
project
right.
But
if
we
miss
that
missing,
that
deadline
actually
means
that,
like
the
next
set
of
like
big
conferences
around
it,
we're
like
Europe
and
Asia
and
Shanghai
won't
really
get
that
same
like
adoption
and
then
after.
H
D
C
C
H
C
I
Are
incubation
requirements
which
include
production
deployment
so
we're
pretty
far
from
that
at
the
moment
and
constants
your
point
about
the
biggest
noise
from
a
PR
perspective
and
sort
of
FOMO,
which
is
really
the
thing
that
is
cloud
made
of
computing
foundation,
does
best
the
biggest
noise
for
that
is
November.
So
if
we
can
make
the
story
good,
even
if
it's
not
incubated,
we
can
generate
interest
from
the
developers,
because
I
think
that
the
marketing
and
PR
is
orthogonal
to
developer
interest.
H
B
C
C
I
Just
that
I'm
pulling
up
the
process
right
now
to
see
if
graduation
criteria
to
become
incubating
document
that
it's
being
used
successfully
in
production
by
at
least
three
independent
end-users,
which,
in
the
TOC
s
judgment,
are
of
adequate
quality
in
scope.
So
three,
not
one.
A
healthy
number
of
committers
demonstrate
substantial,
ongoing
flow
of
commits
and
merged
contributions.
I
A
D
Mean
there
are
a
number
of
people
I
know
who
are
interested
in
using
this
stuff
like
because
of
the
nature.
The
product
is
possible
to
use
it
the
production
very
verbally,
what
you're
you're,
not
really
risking
your
stability
or
more
risking,
whether
or
not
you'll
have
to
like.
You
know,
change
your
code
because
the
API
is
chefs
or
something
like
that.
But
in
terms
of
like
meeting.
D
B
C
D
We're
super
excited
about
this
and
we're
running
the
prototype
or
whatever,
but
I
just
don't
know
if
that
would
pass
muster.
If
it
did
I
think
it
would
be
a
pretty
straightforward
for
the
TSC
to
approve
this.
Given
the
conversation
when
we
got
sandbox
status,
I
mean
I
think
there
are
some
people
who
wanted
to
incubate
the
project
at
that
point
and
I
think
we
felt
that
was
pretty
mature,
and
so
we.
G
We
said
like
what's
wait,
but
you
know
by
the
way,
for
the
user
for
the
usage
in
production,
at
least
from
openness.
We're
gonna
get
a
big
help.
Once
we
release
more
than
better
part,
we
better
be
two
or
something.
What
we
planned
was
to
replace
the
organization
like
this
for
all
the
users.
So
even
though
I
may
not,
they
may
not
directly
use
opportunity.
They
will
use
it
because
we
redirect
everything
open
telemetry.
So
we
will
get
usages
there
immediately,
but
I
don't
know
if
they
count
correctly
or
not.
G
C
Can
see
us
I
mean
given
that
we're
a
successor,
you
know
we're,
like
version
2.0
of
something
that's
already
incubation,
that's
gonna
get
deprecated
as
a
result
of
this
I.
Imagine
we
get
some
special
tree,
but
what's
so
what's
the
timeline
here
Sera's
and
we
just
like
maybe
get
ourselves
onto
their
calendar
and
then
we'll
have
a
deadline.
I
A
A
It
might
just
by
the
way,
take
a
bit
longer
right
now
from
events,
because
the
main
change
right
now
is
that,
for
a
number
of
reasons
that
you
see
decided
that
it
just
don't
want
to
add
the
project
in,
but
I
was
about
to
see
whether
they
fit
in
this
and
I
might
defer
it
to
a
sake
to
look
at
the
project
first
and
where
it
fits
in
there.
So
so,
for
my
personal
opinion,
I
think
it'll
there's
a
lot
of
reasons
for
supporting
the
project.
It
will
still
be
done
if
food.
A
And
I
think
that
the
biggest
pushback
valley
right
now
might
be
that
it's
not
yet
in
a
1-0,
stable
release.
So
that's
where
I
we
expect
most
of
the
pushback,
because
I
think
production
uses
of
one
thing,
but
how
stable
are
we
from
from
everybody's
perspective
right
now
that
might,
if
I
worried
the
situation?
This
is
what
I
would
object
right
now
and
would
say:
well
guys,
don't
want
to
wait
like
probably
for
Amsterdam
to
do
this,
but
that
might
really
questions
really
what,
but
do
you
really
want
to
gain?
A
Moving
from
sandbox
to
incubation,
like,
what's
the
immediate
benefits
for
the
project
right
now
that
it
would
get
out
of
this
move
right
now,
I
think
you
can't
have
your
sessions
at
cube
con.
You
can
interact
with
the
community.
You
have
CNTs
support
if
you
want
to
have
like
dedicated
to
any
support
a
lot
of
things,
I
think
they,
okay.
