►
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
Great
just
before
we
get
into
it
I'll
let
this
come
up.
I'm
recording
here.
A
And
action,
great
thanks,
everyone
for
joining
another
episode
of
the
open.js
foundation's
cross
project
council
meeting
today
is
the
29th
of
march
2022.
And
let's
get
into
things,
do
we
have
any
announcements?
We
don't
have
jory
here,
but
robin
you
got
some
stuff.
Do
you
need
a?
Do?
You
need
a
drum
roll.
Are
you
good.
B
Yeah,
a
drum
roll,
that's
right
practice,
maybe
a
guitar
intro
we
have
openjs
world
is
just
going
like
gangbusters.
We
have
had
so
many
cfps
that
are
so
awesome
submitted.
That
is
taking
our
committee
a
little
bit
longer
to
go
through
them,
but
we're
nearly
done-
and
I
think
we
said
in
our
our
website-
said
last
week-
that
we
would
notify
everybody
we're
going
to
notify
everybody
by
this
friday
april.
1St
no.
C
B
And
so
look
for
that
we
have
some
awesome
keynote
speakers
so
check
out
openjsworld.com
if
you
haven't
recently
and
what
else
oh
a
couple
of
important
things.
So
we
have
early
bird
pricing
for
tickets
and
that
expires
april
8th,
and
we
also
have
scholarships
if
you
know
your
company's
not
going
to
support
you
attending.
We
do
have
lower
rates
for
tickets
for
that,
but
if
you
can't
afford
to
go
at
all,
please
look
at
our
scholarships.
That's
on
our
website
and
that
deadline
is
april,
8th
as
well,
so
yeah
buy
a
ticket.
A
Yes,
it
will
yeah,
so
cfp
notification
extended
sorry,
I'm
taking
notes.
B
A
Yeah
that'll
be
great.
I'm
super
excited
about
that
and
there's
already
talk
on
twitter
about
karaoke
and
austin
in
general,
too.
So
looking
forward
to
it
already
yeah.
B
And
we
also
actually
are
adding
more
and
more
tooling
around
the
hybrid
participation,
so
we're
working
on
the
platform
for
that
and
we'll
have
more
to
share
in
the
next
week
or
two.
Some
folks
may
not
be
able
to
or
may
not
want
to
travel
to
texas
for
a
number
of
reasons.
So
we'll
have
more
engagement,
opportunities
and
participation,
opportu
opportunities
on
a
virtual
platform
as
well.
A
That's
that's
my
way
of
getting
you
to
pay
attention
cool
all
right.
Well,
thank
you.
That's
awesome!
All
sorts
of
exciting
stuff,
I'm
really
looking
forward
to
it.
It's
gonna
be
an
action-packed
week
great.
So
if
we
get
into
things
here,
then
the
agenda.
A
A
So
look
for
more
on
that.
You
know
on
on
on
this
item
in
the
coming
days
and
yeah
coming
days,
anything
else.
Anyone
want
to
add
to
that
issue.
B
Just
that
we've
been
having
great
conversations
with
the
open
source
security
foundation.
They
have
a
lot
of
great
recommendations
and
tools,
so
we're
working
on
how
we
can
work
more
closely
with
them
with
our
projects.
B
A
Cool
moving
on
the
next
item
is
license
check,
supporting
support
and
tooling.
We
were
waiting
on
the
lf
for
this.
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
sort
of
update
there.
B
Yeah,
jordan
and
I
met
with
shubra
and
two
or
three
folks
from
his
team.
Shubra
runs
the
product
and
it
department
at
the
linux
foundation
and
they
are
going
to
take
on
the
development
of
this
feature
in
the
lfx
platform
and
they
should
be
able
to
start
like
in
mid
april,
and
I
think
it
may
take
a
month.
But
we
had
a
really
great
productive
discussion,
they're
going
to
use
jordan's
tool,
which
I
believe
is
linked
in
that
issue.
That's
a
starting
point,
so
yeah!
So
that's
coming
along.
So.
A
Great
yeah,
you
wouldn't
mind,
dropping
something
of
an
update
into
that
issue.
That
would
that
would
be
helpful
I'll.
