►
From YouTube: 2022-09-06 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
Oh
keyboard
shortcut
all
right:
this
is
the
September
6th,
2022
Rook
community
meeting.
So
let's
get
this
thing
underway.
I
have
been
out
of
town
and
on
PTO
for
the
past,
a
little
bit
so
I'm
a
bit
behind
and
needing
to
catch
up
on
some
stuff,
especially
around
the
1.10
release.
But
let's
go
ahead
and
jump
into
it
and
go
into
sequential
order
here.
There's
no
1.8
plans,
patch
releases
or
recent
ones
that
we
need
to
talk
about.
A
So
let's
go
ahead
and
move
on
to
1.9
and
talk
about
yeah.
That
would
be,
since
the
last
community
meeting
the
1.9.10
patch
release
that
went
on
on
August
29th
anything
major
to
call
out
there
or
anything
to
to
share.
B
Let's
see
yeah,
we
did
get
that
out.
There
was
oh,
the
the
main
issue.
I
wanted
to
get
that
out.
After
a
fix
was
the
two
days,
1.25
completely
removed
PSPs
and
we
still
had
PSPs
in
the
builds.
So
we
removed
those
and
enabled
basically
the
install
on
1.25
and
that
actually
supported
that
and
the
effectively
1.10,
of
course,
but
yeah
we
haven't
yet
implemented
the
replacement
for
PSPs,
which
is
one
of
the
next
things
to
look
at
and
make
sure
we're
staying
on
top
of
that.
A
Nice
yeah
glad
we
got
that
out
there
and
so
is.
Is
there
any
assumptions
that
1.25
kubernetes
is
the
like?
Defaults
are
expected
version
that
that
we
support
or
anything
special
around
that
or
hey
we
just
we
just
got
support
working
again
for
1.25
by
removing
PSPs.
B
Yeah
125
just
came
out
last
week
or
no
two
weeks
ago,
something
like
that.
So
we
were
just
broken
until
we
removed
those
PSPs
and
so
now
our
yeah.
We
don't
really
have
a
kind
of
a
default
version
kubernetes
we
just
try
and
run
on
all
the
supported
versions
which
now,
with
1.10
release
we
up
to
that
Min
version
to
kubernetes
1.19..
B
A
All
right
add
that
in
there
yeah
Okay
add
that
in
there
all
right.
So
let's
talk
about
1.10
then
so
we
had
another
big
release
for
the
1.10
release
that
was
done
last
week
and
so
yeah
I
was
out
and
did
not
see
anything
about
that.
So
yeah
catch
catch
us
all
up
here
on
1.10
as
well.
B
Yep,
so
we
got
it
out
there
excited
for,
for
that
got
the
blog
out
got
an
image
from
Matt.
I
ended
up
emailing
him
directly,
since
we
didn't
have
to
use
the
middleman.
So
maybe
I'll
do
that
in
the
future.
So
I
don't.
B
Right
but
yeah
Matt
responded
really
quick
after
I
realized,
oh
you're
not
responding
dude,
it's
been
a
couple
of
days
and
we
need
the
blog
like
tomorrow.
So
anyway,
yeah
Matt
was
really
responsive
and
have
you
looked
at
the
blog?
Yet
if
the
image
is
it's
pretty
entertaining
I
really
like
it
this
time
so
yeah
anyway,.
B
I'm
not
up
on
my
movies
enough
but
yeah
otherwise
for
1.10
I,
don't
know
we
got
it
out.
We'll
I
haven't
heard
of
any
urgent
issues.
I
gotta
double
check,
though,
since
the
long
weekend
but
I
think
we're
okay,
we
may
do
a
patch
release
or
usually
we
do
a
patch
release
a
week
after
the
minor
release,
but
we
may
wait
wait
two
weeks
if
there's
nothing
urgent,
we'll
see
so
I
add
up
a
note
there
to
have
the
dot
one
on
that
eighth
on
Thursday,
but
it
might
move
the
next
week.
Let's.
A
Go
let's
go
ahead
and
look
at
the
project
board
then
and
see
see
what
maybe,
pending
or
potentially
importance.
B
A
B
So
that's
all
good
yeah,
so
I
need
to
double
check
if
there
was
something
else
worth
getting
it
out
quickly.
Probably
it's
worth
just
planning
on
Thursday
to
do
it
and
I
just
can't
think
of
offhand
the
urgency
for
it.
