►
From YouTube: Open Telemetry's Personal Meeting Room
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
E
C
E
F
E
F
E
E
I'm
putting
on
the
top
here
because
not
last
meeting
but
a
couple
of
other
meanings,
we
kind
of
went
a
long
time
of
open
new
issues,
so
I
I
think
this
about
dropping.net
three
chord
three
point:
one
and
adding
seven
are
kind
of
the
most
important
decision
that
we
have
right
now.
E
I
I
think
that
giving
the
end
of
life
of
3.1.
We
could
declare
that
the
last
version
that
we
had
support
for
3.1
was
the
last
one
that
we
released.
E
I
know
that
we've
been
doing
3.1
radio
with
the
intent
of
facilitating
feedback,
so
I
I
I.
Think
for
now
is
what
we
can
do.
Given
the
the
timelines.
You
know,
then
we
can
use
the
latest
package
from
SDK
and
contrib
that
have
perhaps
Independence
on
latest
latest
diagnostic
source,
but
we
also
open
ourselves
kind
of
to
debug
about
the
versions
of
diagnos
source
again,
because
then
we
talk
about
perhaps
take
Independence
on
latest
version.
That
is
seven.
E
So
I
would
like
to
kind
of
discuss
and
plan
what
these
steps
we're
gonna
do
for
that,
and
also
to
see
if
everyone
agrees
with
this
idea
of
dropping
3.1
from
the
release
that
Robert
did
last
week,
so
that
you
become
the
the
last
one
that
we
supported.
3.1.
E
So
I
think
I
think
we
are
agreeing
on
that
for
now,
then
we
need
to
discuss
next
steps.
E
So
I
think
the
first
thing
is
upgrade
the
packages
and
clean
up
any
dependencies
to
3.1
I.
Think
upgrading
the
package
is:
is
the
the
next
clear
step
there.
F
Sorry,
can
you
clarify
so
it
says
dropping
down
at
core:
they
don't
want
an
N7,
but
does
this
mean
we're
moving
support
from
net
worthy
one
up
to
seven.
E
Yeah,
let's,
let's
write
that
very
clear
and.
E
Okay,
yeah
yeah
just
dropping
3.1.
We
could.
We
could
do
this
kind
of
station
like
we
just
really
drop
3.1
upgrades
and
but
then
we
just
tested
the
steel
wish.net6.
E
It
should
work
besides
the
dependency
stuff
when
it
upgrades
to
the
the
BCL
itself
is
upgrades
to
diagnostics
for
seven
for
us,
even
if
you
are
reference,
the
old
version.
A
E
So
if
we
have
agreement
on
that,
then
we
we
can
start
doing
the
tasks
kind
of
remove
3.1.
F
Well,
one
question
I
have
is
I
know,
dotnet6
is
still
going
to
be
supported,
for
it
was
a
shorter
release,
but
are
we
going
to
have
a.net6
build
Target
at
all,
or
are
we
going
to
just
have
like
a
net
standard,
one
that
we'll
cover
that
I.
A
We
do
or
not,
I
don't
think
we
are
running
tests,
I.
Think.
E
E
F
E
E
So
there's
this
will
be.
E
D
Yeah
remember
in
hotel
we
had
issues
like
shipping,
multiple
different
versions.
E
Yeah,
this
is
the
thing
that
we've
been
kind
of
in
the
backlog,
kind
of
not
in
the
backlog,
but
more
in
the
background
for
us
to
kind
of
do
we
are
kind
of
in
a
comfortable
position
using
the
3.1,
because
then
the
versions
the
conflict
was
less,
but
when
we
upgrade
the
packages,
then
we
get
in
the
conflict
situation
back
again.
E
E
Okay,
so
I
think
this
is
the
plan
and
we
are
gonna
see
whatever
I.
Don't
I
don't
expect
until
we
upgrade
the
packages
and
have
releases
to
have
issues
related
to
this,
but
then
we
are
gonna
have
to
confront
the
version
issue
up
ahead,
so
yeah.
