►
From YouTube: 2022-07-12 Rook Community 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
All
right
recording
has
started-
and
this
is
the
july
12th-
not
13th
community
meeting
here.
So
let's
get
this
thing
started.
There
is
not
any
planned
release
for
the
v
1.8
release
a
release
branch.
So
let
me
actually
go
ahead
and
zoom
chat.
I
will
drop
a
link
to
this
agenda
document,
so
folks
can
add
things
if
they
want
to
so
that's
available
in
the
chat
now.
But
yes,
so
back
to
the
releases
and
milestones
yeah,
we
don't
have
an
upcoming
patch
release
for
1.8.
A
That
is
expected,
so
we'll
go
ahead
and
skip
past
that
unless
somebody
raises
an
objection,
I
will
go
back
to
it.
Otherwise,
though
we
did
have
a
recent
release
in
db
1.9
branch,
so
you
can
see
the
release
notes
here
from
1.9.7.
A
Any
big
you
know
features
or
things
to
take
note
of
here
worth
calling
out
anybody
for
1.9
sisters1.9.6
hold
on
a
second
yep
where's
dad7
was
that
the
wrong
link?
Yeah?
Let
me
I'll
just
fix
this
link
here,
real
quick,
so
that
should
be
the
real
1.97
now
anything
to
call
out
specifically
from
the
9.7
patch
released
just
last
week.
B
Let's
see
nothing
too
special,
I
feel
like
just
fixes
yeah
some
helm
properties
some
well,
maybe
one
I'll
mention
is
disabling
the
insecure
global
ids
so
that
that's
a
setting
that
we've
we've
disabled,
that
like
for
the
last
year,
I
think,
is
since
specific.
B
But
the
difference
is
now
that
in
new
clusters
we
disable
it
immediately
and
still
basically
waiting
until
the
alert
is
raised
it.
It
was
always
kind
of
disturbing
it's
always
kind
of
disturbing
to
see
a
new
cluster.
If
something
is
alerting
right,
but
then
we
suppress
it
immediately,
so
we
just
avoid
the
whole
thing
and
disable
that
from
the
start,
so
a
better
experience.
That's
a
better
experience.
A
So
that
is
1.9.7
that
is
released
last
week,
we'll
probably
have
a
regular
recurring
next
packs
released
on
the
1.9
branch
for
1.9.8.
A
So
let's
go
and
take
a
quick
look
at
the
project
board
and
see
if
there's
anything
that
we
want
to
call
out
there
for
upcoming
1.9.8.
It's
probably
just
you
know
recurring.
You
know
regular
cadence
type
of
thing,
so
I
don't
know
if
there's
anything
really
driving
driving
it
specifically
any
sooner
than
that.
B
B
A
Don't
so
any
any
particular
issues
that
we
want
to
call
out
moving
towards
the
1.9.8.
B
There
was
one,
oh,
I
can't
remember
what
it
was
a
few
days
ago.
Shabbat
were
we
talking
about
an
issue
that
we're
surprised
it
wasn't.
Oh
that's
right.
I
think
we
merged
it
the
day
after
their
last
release,
and
I
can't
remember
what
the
issue
was,
and
I
was
wondering
if
more
upstream
users
would
hit
it
shabbat.
Do
you
remember
what
I'm
talking
about
or
it
might
take
me
a
minute
to
find
it.
B
B
Yeah-
let's
see
so
oh
that's
right,
it
was
a
missing
port
in
the
missing
part
for
the
web
hook
in
the
helm
chart
so
with.
Without
that
a
user
was
failing
to
install
the
helm
chart.
A
Is
that
issue
on
the
1.9
board
the
this
one
here,
the
one
that
this
fixes.
C
B
A
Into
the
1.9
project
so
that
it's
got
some
visibility
on
the
board,
that
would
be
perfect.
Yeah.
A
Column
but
great,
the
all,
the
better
all
right
cool,
so
yeah
thanks
for
calling
that
out,
travis
and
yeah,
I
guess
we
keep
an
open
eye
on
that
one
for
getting
some
more
reports
on
that
and
we
can
expedite
fix
if
we
need
to
yeah
all
right.
Let's
move
along
then
to
1.10
coming
up
it's
somewhere
around
the
month
out
time
frame
from
early
august.
So
let's
take
a
look
at
the
board
here
and
see
anything
that
we
want
to
dive
into
as
part
of
1.10
discussion.
B
Yeah,
there's
one
in
progress,
shabon's
working
on
with
the
the
client
diamond
key
we're
using
your
key
instead
I'd
like
I
really
like
to
see,
I
get
done
by
the
time
we
before
we
ship
or
else
it'll,
just
wait
for
the
next
major
release.
I
think
so
right
now
has
had
other
things
come
up
and
we
may
not
get
that.
