►
From YouTube: 2022-10-04 meeting
Description
cncf-opentelemetry meeting-2's Personal Meeting Room
B
A
D
D
D
Yeah
I
think
we
can
get
started
released
a
1.4.0
beta
one
last
week
and
yeah
I
think
we
should
be
doing
another
Beta
release
soon.
D
A
Sure
yeah
I'm
I've
put
up
those
two
proposals,
basically
to
keep
or
not
to
keep
that
standard.
A
I'm
hoping
to
put
one
of
those.
The
proposals
are
basically
meant
to,
as
we've
discussed,
to
be
an
announcement
that
we're
going
to
post
underneath
discussions
in
hopes
to
get
kind
of
a
broad
reach
for
this
announcement
make
sure
that
people
are
aware
that
this
is
coming.
A
Both
of
them
are
worded
slightly
differently,
but
basically
I.
Think
the
first
decision
point
for
us
is
just
to
decide
do
do
we
want
to
go
ahead
with
dropping.net
standard
and
if
so,
then
we
can
get
into
the
details
and-
and
talk
about
you
know
is
this:
is
this
announcing.
B
A
We
want
to
announce,
or
vice
versa,
do
we
want
to
keep.net
standard
and
then
likewise
dig
into
that
announcement
and
make
sure
that
it's
that
it's
what
we
want
to
say
so,
firstly,
just
kind
of
the
first
question:
that's
that's
what
I'm
curious
what
others
other
people's
thoughts
are.
I
was
particularly
interested
in
CJs.
A
If,
if
I
don't
know,
if
any
of
you
have
spoken
with
him,
it
looks
like
Riley
has
approved
both
PR,
so
he's
basically
I.
Think
stating
that
he's
he's
okay
with
either
path,
but.
B
D
Yeah
so
I
was
saying:
I
would
support,
removing
the
net
standard
targets,
I
think
because
I
think
it
also
gets
helps
us
like
avoid
certain
other
issues
which
are
like
you
know,
those
issues
with
HTTP
client,
libraries
and
SQL
plan
libraries
that
we've
seen
earlier,
where
there's
a
wrapper
Library
which
wraps
over
hotel
and
then
they
are
targeting
net
standard,
and
since
our
public
API
surface
is
different
based
on
the
the
target
framework,
which
is
also
a
wrong
thing
in
the
first
place
to
begin
with,
but
now
that
we
have
it,
we
can
avoid
issues
like
that,
and
also
yeah
I
mean
that's.
D
That's
I.
Think
one
of
the
like
one
reason
why
I
feel
we
should
remove
that
standard
and
also
just.
B
Great
I
have
a
quick
question
this
one.
So
if,
if
we
decide
to
remove,
let's
say
we
are
removing
the
Army
currently
emulate
it
along
with
the
next
stabilities
or:
what's
what
are
we
gonna
do
so?
Are
we
gonna?
Do
the
next
table
release
and
then
do
the
major
version
one
or
the
next
table
will
be
done?
The
major
version
from
sorry
if
I
missed,
if
it
was
already
mentioned,.
A
What
I'm
proposing
here-
and
this
is
all
up
for
discussion,
but
what
I'm
proposing
is
that,
at
least
with
this
initial
announcement,
we're
just
dropping
that
standard
from
just
our
unstable
packages,
the
ones
that
have
never
seen
a
stable
release
yet,
but
then
I
would
also
like
to
communicate
that
we
do
intend
to
remove
them
also
from
our
core
packages.
A
That's
something
that
we
have
not
specified
or
talked
discussed
a
timeline
for,
but
what
I
am
proposing
in
in
the
dropping
of
net
standard.
One
here
is
that
we
do
it
under
a
major
version
bump
and
the
primary
reason
why
I'm,
basically
making
that
recommendation
is
that
dropping
that
standard
is,
is
a
heavier
taking
a
heavier
hand
than
what
we
what
we
have
taken
in
the
past
so
like
in
the
past.
We
have
dropped.
You
know,
net
461,.
