►
From YouTube: Core Team Meeting 2019-11-20
Description
Core Team Meeting 2019-11-20
A
C
So
I
drafted
some
language
there
for
a
proposal
on
how
the
lang
team
might
manage
RFC's,
which
marks
a
pretty
big
shift
from
how
we've
done
it
so
far,
I
haven't
really
had
time
to
follow
up
on
that.
I
floated
it
or
in
Zula
gotten
some
feedback
from
a
few
folks,
including
Steve
clapper
Nick
was
not
here
and
a
few
others
and
but
I
haven't,
have
tried
to
like
really
promote
this
or
get
a
lot
of
discussion.
C
But
I
would
like
to
get
started
on
that
at
some
point,
the
gist
of
it
being
that,
instead
of
trying
to
move
the
RFC
repo
to
reflect
exactly
those
RFC's
where
the
link
team
is
actively
engaged
and
no
others
and
say
that
you
don't
just
open
RFC's
point
link,
you
don't
open
a
PR
on
the
RFC
repo.
You
create
a
lightweight
issue
on
a
different
repo
that
indicates,
like
I,
have
a
proposal
that
I'd
like
to
know.
C
C
Yeah
the
goal
is
kind
of
to
take
the
first
step.
I
introduced
a
sort
of
more
formal
version
of
the
pre
RFC
or
stage
zero,
and
an
intern,
hopefully
like
I,
said
help
keep
the
artists.
Here
we
thought
it'd
be
more
reflective
of
what
our
actual
priorities
are,
but
I
plan
to
open
this,
as
in
genuine
RFC
I'd
like
to
sort
of
start
by
writing
some
kind
of
blog
post
or
something
I
might
try
to
do
that.
Soonish,
but
I
I'm
happy
to
get
feedback
on
it
too.
B
D
C
B
Think
one
thing
too,
he
said
to
the
group-
is
PC
city
9,
for
example,
doesn't
have
a
structured
moderation
process
and
moderation
rules
and
all
around
that,
and
that
must
be
interesting
to
me
because
padam
just
goes.
This
is
a
job
of
the
person,
who's
driving
the
artsy
and
I.
Think
ours
in
this
case
is
vastly
better
model
and
I
think
would
also
be
good
to
work
out.
The
strengths
of
our
third
model
make
sure
that
I
think
I'm
kind
of
home
life
yeah.
C
Is
that
one
of
the
ways,
if
a
proposal
that
someone
has,
if
it
seems
like
a
small
idea,
we
can
just
move
it
to
an
RFC,
but
if
it
seems
like
a
big
idea,
the
idea
is
that
when
we
review
it,
we
would
decide
to
form
a
project
group
around
it,
which
would
have
a
repo
which
would
have
a
zoo
upstream
and
would
do
some
of
the
discussion
in
this
format,
as
opposed
to
like
in
an
RFC
thread.
That
goes
to
10,000
comments.
C
A
Okay,
the
next
is
legal
issues.
I
I
just
noticed
that
fluorine
added
the
rusty
licensing
guidelines,
but
it
looks
like
it's
been
there
for
a
while,
but
I
don't
know
if
I
just
missed
it
or
fluorine.
You
haven't
been
around
to
talk
about
it,
but
is
there
anything
you
want
to
say
about
that
or
licensing
in
general.
E
B
C
Yeah,
so
this
isn't
feedback
state
I
missed
that
the
first
time
I'm
wondering
is
that
something
it
seems
like
the
compiler
team
ought
to
be
educated
on
this
I'm
wondering
if
it
makes
sense.
I,
don't
know
if
you
know
about
our
design
meeting
processes,
but
we
have
a
process
where
we
propose
meetings
that
I
wonder
if
we
should
propose
one
on
this
topic.
I
can.
B
Totally
do
that
I
would
like
to
end
this.
They
have
this
end
up
as
a
guideline
that
gives
people
clear
guidance
on
if
a
pull
request
comes
in.
That
feels
like
it's,
for
example,
quartet.
How
do
I
deal
with
this,
and
what
do
you
do
if
I
don't
feel
competent
to
do
it?
I
think
that's
the
most
important
part
to
do
not
put
the
I
mean
in
the
end,
the
person
who
merged
is
a
pull
request
is
in
some
way
responsible
and
accountable,
but
making
it
clear
hey
if
you
are
not
sure
this
is.
B
C
I
think
this
is
great
what
I
think
we
should
do
a
meeting
to
let
people
review
it
and
ask
questions
I'm
sure
there
will
be
people
who
have
questions
and
I
think
we
should
try
to
have.
We
have
this
expertise,
map
that
we
could
have
underutilized,
but
I
could
imagine
adding
an
entry
for
like
licensing
where
we
can
put
people
in
there
to
try
to
drive
questions
yeah
thanks
for
you,
okay,.
C
B
E
B
Yes,
we
could
put
out
and
kind
of
I
would
put
it
on
the
blog,
but
kind
of
a
call
the
website
is
yeah.
I
would
actually
have
no
problem
with
me
if
it
just
put
out
hey
if
you're
interested
in
working
on
the
website
productively.
There's
a
couple
of
people
now
popping
up
also
trying
to
figure
out
if
there's
someone
who
actually
has
leadership
qualities
to
do
that
interest.
B
B
D
C
B
Definitely
had
a
couple
of
people
approach
me
recently,
where
we
will
release
more
requests
and
what
to
change
on
the
website
and
I
wouldn't
want
that
to
go
to
race.
So
this
and
one
of
these
people
have
configural
asks
on
what
specific
looks
like
a
lot
of
good
questions.