B
I'm
hoping
we
can
turn
back
to
that
one
in
the
next
day
or
two
and
focus
on
it
get
it
done.
It
should
just
be
a
nice
tab,
really
nice
release,
but
otherwise,
I
think
other
things
are
just
yep.
We
need
to
do
them,
but
really
not
blocking
further
these
either.
For
the
most
part,
it's
just
like.
Let's
we're
getting
the
features
in,
we
can
and.
A
In
this
one
here,
this
is
focused
on
design
dock.
Only
not
so
we
don't
expect
to
be
implementing
the
proposals
within
this
design.
Here.
B
A
B
A
Are
there
so,
then
it
seems
like
it
might
be
possible
that
there's
a
number
there's
some
issues
here
that
are
just
not
on
the
board.
Then
it
sounds
like
with
some
of
the
improvements
you're
making
around
rgw
or
multi-site
stuff,
that
they're
being
done,
but
they're
just
not
included
in
the
project
and
showing
up
on
the
board.
Maybe
that's.
A
Playing
okay,
that
sounds
good,
then
it
gives
better
insight
into
what's
what's
going
on
in
the
milestone
as
we're
making
progress
on
it
all
right,
anybody
anything
else
for
1.10
that
folks
want
to
bring
up.
A
The
club
that'd
be
pretty
close
to
it,
yeah
exactly
that
sounds
great
to
follow
up
on
then
all
right,
okay!
So
then,
if
that's
everything
for
one
1.10,
then
that
concludes
our
milestone
checkup
and
we
can
move
ahead
on
to
community
topics.
B
B
A
And
then
this
is
another
another
project
or
sorry
issue
that
you
know,
since
it's
resolved,
that's
in
mainline
now
that
we
want
to
put
into
1.10
also
to
get
more
visibility
into.
What's
going
into
that
release.
A
Nice,
it's
great
it's
great
to
get
that
to
the
finish
line.
Yep
and
that'll
be
in
1.10,
and
then
it
sounds
like
we're,
leaning
towards
including
1.9
in
a
backboard
as
well
yeah,
all
right,
okay,
yeah.
So
the
enabling
to
the
telemetry
blame
is
that
you
on
the
agenda
here.
B
B
B
C
I
don't
I
don't
know,
what's
happening
there
yeah,
I
I
think
it.
It
makes
sense
to
go
ahead
and
do.
C
I
think
our
our
meeting
with
the
self-telemetry
team,
I
think,
gave
us
all
the
information
we
kind
of
need,
and
I
think
we
have
an
understanding
of
kind
of
some
of
the
car
cases
we
might
have
to
like
consider
when
doing
the
feature,
just
to
make
sure
that
we
go
through
some
of
the,
like
minor,
upgrade
scenarios
to
make
sure
that
properly
handles
accepting
the
like
delta
changes
when
telemetry
is
added.
B
C
Right
yeah,
I
guess
I
was
just
meaning
like
as
far
as
like
developing
the
rook
internals
like
we
can
yeah,
I
mean
we
can
certainly
like
ask
people
to
enable
it,
but
as
far
as
like
implementing
this
in
code,
I
think
testing
the
other
one
quincy
will
give
us
that
delta
change
to
make
sure
that
we're
testing
a
corner
case
of
you
know
what
happens
when
like
what
happens
when
set
adds
to
a
lot
of
tree
items
like
kendrick
automatically
accept
those
or
not,
and
I
think
we
do
want
to
automatically
accept
those
if
users
fill
in
the
spec
to
do
so.
C
C
A
A
It
yeah
so
give
that
possibility.
Yes,
cool.
That
makes
sense
all
right,
so
yeah,
so
octopus
has
been
removed
now
in
110.
B
A
All
right,
that's
great,
and
then
ci
looks
good
as
well
with
that.
With
that
change
in
in
mainline.
A
B
B
A
All
right
and
then
exploring
bots
for
assigning
issues,
re-running
ci
et
cetera.
I
think
maybe
this
this
comment
is
associated
with
that.
D
Yeah
yeah
sure
so
actually
I
was
thinking
like
if
there
can
be
a
bot
with
upstream
repo
that
can
help
like
the
upstream
collaborators
like
like,
like
auto,
saying
issues
and
like
do
the
stuff
that
a
collaborator
can
do
like
and
without
having
those
collaborator
permissions,
because
we
cannot
go
and
like
give
all
the
permissions
to
everyone
so
something
like
if
we
go
and
commit
assign,
so
that
issue
can
be
auto
assigned
to
a
particular
like
developer.
D
If,
if
he
needs
to
take
that
issue,
so
the
auto
assign
issue
pr
has
been
ready,
and
by
that
like
adding
that
I
was
thinking
like
why
not
we
can
do
go
ahead
and
also
add
the
features
like
like
re-running
the
ci
and
something
like
like
adding
the
labels
in
the
issue
and
all
so
yeah.
