►
From YouTube: 2021-10-19 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
Hello,
everyone
just
give
me
one
more
minute.
C
Okay,
perfect
yeah!
You
can
put
your
name
in
the
attendees
list.
I
think
it's
already
two
minutes
past
two,
so
we
can
go
ahead
and
get
started.
I
don't
think
there
is
anything
in
the
agenda,
so
I
just
I
was
not
working
last
week
as
well,
so
I
did
not
have
any
updates,
which
I
usually
give.
So
it's
just
like
open
for
any
questions.
C
C
D
C
C
D
Yeah,
because
I
had
some
difficulty
I
had
to
how
to
say
to
get
rid.
Endpoint
is
not
out
of
property
anymore.
I
had
to
introduce
some
like
normal
property,
because
there
is
no
way
the
moment
to
identify
if
endpoint
is
defined
by
customer
or
overwritten
or
written
it,
and
but
it
leads.
D
Endpoint
behavior
is
not
changed
from
customer
point
of
view
or
but
from
point
of
view
of
api
compatibility
check.
It
fails
because
it
thinks
that
it
doesn't
have
default
anymore,
but
it
actually
it
has
default,
but.
C
I
mean
we
can
only
ignore
it
if
you
know
that
it's
not
a
breaking
change,
so
this
is
the
one
you're
saying
which
failed,
which
one
is
it
yeah
exactly?
This
is
the
ap
come
back
to
one
right.
D
C
D
D
C
Okay,
if
it's
like
not
a
genuine
like
thing,
then
we
should
have
a
way
to
suppress
it,
trying
to
figure
out
who
my
oh
yeah,
you
are
in
the
code.
You
might
know
how
to
like,
suppress
like
a
particular
check
right.
D
C
C
D
C
Should
be,
but
I
haven't
had
a
chance
to
look
at
it.
I
mean
the
pr
assay
hold,
but
if
that's
the
only
thing,
then
it
should
not
be
a
concern.
We
should
have
a
way
to
like
fix
it
in
the
okay.
Then
no
problem.
Thank
you.
Yeah
anything
else
about
this
yeah,
I'm
not
trying.
A
To
I
think,
I
think
the
difference
in
the
ap
comparability
check
is
that
the
the
c-sharp
compiler
adds
some
attribute
to
the
property
which
are
also
generated
yeah.
A
I
don't
know
if
it's
possible
to
configure
this
roslin,
these
rustling
compatibility
checks,
but
maybe
it's
possible
to
ignore
such
attributes,
because
I
expect
this
kind
be
kind
of
a
frequent
problem.
So
I
don't
know.
Maybe
it
will
be
helpful
if
you
take
a
look
at
it
as
part
of
your
review.
D
C
Yeah
yeah,
I
mean
one
good
thing
is
we
know
the
ap
compatibility
check
is
working
at
least
it's
doing
its
job,
what
it
claims
to
be
because
we
added
it
explicitly
because
to
catch
like
any
accidental
apa
breaking
changes,
so
it
looks
like
it's
working,
even
though
it
did
not
catch
a
right
issue,
but
yeah
at
least
it's
working,
so
which
is
a
good
thing
for
me,
because
there
are
like
a
lot
of
there
was
like
one
potential
breaking
change
issued
between
1.0
and
1.1,
but
turns
out.
C
C
Yeah,
okay,
I
will
be
back
to
work
this
week,
so
I
look
at
the
actual
code
changes
itself,
any
other
pr's
which
require
emulated.
I
actually
had
it
some
time
to
look
at
like
some
old
pr
trying
to
see.
C
So
there
was
a
pr
where
we
are
attempting
to
get
the
semantic
conventions
auto
generated
just
trying
to
find
where
that
is.
I
was
under
the
page.
That's
mine,
yeah,
oh
yeah,
you're.
Also
here.
Thank
you
yeah,
okay,
so
I
want
to
see
like,
since
this
looks
like
I
mean
I
try
to
yeah
push
the
latest
main
to
it,
but
then,
like
I,
never
get
the
time
to
actually
review
it,
like
some
other
pr,
always
overwrites
it
yeah.
So
it.
C
Go
like
do
you
want,
do
you
see
like
anything
pending
here
I'll,
do
a
review,
but
this
looks
like
we'll
be
creating
a
new
nougat
package
with
the
name
open,
elementary
dot
semantic
conventions
right.