We
knew
that
that
was
coming
eventually,
so
we
have
to
do
it
great.
F
G
Yeah
yeah
hi
everyone.
This
is
virus
here,
yeah
I
started
exploding.
This
project
very
interested
to
contribute.
I
wanted
to
know
how
this
project
is
doing.
E
Yeah,
so
if
you
want
to
bring
any
specific
top
or
have
any
any
questions
feel
free,
you
know
either
now
or
at
the
end
of
the
meeting,
feel
free.
G
Yeah
I
just
go
quick
question
on
the
versioning
like
how
how
like
are
we
guys,
also
taking
into
consider
and
consider
us
on
the
long-term
support
like
for
example.net
server.net
7.0
doesn't
have
long
term
support
right,
I
mean?
Are
we
kind
of
considering
those
kind
of
things
or
you
know
as
soon
as
a
latest
person
comes
in,
we
are
going
to
provide
support.
That's
that's
the
that's
the
objective
that
we
are
setting
it
up
here.
E
Yeah,
so
we
plan
to
kind
of
we
are
a
bit
behind
on
that,
but
we
plan
basically
to
follow
what
the
SDK
is
doing
in
the
sense
that
we
supportive
and
the
short-term
release,
while
they
are
still
supported
by
Microsoft,
about
the
same
time
that
the
short-term
release
end.
We,
we
also
ended
new
releases
for
that
version,
but
we
are
really
committed
to
the
long-term
releases.
G
E
One
thing
is
that
we
still
didn't
release
a
a
production
version,
what
we
call
1.0,
so
we've
been
kind
of
more
eager
to
drop
stuff
in
that
case.
In
that
sense,
you
know,
because
we
don't
have
any
version
yet
that
we
committed
to
production
status,
but
what
I
can
tell
is
that
from
our
side,
I
I
mean
Splunk.
That
provides
pays
my
my
deals
and
we
are
working
on
this.
We
are
really
commit
that
you
have
these
release
sometime
next
year.
E
E
G
Sounds
good
yeah,
yeah
I
I'm
today
I'm
going
to
hear
what
you
guys
are
going
to
discuss
yeah.
Okay.
Thank
you.
E
A
Recall
factoring
right
now,
it's
like
not
longer
valid,
but
I
want
to
take
a
look
after
Atmos
merge
if
I
can
also
refactor
he's
he's
a
little
bit
his
work.
So
probably
I
will
take
a
look
on
Monday
or
something
like
that.
All.
B
E
C
C
A
I
mean,
but
because,
right
now,
if
something
is
missing
right,
like
the
we
are
just,
we
are
just
continuing
and
logging
errors.
Yes
and
I
was
just
proposing
to
three.
It's
like
a
normal
use
case
and
just
write
a
debug
log
that
you
know,
there's
no
implementation
for
it
and
you
know
it
skipped
and
then
this
issue
could
be
closed
without
even
thinking
that
way.
E
But
I
I
think
I
think
it
should
be
that's
why
I
mentioned
the
framework
thing
you
know,
because
the
way
that
we
are
targeting
right
now
is
not
ideal,
and
if
we
had
this
by
framework,
then
it's
even
it's
not
that
debug
is
not
nothing
it's
kind
of
hey.
This
is
not
instrumented
for
this
framework.
You
know.
E
E
I
think
you
opened
this
regarding
all
work
to
remove
the
unnecessary
dll.
So
you
identify
that
also
you
can
do
that
for
open
tracing
right,
yep,
okay,
so
I
think
it's
milestone.
E
Yeah
I
think
there
is
it's
clear
in
the
last
week
last
week
you
did
this
so
I
think
now
you
wanna
kind
of
automate
it
right.
Robert.
E
F
E
A
E
So
this
one
that
we
just
discussed
at
Robert,
what
do
you
think
I
think
we
can
zero
six
yeah.