B
A
A
Target
we've
dropped
net
core
app
3.1
and
we've
dropped
net
five
and
in
all
of
those
circumstances,
the
individuals
who
are
on
those
Frameworks
we're
still
able
to
upgrade,
albeit
maybe
not
in
an
like
ideal
fashion,
but
they
were
still
able
to
upgrade
because
we
had.net
standard
targets,
so
if
we
drop
them
right,
that
is.
A
That
is
a
difference,
and
so
that's
why
I'm
suggesting
that
it'd
be
a
major
version
release.
However,
again
that's
up
for
discussion.
I,
don't
know
if,
if,
if
folks
agree
with
that,
necessarily.
B
Yes,
that
makes
sense
to
me
just
one
quick
follow-up
question
on
that.
So
for
the
non-core
packages,
I
think
I
saw
the
the
pr
where
we
are
removing
it
from
the
exporters,
so
the
the
major
version
well,
when
we
do
that
at
that
time.
B
What
do
you
merge
that
we
are
right
like
we're
not
going
to
be
merging,
that
we
are
first
and
do
the
minor
release
and
then
do
this
one
where
we
are
removing
it
from
the
SDK,
an
API
and
then
do
the
major
I
just
want
to
make
sure
otherwise
like
it
makes
it
a
bit
odd
right.
B
To
I
mean
there
was
one
beer
I
think
I
saw
where
we
were
removed,
it
maybe
I'm
confused.
There
was
one,
yeah
are.
A
C
A
Yeah,
all
of
the
ones
that
are
stable,
so
yeah
I
think
the
idea
would
be
that
you
know
we
would
remove
it
from
the
non-core
packages
like
this
PR
is
doing,
and
then
you
know
we
would
wait
until
our
next
minor
release.
1.4
coming
in
you
know,
november-ish
and
then
sometime
after
that,
right
at
least
as
I've
boarded
The
Proposal.
Up
to
this
point,
you.
B
A
Sometime
after
that,
we
would
do
a
release
where
we
remove
it
from
the
rest
of
the
packages,
but
that
would
be
after
1.4.
B
That
makes
sense
yeah
thank
you
for
clarifying
I
just
wanted
to
because,
like
that,
will
allow
people
to
kind
of
use
the
latest
changes
or
the
features
that
will
be
releasing
in
the
next
table
and
then
give
them
some
time
to
update
to
the.
A
Next
major
version,
because
that
was
the
reason
I
was
asking
the
question:
correct
I
see
Mike's
hand
up,
but
let
me
just
clarify
one
more
thing.
So
one
of
the
concerns
that
I
have
right
and
I
don't
know
whether,
like
how
how
big
of
a
concern
this
is,
but
it's
a
potential
concern.
So
we
do
a
1.4
release
where
we
have
removed
net
standard
from
all
of
our
instrumentation
right.
A
And
so,
if
there
are
customers
that
are
on
Net,
5
or
net
core
app
3.1,
then
they
will
sure
they'll
be
able
to
upgrade
their
SDK
and
get
you
know
up
down.
Counters
features
like
that
things
that
have
been
released
since
and
min
max.
You
know
things
like
that:
they'll
be
able
to
get
that,
but
they
won't
be
able
to
upgrade
to
the
latest
instrumentation.
A
So
maybe
that's
a
concern.
Maybe
it's
not,
but
it's
just
something
to
know
a
couple
of
hands.
Michael
I
think
was
first.
C
So
I
have
a
couple
thoughts.
I
was
leaning
last
week
towards
not
dropping
any
of
these
things,
at
least
for
one
four
like
we're
not
on
an
annual
release
schedule
like
dot
net.
So
we
could
always
do
one
five
soon.
You
know
in
a
month
or
two
and
Tackle
this.
Then
that
has
a
couple
advantages.
It
gives
us
more
Runway
to
kind
of
publicize,
communicate
the
change.
It
also
kind
of
allows
us
to
see
what
happens
when
dot,
Net
7
drops,
which
is
sort
of
aggressively
deprecating
and
emitting
warnings.
C
We
don't
know
what
the
world
and
the
community
is
going
to
do
with
that
like
it
was
a
big
surprise
for
us.
We've
seen
some
blogs
where
people
are
upset
about
it,
it's
possible
that
goes
out
with.net7
and
something
happens.