Do
it
excellent
next
on
the
agenda
is
clarify
requirements
around
coc
violation.
A
I
haven't
done
the
work
there.
I'm
sorry.
A
Okay,
no
apologies!
So
no
news
there
so
we'll
move
on.
Unless
anybody
has
anything
they
want
to
comment.
I.
A
A
Yeah
there
are
a
few
issues
that
I
definitely
want
to
talk
about
ben's
issues
and
then
the
repo
cleanup
issue,
okay,
yeah
one
more
on
the
agenda
and
then
we'll
move
into
that
space.
This
is
create
proposals
for
the
community
fund.
I
know
if
there's
really
a
specific
ask
here
or
what,
if
we
should
leave
this
open
or
what
we
want
to
do
with
this
one.
B
We
have
the
proposal
application
everything
written
for
the
thank
you
or
the
recognition
and
award
program.
We
had
a
working
session
on
it
with
the
cpc
and
with
the
standards
working
group,
so
jory
and
I
will
be
sending
out
mail
shortly.
The
idea
is
that
we're
seeking
nominations
you
can
nominate
others.
You
can
nominate
yourself
and
we'll
use
this
group
to
choose
awards
and
we'll
be
having
an
award
program
at
open.js
world
great.
A
That's
fun:
do
we
think
we
should
leave
the
agenda
label
on
this
one
or
just
leave
it.
D
A
Yes,
this
is
sort
of
just
you
know,
an
ask
for
people
to
create
proposals.
F
A
But
yeah,
I
will
remove
it
for
now
cool
before
we
get
into
those
other
issues
that
we
touched
on,
I'm
reminded
of
something
that
we
should
talk
about
real
quickly
the
dates
and
reminders
file,
which
we
should
be
checking
every
cross
project
council
meeting.
That
file
reminds
me
that
number
one
the
cpc
chair
term
ends
april
30th.
A
So
we
should
open
that
up
soon,
however,
the
the
primary
director
term
ended
february,
28th,
and
so
since
I
don't
think
we
want
to
do
those
at
the
same
time.
Maybe
we
should
do
one
and
then
the
other
and
probably
get
both
of
those
balls,
or
at
least
one
of
those
balls
rolling.
F
Oh
sorry,
any
reason
why
we
don't
want
to
do
this
at
the
same
time.
A
It's
a
bit
hard
to
hear
you,
sarah,
but
all
right.
F
A
Oh
in
case
one
person
wants
to
run
for
both
positions.
A
Oh
that
makes
sense
yep,
which
I
guess
isn't
you
know
I
mean
you
could
I
think
it
says
in
the
bylaws
that
you
can
do
both,
but
you
know
I
think
it's
probably
not
a
bad
thing
to
keep
them
separate.
A
Cool,
so
I
propose
we
get
the
director
election
going
asap
and
then
follow
that
up
with
with
the
cpc
chair
election
right
after
that.
What
do
people
think.
B
And
then
I
I
checked
on
process,
so
I
think
what
we
will
do
is
you
all
will
have
a
form
for
nominations
and
then
we'll
put
it
through
opavote.
That's
well
done,
but
I
check
with
brian.
So
we
can
manage
that.
B
That's
what
I
was
sort
of
hoping
just
yeah,
easy
yep.
A
B
A
Okay-
and
we
can
look
at
previous
election
issues
to
see
if
there's
any
supporting
documentation
or
whatever
and
I'm
primarily
thinking.
I
think
there
was
like
some
document
that
somebody
wrote
about
being
on
the
board
and
stuff
like
that.
B
Yeah,
I
think
it
was
brian
wrote
something
up
last
year
about
sort
of
the
role
and
the
job
and
the
time
commitment.
And
things
like
that.
So
I
will
be
sure
to
link
that
for
the
email.
A
Excellent,
so
will
you
get
that
going
robin
we'll
take
that
action
item
excellent.
Thank
you
very
much
cool.
A
So
the
other
thing
that
I
wanted
to
mention
to
you
is
that
the
last
working
session
was
a
repo
cleanup
session,
and
so
we
were
trying
to
just
organize
the
files
a
little
bit
better
in
in
the
cross
project
council
repo.