E
E
But
I
think
this
is
more
true
starting
investigation
time
frames
for
this
I
tend
to
say
six.
What.
A
This
one
was
added
to
a
current
milestone
personally
I'm,
not
sure
if
it's
needed
at
all
I'm,
not
sure
if
we
should
not
put
it
into
RC
I,
don't
know
how
many
customers
will
use
it.
Yeah,
but
I
see.
F
Is
this
something
that
can
be
done
without
by
code?
I
was
thinking,
I
vaguely,
remember
WCF
having
some
sort
of
like
interceptors
or
some
sort
of
processing
that
you
could
add
it
into
like
the
sort
of
pipeline
is
there?
Can
we
at
startup
be
able
to
add
our
own
sort
of
processor
into
that
I
I
haven't
recently
touched,
wcfs
I,
don't
know
if
that
is
accurate,
but
is
anyone
instantly
familiar
with
WCF
at
the
moment,
yeah.
A
G
I
mean
I
can
I
can
get
the
details
guys
if
something
is
something
you
need
I,
I,
I,
actually,
don't
know
what
how
we
are
getting
all
the
instrumentation.
So
I
cannot
speak
for
like
Alcorn
and
what
other
thing,
but
anything
specific
to
wcy
can
I
can
take
a
stab
I
mean
what
what
needs
to
be
done
as
a
part
of
research.
I
can
do
that.
F
F
We
have
some,
we
do
have
some
bicode
instrumentation,
where
we
can
hook
in
to
Methods
at
runtime,
but
we
also
basically
inject
ourselves
at
the
start
of
the
application
and
we
use
the
SDK
to
light
up
like
asp.net,
core
instrumentation,
SQL,
client
instrumentation.
So
either
we
can
enable
something
from
the
SDK
or
if
we
have,
if
there's
some
configuration,
that
we
can
use
reflection
to
basically
add
like
register
some
sort
of
state
or
processor
for
the
client
Library.
G
G
First
of
all,
I
I,
I,
just
I,
have
to
be
honest
right.
I
I
didn't
understand
both
the
method
that
you
told,
but
I
can
definitely
do
the
research
and
I
can
I
can
get
the
information
how
it
is
done.
On
the
wcf.net
I
mean
we
are
specifically
on
the
double
zip
client
right.
This
is
specifically
available
right,
so
I
can
see
like
what
is
the
current
way,
how
they
are
getting
all
the
Diagnostics.
E
Yeah
I
think
we
can
direct
better
the
conversation
for
you
because
you
are
new
to
the
project.
E
E
But
now,
let's
think
about
targeting
this
I
I,
think
that
for
now
I
actually
now
after
this
conversation,
I'm
I'm
a
bit
more
eager
to
begin
this
earlier
so
I'm
tending
to
zero
six.
So
we
can
kind
of
have
this
conversation
earlier.
D
Just
to
one
location,
tested,
WCF,
clientos,
verse,
propagation
or
propagation
is
done
over
in
some
work.
Generic
way.
F
You'd
probably
have
to
do
propagation
over
the
WCF
message,
because
if
that
client
Library
does
support
like
I,
think
you
can
just
do
like
pure
just
like
TCP
or
something,
then
we
don't
have
a
mechanism
for
passing
context.
D
E
I
want
to
say
is
that
let's
bring
it
to
six
zero
six,
but
if
we
encounter
any
kind
of
these
roadblocks
that
require
other
you
should,
then
we
we
retarget
them
to
1.0
or
post
1.0
dependent.
G
A
E
Yeah
we
we
transfer
the
the
context,
trace
and
activity
slash
span
to
the
the
server
side,
and
then
we
can
create
the
distribution
phase.
Exactly
of
that.
E
We
we
are
read,
have
discussed
that
other
times
and
just
one
question
removing
3.0
do
we
still
have
something
to
do
for
this?