If
there's
anybody
else
have
any
comments
around
for
issues
for
1.10.
A
A
Okay
sounds
good,
so
that's
yeah,
so
then
obviously
1.11
is
for
very
early
in
that
cycle,
as
in
like
week,
one
barely
so
I
think
that
in
the
next
community
meeting,
we'll
probably
start
talking
about
1.11
project
board
and
things
like
that,
but
otherwise
this
I
think
we're
probably
good
for
today
on
release.
Milestone
updates
works
for
me
all
right.
So
let's
move
on
to
the
community
topics.
Section
then
did
this.
Did
the
using
this?
The
you
know
the
Rook
operator
keyring
said
admin.
A
B
We
were,
we
were
holding
the
release
a
few
extra
days
because
we
really
did
want
to
get
that
in,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
it's
just
like
something
is
not
coming
together.
It's
still
failing
a
CI
and
and
so
yeah
we
decided
to
hold
off
this
week
or
the
last
couple
of
days.
I
didn't
get
a
chance
to
go
back
and
try
that
again,
but
I
think
the
thing
is
there
were
to
get
this
in.
We
need
to
be
confident
about
upgrades,
either
way,
whether
it's
in
a
minor
release
or
pass
release.
B
So
if,
if
we
can
get
it
in
and
get
the
confidence
in
that
we
could
we
decided
we
could
put
it
in
a
batch
release
too
or
wait
till
111
if,
if
it
takes
that
long
to
troubleshoot
too
I
guess
at
the
same
time
honestly,
if
we
decide
to
pump
the
feature
or
not
do
it,
it's
not
a
I
mean
we
spent
a
lot
of
time
on
it.
So
I
really
wanted
to
I.
B
A
With
the
debugging
of
the
of
the
CI
failures,
is
it
is
this
something
that,
like
is
just
completely
like
unexplained
Behavior,
it's
left,
leaving
us
bewildered,
or
is
it
kind
of
okay
find
the
next
thing
where
you
know
a
previous
assumption
about
permissions
and
privileges
is
no
longer
valid,
and
so
that's
the
part,
that's
failing
now
and
then
we'll
figure
that
out
and
then
we'll
find
the
next
one.
A
B
D
It
fails
on
local
testing
also.
It
is
just
that
few
of
the
commands,
if
I
remember
like
Object
Store,
a
few
Object
Store
command,
fails
and
a
few
commands
when
we
try
to
delete
like
tools
as
file
system.
In
this
three
scenario.
I
remember
like
this,
where
the
CI
fails,
so
CI
basically
fails
when
we
are
trying
to
clear
down
the
cluster
when
we
basically
run
some
delete
commands.
D
B
A
Got
it
cool
cool
yep
that
makes
sense
that
makes
sense
yeah.
So
it's
not
it's
not
flakiness.
It's
not!
It's
like
we're,
seeing
it
locally
we're
seeing
it
consistently.
Okay,
cool
yeah,
thanks
for
the
the
extended
effort
on
that
definitely
appreciate
it.
Man.
D
D
We'll
keep
yeah.
A
B
B
How
many
versions
should
we
really
support,
because
I've
been
I've
tried
to
be
where
my
position
has
been
to
really
be
pretty
open
about
trying
to
support
as
many
as
many
versions
as
we
can
so
there's
the
issue
I
should
put
in
the
engine
number
too,
but
so
like
back
to
1.17
for
1.9,
so
1.17-24.
What
was
that,
like?
B
Seven,
eight
versions
and
shabam
is
having
a
lot
of
pain,
trying
to
keep
supporting,
1.17
or
and
we're
seeing
more
flakiness
there
and
I
opened
this
issue
to
ask
Community
hey
what
if
we
raise
the
Min
version
to
1.20,
which
would
give
us
six
versions
of
kubernetes
since
1.25
just
came
out
and
it
yeah
discussing
with
Alexander
and
other
folks,
it
seems
like
well.
B
B
If
we
have
the
sort
of
a
policy
of
supporting
the
last
six
or
seven
versions
of
kubernetes,
that's
sufficient,
because
that's
more
than
the
kubernetes
ever
shifts
patches
before
they
only
score
like
the
last
three
I
think
for
for
patches,
so
we're
being
pretty
generous
and
that's
where
we
landed
so
other
thoughts
about
what
versions
to
support.
