►
From YouTube: 2022-07-14 meeting
Description
cncf-opentelemetry meeting-2's Personal Meeting Room
B
A
A
C
My
daughter
knows
she's
on
camera,
so
I
guess
it's
okay.
I
come
to
these
meetings
always
feeling
a
little
bit
like
guilty
that
there's
that
there's
no
progress
for
me
to
report
so
I'll.
Do
it
again.
I
always
end
up
feeling
like
it
was
worth
coming
anyway.
C
So
I
repeat
this
every
time
I
was
looking
over
the
agenda
before
the
call
and
saw
there
was
something
from
a
few
weeks
ago
or
a
few
calls
ago
that
we
literally
haven't
followed
up
on,
and
I
re
I
realize
it-
it's
probably
an
indicator
for
a
larger
problem.
So
I
put
that
back
on
the
agenda,
to
mention
to
you
all
and
other
than
that
I.
C
C
We're
focused
a
little
bit
more
on
span
compression
in
otlp
right
now,
so
there's
definitely
going
to
be
some
tension
given
to
lowering
costs,
but
there's
a
lot
of
low-hanging
fruit
in
literally
just
improving
how
we
do
compression.
That's
that's
the
short
story
with
that
said.
C
The
item
on
the
agenda
had
been
brought
up
by
peter
a
few
times
ago,
as
something
that's
kind
of
lingering
and
tristan
had
put
up
this
pr
with
good
intention
and,
I
think,
got
a
lot
of
kind
of
blocked,
got
blocked
and
a
lot
of
no
answers
from
people
who
are
not
offering
solutions.
It's
a
fairly
strong.
This
pattern
happens
in
open
telemetry,
where
people
can
find
reasons
to
say
no
but
can't
find
anything
constructive
to
say
so.
C
I
feel
like
we've
gotten
that
situation
and
I'm
referring
to
pr
2555
where
and
no
answers
are
obvious,
but
the
but
the
path
forward
is,
is
still
in
demand
and
not
very
clear.
C
C
C
The
amount
of
work
needed
to
carry
sampling
forward
inside
of
open
telemetry
is,
I
think,
so
it's
so
so
much
bigger
than
tristan
could
put
forward
in
this
pr-
and
you
know
like
that,
he
you
know
it
got
closed
by
the
stale,
bot
and.
C
To
me,
that's
an
indicator
that
some
much
larger
effort
is
needed.
I
don't
know
exactly
what
it's
going
to
be.
D
Is
there
I'm
wondering,
are
we
running
into,
and
this
is
yeah
I'm
coming
into
this
a
little
later
than
everybody
else,
so
I'm
just
I'm
worried
about
the
difference
between
like
sort
of
theoretically
correct
and
actually
useful,
and
and
if
we're,
if
we
are,
you
know
if
the
problem
is
some
somewhat
related
to
perfect
being
the
enemy
of
the
good.
You
know.
A
C
Yeah,
I
think
you're
you're,
probably
your
inclination
is
to
counter
what
I
just
said
a
little
bit.
You
should
I
I
I
see
a
larger
effort
needed
and-
and
that
may
be
true,
but
I
also
you
know
in
this.
If
it's
just
a
case
of
this
one
issue
which
I'm
not
sure
it
is,
but
if
it
was
just
in
case
of
this
one
issue,
more
efforts
needed-
and
maybe
maybe
I
should
be
re-prioritizing
myself-
to
help
with
this,
because
maybe
getting
this
solved
would
help
unblock
a
lot
of
experimentation.
Like
you
said.
C
D
C
C
Actually
heard
of
criticism,
I've
heard
of
myself
in
the
past
in
it,
so
it's
me
criticizing
the
the
the
the
problem
in
2555
is
that
you
can't
use
the
the
library
to
make
the
sampling
decision
and
there's
an
efficiency
argument
why
it
hasn't
been
done.
The
most
obvious
way,
basically
so.
C
That's
that
yeah
perfecting
the
enemies
of
the
good
and
all
you're
you
might
be.
You
might
be
right,
so
so
so
right
now,
I'm
thinking
I
I
should
take
another
look
at
this
pr
and
figure
out
how
we
can
let
good
good
win.
You
know
and
I
have
as
a
practice
keep
keep
a
set
of
tabs
open.
These
are
the
tabs
I'm
going
to
try
and
help
get
done
this
week,
and
so
maybe
I'll
keep
this
one.
Okay.