One.
F
E
So
I'm
just
gonna
keep
in
this
Milestone
so
because
we
are
gonna
do
that
before
releasing
so
but
I
in
theory,
there
is
no
work.
It's
just
kind
of
closing
by
the
by
by
the
other
one
all
right
and.
G
E
E
This
is
still
open.
We
did
the
the
work
regarding
strong
name
domain
neutral.
Now
we
have
the
work
of
adding
the
instrumentation
per
se
right.
D
Sim,
stick
graphical
the
first
last
time.
Basically,
the
crap
ql
doesn't
have
a
proper
exception.
It's
picking
up
some
context
with
different
error
messages,
so
this
is
causing
the
issue
there.
G
D
Yeah,
basically
we're
doing
it
manually,
but
it's
also
indicating
that
we
are
creating
the
exception
ourselves,
but
this
doesn't
seem
to
be
a
right
way
because
there
is
actually
no
exception.
It's
just
some
kind
of.
A
Know
yeah:
the
thing
is
that,
in
my
opinion,
first
of
all,
these
are
not
exceptions
which
says
that
the
turret
should
not
be
error.
One
thing,
second
reason
why
I
think
you
should
be
removed
is
that
in
general,
when
there's
a
server
span,
the
client
errors
are
not
treated
as
as
errors,
because
this
is
not
a
server
error.
This
is
a
client
error.
That's
why
it
should
not
be
marked
as
an
error.
A
E
A
D
Okay,
should
we
open
the
issue
to
track
the
I,
think
something
Patrick
or
all
right
just
forget:
you
can.
E
I
I
think
I
think,
let's
remove
it.
If
we
see
some
graphql
complaining
on
using
missing
that,
then
we
look
at
this
again.
You
know
we
take
the
short
path
to
comply
with
this
pack
as
Robert
saying
about
these
stats,
because
the
status
is
much
more
visible,
so
I
think
let's
take
the
shortest
path
and
just
remove
it.
A
To
be
honest,
recipes
I
expect
that
if
someone
uses
Hotel,
then
probably
he
uses,
for
example,
some
some
JavaScript
library
for
graphql
and
the
client
Library
should
have
the
errors.
D
E
Yeah,
as
Robert
said,
that's
that's
the
pattern
for
the
kind
of
error
that
should
be
client
versus
server
right,
so.
E
C
E
E
C
E
E
Format
native
code
I
did
a
a
little
bit
of
work
with
native
code
in
the
last
two
PRS.
That
I
did
it's
interesting,
that
the
visual
studio
has
a
formatter
that
it
asks
if
you
wanna,
but
I,
find
the
formatter
horrible.
You
know
kind
of
things,
look
really
ugly,
so
I,
basically
disabled
that
and
did
everything
by
by
hand.
E
So
this
will
be
a
nice
to
have
for
us
as
we
work
more
and
more
if
the
native
code,
but
because
we
diverged
quite
a
bit
for
some
time
from
Upstream
I'm
thinking
putting
that
together.
If
the
duck
typing,
we
perhaps
should
postpone
format
in
native
code.
You
know
at
least
let
that
work
about
duct
typing
happen,
and
then
we
consider
some
reformatting
or
two.
E
E
Hard
cold
paths
by
the
way
Robert
regarding
this
I
had
a
I
set
up
a
new
WSL,
Ubuntu
and
mute
I
did
something
wrong
in
one
moment.
So
one
of
those
the
penis
was
incorrectly
built,
I
think
the
regular
expression
and
then
for
me
to
find
that
that
was
a
problem.
There
was
kind
of
okay.
E
I
saw
that
it
couldn't
link,
but
then
they
make
they
make
fire.
It
seems
kind
of
hey.
This
thing
is
in
the
wrong
place,
but
has
a
folder,
and
there
was
no
message
in
the
make
file
making
clear
kind
of
hey.
