►
From YouTube: 2021-10-21 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
B
A
C
C
All
right,
yeah
I'll
put
it
link
to
it
in
the
notes.
In
case
people
see
it.
I
see
the
yeah
other
thing.
A
C
So
there's
a
question
about
where
resources
should
be
published.
Specifically,
is
one
of
the
specification.
B
C
A
C
I
don't
think
we're
gonna
come
up
with
an
answer
today
and
I
don't
think
there's
I
mean
I
don't
know
like
I
feel
like
if
we
wanted
to
do
the
sub
module
thing
and
pull
it
over.
I
tend
to
from
a
visibility
perspective
and
like
making
sure
that
everything
is
easy
to
find.
I
do
think
that
there's
probably
more
arguments
in
favor
of
stuff.
A
Yeah
yeah
that's
a
good
argument,
because
I
it
happens
often
to
me
that,
like
I
click
around
in
this
bag
and
suddenly,
especially
with
the
semantic
conventions,
I
suddenly
land
in
the
yaml
files,
or
something
like
that,
so
right.
C
C
C
C
A
A
Yeah
at
least
not
on
the
landing
page,
where
I
don't
find
it,
but
it's
maybe
me,
and
then
I
agree
with
you.
I
mean
from
from
a
new
eye
perspective
like
because
the
the
one
question,
while
while
you
said
like
hey
navigation
interesting,
so
I
was
like
hey
what
about.
If
I
say
like
a,
I
want
to
look
at
an
older
version
of
this
back
I
mean
you
can
find
it.
You
have
to
know
that
you
have
to
click
on
tags
and.
C
Yeah
well
also,
just
like
another
thing
that
occurred
to
me
is
that,
in
terms
of
accessibility,.
C
A
A
I
think
that
the
the
best
thing
is
probably
like
to
to
lie
out
like
hey
what
what
are
the
advantages
to
having
one
way
and
then
the
other
way,
and
then
maybe
survey
people
a
little
bit
like
hey.
What
what's
your
preference
on
there.
C
C
We
would
need
to
have
a
way
to
template
out
so
that
link
that
people
could.
That
would
basically
preserve
the
links
to
work
as
they
are.
But
then,
when
they
come
over
like
get
rewritten
to
the
appropriate
thing
which
we
would
have
to
do
through
templating
and
not
because
if
we
were
using
a
sub
module,
all
we
would
be
able
to
get
over
the
sub
module.
C
D
Yep
I've
done
what
you've
described
for
another
project.
C
I
I
mean
I
tend
to
think
that
the
arguments
in
favor
of
especially
if
we
have
per
especially
if
we
can
do
you,
know,
per
subdirectory
versioning,
and
so
we
could
have
slash
dot.
You
know
so
at
whatever
arbitrary
point,
so
slash
doc,
slash
dot
net
and
slash
java,
both
conversion
differently
and
so
that
slash
doc,
slash,
spec
conversion
differently,
right
yep,
then
I
think
there's
a
lot
more
in
favor
of
bringing
in
everything
via
submodule
inside
or
bringing
stuff
in
and
being
like.
Okay,
here's!
C
That'd
be
tricky
anyway,
I
think
there's
in
terms
of
presentation
and
discoverability
and
accessibility
of
that
stuff.
Then
I
think
there's
those
three
alone
even
beyond
versioning
stuff,
makes
me
very
in
favor
of
trying
to
pull
it
over.
I
just
think
we're
gonna
have
to
like.
Maybe
let's,
let's
think
about
it
as
like
a
q1
thing.
C
Okay,
I
mean
there's
other
there's
lower
there
are.
There
are
other
apples.
We
can
take
a
bite
of
so
to
speak
right
now.
That
I
think,
will
give
us
more
bang
for
our
buck.
Without
going
and
starting
a
fight
about
the
spec
and
as
the
spec
gets
more
firm,
then
I
would
also
think
it's
like
okay.
Well,
hey!
C
D
I
mean,
even
if
there
was
an
active
period
during
which
the
specification
was
changed,
I
mean
the
the
website
can
can
be
made
to
keep
up
to
date
since
we're
pulling
we'd
be
pulling
things
in
through
the
submodu,
through
a
sub
module.
D
Which
is
what
we
have
for
the
language
sigs
right
is
that
what
you're?
Referring
to
the
repository
links
like.
C
Oh,
no,
I
meant
out
of
the
sorry
out
of
the
nav
bar,
not
the
sidebar.
Oh
okay,
yeah,
my
bad,
but
like
you
have
on
grpc,
like
on
grpc,
like
where.
C
Yes,
the
left
nav,
not
the
right
nav
or
the
left
nav,
not
the
right
but
yeah
from
the
left.
Nav.
Where
you
can
go
and
you
can
put
on
just
drop
a
link
to
something.
Then
you
could
have
specification
and
then
have
a
sub
page
for
specification
and
then
have
like
you
know,
find
me
on
github
type
stuff.
So.
D
D
Yeah
we
have
the,
as
you
might
see.
I
added
a
comment
stating
that
the
spec
is
already
a
sub.
A
D
B
D
That
you
mentioned
in
the
notes,
blog
migration,
you
said
needed
more
feedback
is.
Are
you
gonna
solicit
that
feedback
or.
C
I'm
gonna
bring
it
up
with.
I
think
I
missed
the
gc
meeting,
but
yeah,
probably
next
gc
meeting
okay,
so
I
don't
know
if
that's
going
to
be
a
q4
thing,
but
I,
when
I've
talked
to
people
about
it,
excuse
me
when
I've
talked
to
people
about
it
in
the
past,
they've
been
generally
supportive
because
I
don't
think
people
are
terribly
enamored
with
medium,
and
I
think
we
have
a
pretty
good
argument
now,
because
there
are
more
and
more
people
trying
to
contribute
content.
C
C
Are
we
going
to
republish
existing
content,
which
I
would
say?
Yes,
we
can
just
take
the
stuff,
that's
already
there
and
then
do
canonical
links.
You
can
do
that
in
hugo
right.
D
D
D
D
C
To
the
medium
page,
yeah,
okay,
that
makes
sense
all
right.
Well,
I
will
bring
that
up
with
by
ben
and
liz
and
see
if
I
can
just
get
a
thumbs
up
from
the
gc,
we
might
be
able
to
do
it
out
of
cycle
like
I
don't
think
I
feel
like
this
is
not
a
should
not
be
a
controversial
thing,
because
we
can
just
argue
like
it's
for
seo
benefits
and
a
better.
A
C
Experience
in
terms
of
actually
getting
blog
contributions
and
reviewing
them,
because
I
just
didn't
hear
some
pull
request,
workflow,
so
all
righty,
I
don't
actually
have
a
lot
else.
It's
been
a
really
busy
couple
weeks.
A
C
Family,
so
I've
been
kind
of
hit
or
miss
on
stuff,
but
I
will
hopefully
getting
we're
getting
into
a
swing
into
the
swing
of
things
with
some
changes
around
here
and
that
should
I
should
be
able
to
get
back
on
this
more.
D
Thanks
thanks
for
commenting
on
the
specification
issue,.