►
From YouTube: Working Group:2020-12-15
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
A
A
B
A
B
I
was
trying
to
actually
catch
up
on
my
rfcs
before
this
meeting.
These
are
mostly
just
questions
as
someone
who's,
not
as
familiar
with
the
depth
server.
Some
additional
context
that
I
think
would
be
good
to
capture
in
the
rfc
like
when
people
use
it
and
also
sort
of
discuss
the
merits
of
just
having
a
client
package
in
the
depth,
server
library
versus
extracting
another
repo.
A
Fair
enough,
I
don't
know
that
it's
urgent,
so
I
probably
wait
until
the
new
year.
We've
also
got
this
go
function,
build
pack,
matt
moore
is
not
here.
A
I've
been
continuing
to
think
about
this.
I
think
it
does
make
sense
for
us
to
do
something
like
pull
this
into
community
and
kind
of
iterate
from
there
to
see
where
this
goes,
but
yeah
it
needs
quite
a
bit
more
fleshing
out
before.
I
think
it
makes
sense
for
it
to
be
something
that's
in
in
the
top
level
organization.
B
Yeah
my
big
concern
here:
sort
of
around
the
function,
signature
detection-
I'm
a
little
bit
worried
that
even
in
this
go
case,
it's
gonna
we're
gonna
get
a
lot
of
false
positives.
B
I'm
wondering
if
we
should,
especially
in
the
beginning,
do
the
more
explicit
opt-in,
especially
if
one
of
the
end
goals
is
for
it
to
end
up
in
sort
of
the
as
an
optional
build
pack
in
the
generic
go
group.
I
think
it
will
start
to
false
positives
can
cause
a
lot
of
problems
there.
A
A
A
And
then,
finally,
this
proposal
to
create
the
paquetto
project,
programming
guide,
frankie
any
update
on
this
one.
C
A
Cool
for
folks
that
didn't
see
that
comment,
I
think,
frankie
proposed
that
it
kind
of
move
in
a
direction
of
being.
Where
is
the
comment
just
kind
of
like
an
rfc
that
explains
where
a
style
guide
could
live
and
like
kind
of
some
broad
outline
of
what
the
style
guide
could
look
like,
but
that
we
don't
have
to
define
everything
we
want
to
see
in
the
style
guide
here
in
this
rfc?
A
There
all
right,
I
think,
that's
all
of
the
project-wide
rscs,
let's
take
a
look
at
any
of
the
language-specific
ones,.
D
I
don't,
I
believe,
there's
no
open
conversation
there.
Well,
I
I
think
just
tim
had
just
have
to
like
review
it
I'll
bring
tim
to
like
take
it
look.
A
Okay,
I
think
that
brings
us
to
the
end
of
the
standing
agenda.
The
only
other
thing
that's
left
and
why
jen
is
here
today
is
that
jen
has
created
this
rails
assets
build
pack,
which
is
an
implementation
of
an
rfc
that
I
wrote
up
earlier,
probably
like
a
month
or
more
ago.
I
don't
know
jen
you
want
to
talk
about
it,
tell
us
what
it
does.
E
Yeah,
it
actually
is
just
very
simple:
it
just
runs:
bundle
exact
rails
like
assets,
pre-compile
and
then
assets
clean
just
to
clean
up
like
old
compiled
assets,
and
then
yesterday
it
was
finally
able
to
implement
the
caching.
So
if
you
have
not
made
any
changes
to
your
app
assets
directory
in
your
rails
application,
it
will
just
reuse
the
cache
layer,
otherwise
it
will
rebuild.
E
E
And
I
think
sophie
has
had
an
opportunity
to
review
it
a
couple
different
times.
I'm
not
sure
if
there's
anything
else
that
like
y'all,
would
want
to
see
or
any
other
issues
you
want
to
open
or
who
else
wants
to
review
it.
We're
happy
like
so
I
I
work
at
proximity.
E
A
F
Yeah,
I
was
actually
wondering
about
this,
so
if
we
wanted
to
actually
bring
this
in
to
our
like
ruby
language,
family
build
packs,
would
we
have
to
put
this
first
into
pocketo
community
and
then
move
that
into
paquetto
build
packs?
Eventually,
like
I
was
kind
of
unclear
what
the
steps
would
be
once
the
build
pack
is
done,
which
it
almost
is
or
basically
is.
A
I
don't
think
so.
I
think,
because
there
was
an
existing
rfc
that
was
at
the
top
level
org
if
we
had.
If
someone
in
the
like
maintainer
contributor
group
had
actually
like
done
the
work
to
contribute
the
build
pack
that
the
rfc
was
for,
we
would
just
immediately
have
put
it
in
the
top
level
org.
So
I
think
the
same
kind
of
process
applies
here
cool.
Does
anyone
object
to
that
or
see
a
flaw?
In
my
logic,.
A
A
A
F
F
E
A
E
I
have
had
your
bot
like
make
pr's
against
this
repository
to
like
bump
dependencies.
I
don't
know
what
else
there
is
that's
like
missing
or
needs
to
be
added.
A
Okay,
cool
yeah,
I
think
we'll
we'll
coordinate,
transferring
the
repo
and
we
can
take
it
from
there
all
right.
I
think
that
covers
this.
Is
there
anything
that's
not
listed
here
on
the
agenda
that
folks
wanted
to
talk
about.
A
All
right,
I
take
the
silence,
as
that
will
be
the
end
of
the
meeting.
Then
cool.
Well,
thanks
for
showing
up
folks
for
the
short
meeting.
A
We
are,
we
are
off
till
next
year,
so
don't
show
up
for
this
meeting
next
week
or
the
week
after
all,
right,
bye,
everyone
see
y'all.