E
Yes,
so
the
idea
is
to
create
this
new,
this
new
package
and
then
because
it's
not
it's
still
in
experimental
yeah,
so
we
shouldn't
release
it
as
a
stable
but
yeah
yeah
so
and.
C
E
C
E
Yeah
so
the
way,
the
way
we
move
forward
and
how
to
use
india
departure,
we
can
discuss
how
we
could,
how
we
could
use
it.
Yeah.
C
Okay,
yeah
thanks
for
this,
like
we
think
there
was
someone
else
who
parallelly
did
the
similar
effort
and
we
decided
your
approach
was
better,
but
after
that
kind
of
lost
track
of
it.
So
sorry
for
the
delay,
we'll
try
to.
E
Oh
no
yeah,
the
only
thing
as
well
is
that
I
discussed
with
someone
else
I
think
was
from
christian,
my
mother,
but
there
is
some
conventions,
for
example,
couchdb,
for
example,
the
two
end
letters
they
ended
up
as
just
just
lowercase
count
to
b,
and
they
we.
E
I
think
there
is
some
like
code
style
warnings
or
something
like
that,
but
it's
really
tricky
to
because
it's
all
from
the
semantic
conventions,
yemo
files
and
there's
not
really
like
a
way
to
say:
okay,
like
because
the
dot
net
style
comment
says
that
two
two
letters
like
couchdb
or
something
like
that,
but
the
two.
If
there's
two
two
letters,
they
should
be
capitalized
yeah,
but
it's
not
really
like
easy.
So
it's
just
not
doing
that
right
now,
I'm
not
sure.
E
Issue
with
this
cache
known
as
characters-
yes
yeah,
but
I
saw
that
I
just
include
html
encoded
in
the
with
the
python
template
file.
So
it's
it's
encoded
and
then
in
the
comments.
So
when
you
view
it,
for
example,
when
you're
developing
visual
studio
and
you
hover
it
or
you
use
the
method,
then
it
shows
correctly
because
it's
it's
html
encoded
escape
yeah.
So
all
works
nicely.
You
know:
okay,
yeah,
perfect,
yeah,.
C
I
yeah
thanks
for
like
sticking
with
this
one,
even
though
it's
like
more
than
a
few
months,
no,
no
problem
yeah,
we
had
like
another
one
which
ellen
is
not
here
today,
so
he
he
was
like
trying
to
bring
the
similar
approach
for
the
proto
files
as
well
like
we'll,
have
a
package
which
will
just
bring
the
new
version
of
a
lot
of
files
as
well,
but
that's
also
like
stored,
because
we've
been
like
trying
to
focus
on
other
things,
but
this
looks
like
it
should
be
like
very
useful,
so
we
should
be
able
to
go
ahead
and
merge
this.
F
F
C
C
F
E
C
Okay,
all
right
yeah.
Okay,
so
I
I'll
do
this
at
the
last.
So
let's
go
to
the
questions,
so
I
need
to
open
slack.
Okay
yeah
this
one
was
awesome
for
me.
We
had
a
discussion
there,
yeah
yeah.
I
remember
that.
I
don't
know
what
happened
afterwards,
because
I
was
not
working
last
week
partially.
E
I
mean
it's
a
bit
long
discussion,
so
maybe
the
others
don't
need
to
wait,
but
the
idea
was
that
I
was.
I
was
playing
with
the
matrix
sdk
and
I
was
having.
I
was
like.
I
want
to
have
a
use
case
where,
if
you,
if
you
can
scroll
a
little
bit
more,
where
there's
there's
a
use
case,
yes
this
one.
So
I
was
thinking
on
having
a
use
case,
for
example,
where
I
have
let's
say
I
have
a
I'm
developing
an
application,
and
I
in
some
part
of
my
application.
E
Let's
say
I
don't
know
the
user
part
of
my
application.
I
have
a
I
have
a.
I
have
a
an
instrument
that
counts.
Something,
and
I
don't
know
the
instrument
name
is,
for
example,
just
in
this
case
response
size
or
something,
and
then
in
another
part
of
my
application,
or
you
know,
or
coming
from
a
library
that
I
use
like
a
third-party
library.
They
also
have
exposure
or
ads,
or
I
add
another
part
of
my
app
another
instrument
with
the
same
name.
E
So
I
was
doing
this
just
to
try
it
out,
and
then
I
noticed
that
the
second
instrument
is
it's:
just:
it
just
dropped
it.
It
skipped
yeah.