We
just
have
a
lot
of
documents
at
the
top
level,
so
we
thought
we
would
kind
of
put
some
organization
we
we
ran
out
of
time.
A
I
think
before
we
maybe
might
have
completed
our
session,
but
we
did
do
a
bunch
of
work
and
I
opened
a
pr
for
that
work.
So
it's
basically,
I
think,
just
moving
some
files
around
so
folks
could
take
a
look.
I
think
that
could
be
merged.
A
You
know
at
any
time
cool
and
if
there's
any
follow-on
organization
that
somebody
wants
to
take
the
initiative
on
feel
free
to
do
that
as
well.
There
are
a
few
files
that
would
will
be
left
at
the
top
level
that
I
think
we
could
still
further.
A
You
know
organize
great
now,
beyond
that
there
were
a
few
issues
and
pull
requests.
That
ben
had
opened
relic
question.
I
don't
think
I've
ever
actually
said
his
github
name,
and
it's
not
an
easy
one
to
say
so
I
don't
know
if
anybody
has
any
comments
on
those
or
or
anything
they
want
to
talk
about
specifically
about
any
of
those
issues
or
pull
requests.
A
We
can
if
he
did
a
lot
of
work,
which
is
I
appreciate.
So
if
I
look
at
the
pull
requests,
there's
one
that's
oh!
This
is
actually
brian
open.
This,
I
think,
based
on
a
conversation
with
with
ben,
to
minor
update
to
legal
questions.
A
This
could
this
could
use
another
thumb
if
oh
yeah,
this
is
this
is
a
simple
one.
I
will
put
my
thumb
on
this
now
cool.
A
What
else
do
we
have
in
here?
The
update
contributor
covenant
code
of
conduct
to
version
2.1
and
formatting
jordan's
got
some
comments
here.
So
maybe
jordan's
got
a
lot
of
comments
here,
so
maybe
we
let
those
happen,
and
then
we
can
chime
in
as
well.
A
One
is
to
add:
json
schema
to
the
list
of
incubating.
That's
done
like
done
done.
A
You
talking
about
on
the
website
or
in
the
website,
okay
yeah.
This
is
in
the
github
repo
on
the
github
repo
yeah,
which
looks
good,
oh
and
it
was
open
yesterday.
So
we'll
give
it
a
couple
more
days
and
then
we.
F
A
Plan
that
as
well
so
yeah
that
oh,
an
ad
link
to
trademark
policy
re-crowdfunding,
but
that's
that's
pretty
straightforward
too,
just
another
link
great!
So
those
are
the
prs.
If
anybody
has
any
questions
or
comments
feel
free
to
speak
up,
and
otherwise
I
will
move
on.
E
About
the
code
of
conduct
one
most
of
the,
I
think
I'm
not
sure
I
think
all
of
the
comments
that
were
made
about
formatting
of
I
don't
think
they're
act.
I
mean
it
needs
to
be
checked
right,
but
I
don't
think
they're
addressing
like
they're.
I
don't
think
they're
editorial
in
nature
right.
E
I
mean
this
is
kind
of
like
a
special
thing
to
change
the
code
of
conduct.
Right,
like
it's
a
I
mean
it's
a
pretty
big
deal
because
it
impacts,
like
literally
everyone
in
the
organization.
E
So
I
don't
know
how
we
have
to
do
this,
but
it
feels
a
bit
cavalier
to
just
go
ahead
and
merge
this
without
like
telling
the
different
projects,
because
essentially
it's
just
telling
everyone
like
you're
now
operating
under
these
upgraded
rules,
and
so
I
don't
know
what
the
process
is
for
this,
but
it
feels
like.
Maybe
we
should
do
something
a
bit
more
than
just
like
approve
report.
I
think.
B
Yeah,
I
think
I
had
mentioned
in
a
cpc
meeting
a
month
or
so
ago
that
there
was
a
kind
of
a
informal
gathering
that
opened
at
the
linux
foundation.
Member
summit.
There
were
a
couple
of
sessions
breakout
sessions
on
code
of
conducts.
B
I
think
the
trend
is
allowing
more
flexibility
for
the
code
of
conduct
committee
versus
less
so
some
people
are
rolling
back
numbers,
but
there's,
I
think,
movements
to
update
code
of
conduct
so
you're
right.