Maybe
they
change
their
guidance
on.net
standard.
Maybe
they
revert
stuff.
Maybe
support
gets
put
back,
I,
don't
really
know,
but
we
don't
have
to
blaze
that
trail.
C
C
C
People
don't
really
know
like
what
major
version
really
is
breaking
versus
it's
just
sort
of
deprecation
of
things.
We
don't
really
have
a
way
to
distinguish
that
we
might
be
burning
our
only
Avenue
to
do.
You
know
real
breaking
changes.
We
we
might
not
know
ever
do
them
anyway,
but
I
think
we
have
to
be
cautious
about
sort
of
burning
our
opportunity
to
do
that
type
of
thing.
If
that
makes
sense,.
A
Yeah
I
think
those
are
all
good
and
valid
concerns
and
also
a
pretty
reasonable
suggestion
for
going
forward
right
on
Timothy
you,
you
had
some
comments.
E
Hi
yeah,
so
I
heard
you
mentioned
that
you
were
concerned
about
applications
running
like
dot
net,
core
3.1
or
net
core
five,
and
both
of
those
will
be
end
of
life.
This
calendar
year,
so
I
was
wondering.
Have
we
like
defined
any
sort
of
Charter
like
we're
going
to
support
the
supported
with
the
same
versions
of
net
that.net
supports?
Or
do
we
support?
You
know,
expired
versions.
E
You
know
six
months
a
year
after
they
get
you
know
end
of
life
and
that
kind
of
segues
ways
to
like
what
is
dot
net
standard
really
like
afford
US
like
what
what
benefits
are
we
getting
at
a.net
standard
because,
in
my
mind,
dynasty
was
really
bridging
those
dot,
NET
Framework
versions
with
the
early
versions
of
net
core?
E
A
Sure
so
yeah,
let's
talk
about
that
for
a
second,
so
so
the
so
net
standard.
Of
course
you
know
one
one
of
the
benefits
is
I.
Think
the
one
that
we've
been
talking
about
the
most
up
to
this
point,
which
is
hey,
you
know
like
people
on
Old
Frameworks
right
support
is
one
thing
like
end
of
end
of
life
and
end
of
support
is
one
thing.
At
the
end
of
the
day,
I
think
people
still
do
stay
on
Old
Frameworks
and
they
ultimately
get
grumpy.
You
know
when
they
can't.
A
That
is,
that
is
I,
think
more
in
the
spirit
of
why
I
think
Microsoft
is
still
hanging
on
to
net
standard,
and
that
is
that
it
does
provide
a
kind
of
a
a
migration
path
for
folks
still
on.net
framework
right
where
net
standard
is
still
supported.
Where
it
is,
you
know,
NET
Framework
is
not
end
of
life,
so
they're
able
to
share
code
right
between
their.net,
core
apps
and
their.net
Framework
apps,
as
they
continue
to
make
that
migration.
A
The
other
thing
that's
standard
also
affords
to
library,
authors,
not
necessarily
us,
but
to
library.
Authors
in
general
is
the
ability
to
share
code
with
mono
and
xamarin.
A
Now
I
think
Michael's
spoken
with
me
before
and
is
suggested
that
I
that
he
doesn't
think
that
we
currently
work
with
xamarin
and
mono
anyways,
but
that
is
generally
speaking,
another
benefit
to.net
standard.
Is
this
notion
of
code
sharing
between
supportive
so.
E
And
only
because
I've
done
some
of
this
for
on
the
application
site
side,
I
know
that
Microsoft's
policy
was
for
customers
on
dot
net.
Four
five
or
four
six
was
to
upgrade
to
four
seven,
so
not
necessarily
like
pushing
them
to
the.net
core.
But
like
hey
like
if
you're
in.net
framework,
now
you
can
come
to
dinet47
with
very
minimal
change,
and
maybe
that's
one
reason.
E
This
thing
on
that
standard
is
to
you
know,
help
with
that
migration
and
just
looking
so
I've
got
the
numbers
pulled
up
dot
net
four
six
and
four
seven
ship
with
Windows
10.