So
I
was
debugging
that
I
saw
that
the
skit,
because
it's
we
saved
the
instrument
names
in
the
dictionary
and
it's
if
it's
already
there,
then
it
just
skipped
and
then
I
already
had
I
mean
I
looked
at
the
spec
in
the
view,
spec
and
then
riley
comment.
This
part
up
above
about
the
about
the
view
specification,
but
I'm
not
pretty
sure.
E
E
C
C
Okay,
so
I
think
we'll
like
two
things
like
one
is
it's
my
understanding
that
from
the
api,
if
a
user
creates
like
two
instruments
with
the
same
name
as
long
as
they
are
from
a
different
meter,
the
apa
wouldn't
complain
there
is
no
exception
or
anything
because
it's
api.
F
C
Is
allowed
legally
to
have
duplicate
instrument
names
as
long
as
they
are
from
different
meters,
but
in
the
sdk
like,
let's
explicitly
ask
the
spec
to
clarify
whether
this
rule
is
only
applicable
for
views
or
is
it
for
the
overall
sdk?
If,
yes
and
move
this
section
like
out
of
the
view
and
move
it
like
further
up
to
clearly
state
that,
if
there
is
a
conflict,
then
it
should
be
like
handled
in
the
following
way
either
or
like
do
something
else.
C
But
having
said
that,
like,
you
should
be
able
to
work
around
it
with
not
work
around
like
based
on
the
view
conflict.
It
is
one
of
the
intention
behind
views
is
to
like
rename
the
metric
stream.
So
if
there
is
a
conflict,
you
can
always
use
the
views
to
rename
it.
I
think
yeah.
I
provided
an
example
where
you
can,
like
repent
or
prefix
the
meter
name
to
the
instrument
name
for
all
the
instrument.
C
There
is
a
single
line,
view
change,
which
you
do
that
all
your
instrument
names
would
be
like
prefix
with
the
meter
name,
so
that
should
essentially
achieve
what
we
are
trying
to
achieve.
C
So
let's
do
this
thing
first
step
I'll,
ask
officially
in
the
spec
whether
this
is
the
intended
behavior
or
not,
because
I
be
like
totally
agreeing
with
you
because
initially
I
thought
this
was
only
for
view,
but
I
think
I
got
some
clarification
from
wiley
likey
on
the
like
this
part
of
the
spec
that
it
is
meant
for,
like
everything
not
just
the
view,
part
whether
it
is
a
view
or
not.
Yeah.
E
And
there's
another
problem
that
I
I
noticed
is
and
it's
completely
different.
So,
for
example,
if
I
have,
if
I
have
my
app
and
I
created
two
instruments,
so
I
say
counter
a
and
counter
b
and
then
I
I
configure
the
the
meter
provider
with
two
with
with
my
meter
and
then
I
say
add
view
and
then
I
say
the
instrument
counter
underscore
star
so
to
get
the
counter
a
and
counter
b
right.
That
is,
that
is
supported
the
wild
card
support
and
then
I
add
a
view
with
the
custom
name
as
well.
E
C
Is
it
the
same
as
what
you
described
here?
Oh.
E
No,
this
is
another
one
that
I
found
today.
I
think
I
can
share
this
school
if
you
want.
E
E
C
E
One
meter,
okay,
so
I
have
one
meter
here
and
then
I
have
two
counters
from
it.
So
counting
a
counter
b
just
ignore
this
one,
because
I
was
using
the
collector
and
then
I
say
add
meter
my
meter
above
there
and
add
view
so
counter
dash
like
this,
because
I
want
to
include
the
two
counters-
and
I
name
it
my
view
like
this
yeah.
C
E
Yeah,
so
if
I
run
this
now,
then
I
will
get
counter
a
exported
yeah.
C
I
mean
we
have
unit
tests
like
doing
exactly
the
same
thing
will
only
export
whatever
comes
first.
The
second
one
would
okay
yeah.
This
should
be
like
more
clear,
like
from
the
view
spec,
because
it
clearly
stayed
like
if
you
like
it
steps.
It
has
a
step
by
step
like
flowchart,
on
what
you
do
with
every
measurement
like
find.
The
view
apply
views
one
by
one,
and
if
there
is
a
conflict
like
let
the
user
know
that
we
are
dropping
it
so,
but.
C
C
The
like
right
behavior,
I
don't-
I
mean
right
now.
C
C
C
So
that's
the
ad
view
takes
two
parameters.
One
is
the
instrument
selection,
which
is
the
first
one
and
second.