I
think
it's
a
broader
discussion,
probably
with
us
and
then
I'm
sort
of
curious
on
some
of
these
other
some
other
communities
and
what
they're
looking
at
as
far
as
making
any
changes.
B
A
So
but
in
terms
of
this
pr
I
mean
the
the
description
says
that
the
changes
from
2
to
2.1
are
minimal,
but
we
should
probably
understand
what
that
exactly
is
and.
E
Yeah,
I
think
I
agree
like
I
think
there
are
two
different
conversations
here
right,
one
which
is
sort
of
like
a
a
broader
revamping
of
like
how
this
is
handled
and
another
one,
which
is
what
do
we
do
with
this,
which
is
a
small
change,
but
which
really
impacts
every
like
every
project,
because
they
all
sort
of
like
hotly
since
every
project
is
hot.
Linking
this
we
have
to
sort
of
make
people
I
mean
I
don't
know
like
do
we
need
to
make
it?
I
think.
B
H
H
We
wait
two
weeks
and
if
there's
no
concerns,
we
can
progress
right,
but,
like
it'd,
be
good
to
have
something
that
says
every
time
we
do
it.
This
is
what
we
do
and
people
could
ask
for
more
or
less
and
then
hopefully,
when
a
project
gets
that
email
they're
like
if
I
care
I'll,
look
at
it
and
raise
an
issue.
Otherwise
I
expect
in
two
weeks
you
know
I
won't
be
surprised
that
it
actually
happens.
Yeah.
B
What
I
would
recommend
is
having
folks
who
are
quite
familiar
with
the
code
of
conduct
versions
and
have
a
discussion
in
cpc.
So
it's
a
it's
a
thoughtful
decision
that
people
are
aware
aware
of
what
their
you
know,
plus
wanting
plus
one
is
that
a
verb.
B
F
E
No,
but
I
mean
I
think,
that's
like
it's
important
like
what
you
know
the
delight
that
you're
bringing
to
this
conversation
of
like
thinking
about
this
differently,
possibly
allowing
some
projects
to
be
running
different
kind
of
like
this
is
an
interesting
conversation
and
probably
like
a
composition,
that's
worth
having.
If
folks
actually
want
to
have
this
conversation,
but
I
think
it's
different
than
sort
of
like
the
kind
of
tacit
agreement
that
we
had
in
the
cpc
to
rely
on
this
document
and
update
it.
E
Following
the
updates
on
on
that
doc-
and
I
mean
like
if
I
remember
when
we
had
conversations
around
moving
to
from
1.4
to
2.0,
that's
kind
of
like
when
I
got
involved
with
the
cpc
and
when
the
amp
project
moved
in
it.
I
think
that,
like
that
was
the
agreement
that
was
in
place,
so
I
think
we
have
to
sort
of
like
on
one
end
continue
following
that,
and
if
we
want
to
change
it
I'll
have
a
conversation
about
changing
it.
E
But
I
mean,
unless
there's
something
that's
like
really
bothered
about
like
a
problem
in
this
one.
I
don't
think
it
should
block
us
from
doing
what
it
is
that
we
wanted
to
do
first,
I
think
they're,
two
different
things.
H
The
discussion
was
there's
value
in
sticking
with
one,
that's
well
known
and
maintained
versus
like
crafting
our
own,
so
I
kind
of
think
I
agree
with
you
at
least
that
the
default
should
be.
We
would
adopt
it
unless
there's
something
that's
bad
enough.
That
throws
that
whole
approach
into
question
right.
H
H
B
E
Read
this
right,
and
I
also
would
like
to
point
out
that
my
understanding
is
that
is
from
like
1.4
to
2,
which
is
very
different
for
the
reasons
that
you've
mentioned.
There's
a
lot
in
this
version
that
we
have
agreed
to
adopt
right
like
there's
a
lot
of
like
I
mean
it's,
it's
kind
of
fairly
explicit
in
terms
of
like
what
happens
and
what
the
consequences
of
something
happening
are
the
version
that
was
before,
which
I
think
is
1.4
not
so
much.