Windows
10
is
expected
to
be
supported
until
October
2025..
E
So
four,
six,
four
seven.
If
we
want
to
like,
have
support
ability
for
four
six.
Four
seven,
you
know
that's
for
the
foreseeable
future.
Four
six
percent
will
be
supported
by
Microsoft,
and
so,
if
they're,
not
if
net
standard
helps
us
cover,
just
all
the
Net
Framework
libraries,
maybe
that's
a
vote
for
keeping
a
standard
in
you
know
a
year
two
more
years,
foreign.
E
I
haven't
seen
clear
guidance
from
the
Dyna
team
when
the
net
standard
is
going
to
go
away
like
when
they're
going
to
stop
supporting
that
standard.
I
do
see
them
at
standard
2.1
doesn't
support
any
of
the
Net
Framework.
A
Great
great
yeah
I
think
that
was
introduced
with
net
core
3.1
if
I
recall
so.
A
I
guess
at
this
point:
in
the
conversation
it
sounds
like
what
Michael
suggested
was.
Okay,
maybe
maybe
we
just
take
this
as
an
opportunity
to
hold
like
kind
of
hold
in
pattern
for
a
little
bit
keep
net
standard.
A
Knowing
that
you
know
we
can
a
few
months
after
1.4,
we
could
just
decide
to
do
1.5
and
at
that
point
in
time,
maybe
with
more
insight
into
what
Microsoft
is
doing,
we
can
drop
it
then
or
clarify
our
stance
one
way
or
another
I
I
kind
of
like
that
approach.
You
know,
there's
there's
I
I,
agree,
I,
don't
think
it's
something
that
we
need
to
rush
into.
A
That
said,
I
I
do
think
that
we
should
announce
something
just
because
I
I
think
that
it
is
possible
that
folks
will
run
into
this
compile
time,
warning
that
you
know
they
may
not
have
experienced
yet,
but
they
they
will
as
soon
as
they
start.
Upgrading,
open,
telemetry
and
I
think
that
that
may
be
a
good
learning
opportunity
for
us
to
see
like
is
it
is
this
affecting
anybody
is?
A
Is
anybody
noticing
this
and
and
so
on,
so
I
I
I'd
still
like
to
make
some
announcement
and
that's
kind
of
the
the
other
in
the
vein
of
the
other
write-up
that
I
did
the
other
proposal.
D
B
D
B
A
A
Write
feedback,
if
you
have
it
thumbs
up
thumbs
down,
should
we
even
release
this
as
an
announcement
I
think
it
should
be.
Maybe
the
first
question,
as
you're
kind
of
reviewing
it
again,
I
feel
like
there
is
some
value
in
announcing
something,
but
the.
B
A
A
D
So
Alan
you're
asking
about
announcing
the
possible
warnings
which
people
would
see
when
they
get
in
the
newer
version
1.4
or
photo
not
the
next
you're,
not
talking
about
making
announcements
for
net
standard,
topping
right.
A
D
D
No,
the
I
was
looking
for
the
issue
that
we
want
to
make
the
announcement
towards.
A
Oh,
the
the
the
pr
that.
D
I
well
I
thought
that
was
an
issue
created
like
I
I
didn't
follow
so
USU
saying
we
should
you
wanted
to
know
like
what
kind
of
announcement
we
should
make
or
like
should
we
be
making
an
announcement
to
address
that
build
warning
issue
like
I'm
I'm,
a
little
confused,
so
when
you
we
were
asking
like,
should
we
be
making
announcement
and
when
or
like
how
should
we
be
making
an
announcement
so.
A
B
A
This
is
why
you're
getting
those
warnings,
it's
because
we
have
net
standard,
builds
and
you're
on
and
and
you're
on
a
framework
that
is
end
of
life
and,
let's
see
Dan
also
linked
to
the
original
issue.
If
that's
what
you
were
looking
for,
but
the
issue
is,
is
basically
this
PR
is
achieving
or
aiming
to
address
that
issue
that
Dan
just
linked
in
the
chat.
D
B
A
D
D
Cool
and
yeah
the
this
I
added
this
agenda
item,
so
this
PR
has
been
open
for
quite
some
time
and
I.