E
C
E
E
But
I
thought
because
because
the
this
this
wild
card
that
I
passed
there
is
like
a
selector
to
to
it's
like
a
it's
like
a
funk
function.
For
me
to
be
able
to
select
which
instruments
is
going
to
be
part
of
the
view
right,
yeah
and
I
mean
in
this
way,
then
I
can
only
use
one
instrument
in
the
building.
What's
the
purpose
of
the
view,
if
I
can
only
use
one
so.
C
C
Facility
like
merging
off
like
two
instruments
like
that
it
won't
be
at
least
part
of
the
first
person
because
right
yeah,
it's
a
bit
more
complicated,
but
the
main
reason
is:
whoever
is
your
collector
or
like
back-end?
They
have
to
anyway
do
the
merging,
so
it's
kind
of
given
that
any
back-end
is
capable
of
doing
that.
So
there
is
no
need
of
duplicating
that
effort
into
sdk,
because
that
will
really
like
make
the
stiga
design
look
more
complex
and
less
performant
than
we
want.
C
So
it
was
called
out
explicitly
that
we
won't
do
that,
like
instrument
being
merged
into
one
scenario
right.
E
Yeah
and
then
just
quickly
so
there's
the
other
example
they're
the
same
the
instrument
thing
so
there's
another
app.
So
I
have
a
meter
here
and
I
have
a
counter.
So
I
call
it
request
count,
and
this
is
my
amp
and
I
I
say
like
add,
meter,
that's
meter
above
here
and
I
say,
add
meter
from
my
library
from
another
from
another
library
and
then
I
export
to
otp
blah
blah
blah,
and
then
I
say
okay
first
counter
add
and
then
imagine
that
I
don't
know
got
a
request
for
my
app
or
something.
E
Then
I
using
a
service
from
the
library
whatever,
and
then
the
library
exposed
this
method
here
from
the
request-
and
here
I
am
in
the
library
now
and
the
library
itself
has
its
own
meter-
also
request
count
and
I'll
just
say
count
one.
I
I
I'll
say
that
this
is
a
pretty
common
scenario.
I
would
say.
C
This
one
is
like
my
company,
not
my
product,
the
other
one
is
a
different
meter
name,
so
it
still
inspect.
What
do
we
do
with
the
meter
name?
It's
there
are
like
open
issues
in
the
specs,
so
I
expect
it
to
be
like
clarified.
E
C
E
C
E
Clear
is
that
the
api
spec
says
that
yeah
like
like,
like.
We
already
saw
that
the
the
meter,
the
difference.
The
instrument
should
not
conflict
with
different
meters
yeah,
and
what
I
think
is
the
issue
is
that,
because,
in
our
case
here
the
sdk
already
drops
it,
and
I
think
the
issue
with
the
with
the
the
meter
names
and
and
flattening
out
and
meaning,
like
concatenating,
the
metering
with
the
instrument.
E
I
think
it's
more
like
a
responsibility
of
the
export,
because
you
mentioned,
and
I
know
that
the
prometheus
one
doesn't
doesn't
work
with
with
duplicate
instrument
names
and
then
in
the
promise
in
the
prometheus
exporter.
Then
that
one
should
drop
or
should
say
something,
but
that
would
be
part
of.
C
The
spec
we
cannot
just
like
prefix
in
prometheus,
because
prometheus
is
also
part
of
the
spec
required
exporter,
so
there
would
be
like
a
spec
which
clearly
states
what
to
do
with
the
thing
we.
B
C
Tracing
like
for
tracing
also
the
tracer
name,
how
it
should
be
exported
for
non-hotel
b,
is
like
a
specked
out
thing
like
for
otlp,
it's
very
clear,
like
what
do
we
do
with
the
name
of
the
tracer
slash
meter,
but
for
other
backends?
What
do
we
do
for
traces
it's
exported
as
attributes,
but
for
meter
it's
not
specked
out,
so
I
once
that
part
is
packed
out.
If
it
is,
the
spec
happens
to
be
like
saying
that
it
would
be
like
prefix
with
the
instrument
name.
C
If
it
is
creating,
then
it
would
solve
the
problem
which
you
currently
face,
or
if
the
spec
says
the
sdk
should
still
handle
it
and
let
the
exporter
deal
with
this,
then
that
also
would
solve
it.
But
I
expect
it
to
come
from
the
spec
and
I
will
create
a
view
or
I'll
ask
in
the
matrix
working
group
about
this
one,
all
right,
cool
yeah.