E
So
I
think
that
that
conversation
between
1.4
and
2
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
I
am
not
sure
that
this
conversation
between
2
and
2.1
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
So
if
we
wanted
to
do
that,
it
would
really
imply
having
a
conversation
about
rolling
it
back
to
1.4
or
adopting
something
else
which
again,
I
think
it
completely
value
conversations
to
have.
But
like
they're,
it's
a
it's
a
broader
topic,
yeah.
A
So,
but
should
we
create
an
issue
that
says
we
need
to
have
some
sort
of
process
for
updating
the
code
of
conduct,
even
if
it's
you
know
minor
versions
and-
and
you
know,
circulating
those
changes.
E
Yeah,
and
can
we
have
a
conversation
about
what
this
would
look
like
now
briefly,
so
we
actually
like.
I
mean
at
least
if
we
can
agree
on
something
simple
now.
I
think
what
michael
offered
sounded
reasonable
to
me.
I
mean
I'd
love
to
hear
what
jory
has
to
say
about
this
because
jerry,
like
you,
do
a
lot
of
these
conversations,
and
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
hear
what
you
have
to
say
about
how
we
could
get
that
kind
of
approval.
C
Sorry,
I'm
staying
mostly
needed
because
we've
got
a
competing
meetings
going
on
today.
I
think
one
of
the
points
that
you
made
and
robin
about
flexibility
is
is
super
important
to
our
communities
and
and
it's
going
to
be
kind
of
central
to
the
topic,
even
as
we
consider
how
to
how
to
process
move
things
forward.
C
So
I
need
to
kind
of
spin
some
thought
cycles
on
that,
because
I
do
think
it's
going
to
be
a
question
that
we
address
and
that
we
will
probably
need
to
you
know
kind
of
cope
with
if
there
are
communities
that
want
to
move
a
rev
forward
of
the
of
the
code
of
conduct
versus
you
know,
stay
on
stay
on
an
older
version,
so.
A
I'll
just
point
out
that
I
don't
think
we
have
anything
on
the
calendar
for
next
week's
working
session.
If
we
want
to
discuss
this
further,
there.
A
I
mean,
I
think
you
know
like
toby
said
what
michael
had
proposed
is
is
a
a
a
good
chunk
of
that.
You
know,
I
would
say
it
would
be
a
good
idea,
probably
to
simply
open
an
issue
with
some
details
about
the
the
upgrade.
You
know
the
the
minor
version
update
and
what
those
changes
are.
That
would
probably
be
helpful,
but
then
some
sort
of
process
around
surfacing
that
would
be
good,
toby.
E
Yeah,
I'm
sorry.
I
want
to
roll
back
some
of
what
I
said
given
what
sure
the
perspective
that
joy
gave
now.
My
understanding
from
what
robin
was
saying
was
that
there
was
a
trend
among
other
communities
to
rethink
this
and
go
to
older
thing.
What
I'm
hearing
joy
say
is
within
our
community.
There
are
people
that
would
be
upset
about
moving
directly
to
like
2.1
like
this,
and
I
think
that's
different
and
that
questions
that
puts
in
like
in
a
different
light.
E
Moving
ahead
was
the
planned
strategy
and
kind
of
says.
Well,
it
turns
out
that
we
might
have
to
have
a
broader
discussion
more
quickly.
That's
what
I'm
hearing
at
least,
and
if
that's
the
case,
then
we
probably
it
probably
doesn't
make
sense
to
create
a
process
for
something
that
we
might
actually
not
adopt.
If
there's
a
broader
conversation
going
on,
you
got
that.
B
Think
yeah,
I
I
I
think
I
want
to.
I
would
want
to
wait
a
little
bit
again.
There's
some
women
leaders
in
the
linux
foundation
board
and
some
other
folks
who've
been
thinking
about
that
joanna
lee
who's.
Our
council
is
quite
an
expert
in
this,
so
I
maybe
let
it
percolate
a
little
bit
after
you
know
during
the
june
conferences
or
open
js
world
and
the
linux
foundation
summit,
because
I
do
know
that
there
is,
I
think,
work
happening
that
we
can
plug
into
and
benefit
from
others.
A
So
I'm
sorry
were
you
saying,
put
this
off
until
after
the
events
in
june.