B
C
C
B
A
D
D
A
D
H
D
C
B
C
I
D
Constants
for
your
information,
if
there's
issues
and
so
on,
I
think
it's
probably
completely
viable
for
the
to
see
to
be
like
we
have,
you
know
accompanying
the
I
mean
totally
making
this
up.
We
have
a
company
in
the
e-commerce
space,
that's
the
public
company
or
whatever
I
mean
you
can
be
just
like.
You
can
describe
it
and
that
in
those
terms
and
not
run
afoul
of
PR
issues
and
so
on,
so
I
think
that's
totally
viable
as
well
as
long
as
it
just.
It
just
needs
to
be
like
a
real
company.
D
A
D
B
A
As
well.this
showed
public
presentations
where
people
talk
about
their
active
usage,
the
project,
so
if
you
have,
for
example,
meetups
or
other
conferences
where
and
users
talk
about
the
usage
of
the
product,
that's
something
usually
good
enough,
as
well
as
a
validation,
they're,
seen
a
lot
of
our
approach
to
presenting
that
way
and
I
think
this
can
be
done
here
as
well.
So
I
think
that
might
definitely
be
a
wrong
way
to
go.
Oh.
D
A
C
C
H
B
C
B
J
I
I
G
H
H
Rude
I'm
gonna
say
that's
pretty
rude,
but
yes,
I
get
that,
but
yeah
definitely
like
more
transparency
on
that.
Just
to
like
understand,
like
you
know
like,
is
it
people
who
are
like
really
active
in
the
community
or
like
you're
on
the
governance
board,
but
then
like?
Is
it
coming
from
contributors
or
like?
Is
it
just
people
who
are
doing
like
you
know
like
understanding
that
and
then
after
making?
Maybe
more
public
call
to
have
people
part
of
it
since,
like
you
know
the
process
isn't
actually
part
of
the
CFP
submission
right?
It's
actually
really.
I
I
Speakers
advocates
that
kind
of
space
and
work,
as
well
as
being
involved
in
the
project
in
multiple
ways,
not
necessarily
only
the
singular
coding
version,
because
that's
really
tough
to
get
in
all
of
the
combinations,
but
so
the
fact
that
Liz
was
doing
the
community
calls
and
community
work
was
super
interesting
as
well
as
her
history.
As
an
advocate
and
like
I
bring
the
broad
picture
of
the
steering
committee
and
at
some
level
some
commutative.
I
Let
me
show
you
what
what
I'm
working
on
now
from
the
kubernetes
type
yeah.
So
that's
that's
a
fun
thing
for
me
to
bring
on
stage
for
the
the
telemetry
project,
so
that
was
that
was
very
short
version
of
how
we
kind
of
got
there.
But
it
was
a
bunch
of
names
are
addled
around
and
the
big.
The
big
challenge
was
the
who
is
comfortable
speaking
in
front
of
an
audience.
That
is,
you
know
up
to
10,000
people
yeah.
H
But
I
guess
like
I
would
definitely
say
like
that
was
I
guess
maybe
I
don't
know
if
I
made
that
clear
in
terms
of
like
what
I
offer
but
like
that
was
like
I've
done,
keynotes
like
I,
guess
yeah.
So,
like
I'm
gonna,
like
it
definitely
and
say
like
in
terms
of
feedback
to
the
government's
bond,
which
I'm
sure
you
guys
are
gathering
right
now,
it's
like
it's
actually
like
you
know
it
is
definitely
just
a
little
bit.
H
It's
very
disrespectful
won't
get
any
form
of
feedback
and,
like
here,
like
you,
know,
either
here
just
like
directly
in
the
government's
main.
If
you
are
chosen
without
that
being
probably
communicated
and
like
that,
doesn't
that
kind
of
goes
against
also
like
what
the
community
is
trying
to
build
in
terms
of
being
transparent
and
inclusive,
and
so.
I
H
Don't
really
care
about
that,
and
it's
more
like
you
know,
like
one
thing.
I
also
do
want
to
say
he's
like
representation.
I
think
I
talked
I
said
this
part
like
I
guess
like
went
off
to
Ben
and,
like
speaking,
it's
like
one
thing
that
you
want
to
bring
up
is
like
equal
representation
of
like
people,
who've
been
like
really
active
and
the
like
project
and
far
it's
been
Microsoft
Google
and
life.
I
We
actually
have,
as
a
closing
slide
a
huge
thank
you
and
recognition
to
top
contributors
and
top
companies
that
are
participating
and
so
on.
So
there
will.
There
will
be
time
in
that
talk,
because
we
want
to
make
sure
that
that
is
made
clear
as
well,
because
it's
not
just
it's
not
just
the
the
three
people
they're
the
three
companies
that
you
listed
by
any
striped,
no.