If
you
I.
C
Was
something
which
confused
me
as
well
in
the
very
beginning,
because
I
was
also
thinking
okay
api
allows
it
so
should
the
sdk
not
allow
it
by
default,
but
then
there
is
this
hidden
section
within
views
which
says:
if
there
is
a
conflict,
you
should
drop
it
so
right
yeah.
I
totally
agree
with
your
confusion.
I
I
went
through
the
same
experiment
when
I
was
working
on
the
early
prototypes
cool
all
right.
So
if
there
is
a
unit
test,
all
the
scenarios
which
you
described
are
right
now
a
unit
test.
C
C
It
should
be
fine
yeah
I
mean
like
last
week.
I
wasn't
working,
but
usually
I
attend
the
mrexpect
meeting,
so
I
can
get
it
asked
or
create
an
issue
or
yeah
make
it
my
problem,
at
least
for
now
to
ask
and
get
clarification
on
the
spec,
and
if
respect
doesn't
move
then
then
we
can
decide
like
what
do
we
do
in
the
main
way
right
cool
thanks
anything
else.
Before
I
go
to
my
topic,
I
can
see
new
faces.
Oh
hi,
neil
you're,
not
new.
Here
I
have
hello.
C
Yeah
I
thought,
like
I
mentioned
your
name
for
something
else,
because
the
last
time
we
I
mean
you
are
part
of
the
you're
trying
to
do
something
with
the
matrix
and
then
we
had
like
some
conversation
about
metrics,
and
I
did
mention
your
name,
but
unfortunately
that
then
you
are
not
in
the
code
anyway.
So
yeah
nice
to
see
you
back
here.
Is
there
anything
else?
Anything
in
particular,
you
are
looking
for
or
just
joining
out
of
curiosity,
or
do
you
want
to
like
take
some
items
and
contribute
or
anything.
G
In
general
yeah,
I
would
love
to
I'm
just
trying
to
see
where,
where
things
are
with
the
metrics,
and
I
would
love
to
contribute,
you
know
to
kind
of
get
this.
You
know
whenever
you
guys
are
ready
for
ga
release.
If
you
need
a
few
things.
C
Okay
yeah.
I
can
probably
like
find
one
item
for
you,
because
something
which
we
discussed
long
back
about
the
even
counter
we
could,
if
we
could
write
a
even
counter
to
the
new
metric
adapter
in
open
telemetry.
That
would
unblock
a
lot
of
customers
who
are
already
using
even
counter
something
which
we
briefly
discussed.
Like
long
back.
C
G
Implemented
one
for
our
purpose
inside
skelto
and
yeah.
I
thought
there
was
already
multiple
such
things
here,
but
if
there
isn't
one
for
you
encounter
I'll,
be
happy
to
write.
One
yeah.
C
So
let
let
me
create
that
issue
here,
because
I
I
was
just
like
creating
issues
for
adding
more
and
more
instrumentations.
So
basically,
I
was
initially
targeting
the
libraries
like
sql
client,
http
grpc,
but
the
even
counter
is
definitely
something
important
because
we
got
like
lot.
I
mean
it's
not
that
popular,
but
it's
still
useful,
because
even
counter
is
a
way
most
of
the
dot
net.
G
C
Yeah,
so
let
me
go
through
my
last
thing,
so
I
only
have
one
thing
so
I
want
to
propose
marking
or
promoting
robot
as
an
approver,
so
I
don't
think
we
have
any
other
maintenance.
Oh
yeah
michael
is
already
here
and
I
think
yeah.
C
So
what
I
do
is
I
create
an
issue.
If
anyone
has
concerns,
please
raise
it
there.
Otherwise,
please
mark
your
approval
in
the
pr
which
I'll
be
creating
shortly.
So
robert,
like
you,
can
look
at,
I
mean
sorry.
I
was
just
generally
telling
like
robert
is
already
an
approver
in
the
auto
instrumentation.
C
Stick
our
something
like
our
sister's
sick,
so
would
be
happy
to
get
more
expertise,
more
hands
to
look
at
the
sig
as
well,
so
I'll
create
an
issue
and
happy
to
fixing
with
other
maintainers
since
they're,
not
all
here
and
get
it
approached.
C
G
E
G
Metrics
I
saw
the
implementation.
Does
not,
I
mean
uses.net
6
api,
but
it
does
not
use
the
open,
telemetry
api
as
far
as
the
sdk
and
it
looks
like
they
have
like
a
really
lightweight
implementation
of
basically
the
aggregator
and
then
the
exporter.