C
So,
but
I
but
I
think
well
I
mean
I'd
like
to
ask
someone
else
here,
I'm
sure
you're
here
I
do
still
think
there's
our
kind
of
minimum
viable
product
that
that
we're
looking
for
and
my
from
from
my
my
vendor
perspective
was
like
I'll
take
anything
as
long
as
I
get
the
counts,
because
that's
really
what
what
was
blocking
us
in
the
first
place
right
but
and
then
and
then
we
we
know
like
we
don't.
C
We
know
a
lot
about
theory
right
and
we
know
about
counting
so
and
that
that
stuff
seems
settled,
but
but
the
user,
the
user
journeys
are
still
not
clear.
I
guess
you
know
like
we
have
this
notion
of
jaeger
remote
sampling.
Maybe
you
want
to
configure
that
now
you
can
receive
a
sampling
configuration
and
every
one
of
those
steps
is
a
little
bit
outside
of
open
telemetry
and
it
feels
like
you.
We
don't
quite
know
how
to
do
that.
C
I
also
have
doubts
about
whether
my
customers
don't
seem
to
want
yeager
remote
sampling,
exactly
it's
something
else
and
I
think
each
one
of
us
might
have
a
different
perspective
on
what
the
customer
actually
wants,
because
we
have
not
been
getting
requests
to
support
jaeger.
We've
just
been
getting
requests
to
lower
cost.
That's
that's!
What's
kind
of,
like
you
know,
dear
vendor,
please
take
care
of
my
costs
and
sampling
problem
for
me.
C
Thank
you
very
much,
but
that's
kind
of
what
we
we
see,
and
so,
if
there's
a
solution
built
on
jaeger
great,
but
it
seems
like
a
giant
request
and
of
course,
I'm
sure
you
know-
I'm
like
lightstep
and
honeycomb,
both
sort
of
have
a
similar
position
in
this
market
a
little
bit
and
we
have
some
similarities
in
terms
of
like
ability
to
do
sampling
once
our
data
reaches
a
sas
and
I
think,
there's
certainly
a
lot
of
marketing
going
on.
C
So
why
aren't
we
talking
about
sampling
and
open
geometry?
Of
course
we
are,
but
it's
not
clear
how
to
give
the
customer
who's
config,
who
who's
got
a
service
and
is
getting
what
they
want
from
a
vendor
to
then
also
control
sampling,
all
the
way
out
to
their
client,
because
it's
like
two
levels
of
sampling
and
right.
C
C
The
kind
of
I
and
I
I
don't
want
to
criticize
jaeger
directly,
it's
just
like
small
scale.
Users
have
different
needs
than
large
scale
users,
and
so,
where
jaeger
remote
might
be
good
for
a
small
scale,
user
might
be
the
kind
of
do-it-yourself
way
to
tweak
your
sampling
to
get
the
performance
cost
benefits
you're.
C
Looking
for,
but
there's
not
a
lot
of
evidence
to
say
that
that's
exactly
what
users
want,
and
I
think
that's
why
I
I
show
up
to
this
meeting
a
little
uneasy
every
time,
because
I
don't
know
that
I
don't
know
what
we're
going
to
do
next
other
than
talk
about
theory,
spencer
raised
his
hand.
I
don't
want
to
talk
anymore,
so.
B
Yeah,
hey
everyone
I
just
before
I
joined
this
meeting,
I
looked
up
how
many
weeks
it
was
since
I
made
the
note
in
the
meeting
notes,
like
spencer
volunteers,
to
chart
this
course
that
we're
talking
about
and
it's
been
16
weeks
and
one
of
the
things
I
wanted
to
like
ask
this
group
is
like
has
my
like
claiming
of
that
held
back
that
because
I've
like-
and
I've
mentioned
this
before,
and
I
feel
like
a
jerk
for
like
teasing
it,
but
like
never
actually
sharing
very
much
except
in
the
may
5th
meeting.
B
I
like
shared
some
stuff
for
feedback,
but
I
was
like
reading
all
these,
like
notes
that
I
have
that
sort
of
make
it's
like
a
like
a
survey
of
the
landscape
and
what
different
solutions
like
there's
a
section
on
yeager
and
like
why.
I
don't
think,
like
jager
remote
sampling
fits
the
bill
for
a
lot
of
people
like
it
can
only
consider
what
open
telemetry
would
call
like
span,
name
and
and
service
name
like
those
are
the
only
two
things
that
it
can
make
sampling
decisions
based
on.