H
B
There
are
a
couple
of
I
believe:
those
are
public.
Ava
black
did
a
session
at
the
linux
foundation.
Member
summit
I'll
try
to
find
a
link
for
that,
so
that
should
be
yeah.
She
outlined
a
lot
of
their
thinking
in
that
new
direction.
A
Okay,
okay,
so
we'll
so
we'll
put
the
conversation
on
hold
in
general.
We
do
have
this
open
pr,
and
I
wonder
if
we
should.
You
know
maybe
just
put
that
on
hold
as
well,
because
it
doesn't
seem
like
we
have
consensus
about
moving
to
0.1.
E
Yeah,
it
sounds
like
the
assumption
that
2.1,
as
a
minor
change
to
2,
isn't
necessarily
correct
from
what
I'm
reading
in
the
chat,
and
so
in
that
case
it's
a
different
conversation
all
together,
and
we
probably
should
I
mean
yeah.
E
I
I
think
we
in
that
case,
we
should
probably
maybe
even
like
put
the
polar
cross
on
hold,
saying
that
we
that
this
actually
brings
in
more.
It's
not
like
a
minor
change
and
it
seems
to
bring
like
bigger
changes
and
that
we
need
to
have
a
broader
conversation
about
it.
C
I
was
going
to
say,
I'm
not
so
so
sure
and
again
I've
been
a
little
bit
away
from
the
conversation
since
november,
but
my
understanding
at
the
time
was
less
to
do.
The
the
concern
was
less
to
do
with
the
copy,
like
the
pros
of
the
documents
and
more
to
do
with
the
and
the
enforcement
and
sort
of
the
like
the
paths
and
processes
and
procedures
that
would
be
available
to
communities
under
the
new
rev
documents
for
remediating
issues.
C
And
so
I
I
think
that
was
more
of
the
open
conversation
about
the
status
of
newer
versions
of
the
contributor
covenant,
where
there
wasn't
necessarily
a
shared
agreement
of
of
what
that
the
new
documents
would
would
allow
a
community
or
would
incur
or
would
require
a
community
to
do.
And
so
I
think
I
think,
that's
where
the
the
questions
come
up
and
I
regret
a
regret
to
say
I
I'm
not
as
deeply
informed
as
I
should
be
at
this
point
on
on
the
nuance
differences
here.
C
But
but
I
think
that's
worth.
I
think
that's
worth
that.
That's
worth
looking
into
to
understand
like
what.
What
some
of
the
you
know,
feedback
from
our
community
is
likely
to
be.
E
I
mean
regardless,
like
the
two
different
asp
right
I
mean
possibility
like
the
two
different
branches
right.
One
is
2.1
and
2
are
widely
different
and
then
that's
a
problem
and
we
don't
want
to
move
until
we
have
this
conversation
and
the
second
branch
is
they're
similar,
but
maybe
it
sends
a
wrong
signal
to
actually
adopt
2.1
without
really
having
a
deeper
composition
about
it
now,
and
so
maybe
we
should
like
also
not
do
this
now
I
mean
this
is
kind
of
like
the.
E
This
is
the
feeling
I'm
getting
from.
You
know
comments
both
you
and
robin
and
jory
right.
E
A
Okay,
how
do
we
what
what
do
we?
What
do
we
want
to
do?
What's
our
our
path
forward
and
I'm
thinking
about
this
open
pr
and
the
you
know
a
future
working
session?
Should
we
open
an
issue
that
just
you
know
briefly
mentions
that
we
want
to
spend
more
time
making
sure
we're
being
thoughtful
about
any
updates
to
our
code
of
conduct
and
such
and
then
ask
to
have
that
pr?
B
A
C
A
I'm
happy
to
talk
about
this
more
in
next
week's
working
session
and
we
don't
have
anything
else
planned
at
the
moment.
So
I
I
I
was
worried
that
it
was
premature
because
you
know
other
folks
in
the
community
are.
Are
you
know
discussing
this
further
too?
E
About
a
session
next
week
on
this
topic
is
that
is
that
what
you
suggested
jory.
C
Yes,
for
the
for
the
working
and
meeting
I
mean
this
would
maybe
be
more
for
educational
purposes.