D
So
basically,
I
I
want
to
ask
like
if
there
is
any
better
way
for
doing
that
and
like
there
is
something
like
I
already
exist,
mod
that
does
so
or
maybe
what
all
features.
Apart
from
these
that
we
can
think
about
for
providing.
B
So
I
don't
know
I'm
kind
of
torn
between
how
much
would
we
use
the
bots
after
we
have
them
versus
if
we
just
keep
adding
people
to
the
org?
Maybe
that
keeps
things
simpler
too,
but
yeah.
I
guess
I'm
curious
if
others
are
aware,
but
that
we'd
be.
That
would
be
useful
and
we
want
to
bring
in
like
dared.
Are
there
any
outbound
or
bots
that
I've
found
is
using
that
you
found
useful
or
for
other
people
just
curious,
because
we're
using
bots
is
great.
A
Yeah
good
question:
travis
yeah,
like
the
I
think
that
there's
like
on
some
other
projects
here,
there's
a
couple
of
more
scoped
things
like
I
haven't
really
besides
prowl,
you
know
that
kubernetes
uses
upstream,
I
haven't
seen
very
many
bots
that
have
like
general
purpose
and
it's
more
like
very
scoped
items
like
a
a
bot
to
do
to
open
back
ports
for
you
or
a
bot
to
you
know
like
assign,
like
a
somebody
so
like
I
haven't
seen
general
ones
that
have
like
a
more
broad
coverage
of
features
than
than
prow.
A
C
B
Yeah,
so
if
it's
about
assigning
an
issue
honestly,
I
think
we
pretty
we're
pretty
flexible
to
add
people
to
the
org,
and
then
I
can
just
self-assign
it
anyway.
So
maybe
we
don't
need
a
buff
for
that.
One.
B
D
D
Sometimes
what
happened
like
somebody
is
like
being
trying
to
already
trying
to
contribute,
and
they
are
not
being
already
auto
saying,
because
the
ones
who
have
the
access
have
not
given
the
collaborator
access,
then
they
try
to
mess
up
because
they
are
already
like
building
that
and
somebody
else
trying
to
come
over
that
and
pick
that
up
so
yeah.
I
would
say
a
start
would
be
good.
But
anyhow,
adding
a
collaborator
is
what
we
do,
but
yeah
it's
something
like
extra
that
you
can
get.
B
E
I
don't
know
this
kind
of
comes
to
mind,
especially
when
we're
talking
about
bots
and
such
as
well
is,
I
don't
know,
to
a
certain
degree,
get
for
example,
for
the
ci
in
general,
there,
like
a
bit
of
more
general
point
as
well,
that
we
should
look
into
adding
a
bit
more
documentation
around
it
as
well
like,
for
example,
to
well
it's
not
a
secret
or
anything,
but
like
at
good
technologies.
E
Where,
where
I
want,
we
will
maybe
give
a
fork
of
the
rook
project,
and
we
want
to
have
all
the
ci's
all
the
ipad
prints,
for
example,
to
run
and
all
and
we're
basically
more
or
less
moving
from
yaml
files
to
the
bash
scripts
and
everything
trying
to
figure
out
like
which
variables
are
needed,
and
all
that
and
well.
At
one
point,
we
hoped
fully
have
like
a
full
list
of
environment
variables
which
you
need
to
set
if
you
would
want
to
run
it
in
well
in
your
fork,
for
example.
E
So
this
might
also
come
down
to
like
if
and
how
these
bots
are
implemented
if
they
should
be
able
to
be
run
in
a
fork
or
not
or
if
they
should
yeah.
Just
before
the
main
repository.
B
B
A
Yeah
yeah
and
then,
and
then
one
that
might
be
particularly
interesting
as
well
too,
is
after
you
know
the
like
a
signing.
One
like
we
said
that
there's
some
work
on
that
one
like
rerunning.
C
A
Ci
to
be
able
to
you
know,
get
pr's
moving
that
one
could
be
interesting,
but
likely
is
mitigated.
If
you
know
somebody
is
contributing
a
pr
that,
like
we,
you
know
making
them
a
member
of
the
organization
is
probably
fairly
standard
for
you
know,
along
with
your
contribution
that
you're
making,
so
that
one
might
not
be
too
bad,
but
yeah
that
one
could
be
a
pain
if
you're
trying
to
make
progress.
If
you.
C
A
Yeah
work
around
we'll
call
it
self-service
workarounds.
Yes,
awesome,
okay,
sweet!
So
anything
else
on
the
agenda,
then.
A
All
right:
well,
that's
everything
for
this
week,
then
we'll
go
ahead
and
follow
up
on
doing
some
of
the
housekeeping
to
get
things
into
the
1.10
milestone
and
to
get
a
date
set
on
that
one
and
we'll
see
each
other
in
two
weeks
for
the
next
community
meeting.