B
It's
like
that
sucks
frankly
and
like
yuri,
has
identified
that
in
like
some
blog
posts
about
it.
So
that's
like
a
room
for
improvement
as
well
as
it
works
at
the
level
of
traces
rather
than
spans,
and
so
for,
like
cost
saving
concerns
like
that
also
doesn't
quite
fit
the
bill,
because
my
sas
charges
me
on
spans
on
events
not
on
traces,
and
so
so.
The
story
goes
for,
like
a
couple,
other
solutions
that
people
put
forward
like
they're
kind
of
not
quite
fitting
the
bill
in
one
way
or
multiple.
B
So
I
have
notes
that
kind
of
survey
and
summarize
that
and
summarize
like
the
way
that,
like
a
half
dozen
different
things
are
deficient.
B
Where,
what's
like,
less
polished
still
is
like
the
you
know,
something
to
like
unify
them,
I
guess
or
like
you
know
something
that
could
be
a
basis
for
satisfying
the
various
criteria,
but
anyway
that
was
actually,
I
said
more
about
that
than
I
wanted
to
what
I
wanted
to
ask.
This
group
was
like
I
wanted
to
check,
if,
like
my
saying,
I'm
gonna
do,
this
has
like
held
it
back.
C
I
don't
think
so
personally,
no,
I
think
just.
C
Let's
yeah,
I
think
I
was
very
encouraged
by
your
appearance
16
weeks
ago
and
I
still
am
spencer.
So
that's
great
things
move
a
little
slowly
slowly
in
this
world
as
well.
I
think
it's
probably
a
prioritization
thing
like
I
said
my
company
is
not
asking
for
this
right
now,
so
I
would
say
absolutely
not
your
your
proof.
This
is
valuable
and
you
have
confirmed
a
lot
of
suspicions
as
well.
For
us,
I
think
I
put
in
a
there's
a
hack
week
coming
up
for
whitestep.
C
C
I
think
that
you
know,
as
far
as
the
work
light
steps
prioritizing
for
lightstep
refer
to
open
telemetry
in
the
next
quarter,
to
like
finishing
metrics
and
and
getting
the
collector
to
be
a
viable
stand-in
for
our
current
satellite,
that
those
are
the
things
we're
trying
to
do
and
sampling
is
never
going
to
get
above
the
like
water
line.
For
you
to
get
to
the
end
of
the
year.
I
can
tell.
D
D
A
Yeah,
so
going
going
back
to
what
spencer
said,
I
remember
your
presentation,
spencer,
and
it
was
very
interesting,
and
I
hope
that
you
would
put
something
out
for
a
more
careful
review
and
well,
it
never
happened,
but
maybe
maybe
we
should
cooperate
on
on
on
details
a
little
bit,
I'm
very
interested
in
configurations
for
sampling.
A
This
is
something
that
that
bothers
me
and
my
colleagues
here,
and
it
would
be
a
good
also
why
I'm
saying
this
configuration
is
something
that
users
will
understand
without
going
into
too
many
technical
details
about
this
configuration
is
implemented.
A
B
C
Just
to
tie
that
back
to
what
I
said
at
the
start,
I
think
that
if
we
had
like
the
issue
2555,
it's
really
hard
to
get
people
to
start
saying
yes
to
an
issue
like
that,
when
it's
just
one
step
forward
to
something
that
they
don't
understand
like
if
you,
if
you
had
a,
I
want
to
say,
like
an
a
full
prototype
that
doesn't
have
to
be
finished,
but,
like
a
demonstration
of,
we
need
to
make
this
change
in
this,
you
know
sampler
provider
or
whatever.
C
B
D
Sorry,
I
didn't
mean
to
interrupt
you.
I
guess
I
guess,
would
there
be
value
in.
D
In
other
words,
like
if
spencer,
if
you
were
to
take
your
dock
and
make
it
available
for
others
to
work
on,
however,
whatever
whatever
way
you
feel
like,
if
it's
close
enough
to
be
ready
to
just
put
it
out
there
in
a
you,
know
shared
space,
a
more
publicly
shared
space
or
just
something
that
we
share
among
the
four
of
us.
Just
because
we're
all
talking
about
it
right
now
and
could
maybe
do
a
quick
round
of
improvements
before
making
it
more
generally
available.
B
Yeah,
I
think
I'm
not
opposed
to
that.
I'm
interested
to
hear
what
joshua.