Think
yeah,
like
it's
a
lot
of
merging
with
me
in
France
that
has
happened
and
resolving
of
conflicts.
D
This
PR
and
I
think
I
had
left
some
comments
which
Michael
had
already
addressed
so
I
didn't
get
the
time
to
take
a
look
at
it
again.
One
last
time
before
I
review.
I
would
be
doing
it
in
the
like
this
week
itself,
but
yeah
like
we
would
like
to
get
more
reviews
for
this
PR,
because
this
is
quite
a
desired
feature.
B
D
A
I
have
to
admit:
I
haven't
spent
a
lot
of
time.
Looking
at
that
PR
is
it
it's
given
that
it's
been
out
there
for
a
while
and
I
think
a
number
of
people
looked
at
it?
What's
the
is
there
kind
of
a
summary
of
what's
left
to
decide
or
people
are
still
mulling
over.
B
B
B
D
Yeah
I
think
that
is
all
that
we
have
in
the
agenda.
So
that
means
then
for
the
next
Beta
release,
I
think
yeah.
We
don't
have
to
worry
about
dropping
that
standard
so
like
as
soon
as
this
PR
gets
merged
are
there?
Is
there
anything
else
that
we
would
like
to
be
a
part
of
the
next
Beta
release.
A
I,
don't
think
so:
okay.
D
Yeah,
hey
Dan,
hi,
hi
good,
how
yeah
like
hi,
firstly,
I,
welcome
and
like,
were
you
looking
for
to
bring
up
anything
any
Topic
in
particular,
or
do
you
just
I.
B
Was
just
listening
in
yeah,
Belle
and
I
had
talked
about
you
know
just
said
this
was
open
and
people
could
come
and
listen
and
I
was
curious
about
the
net
standard
conversation,
even
though
I
don't
have
any
specific
feedback,
but
you
know
in
the
future.
If
that
is
relevant
to
my
organization,
I
was
just
wanting
to
know
like
sort
of
where
those
decisions
originated
from
but
I.
You
know
everything
I
heard
made
sense
to
me.
So
thank
you.
A
Yeah
Dan,
if
you
don't
mind,
it
was
telling
telling
this
group
a
little
bit
about
yourself.
B
Sure
I
work
for
a
company
called
relativity,
we're
primarily
a.net
shop,
but
we
that
we
use
numerous
other
languages.
Well,
we
started
using
open,
Telemetry
I
would
say
pretty
early
in
its
life
cycle
and
we're
continuing
to
use
and
adopt
it.
So
you
know
any
decisions.
Around.Net
specifically
eventually
affect
my
group,
so
yeah.
B
Get
out
of
yours?
Oh
sorry,
no,
no
you're,
good,
oh
I
was
gonna
say
like
the
group
that
I,
like
the
team.
I
work
for
in
my
company,
is
like
a
observability
team,
so
we're
kind
of
largely
responsible
for
guiding
the
company
on
you
know,
I,
don't
know
like
best
practices
and
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
You
know
it
was
our
decision
to
adopt
the
inflammatory
and
kind
of
push
it
through
the
org.
So
no
I
do
I
kind
of
wear
many
hats
from
like
developer.
A
Yeah-
and
this
is
a
good
meeting-
the
folks
on
this
call
are
good
folks
to
speak
to
about
best
practices.
You
know
if
you
have
questions
you're,
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
best
accomplish
your
goals.
This
is
a
good
venue
for
that.
So
you
know,
if
you
have
things
on
your
mind
now
or
in
future
meetings,
that's
definitely
we're
open
to
that.
D
A
Yeah
good
question
you
can:
you
are
welcome
to
this
this
Google
doc
that
we're
looking
at
here,
the
new
cars
just
sharing
it's
a
public
dock.
It's
I,
don't
know
if
you
it's
on
the
calendar,
invite
if
you
have
this
calendared.
A
B
The
time
of
this
meeting
also
changes
every
week
it's
11
A.M
or
4
P.M
yeah.
A
B
D
Okay,
then
I
think
that's
all
that
we
had
to
discuss
today.
We
can
end
the
call
early.