►
From YouTube: 2022-02-10 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
C
Have
you
tried
the
new?
I
think
you
had
added
the
new
zoom
link
in
the
document.
C
F
D
C
So
I
have
some
tweaks
to
do
there
or
one
of
the
questions
had
to
do
with.
So
when
you
created
the
document,
the
status
you
gave
to
metrics
was
alpha
and
there's
a
question
of
whether
it
should
just
be
experimental
or
alpha,
but
I'm
assuming,
if
you
put
alpha
there,
was
a
reason
back
then.
D
I
mean
the
problem:
is
that,
like
other
languages
have
alpha
versus
experimental,
I
mean
I
would
think
that
alpha
is
more
correct,
because
experimental
is
everything
that's
not
done,
but
like
there
is
a
metrics
api,
it's
just
going
to
change
or
like
there's
a
metrics
sdk
implementation.
It
can
just
change
which
to
me
is
alpha
not
beta,
like
I
know
what
the
spec
says,
but
the
spec,
but
the
spec
is
overly.
A
D
D
C
I'm
sorry:
what
are
you
referring?
Sorry.
C
I'm
assuming
11
18,
since
it's
only
it's
pages
that
have
been
moved
over
with
almost
no
changes.
Okay,
but
it's
independent.
C
C
In
your
demo,
pr,
you
had
a
manual
page
entry
that
was
kind
of
concocted
from
different
sources.
So
there's
nothing
specific,
I'm
not
going
to
create
a
page
for
that
since
you're
going
to
be
synthesizing,
it
essentially
yeah
yeah.
That
makes
total
sense.
So
once
11
18
gets
merged
in
11
16,
for
which
I
still
have
some
tweaks
to
do.
I'm
assuming
you'll
be
good
to
go
for
reorg,
and
then
I
can.
I
can
continue
moving
on
some
pieces
as.
G
Yep
makes
sense
yeah.
I
should
be
able
to
get
started
on
that
pretty
pretty
quickly,
and
so
what
I'll
probably
do
is
I'll
like
copy
paste,
basically
like
the
structure
from
like
javascript
or
java
or
net
and
then
fill
in
the
things
that
I
know
already
exist,
and
then
everything
that's
a
gap
I'll
just
either
file
an
issue
for
separately
or
just
have
a
rollup
issue.
G
That's,
like
hey,
add
the
stuff
for
for
these
things
and
then
I'll
do
that,
independently
of
so
it'll
kind
of
be
like
several
phases
so
get
the
existing
content.
That's
in
there
get
that
into
a
page,
called
manual,
instrumentation
and
or
other
pages
as
needed,
and
then
continue
to
fill
the
gaps.
Pr
by
pr.
C
G
The
primary
maintainer
for
uh.net
he
brought
it
up
like
he
doesn't.
He
doesn't
seem
like
he's
like
opposed
to
the
way
that
it's
being
described
in
the
docs
today,
just
kind
of
more
a
little
surprised,
and
that,
like,
I
think
he
sort
of
had
this
assumption
that,
like
auto
instrumentation
meant
no
code
changes
literally,
but
that's.
G
If
you
count
infrastructure,
there
are
code
changes
like
you,
don't
like
just
magically
get
a
sidecar
process
that
does
instrumentation
for
you
without
doing
something
and
depending
on
how
you
squint
at
it
that
is
application
code,
then
the
second
one
is
the
spec
itself
is
arguably
not
entirely
clear
because
when
it
says
you're
not
making
changes
to
the
code,
like,
I
think
it's
like.
Oh,
when
it's
saying
you
don't
need
write,
you
need
don't
need
to
write
or
access
application
code
to
use
the
open,
telemetry
apis.
G
Does
that
mean
it
does
not
require
the
ability
to
write
or
access
application
code?
Or
does
that
mean
it
does
not
require
the
use
of
open,
telemetry
apis
in
application
code?
Those
are
two
different
interpretations
that
mean
very
different
things
and
he's.
G
Basically,
his
recommendation,
like
in
a
dm
that
I
have
of
them,
is
like
maybe
the
spec
should
just
get
updated,
because
that
we
don't
want
things
to
be
kind
of
weird
like
that,
and
he
gave
an
example
of
like
how
the
definition
and
net
docs
for
sorry
on
microsoft,
docs
for
azure
monitor
follows
the
the
definition
that
auto
instrumentation
does
not
include
instrumentation
libraries.