B
I
know
that
when
I
started
it,
I
was
like
hey
what
would
be
a
good
vehicle
for
this
and
joshua
pointed
to
the
otep
paradigm,
but
I
could
conceive
that,
like
you
know,
for
agility's
sake
in
the
early
stages
and
like
quicker
refinement
that
something
like
a
google
doc
might
be
accelerating.
D
I
mean
I
go
either
way,
I
I
you
know
I
defer
to
the
the
wisdom
of
the
crowd.
I
think
I
think,
like
you
said
it
may
be
faster
to
have
a
smaller
group,
look
at
it
quickly
and
iterate
on
it,
as
opposed
to
an
otep,
which
you
know
the
the
danger
of
an
otep.
Of
course,
is
you
put
it
out
there
and
before
it's
fully
baked
and
somebody
slaps
it
down,
and
it
never
really
gets
the
chance
to
have
a
day
of
like
oh
well.
C
I
I
don't,
I
don't
know.
Actually
I
was
going
to
say.
The
danger
there
is.
Is
that
no
one
reads
them
and
they
go.
They
sit
for
a
long
time.
We've
seen
that
happening.
It's
it's
almost
I
mean
open
geometry
has
grown
a
lot.
Unfortunately,
so
it's
sometimes
I
I
look
at
the
oteps
and
I
say:
oh,
there
are
20
new
ones,
and
I
only
know
about
three
of
them
and
those
are
the
three
that
someone
came
to
spec,
sag
and
told
us
about.
He
said
this
is
like
pretty
important.
C
We've
got
a
whole
group
of
us
talking
about
it,
so
I
think
that's
probably
what's
happening
here
like
we've
got
a
few
people
who
clearly
understand,
there's
a
sort
of
demand
and
like
it's
some
technical
stuff
and
we're
going
to
make
a
proposal,
and
it's
going
to
be
it's
so
big
that
it
needs
to
be
like
an
otep
because
we're
just
going
to
lay
out
a
framework
and
say
this
is
what
we're
going
to
specify
before
we
start
specifying
it
the
and
so
how
that's
been
working
is
like
I,
you
know
like
number
207
right
now
is
a
really
important,
otep
and
someone
you
know
said:
hey
everybody
come
look
at
207
and
I
did,
and
but
I
looked
down
the
list
and
I
saw
that
187.
C
I
don't
even
remember
the
numbers
now,
but
there's
something
about
kubernetes
resources
that
I'm
really
excited
about,
and
I
forgot
about
it
and
it's
just
sitting
there
and
that's
the
problem.
So
it
depends
on
how
much
effort
is
being
put
into
getting
the
thing
done.
It's
sort
of
the
story,
and
so
in
the
case
of
there's
been
a
one
of
the
major
new
efforts.
That's
of
the
scale
that
we're
talking
about
here
in
the
hotel
has
been
the
advanced
api.
C
There
was
long
period
during
which
the
group
showed
up
to
the
long
stick
and
said
we
think
these
are
logs
but
they're
different.
We
want
to
make
a
new
api,
a
lot
like
that
took
forever
and
what
they
had
to
do
was
what
you
said.
They
would
have
wrote
a
word
document
or
a
google
document
for
a
while.
They
shared
it.
They
got
tc
members
to
sponsor
them.
C
They
came
to
the
spec
sig
and
then
they
wrote
an
otep.
I
think,
like
there's
been
a
lot
there,
but
it
did
start
as
a
as
a
google
doc,
and
then
it
became
an
otap
and,
and
you
need
people
to
show
up
to
the
spec
sigs
and
like
nag
people
to
review
them,
and
it
takes
a
lot
more
than
just
writing.
An
otec
is
what
I'm
trying
to
say,
but
it
is
a
good
place
to
put,
I
guess,
a
large
piece
of
text
that
stands
to
be
be
debated
before
you
begin
writing
a
specification.
B
C
Mean
after
the
oh
chap,
sometimes
after
the
oak
tap,
you
end
up
with
a
tremendous
big
debate
anyway,
which
did
happen
with
sampling
and
you
can
get
to
the
point
which
we
learned
like
there's,
just
not
enough
people
who
can
read
and
understand
the
technical
depth
that
you're
trying
to
get
agreement
on
it's
happening
in
exponential
instagram.
Right
now
too,
that
you,
you
may
have
a
small
group
of
technical
people
who
agree
and
they're
not
like
they're,
not
the
right,
approvers
and
then
things
get
stuck.
C
B
I
have
a
question
about
kind
of
back
on
the
subject
of
2555
tristan
cpr,
and
this
is
also
sort
of
procedural.