Can
we
change
this
kind
of
change
that
so
I
see
more
and
more
requests
pop
up
that
are,
the
website
is,
okay
could
be
improved,
which
is
a
UNH
much
buy
into
and
I.
B
B
B
B
B
B
A
D
D
C
No
update
other
than
there
have
been
more
persons
weeping
at
least
yesterday,
I
went
through
and
synced
up.
That
seems,
like
the
the
tide
has
started
to
Deb
or
I.
Don't
know
if
that's
a
good,
not
a
gold
metaphor,
but
there
are
fewer
being
published
and
you
could
take
a
look
at
the
paper
duck.
There's
a
fly,
some
themes
emerging
which,
if
people
have
started
to
collect
at
the
top
I.
C
What
we
want
to
do
as
a
process
to
eat
I,
especially
around
other
teams,
the
link
team
has
been
trying
to
get
ourselves
organized
to
believe,
been
having
some
trouble
to
do
with
like
a
road
map
meeting
where
we
talk
about
what
for
him
talk
about
what
we
have
in
mind
for
the
next
year
and
if
there
are
themes
and
so
on,
and
it
seems
like
it
mix
post,
for
example,
for
posted
different
structures.
Maybe
we
want
to
try
to
schedule
a
meeting
to
talk
talk
about
it
from
the
quarantines
point
of
view.
C
A
C
B
C
I
didn't
really
I'm
used
or
I
said,
I
receive
and
I
really
meant
for
any
given
like
idea,
I
would
like
to
do.
I
can
sort
of
I
don't
know
seems
like
it
might
be
useful
to
try
to
pick
a
team
and
try
to
come
up
with
some
concrete
specifics,
but
those
concrete
specifics
do
require
interaction
of
the
team.
I
feel
like
I
think.
D
D
D
C
C
B
I
think
some
ping
pong
what
the
team's
would
be
best,
because
this
is
definitely
something
that
we
wanted
you
to
support
the
teams
and
so
asking
the
question.
What
would
be
most
helpful
to
you
to
make
you
have
a
good
road
map
and
understand
what
the
road
that
means
so
making
this
a
theater
here
instead
of
a
two
lot.
The
bottom
thing
there's.
C
A
sink
meeting
in
this
week
and
in
two
weeks
I
could
imagine
trying
to
schedule
something
for
early
I'm,
not
gonna,
be
here
next
week,
I'd
like
to
take
part
but
early
in
December,
and
ideally
we
could
have
something
to
bring
to
the
same
mean.
Interative
advertise
people
hey
we're
playing
to
talk
about
this
at
that
point,
although
I
think
that's
not
if
it
doesn't
work
out,
it
doesn't
really
do
it
isn't
I.
F
Feel
like
it
might
make
sense
to
schedule
one
meeting,
it's
like
maybe
just
core
and
maybe
even
core,
and
then
the
Arab
League
sort
of
try
to
decide
on
three
or
four
like
overarching,
big
ideas
and
then
only
bringing
it.
Maybe
to
the
lead
meeting
as
like.
Each
team
can
figure
out
sort
of
bullet
points
or
something
that
fit
into
those
ideas.
Because
I.
C
C
C
So
I've
been
working
with
Jason
Carr
and
we
have
a
draft
that
we're
pretty
happy
with
me
incorporated
the
feedback
that
people
gave
us
from
the
email
that
went
out
and
I
think
Spence,
I'm
back
and
forth,
the
others
ooh
lips
screens
and
like
marks
and
on
there,
for
example,
and
we're
now
getting
the
translations
going.
Our
goal
is
to
get
the
survey
out
as
soon
as
possible.
C
I
think
most
likely
I
would
have
liked
to
have
it
out
now,
but
most
likely
is
probably
December
1st
or
a
second
like
it's
given
the
way
the
calendar
works
there.
It
is
it'll
run
for
as
long
as
we
can
write
it.
Two
or
three
weeks
pull
it
in
have
some
results
early
in
the
year,
I
think
that's
the
most
likely
schedule.
C
Had
a
I
put
some
notes
there,
we
had
our
first
meeting
we're
trying
to
renewed
focus
where
we
picked
the
topics
for
the
meeting
in
advance
and
try
to
like
do
some
preparation
and
so
on,
and
we
had
a
meeting
just
we
went
over
every
basic
as
a
group
right
over
the
old
teams
that
the
RFC
that
proposed
the
teens
and
tried
to
identify
like
how
accurate
is
this?
What's
missing
and
came
up
with
some
interesting
feedback?
C
But
one
thing
I
wanted
to
run
by
I
say
a
couple
things.
First
of
all,
there's
a
draft
RFC.
If
you
have
a
link
there,
that's
just
proposing
sort
of
clarifying
what
work
the
terminology.
You
don't
really
have
any
place
and
like
official
decision
about
what
a
working
group
is
and
specifically
proposing
like
that,
we
use
the
term
working
group
and
project
group
for
separating
certain
kinds
of
classifications
and
we're
looking
to
essentially
take
try
to
produce
documentation,
which
we
also
don't
really
have
from
what
I
can
tell.
C
Apart
from
the
artsy's
that
will
describe
our
governance
structure
and
for
places
where
the
artsy's
they
don't
seem
to
be
RFC
either
we
seem
out
of
date
or
things
what
we
said.
The
RC
just
never
happened
or
might
try
to
put
some
amendments
to
clarify
that
so
one
example
would
be
the
RFC
states
that
the
court
team
will
approve
all
feature
gates.
This
just
doesn't
happen
and
that's
okay,
I
think
in
general,
the
RFC
kind
of
envisioned
a
more
technical,
hands-on
role
for
the.