This
thing
here
is
wrong:
it
was
just
checking
if
the
top
folder
existed
and
then
it
was
oh.
We
are
all
good.
A
E
It's
in
the
end,
in
in
the
in
this
file
that
you
have
the
thing
that
checks,
if
you
have
the
dependence,
but
the
shack
is
just
the
focus
so
I
I,
don't
remember
what
was
the
step
that
I
did,
that
I
got
in
the
wrong
situation,
I
see,
but
but
the
problem
is
that
the
shack
is
not
good
enough
to
detect
problems.
You
know.
A
E
A
D
E
A
E
I
I
I
got
the
latest
available.
That's
here.
Double
cell
and
I
updated
the
the
package
manager
before
it
works.
Yeah
I
got
I
got
everything
from
the
latest.
You
know
so
I.
E
E
When
I
did,
but
there
was
more
focus
on
the
other
machine
working,
the
all
right,
maybe
I'll
create
another
wcl.
Now
Debian
and
I
I
will
try
to
pay
attention.
I
I
created
this
one.
I
I
think
you
really
should
do,
especially
because
of
um.net
framework,
but
this
is
basically
just
adding
the
test
to
integration
tests,
and
so
we
should
keep
that.
E
This
one,
we
definitely
can
postpone
I
think
we
are
in
a
a
much
better
position
right
now.
This
could
be
postponed,
I'm,
I
think
even
1.0.
You
know
I
think
when
we
open
this,
but.
E
It's
basically
the
the
environment
helper
here,
it's
kind
of
the
way
that
we
but
we're
doing
there.
The
the
code
was
not
clear
kind
of
hey
this
environment
where,
but
it's
going
to
be
reset
or
not.
You
know
and
I
think
the
pattern
Now
is
really
established
that
you
can
set
that
and
pass
to
the
test
and
it's
set
for
the
test.
So
I
think
perhaps
we
could
close
this.
Let
let
me
Chris
is
not
here
today,
or
at
least
I
didn't
see
here
being
earlier.
E
This
one
also
requires
research
for
us
to
see
if
we
can
do
logging
from
the
the
native
to
this
will
be
great,
if
you
could
do
it,
you
know,
but
this
requires
research.
A
We
can
postpone
it.
I
will
try
to
do
it
anyway,
if
I
have
time
the
main
problem
I
see
with
it.
Is
that
I'm
not
sure
like
we
have
some
examples.
For
example,
regarding
like
assembly
conflicts,
plugins
usage,
should
we
have
them
still
or
using
their,
not
really
necessary,
I
for
sure
we
go
on.
E
A
So
I
think
we
have
tests
for
it
already,
because
we
are
explicit.
Sometimes
we
are
explicitly,
for
example,
is
setting
the
diagnostic
source
to
6.0
because
of
this
problem.
E
A
So
I
think
that
at
current
I,
like
the
current
state,
is
like
that,
when
I
looked
at
it
that
I
think
all
everything
is
like
covered
by
tests.
We
can
just
remove
everything.
You
just
have
a
like
user
user
demonstration.
Examples
like
a
client
server,
HTTP,
something
user
that
can
compose
that
one
can.
Just
you
know:
yeah
yeah
enable
and
just
look
at
the
dotnet
alternate
instrumentation,
because
I
think
the
demo
of
open
filament
is
a
little
too
big.
Sometimes
yeah.
E
And
also
it
should
already
be,
but
be
sure
that
the
things
have
documentation
right,
so
sometimes
the
example
become
the
documentation,
but
then
to
remove
it.
We
need
to
make
sure
that
the
documentation
is
there.
E
This
one
I
think
is
a
good
one,
but
I
don't
know
if
we're
gonna
have
time.
A
A
B
A
E
A
C
C
Or
just
remove
this
separator
right
now,
because
we
are
not
putting
here
anything
to
all
six
so
feel
free
to
remove.
E
E
All
right
does
anyone
want
to
bring
any
other
thought?