My
question,
which
is
what
I
see
happening
with
this
pr
and
possibly
arguably
with
sampling.
More
largely,
is
that,
like
somebody
has
identified
some
use
cases
and
I
remembered
a
previous
sig
meeting,
I
bought
some
recordings.
This
group
was
like
not
totally
sure
if,
like
use
cases
were
there
for
this
feature,
but
I
see
tristan
like
followed
up
with
another
one.
B
It
looks
like
so,
but
I
guess
I
was
picturing
what
happens
with
like
product
development
in
in
companies
and
it's
like
if
there
was
one
sufficiently
motivated
person,
is
that
enough
for
for
the
product
to
like
take
on?
B
You
know
the
new
that
feature
and
whatever
complexity
comes
with
it,
and
so
I
guess
I'm
I'm
asking
the
question
like
to
set
it
in
this
context
like
if
tristan
really
wanted
feature
x,
but
he
was,
and
I'm
not
saying
this
is
the
case,
but
if
he
was
the
only
person
in
the
world
that
wanted
that
would
his
will
alone
like
confer
the
you
know
right
to
put
it
into
hotel.
I
guess,
or
is
there
some
just?
C
Yeah
good
questions.
I
think
that
we've
been
talking
about
that
very
same
concern.
Kind
of,
like
like
in
general
hotel,
has
become
large
enough
that
you
can't
always
predict
how
to
get
something
finished
and
the
question
is
who's
going
to
make
sure
it
happens.
We've
talked
about
tc
sponsorship.
For
that
reason,
usually,
if
you
can
find
a
technical
committee,
member
and
you've
got
me
here
to
do
this
right
now,
who's
going
to
agree
to
it.
C
C
If
we
do
the
right
work,
whereas
you
know
there
are
definitely
times,
I'm
less
confident
like
there's
been
a
repeat
motion
to
put
the
version
identifier
into
otlp,
headers
and
tigran
has
blocked
it
every
single
time,
and
I
wouldn't
promise
you
that
I
can
get
that
done,
because
I've
seen
him
block
it,
but
yeah.
C
So
there's
so
so
you
need
somebody
who's
sponsored
and
fairly
confident.
But
I
think
and
and
maybe
what
that's
like
saying
is:
if
you
have
one
tc
member,
that's
enough:
no,
but
they
get
there.
C
Enough
to
block
you
yeah
right,
that's
a
good
good
side!
Point
yeah!
I
I
don't
like
getting
in
that
position.
I
definitely
had
to
struggle
through
something
where
I
seemed
like.
I
was
the
only
person
trying
to
finish
a
project
in
the
hotel,
but
yeah
there's
enough
demand
for
sampling.
C
D
I
think
we
do
have
to
consider
as
part
of
the
process
how
best
to
present
it.
How
best
to
you
know,
explain
the
use
cases,
the
demands,
the
needs
and-
and
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
I'm
I'm
sort
of
perceiving
is
there
isn't
enough.
D
Emphasis
on
end
user
experience,
you
know,
meaning
meaning
the
people
who
are
trying
to
send
telemetry
and
look
at
it
on
a
vendor
site
or
whatever.
So
I
think
that
we,
but,
but
I
I
feel
like
there
is
appreciation
for
it
when
people
do
have.
That
thing
like
here
is
a
user
story,
something
somebody
needs
identified
problem.
D
You
know,
and
this
is
a
solution
to
it-
is,
I
think,
a
good
way
to
present
those
kind
of
things.
And
then
you
know
the
debate
may
be
well,
could
it
be
bigger,
could
it
be
more
general
or
you
know,
does
it
need
to
be?
Those
are
those
are
valid
discussions,
but
they
shouldn't
we
shouldn't,
let
them
block
you
know
this
is.
This
is
back
to
the
good.
Is
the
enemy
of
the
perfect
kind
of
thing
like?
D
C
C
And
they
they
set
it
up
and
they
got
it
working
there's
been,
I
mean
I
want
to
state
sort
of
the
obvious
open.
Telemetry
is
a
vendor-backed
project.
We
we
came
in
here
to
with
the
promise
of
vendor
neutrality
and
and
that,
but
we've
also
come
in
here
with
a
eye
towards
our
customers,
which
are
not
that
individual
user
and
all
that
our
users
are
big
companies
that
have
different
needs
and
use
cases
than
the
small-scale
user.
C
I
think,
and
that's
maybe
partly
responsible
for
some
either
confusion
or
some
like
disagreement,
like
I
think,
yuri,
has
been
very
clear
with
us.
