►
From YouTube: 2021-03-19 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
B
C
D
C
So
if
any
of
these
have
really
been
triaged
yet,
should
we
go
over
these
quickly
unless
bugged
in
they're,
familiar
to
you.
C
C
F
B
C
F
So
we
are
opinionated
that
this
is
what
you
should
get.
I'm
not
saying
it's
correct,
but
I'm
just
explaining
the
situation
right.
A
So
it
seems
like
at
that
time
we
decided
to
support
one
based
on
the
recommendation
from
zipking
and
and
for
that
one.
I
believe
there
is
a
minor
caveat
like
sometimes,
if
you
use
one
zero,
sometimes
you
could
use
true
false.
So
we
we
try
to
be
flexible.
We
we
try
to
like
support
both
when
we
take
the
income,
but
when
we
give
the
outcome,
we
stick
with
the
official
one
from
the
dock
and
we
decided
not
to
support
all
of.
C
Them,
but
when
you
environment
variables
override
what
people
set
in
manual
configuration,
is
that
correct?
It's
the
other
way
around.
C
So
let's
say
you've
configured
something
in
code
and
also
set
an
environment
variable
which
one
wins.
F
But
environment
variable
is
only
for
for
auto
configuration
correct
like
if
you
do
manual
we'll
override
the
auto
configuration
so
manual
wins.
A
Yeah,
so
probably
it's
good
to
understand
the
scenario
it
might
be.
You
want
to
export
like
he
wants
to
communicate
to
another
service
and
that
service
only
support
like
b3,
single
or
something
or
it's
just
because
yeah.
He
think
he
believes,
there's
three
options.
We
should
give
all
of
them.
Well,
we
don't
think
that's
the
case.
C
C
So
that's
that's
the
they're
there.
It's
not
that
the
options
aren't.
H
A
C
B
C
C
H
H
A
A
I
I
think
it's
still
the
client
silver
model,
yeah
yeah,
so
we'll
probably
clarify
that,
like
for
client
server,
because
client
server
is
something
that
is
very
hard
to
define,
probably
would
just
say
if
it's
a
one-to-one
matching.
We
use
client
silver
if
it's
a
like
multi-multi-mapping
than
consumer
and
producer.
A
Yeah
I
I
would
suggest
like
in
case
of
like
one
to
one.
I
think
we
should
always
use
client
and
silver.
A
A
Yeah
so
number
one
thing:
I
I
think
we
have
a
bug
that
that
people
could
create
an
issue
without
any
tag.
I
believe,
if
they
just
go
to
the
issue
and
select
create
by
default,
they
will
have
to
pick
a
type
so
most
likely
he
decided
not
to
like.
He
decided
that
he's
going
to
remove
the
tag.
Is
that
correct,
or
we
just
have
a
bug
somewhere.
A
Okay,
so
if
it's
trace
then
option
is
who,
like
I'm,
I'm
I'm
doing
my
due
diligence.
So
if
you
look
at
the
issue
for
all
the
metrics
api,
one
is
tagged
and
anything
related
to
matrix.
If
it
has
matrix
tag,
I
will
take
a
look
at
least
once
per
week
so
for
trace
is
there
should
we
do
a
rotation
like
automatically
assigned
to
someone
or.
H
H
F
I
G
Where's
the
code
owners
file:
do
we
not
have
one?
Do
we
remove
that
one
we
have
one,
we
do
have
trees.
H
C
Yeah
yeah,
you
have
to
confirm
it's
almost
like,
like
someone
from
that
group
has
to
pick
it
up,
it's
more
that
the
other
direction
right.
That's
the
the
group
of
people
like
it
has.
It
should
be
someone
from
that
group,
but
if
you
just
randomly
assign
someone
that
doesn't
work
at
minimum,
it
should
be
like
reach
out
to
someone
from
that
group
and
say:
hey:
can
you
take
this
like
like
we
could?
C
We
could
potentially
do
this
in
slack
like
there's
this
spec,
you
know,
suspect,
slack
channel,
and
we
could
raise
awareness
about
these
issues
by
asking
and
confirming
for
assignments
there.
That
might
be
a
way
to
make
it
kind
of
visible.
H
On
a
slightly
separate
note,
I
I
think
that
we
don't
have
enough
jagger
and
cpen
experts,
so
we
could
probably
start
with
that
or
something
parallel,
because
I
think
that
we
have
like
people
like
anurag
who
knows
zipkin
and
that's
about
it.