Now
my
question
is:
is
there
any
major
limitations
of
that?
I
could
not
find
any
documentation
yeah
that
like
you're
asking?
Is
there
any
limitation.
G
Elementary
mix
right
right,
but
it's
just
net
metrics
everything
should
be
available
right
like
this,
like
all
of
the
standard,
clr
metrics
are
available
there
and
they
work.
There's
no
like.
Oh
this
format,
or
this
format
doesn't
come
correctly
or
anything
like
that.
F
C
I
know
is
that
this
tool
was
modified
recently
to
accept
the
new
metric
api,
which
is
like
in
line
with
the
open
elementary
one.
So
if
you
I
mean
it's,
I
think
it
was
released
like
very
recent,
like
a
week
or
two
back
as
a
preview.
C
C
He
is
working
on
the
documentation,
so
you
can
expect
to
see
that
show
up
in
the
dot
net
from
this
document,
like
sometimes
phone,
okay,
john,
whether
it's
already
there,
because
I
spoke
to
him
like
yesterday
or
day
before
yesterday,
he
said
he's
working
on
getting
the
documentation
for
the
tournament
counters,
how
it
works
with
the
new
apa.
So
yeah
it
doesn't
look
like
it's
updated
yet
so
yeah
you
can
expect
to
have
it
sometime
soon.
I
don't
know,
hopefully
by
number
10
before
that.
G
Okay,
all
right:
okay,
yeah-
that
was
my
only
question
and
I
may
have
you
know.
I
was
having
a
difficult
time
with
the
prometheus
exporter
with,
after
all,
the
changes
to
be
able
to
inject
some
configuration
in
a
way
that
our
library
specifies
configuration.
G
C
Sure,
but
everything
should
work
now,
because
I
think
when
we
did
the
initial
version
of
prometheus
like
a
month
back,
we
did
not
support
the
middleware
approach,
but
michael
did
some
clears
and
it
should
be
like
supported
now,
but
yeah
happy
to
take
any
other.
G
Yeah,
it's
it's
supported.
It
works
in
the
normal
way.
Somebody
would
use
the
open
telemetry
project,
but
one
of
the
things
we
do
is
expose
something
called
actuators
for
spring
boot
and
stilto
is
similar
to
that.
So
I
kind
of
found
some
difficulty
in
taking
our
configuration
and
injecting
it
into
this,
but
I
haven't
spent
a
lot
of
time.
F
C
Support
yeah:
we
should
like
have
somebody
work
around
it,
but
anyway
open
the
issue
and
we'll
take
it
from
there.
G
Yeah,
basically,
it
might
be
in
opening
up
some
some
interfaces
or
whatever,
like
some
things
that
are
internal
right
now,
maybe
I
don't
know
but
yeah.
Thank
you
for
helping
with
that.
C
Okay
yeah,
so,
as
I
mentioned
like
two
weeks
back,
I
am
still
haven't
created
so
I'll,
be
creating
some
issues
just
to
track.
Creating
more
instrumentation
libraries
for
metrics
motivation
is
just
to
have
like
something
working
when
someone
is
on
boarding
for
the
very
first
time
just
like
tracing.
So
it's
not
going
to
be
like
released
a
stable,
but
it
would
be
nice
to
still
get
it.
So
if
anyone
has
free
cycles,
we
could
use
some
help
with
writing.
Instrumentation
libraries
for
like
sql
I'll,
be
creating
for
grpc
and
asp.net.
C
I
think
I'll
create
an
issue
for
that
yeah.
So
if
there
are
no
other
question,
I
think
we
can
end
and
I'll
create
the
issue
for
like
robert's
proposal
as
an
approval
and
yeah.
So
I'll
be
updating
this
like
very
shortly
but
like
we
need
to
create
an
issue
in
the
spec,
so
I'll.
Take
care
of
that
and
update
in
the
selection.
E
C
C
Yeah
I
was
like
only
partially
in
working
last
week,
so
I
had
a
lot
of
backlog
also
happened
that
happens
that,
like
this
week
and
the
primary
one
calling
my
primary
job,
so
we
might
have
like
limited
availability
but
yeah
still
going
through
all
the
ones
yeah
yeah,
thanks
for
the
remainder
we'll
be
looking
at
it.
Yeah
thanks.
Everyone
see
you
next
week
all
right
see
you
thanks.
Bye
thanks.