This
may
not
be
what
users
want,
but
it's
what
they
have.
We
have
to
bring
them
along
with
us,
so
supporting
jaeger,
even
if
we
think
it's
not
what
users
really
really
want
is
super
important
here,
because
they
don't
understand
what
they
want
and
they've
been
given
something
already.
C
C
Thinking
and
the
value
of
their
money
in
open
telemetry,
we
have
that
and-
and
I
think
the
exchange
is
that
the
vendors
are
pumping
all
this
resource
engineering
resources
in
and
and
hopefully
the
community
gets
better
software.
But
we
we
have
our
requirements
and
that's
that's
why
you
know
like
you.
I
could
have
this
debate
with
like.
If,
instead
of
we
were
talking
about
jaeger
and
open
source,
we
were
talking
about
prometheus
and
open
symmetry.
C
There's
just
a
tremendous
amount
of
conflict
right
now
and
a
lot
of
it
is
a
perception
that
we're
like
vendors
coming
to
take
their
money
or
their
lunch,
but
we're
also
coming
with
demands
from
big
customers
that
just
are
not
satisfied
and
prometheus
we're
trying
to
help
the
the
big
vendors
and
I'm
not
trying
to
be
a
jerk.
You
know
what
I
mean
anyway
yeah,
so
there's
there's
there's
that
too.
D
Yeah
and
and
just
to
clarify,
because
everything
everything
you
said
is
correct.
What
I
was
trying
to
say
is
user
stories.
When
I
say
user
stories,
I
mean
real
companies
with
real
problems
at
any
scale.
Effectively
there
are
you
know,
and,
and
so
no
I'm
not
talking
about
you
know
my
brother
who's
running
a
team
of
three
engineers
and
and
has
six
servers.
That's
a
different
issue
than
you
know.
D
Large
companies
sending
billions
of
events
a
day
so
yeah
both
of
those
are
valid
user
stories,
though,
but
one
of
them
has
a
lot
more
weight
than
the
other
and
justifiably
so.
C
Summarize,
I
think
it
would
be
a
good
path
forward.
It
sounds
like
you'd
be
interested
in
working
on
this
with
spencer.
C
I
think
I
all
I
can
do
is
come
cheer
you
every
week
every
other
week
or
something
like
that
at
the
moment
and
and
sponsor
and
review
the
otep
and
and
speak
in
the
hotel,
spec
sig
like
that
that
stuff
I
can
do
to
help
this.
D
C
D
I'll
just
clarify
my
my
situation
is,
I
had
you
know:
I've
been
at
honeycomb
for
a
little
more
than
a
year
and-
and
I
started
off
working
on
one
particular
project,
which
is
our
secure,
tenancy
proxy,
and
then
we've
decided
to
end
of
life
that
and
now
I'm
moving.
I'm
gonna
end
up
being
the
team
lead
for
a
on
on-premises
team,
which
includes
collector,
as
well
as
the
sampling
proxy.
D
We
have
called
refinery,
and
so
like
all
of
this
stuff
is
very
much
of
interest
to
what
I'm
explicitly
and
exclusively
going
to
be
working
on
for
the
next
couple
of
years.
So
so
I'm
and
I'm
growing
that
team
and
I'm
hiring-
and
you
know
like
this-
is
just
ramping
up.
So
I'm
trying
to
get
involved
as
much
as
possible
in
all
these
areas,
because
they're
they're
relevant
very
relevant
to
to
the
work
I
expect
to
be
doing
over
the
next
little
bit.
D
So
honeycomb
is
putting
more
weight
behind
this
effort,
and
you
know,
I'm
being
told
yep
start
be
going
to
these
cigs
and
be
here
and
get
involved
and
yeah.
C
Yeah,
I
think
that's
that's
encouraging.
I
think
lightstep
also
kind
of
sees
the
future
in
the
open,
elementary
collector
being
able
to
do
this
stuff
as
well.
So
it's
it
eventually,
the
same
marching
order
will
come
down
here.
C
We
need
to
get
basic
collector
functionality
to
replace
our
basic
satellite
independent
of
sampling
before
that,
essentially
yep
people
don't
want
to
configure
anything
new.
C
So
well
great.
I
think
we've
covered
our
agenda.
I
would
propose
we
end
the
meeting
and
look
forward
to
some
shared
documents.
I
do
check
the
slack
now
and
then
anyway,
great
seeing
you
all
see
you.