So
probably
I
don't
know
it's
like
you
could
be
too
over
the
top
trying
to
find
you
know
like
automatically
if
it's
zipking
assigned
and
if
it's
jager
assign
duty,
for
example,.
C
Yeah
and
honorable
is
he's
a
member
here,
so
so
we
could
assign
it
to
him.
H
C
F
I
would
I
would
I
mean
ideally,
we
should
assign
him,
but
we
don't
have
and
we
did
not
communicate
what
that.
Does
that
mean,
and
probably
for
the
moment,
just
to
see
him
here
and
say
what
we
expect
him
to
do.
C
C
Cool
and
then
in
the
future,
I
think,
rather
than
doing
this
kind
of
request
here
on
the
issue
thread.
This
is,
I
feel,
like
kind
of
like
the
kind
of
thing
we
should
be
doing
in
slack
sort
of
for
like
the
first
round
like
post
this,
in
slack,
like
maybe
that's
part
of
the
new
the
issue
process
is
like.
I
want
to
resolve
this.
It
needs
to
be
someone
from
this
group
honorary.
Can
you
do
it
or
someone
else
if
you're
interested
like
that,
creates
a
little
bit
opportunity?
C
A
And
for
triage
like,
are
we
going
to
put
a
milestone
or
a
priority
or.
C
Or
just
leave
it
right
and
well,
that's
that's
kind
of
actually
the
question
for
this
is
the
stuff:
that's
not
not
on
any
of
our
like
project
plans,
but
is
like
oh
yeah.
That's
the
long
tail
of
just
tracing
things
we
should
deal
with
and
if
we
do
decide
to
deal
with
it
it
feels
like
we
need.
We
need
a
backlog,
maybe
that
this
stuff
goes
into
right.
A
So,
for
open
time
to
donate,
I
I
think
cjo
figured
out
a
way
like
he
has
a
nice
to
have,
but
it's
not
in
any
release.
So
he
just
tag
that
has
help
needed
and
which
communicates.
If
you
look
at
the
tag
it
mentioned,
if
people
are
offering
help,
we
might
be
able
to
push
this,
but
if
nobody
offered
help
the
maintainers
will
have
more
like
no
motivation
to
push
this
any
soon.
C
Okay,
so
we
can
use
the
help
wanted
tag
and
then
we
could
have
like
a
a
like.
What
should
we
name
this
this
project
right?
This
would
be
like
a
project
that
we
put
up
here
right.
That's
like
spec,.
C
Yeah,
and
do
we
want
to
like
define
this
backlog
is
like
this
is
the
stuff
that
how
do
I
want
to
put
it
things
go
on
this
list
if
we've
decided
that
they're
important
enough
to
do,
but
they
don't
go
into
the
other,
we're
like
committed
to
doing
these
things
but
handling
these
issues
but
they're,
not
in
other
things
like.
In
other
words,
it's
not
that
everything
ends
up
in
this
project.
Backlog.
H
Right
I
yeah
I
wanted
to
ask
like:
are
there
any
issues
that
we
say
we
won't
work
on
them
for
sure
that
if
that
exists,
then
having
this
separate
project,
would
you
know
be
validated
or
justified?
Otherwise,
it's
like
everything
that
has
no,
that
is
not
in
the
plan
can
go.
If
somebody
works
on
that.
C
Yeah
there's
a
this
like
just
this
level
of
like
hey.
This
looks
like
we're,
gonna
work
on
it,
but
it's
not
in
the
plan
and
someone
needs
to
do
it
versus
like
that
is
like
nice
to
have
like
that's
nice,
but
like
that's
like
a
feature
request
or
or
something
we
don't
have
the
bandwidth
to
think
about.
I.
C
H
Then
yeah
that
that
makes
sense,
so
I
could
be
up
with
having
such
milestone,
but
let's
just
clarify
yeah
like
and
actually
I
yeah,
I'm.
Actually
I'm
wondering
whether
stuff
like
important
stuff,
like
the
telemetry
compatibility.
H
C
This
is
like
not
part
of
the
project
plan
yeah,
but
we're
like
this
should
be
done
like
like
we
will
like
review
and
approve
like
like
we
will
go
through
the
effort
of
like
moving
through
this,
provided
someone
is
championing
it,
but
it's
not
part
of
any
backlog
and
then
there's
this
like
wish
list
thing,
and
I
don't
think
we
decided
exactly
how
we
want
that
to
work.