G
Those
are
also
capable
of
being
changed.
He
was
just
kind
of
pointing
out
that,
like
hey,
you
know
if
the
vendor,
who
I
work
for,
is
documenting
this
concept.
One
way
there
might
be
others
who
document
it
a
different
way
and
that
can
just
be
confusing
for
people
who
are
looking
to
use
one
or
more
vendors.
So.
D
D
Tackle
that
you
were
more
than
welcome
to
reference
the
comment
I
just
made
on.
C
If
you've
laid
it
out,
then
fidip,
if
you
prefer,
I
can
open
up
the
issue
issue.
G
D
Okay,
so
I
just
commented
on
the
1042,
which
is
the
one
where
that
went
back
and
forth,
and
I
basically
said
like
the
docs
aren't
intended
for
maintainers
and
spec
approvers
like
to
hear
you
know,
from
the
perspective
of
a
developer,
from
an
end
user,
like
the
exact
details
of
how
automatic
instrumentation
work
or
the
exact
level
of
effort
of
integration,
of
how
auto
instrumentation
works
is
irrelevant.
D
There's
code,
I
have
to
completely
write
myself
for
instrumentation,
which
is
manual
instrumentation,
and
then
there
is
things
that
make
that
easier,
which
is
and
that
universe
is
automatic.
There's
a
scale
there's
like
a
sliding.
You
know
spectrum
of
like
how
automatic
is
it,
but
that's
the
line
of
demarcation.
If
the
spec
needs
to
change
the
spec
needs
to
change
and
philip,
you
can
like
open
an
issue
shepard
that
through
and
reference
this
comment
or
this
this
thread,
but
I'm
I
think
it's
ridiculous
to
like
one.
D
D
C
D
C
Which
is
fine,
but
what
I
wanted
to
discuss
today
was:
do
we
want?
What
do
we
think
about
this?
Getting
started
becoming
a
directory?
Does
that
make
sense?
And
if
so,
how
many
pages
do
we
want
below
there?
Is
it
going
to
be
one
for
tracing
one
for
metrics
one
for
logs?
Is
it
gonna
be?
Do
we
allow
language
sigs
to
do
whatever
they
want?
You
know
it
could
be
a
single
one
with
all
three
or
a
single
page.
Sorry.
D
The
the
two
notes
I
would
have
right
now
is
one
dot
net
runs
way
ahead
of
everyone
else,
because
they're
being
by
microsoft,
to
get
like,
like
literally
everything,
into
their
neck
into
whatever
this
falls.net
releases
like
they
want
logs,
they
want
metrics,
they
want
the
whole
shebang,
cool
and
historically,
what
this
has
meant
is
that
they
end
up
shipping
stuff.
That
looks
and
feels
very
different
than
what
everyone
else
eventually,
ships,
because
they're
running
so
far
ahead
of
the
spec
process
that
they're,
basically
just.
C
D
C
D
D
G
I
I
definitely
I'm
like
of
two
minds
of
this:
the
logging
less
so
but
like.
I
know
that
there
are
some
people
out
there
who
metrics
is
kind
of
where
they're
looking
to
start
with
and
then
they're
going
to
add
tracing
at
some
point
later
and
if,
like
the
only
getting
started,
thing
is
like.
Oh
here's.
F
G
You
do
tracing
they're
like
well,
that's
not
why
I'm
here
and
like
whether
or
not
that's
in
a
thing
called
getting
started
or
just
like
a
separate
thing
called
metrics.
D
D
D
D
Basically,
it's
an
argument
for
getting
started
should
be
one
page
where
it's
just
like.
This
is
the
minimal
program
that
you
run.
You
know
this
is
the
minimal
sort
of
like
download,
install
configure
code
to
get
you
a
trace
to
get
you
some
metrics
and
to
get
you
a
log
statement
or
whatever
and
then
the
more
then
you
would
split
up
the
like.
C
G
That
you're,
seeing
no
it's
it's
more
they're
like
they
were
doing
the
whole.
Oh,
I
guess
they
were
doing
the
whole
like
old,
school
apm.
Metrics
is
the
way
that
I
figure
out
world
and
they're
like
okay.