For
folks,
like
myself,
who
probably
aren't
as
into
the
nuance
of
the
discussion
at
the
moment
to
you,
know
kind
of
figure
like
understand
the
current
state
of
the
problem.
But
you
know
to
to
joe's
point-
maybe
maybe
it's
premature,
but
it's
it's
been
a
while,
since
I
think
we've
had
a
meeting
a
working
meeting
on
the
code
of
conduct
anyway,
and
so
it's
just.
It
was
just
a
idea.
A
I'm
remembering
that
next
tuesday,
I
might
not
be
around
so
I'll,
have
to
see
about
that.
But
but
yeah
I
mean,
I
think
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
at
least
explore
this
further,
not
maybe
necessarily
to
make
decisions
but
to
discuss
what
the
concerns
are,
and
you
know
surface
any
of
the
things
that
are
out
there,
that
we
can
further
educate
ourselves
with.
C
Okay,
well,
I
mean
fair,
fair
point
that
like,
if
maybe
what
we
need
is
to
have
somebody
who
is
who
has
been
up
to
like
joanna
or
you
know,
someone
of
that
or
coraline
or
you
know
somebody
to
to,
but.
A
Well,
why
don't
we
discuss
this
further
in
slack
or
something
and
see
what
we
want
to
do
like?
I
said,
I'm
not
sure
I'll
be
able
to
make
it.
So
I
don't
know
if
I
should
really
help
decide
what
should
happen,
but
if,
if
not
this
week,
you
know
in
in
three
weeks
you
know
the
the
next
working
session,
I
think,
would
be
great
to
to
discuss
it
further
for
sure.
E
A
C
Joey,
if,
if
next
week
is
open,
then
I
think
doing
a
cycle
on
the
on
updating
and
making
this
a
real
working
meeting.
Updating
the
travel
and
community
fund
documentation
ahead
of
what
I
assume
to
be
will
be
many
new,
hopefully
many
new
requests
for
support
to
travel,
open,
js
world
in
june.
So
that's
that's
my
and
other
suggestion.
For
next
week.
A
C
Do
I
don't
know,
I
unfortunately
was
missed
the
first
part
where
we're
doing
announcements
did
we
just
do
a
quick
update
on
like
where
we're
at
in
terms
of
the
speaker,
announcements
and
stuff
did
robin
share
alex
share
that
we're
gonna
get
announced
or
gonna
notify
speakers
end
of
the
week?
Okay,
yeah.
We
did
cover
that
yeah.
A
And
highlighted
the
community
fund
scholarships
and
yeah
some
of
the
fun
events
live
band,
karaoke,
hybrid
aspects,
yeah.
C
C
E
C
Right
exactly
well
so
to
be
fair,
like
the
city
of
austin
was
like
no,
that
sounds
they're
like
they're,
chill
they're
they're
fine
with
it,
but
the
venue
did
not
have
like
an
appropriate
space
for
us
to
do.
We.
A
Could
do
something
informal
and
we
got
friends
down
there,
we'll
just
find
a
space.
I
I
have
a.
I
have
a
friend
who's,
helping
like
the
sort
of
art
collective
yeah
there.
There
might
be
some
synergy
there.
Well.
C
Point
being
whatever
there's
a
lot
of
opportunity
to
do
like
fun,
stuff
and
I'm
really
into
fun
stuff
right
now,
so
if
anybody
wants
to
get
together
and
brainstorm
like
things
to
do
to
get
like
get
get
the
get
the
kids
together
and
go
play
like
basically,
I
I
would
be
super
game
for
that.
So
yeah.
A
Time
after
the
end
of
next
week,
I'm
trying
to
list
my
house
and
it's
making
me
crazy
and
people
have
tried
to
get
me
to
perform,
and
I
think
luke,
my
buddy
at
ibm.
He
and
I
are
gonna,
start
a
project
and
we'll
both
be
down
there.
So
maybe
maybe
we
will
do
something
we'll
see,
that'll,
be
fun,
cool,
yeah,
all
right,
rock
and
roll
we're
a
minute
over
time,
so
I'll,
let
everybody
free
and
we'll
talk
more
soon,
thanks
everybody.