But
that's
where
we
want
to
shunt
over
the
issues
we're
like
we.
We
can't
find
anyone
to
to
work
on
this
or
like
we.
C
B
B
D
C
C
How
do
we
want
to
say
this
work?
Someone
should
get
assigned
to
championing
the
issue
from
like.
Do
we
still
need
an
approver
assigned
to
these
issues
like
what,
if
community
members
like
I'm
gonna
deal
with
this,
like
seems
like
there
still
needs
to
be
somebody
assigned
to
like
pay
attention
to
it.
I
I
C
I
A
C
Yeah,
I
think
we're
looking
at
this
and
we're
at
least
saying,
like
wow,
that
that
looks
like
a
something
potentially
busted
about
our
zipkin
model.
Like
that's
the
kind
of
thing
we
should
we
shouldn't
change
like
that
sounds
like
it
sounds
like
a
bug,
basically
or
like
like,
like
a
lack
of
clarity
in
the
mapping,
and
so
someone
should
deal
with
it.
Even
if
the
outcome
is
like
it's
turns
out
what
we're
doing
is
fine
or
something
like
that
that
still
needs
to
like
like
get
looked
at.
C
It's
not
it's
not
like.
Wouldn't
this
be
a
cool
feature
issue,
it
looks
sort
of
like
a
bug
or
like
an
incomplete
mapping
to
zipkin
and
zipkin's
important
and
a
required
backend
and
protocol.
We
want
to
support
so
yeah.
I
C
A
Probably
make
it
stronger,
we
expect
we
expect
people
from
the
community
to
assign
or
like
to
champion
this
effort
and
and
the
tc
member
and
spike
approvers
will
facilitate.
A
C
C
Do
you
want
to
say,
can
we
just
say
spec
approvers,
instead
of
tc
inspectors
everywhere,
right,
yes,
yeah,
we're
saying
the
spec
approvers
must
must
do
something
with
this.
They.
B
A
A
B
A
A
Oh,
no,
it's
if
you
click
the
project
on
the
right
side,
there's
a
place.
You
can
yeah
there's
settings.
Oh.
C
Okay,
okay
and
then
for
reference.
A
C
C
C
Yeah,
that's
god,
damn
it!
That's
annoying!
A
I
think,
probably
it's
still
here
because
we're
saying
these
things
are
nice
to
have.
That
means
we
don't
have
a
specific
epa
for
this.
It
could
take
a
month
or
a
year
depending
on
the
progress
on
the
champion,
so
we're
not
committed
hey.
We
must
ship
this
as
part
of
the
metrics
api
like
by
end
of
may,
so
no
need
to
move
that.
C
C
C
Do
we
need
a
more
time
together,
looking
at
like
this,
the
spec
backlog
should
we
should
we
ex
extend
this
to
like
an
hour
if
we
expend
this,
like
back
back
in
time
from
like
8
a.m,
to
9.
A
So
previously,
when,
when
angel
was
driving
this,
I
propose
that
we
we
prepare
this
before
the
meeting.
So,
for
example,
if
the
number
can
be
divided
like
we
always
have
the
number
of
people
right.
If
the
number
can
be
divided
by
four,
then
riley
should
go
and
prepare
that
before
the
meeting
and
in
the
meeting,
we
simply
go
through
and
see
who's
not
doing
the
job
and
give
some
social
pressure.
C
Okay,
okay,
so
we
should
be
doing
this
during
the
week,
but
by
we
I
mean
this
is
like
actually
the
tc
that
should
be
doing
this
right.
I
mean
it's
fine
that
we're
helping,
but
maybe,
like
the
other
part
of
the
issue
here,
is
like
we
got
bogdan
and
carlos,
but
but
the
rest
of
the
tc
is
like
not
not
really
actively,
certainly
not
actively
showing
up
to
this
meeting
and
maybe
not
actively
doing
a
lot
of
triage
yeah.
I.
A
H
C
Yeah
I
mean
we,
we
I
feel
like
we
can
do
this
like.
I
do
feel
like
like
it's
genuinely
helpful
for
riley
and
me
to
be
driving
this,
but
we're
also
like
not
on
the
tc
like
we
could
get
added
to
the
tc.
That
would
be
a
thing
I
love
signing
up
for
more
work,
but
it
feels
like
there's
a
mismatch
here
right
like
like.
If
the
tc
has
just
one
job,
it's
managing
the
spec
backlog
right.
That's
that's!
Really.
The
writing.