B
D
So
it
is
just
like
it
is
painful
for
me
and
also
like
the
CI
cannot
handle
that
range,
because
we
we
see
some
issues
with
the
latest
Ubuntu
version
and
then
the
actions
that
we
use
for
running
in
the
like
GitHub
actions.
So
they
do
not
support
this
big
range.
A
Travis,
did
you
the
this?
One
strikes
me
as
just
a
little
bit
odd
of
of
of
skipping.
Having
version
skips
is
that
just
kind
of
an
attempt
at
using
our
resources
more
wisely
and
while
still
casting
abroadnet
with
our
our
quality
checks.
B
Yeah
because
we've
got
a
whole
bunch
of
test
Suites
like
five
test
Suites
that
run
on
all
these
different
versions
of
kubernetes,
and
so
it's
just
trying
to
be
responsible
with
okay.
At
some
point,
I
mean
kubernetes
is
really
stable
enough.
We
really
have
rarely
seen
differences
in
runs
between
kubernetes
versions
or
things
breaking
on
one
version
and
not
another.
B
So
if
we
get
so,
it
has
seemed
sufficient,
at
least
to
run
the
CI
on
the
oldest
version.
We
support
the
newest
version.
We
support
and
or
the
latest
that's
out
and
then
some
in
between
just
to
give
us.
C
Got
it
I
guessed
as
as
a
piece
of
information
I
just
quickly
looked
at,
which
versions
of
kubernetes
Amazon
eks
supports
it
looks
like
it
currently
supports
one
dot
20
to
1.23
1.19
support
ended
on
August
1st
1.20
support
will
end
on
November
1st.
It
seems
like
they
roughly
support
two
years
worth
of
releases,
which
is
I,
think
approximately
six
releases
so
that
that
does
seem
like
a
a
pretty
good
Target
for
us
to
to
try
to
match.
A
Definitely
think
it's
I'm
grateful
that
we're,
you
know,
have
a
more
aggressive
or
you
know,
new
policy
for
supporting
newer
versions
than
eks
does.
If
you
know
it
seems
like
the
cloud
providers
and
their
main
distributes
offerings
they
take
a
while
to
you
know,
have
as
the
latest
releases
available,
but
us
supporting
those
and
being
on,
like
the
bleeding
Act
of
those
like
actual
releases
and
doing
125
is
a
very
good
thing,
yeah,
so
I'm
glad
we
do
that
agreed,
cool
and
then
Travis.
Do
you
think
it's
in
Blaine?
A
Do
you
think
it's
worth
do
we
do?
We
have
it
captured
like
the
general
policy
here,
because
in
that
PR
that
we
had
that
I
was
just
looking
at
this
guy.
You
know
we
we
State
what
the
minimum
version
is.
Do
we
also
State,
like
the
general
policy
of
seven
releases,
or
you
know
this
amount
of
time
period,
two
years
or
whatever
it
is
like?
Do
we
state
that
as
well
or
is
it
worth
doing
that.
B
What
was
it
in
that
comment
or
somewhere
in
that
issue?
I
mentioned,
you
know
as
a
general
policy.
Let's
support
the
last
six
or
maybe
seven
versions
might
have
been
an
elated
comment.
A
It
looks
like
we've
mentioned
it
in
the
issue:
I,
don't
know
if
it
made
it
to
like,
for
instance,
our
documentation
that
got
prerequisites.
We
say
that
you
know
1.19
is
required,
but
just
wondering
if
we
wanted
to
be
like
State
the
general
requirement
here
in
the
user-facing
docs
as
well
as
opposed
to
like
an
issue
I.
B
See
I,
don't
know,
people
I
mean
people
need
to
know
the
minimum
version
we
support
because,
ultimately,
that's
probably
all
I
care
about,
and
then
they
raise
it
with
each
release.
Maybe
it's
obvious
yeah
what
the
policy
is
enough
or
we
could
just
say
the
policy
on
that
line
too
in
the
darks
I,
don't
know
if
a
user
asks
for
it,
we
can
complete
the
policy.
A
Yeah,
yeah
and
I
don't
think
it's
a
big
deal,
I
think
in
general
I've
had
some
some
challenges
with
having
policy
decisions
captured
only
in
closed
issues
like
we
state
it,
and
you
know
an
issue
that
closed
it
and
go
away.
You
know
it's
not
as
prevalent
or
discoverable,
necessarily
as
putting
the
policy
in
a
more
live
Place
yeah.