Well,
I'm
kind
of
bought
into
the
concept
of
also
doing
tracing,
but
I
want
to
first
get
my
metrics
in
this
proprietary
sdk
over
into
hotel,
like
that.
This
isn't
a
super
common
thing.
We
just
we
have
like
some
prospects.
That'll
say
that
and
then
we're
like
hey
yeah.
D
I
adam
sort
of
colloqui,
you
know
without
naming
names,
we've
had
some
conversations
with,
like
some
pretty
big
companies
that
you've
heard
of
that
are
feeling
like
they
kind
of
got,
jumped
into
the
hotel
pool
a
little
too
early
and
are
stopping
or
reversing
their
hotel
migrations,
at
least
at
a
library
level,
because
it's
just
it's
not
there's
not
enough
benefit
to
migrating
just
for
tracing
because,
again,
like
the
story
is
really
about
all
these
things.
D
Like
this
is
the
thing
that,
but
this
is
why
I've
for
so
long
was
just
like.
I
don't
think
we
should
put
anything
about
metrics
on
this
page
until
we
actually
have
like
salt.
You
know
beta
at
least
metrics
or
like
a
really
solid
idea
of
what
metrics
are
going
to
be
just
so
that
it
doesn't
turn
into
every
month,
everything's
out
of
date
again
and
seeing
this
get
started.
That
has
like
a
logging
section
on
it.
Just
like
that's
really.
G
The
caveat
to
that,
at
least
for
metrics,
is
that,
because
the
actual
thing
that
you
use
for
net
landed
in
donet6,
which
is
a
stable
lts
release
like
the
what
I'll
say,
the
open
telemetry
parts
of
it
are
less
stable,
but,
like
the
the
actual
thing
that
produces
the
data
is
about
right.
D
D
I
would
really.
I
think
I
think
my
general
preference
for
this
is
going
to
be
like
I'm
going
to
comment
on
this,
that
I
think
we
would
rather
like
getting
started,
be
one
section
rather
than
multi-section
and
that,
if
you
want
to,
if
he
wants
to
integrate
the
examples
into
a
single,
getting
started
page
then
cool.
D
G
I
I
would
also
think
that,
like
there
should
probably
be
like
a
big
disclaimer,
regardless
of
how
these
get
organized,
that,
like
metrics
as
beta
logs,
is
yeah
experimental.
I
think
yeah
just.
E
G
So
that
it's
clear
that,
like
hey,
this
is
being
documented,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that,
like
this
is
stable,
the
way
that
the
tracing
documentation
is.
C
So
they
have
the
status
on
the
language
landing
page.
I
don't
know
if
you
want
a
banner
on
on
the
pages
themselves.
C
No
I
mean
so
just
to
play
devil's
advocate
a
bit
since
this
is
the
there
being
leaders
of
the
pack
here.
My
feeling
was
to,
if
there's
no
strong
objection
to
try
and
accommodate
merging
this
pr
as
soon
as
possible,
as
is,
and
then
we
can
refine
later
or
rework
later.
But
that's
that's
just
one.
D
C
D
C
In
fact,
by
the
way
philip,
so
they
had
it
set
up,
I
don't
know
if
you
were
aware
they
have
a
generate
dot,
docs
script
whatever
and
that
their
tooling
generates
jekyll
markdown
files.
So
I
don't
know
if
you
picked
that
up
when
you
were
doing
your
port,
I
kind
of
get
the
impression,
maybe
not
anyhow.
No
so
so
that's
you
know
really
cool,
it
helped
a
lot.
C
So
it
helped
me
in
the
migration
and
it
helped
me
focus
on
reworking
the
docs
on
their
side
to
to
clean
things
up
and
start
redirecting
folks
to
the
website
to
the
hotel
website.
Nice.
D
Okay,
yeah,
I
haven't
heard
anything
else
from
shaw
about
the
end
user
stuff,
but
hopefully
that'll
get
pushed
forward
a
little.
D
Okay,
yeah,
oh
blog
stuff,
do
we
need
to
just
do
we
ever
come
to
any?
Yes.
C
So
this
morning
ted
voiced
his
opinion
and
we're
now
all
in
agreement.
So
I
closed
one
of
the
pr's
and
merged
the
other
and
when
I
have
the
time
I'll
be
creating
the
other
which
log
entries.