Could
you
discuss
from
here
before
we
wrap
it
up.
G
Oh
okay,
so,
first
of
all,
are
there
any
good
first
issue
which
I
can
you
know
directly
to
understand
this
project
start
contributing.
E
C
Yeah,
so
you
would
like
to
find
kind
of
issue
to
contribute
to
the
reposit
to
our
repository.
Yes,
basically.
G
C
A
Let's
see
my
screen
yeah,
so
here's
a
contributing,
I,
don't
think
there's
an
important,
but
here,
but
here
you
have
a
reference
to
developing
MD.
Here
you
can
you,
you
have
the
prerequisites
which
are
needed,
yeah
and
some
instructions
how
to
build
Etc
so
like
so
this
will
help
you,
you
know
just
to
build.
The
project
run
some
things
Etc.
There
is
a
possibility
that
some
things
are
here
outdated.
A
Us
on
slack,
you
can
just
create
PRS
whatever
you.
If
you
it
depends,
but
yeah
we
try
to
have
things
here,
pretty
updated.
So
what
like?
We
were
mentioning
today,
for
example,
there
are
not,
for
example,
things
like
what
versions
of
the
tools
should
be
there,
but
in
general
try
to
use
the
latest
ones.
What
is
more,
if
you
want
to
understand
more
of
the
design,
how
is
it
working
under
the
code?
A
And
then
we
have
this
design
MD
and
here's
like
kind
of
our
vision
like
high
level
like
principles
regarding
General
handling
and
things
like
that
and
also
architecture?
Not
not
everything
is
covered
here.
This
one
is
more.
This
is
basically
this
documentation
was
created
before
we
started
using
the
dot,
the
new.net
runtime
cooks
and
like
this
additional
depths
and
store,
because
this
is
also
additional
mechanics
which
we
started
to
use
for
dotnet
4.net
based
you
know.netfree
mobile4.net,.
G
Okay,
okay
and
my
my
question
was:
are
there
any
good
first
issues
which
I
can
grab
like
simple
issues?
Are
there
any
anything
in
in
the
report
or
there
are
not
if.
A
C
G
G
G
You
guys
said
part
of
which,
which
work
I
mean.
G
Can
we.
G
Yeah
and
how
do
I,
how
do
I
achieve
I
mean
I
I,
just
helping
guys
like
maybe,
should
I
contribute
to
this
repo.
Then
that's
how
I
get
a
part
of
it.
Yep.
B
A
Let's
do
this
thing
here,
so
you
have
a
notifications
also
on
the
GitHub,
so
you'll
find
it
easy
in
what
time
zone
are
you
located
by
the.
A
G
A
B
G
Working
like
which
temperature.
G
G
Okay,
so
second
question
is
like:
do
we
have
a
plan
for
ga
sometime
next
year
or
what?
What
is
our?
What's
our
procedure
towards
it
like.
C
A
Church's
machine,
continuous
profiling,
but
also
this
is
a
popularity
for
monitoring
right
now,
so
we
want
also
to
have
a
possibility
to
add
continuous
profiling,
even
though
open
telemetric
hasn't
started
it
yet,
but
we
want
to
have
a
possibility
to
create
a
distribution
or
some
plugin
to
make
it
possible.
Yeah.
G
Okay,
along
with
the
Telemetry
we
want
to
do
profiling,
yeah
makes
sense.
Second,
question
is
just.
A
Just
one
thing:
we
want
to
make
it
next
year,
but
we
cannot
commit
to
it
because
one
thing
is
also
one
thing
it's
done.
Second,
is
here
our
Sig
that
we
need
to
have
an
agreement
here,
but
the
third
thing,
which
I
heard
is
also
like,
maybe
not
problematic
but
can
be
challenging,
is
to
have
like
a
sign
up
from
the
hotel
technical
committee,
which
is
also
involved
in
getting
a
ga
for
the
first
for
the
first
release.
Yeah.
A
Checking
against
the
specification
making
it
at
least
as
I
heard,
that
they
did
it
for
other
languages.
They
make
basic
peer
review
of
the
project
before
ga.
So,
for
example,
I
I
heard
that
I
don't
know
if
it
was
because
of
the
of
the
technical
committee
or
or
something
else,
I
know,
for
example,
other
other
projects
were
even
late.
Work
like
one
year.
G
G
A
G
Okay,
okay,
okay,
okay,
so
so
there
is,
there
is
a
there.
Is
a
committee
and
I
think
they
eventually
going
to
look
at
our
code
and
make
a
decision
yeah.
This
is
ready
for
G
right,
probably.
C
G
How
do
how
do
we
like
influence
there
or
how
do
we
participate
there,
or
are
we
part
of
that
if
it's
any
one
of
us
part
of
their.
C
G
Can
you
yeah,
can
you
guys
like
Ping
me,
the
link
I
would
see
if
anyone
from
AWS
is
there
or
not
yeah.
B
B
A
G
C
A
G
Yeah
I
mean
I
I'm
asking
because
there
are,
there
are
customers
still
running
on,
not
NET
Framework,
very.
C
G
Yeah
yeah
yeah
yeah,
that
is
what
I,
okay
4.6,
that's
good
to
know
and
then.
A
Also
also
one
thing
to
add:
right
now:
you
are
paying
more
attention:
to.net
like.net,
core
then.net
framework,
so
some
of
the
instrumentations
are
not
working
on
dotnet
framework.
We
just
try
to
fulfill
the
most
most
used
things
on
dotnet
framework,
which
is
MySQL
server,
HTTP,
grpc
and
WCF.
From
my
from
my
experience,
yeah.
A
G
It
is
it's
not
going
I
I,
don't
think
it
is
going,
so
we
will
see
how
we
can
support
both
framework
and
we'll
take
the
priority.
This
last
thing
is
like
have
we
have
we
done
any
benchmarking
on
this
project
like
whether
it
is
going
to
impact
the
performance
like.
C
C
Yet
not
yet
there
is
a
plan
to
do
it.
We
have
pretty
good
benchmarking
system
on
Signal
ethics.
It
is
this
our
old
instrumentation,
like
Barry
from
Instagram,
based
on
datadog
instrumentation.
So
when
it
will
be
needed,
we
could
suggest
sharpen
the
code
which.
G
C
G
G
Yeah
yeah.
That
is
why
we
are
not
telling
1.00
right
like
once.
We,
then
you
have
to
mix
your
debt
back
or
compatible
right.
Yes,
okay,
make
sense.
Oh
yeah
I
mean
these
are
the
questions
so
I'm
actually
I'm
very
excited
I,
because
we
we
also
have
a
lot
of
problems
right.
Customers
are
customers,
a
lot
of
pain
like
with
so
many
things,
so
so
I
thought:
okay,
maybe
I'll
just
get
in
mode.
G
C
G
Yeah
bigger
scale,
yeah
yeah
yeah.
Well,
that's
what
like
I
just
want
to
get
get
comfortable
on
this
code
base
so
that
because
they
would
first
come
to
us
right,
like
so
I
I
want
to
get
comfortable
on
this
code
base
and
you
can
see
how
we
can
take
this
forward.
I
mean
I
would
definitely
part
of
the
team,
and
you
can
considering
this
is
an
open
source
project.
Yeah.
G
C
A
G
I
will
see
open
source
project.
Is
it's
it's
hard
guys
I
mean
we
started
core
WCF
me
and
Microsoft,
so
we
eventually
we
got
a
lot
of
contribution,
but
like
yeah
first
year,
first,
one
to
two
years
like
a
lot
of
effort,
yeah
but
I
understand.
Thank
you.
Yeah
I'm
happy
happy
to
help
you
guys
yeah.
Thank.