►
From YouTube: Carvel Community Meeting - October 14, 2021
Description
Carvel Community Meeting - October 14, 2021
We meet every Thursday at 10:30am PT. We'd love for you to join us live!
The team went over the latest release from the Carvel tool suite and had lengthy discussion on speeding up docs PRs, as well as other topics. Full notes here: https://hackmd.io/F7g3RT2hR3OcIh-Iznk2hw?both#October-14-2021-Agenda
A
A
If
you
are
watching
this
as
a
recording
on
youtube,
we
invite
you
to
come
and
join
us
live
we
meet
every
thursday
at
10,
30
a.m.
Pacific
time
it's
an
opportunity
for
you
to
come
and
listen
in
on
what
the
maintainers
are
working
on.
What
they're
thinking
about
and
present-
and
you
can
you
yourself-
can
present
any
ideas
that
you
want
the
maintainers
to
work
on
regarding
the
carvel
tool
suite.
A
If
you're,
not
a
member
of
that
slack
workspace,
you
can
request
an
invitation
to
gain
access
and
we
are
also
found
on
twitter
at
carnival
underscore
dev
when
you
are
interacting
with
us,
whether
it
be
in
the
meeting
in
slack
on
on
twitter
on
github,
we
require
that
you,
please
read
and
abide
by
our
code
of
conduct
all
right
next
up.
If
you
are
attending
the
meeting
live.
Please
put
your
name
in
any
organization
that
you
are
representing
down
here
in
the
agenda.
A
This
helps
us
keep
track
of
those
that
are
attending
that
are
outside
of
the
maintainer
circle,
and
we
can
keep
the
lines
of
communication
open
if
you're,
using
those
tools
for
the
carvel
tools.
We
also
invite
you
to
input
the
details
about
how
you
use
karvel
into
this
pinned
issue.
That's
on
the
carnival
repo
and
you
can
put
your
logo
for
your
organization
on
there
as
well,
and
it
helps
us
learn
more
about
the
way
that
others
are
using.
The
tools,
as
well
as
help
promote
your
organization
as
well.
A
So,
if
you
haven't
registered
to
attend
coupon
yet
and
want
to
attend
virtually,
there
is
still
time
if
you're
attending
in
person,
we
encourage
you
to
go
and
drop
by
the
the
last
day
of
keynotes
to
check
out
this
five
minute
keynote
covering
carville
shadaroopa
is
going
to
be
doing
a
short
demo
and
once
you
you
view
that
feel
free
to
find
us
back
on
slack
and
give
us
any
questions
that
you
might
have
after
watching.
It.
A
What
you'll
need
to
do
is
keep
an
eye
out
for
the
the
oktoberfest
topic
labeled
on
our
repos
right
now.
We
just
have
it
on
image
package,
repo
and
specifically
labeled
hacktoberfest
labeled
issues,
and,
if
so,
if
you're
participating
in
oktoberfest
and
want
to
help
out
the
karvel
team
go
to
image
package,
repo
check
out
these
issues
and
help
us
out,
and
you
can
also
earn
a
free
t-shirt
once
you
hit
four
pull
requests.
C
This
one's
an
exciting
one,
we've
got
a
couple
of
improvements
here.
First
of
all,
thanks
to
cobra,
we've
got
command
completion
like
shell,
shell
command.
Completion
kind
of
just
comes
for
free,
almost
there's
some
docs
that
we
want
to
do
around
that
to
like
make
that
a
little
bit
easier,
that's
forthcoming,
but
the
command
is
there
is
present.
C
The
other
thing
is
we
got
a
contribution
for
a
new
module
in
our
standard
library
for
parsing
ip
addresses
and
cider
blocks.
So
that's
all
there
to
go.
It's
documented
go
check
that
out
super
cool,
appreciate
the
contribution
and
then,
as
alongside
that
that
same
group
implemented
very
small
but
rather
powerful
new
feature
in
the
assert
modules.
C
This
try
to
feature
which
allows
you
to
attempt
to
do
something
so
like
parson,
json
and
you're,
not
sure
whether
or
not
it's
going
to
succeed,
and
you
don't
want
it
to
be
a
failure.
If
it
fails,
you
don't
want
it
to
end
your
ytt
execution.
You
just
want
to
learn
about
that.
Oh,
there
is
an
error,
and
maybe
you
try
something
else
differently
now
you
can
do
that
with
try
to
it's
great
for
helping
out.
If
you
want
to
write
tests
where
you
have
functions
or
return
errors,
also,
there's
documentation
there
about
that.
C
Yeah,
this
one's
also
contributor
led
as
well
as
great
we've,
got
a
a
whole
new
builder
in
cable.
Now
right,
because
k
build,
helps
you
build
container
images
and
resolve
them
to
digests,
and
you
plug
in
many
of
your
favorite
tools
to
do
the
actual
container
image
building.
Now
you
can
use
bazel,
which
is
a
really
well
known,
commonly
used
general
purpose
build
tool.
The
integration
is
there
so
go
check
that
out.
C
We
do
have
a
breaking
change
in
the
the
body
of
an
annotation
with
this
release,
where
we
used
to
refer
to
something
called
metas
and
now
we're
using
a
term
which
we
feel
is
much
more
intention
revealing
origins
where
the
information
contained
within
the
origin
annotation
tells
you
from.
Where
did
this
container
image
come
from?
So
if
it's
built
from
source,
you
get
to
see
the
get
repo.
C
D
D
It
basically
tells
you
the
flow
between
image
package
and
each
of
the
registries
you're
interacting
with
and
and
it
helps
you
narrow
down.
Potentially,
you
know
an
issue
in
that
flow
between
image
package
and
a
specific
registry.
So
it
shows
all
the
http
course
being
made
it
redacts
the
sensitive
information,
thanks
for
nicholas,
stimulate
for
adding
that
for
folk
using
you
know,
image
package
as
a
library,
we've
bumped
golang
to
1.17
and
also
there's
a
bug
fix.
D
So
if
you're
using
windows
and
using
image
package
on
windows,
it
now
loads,
the
roots
d8
store.
So
if
you're
using
tls,
you
know
https
on
a
registry
and
it
was
signed
by
a
trusted
authority,
then
it
now
is
able
to
verify
that
certificate
and
those
docs
in
terms
of
if
you
want
to
also
use
your
own
custom
ca
and
also
be
able
to
load
the
root.
Ca
store
refer
to
the
docs
and
how
to
do
that
for
windows,
specifically.
D
E
F
B
B
A
E
E
H
Well,
I'm
you
want
to
how
much
you
want
to
bet.
We
were
going
to
say
different
things
or
that
anyways.
I
was
going
to
call
out
that
we
were
even
one
step
closer
to
moving
our
image
repository
to
the
the
github
container
registry
and
that
that
pull
request
is,
you
know,
poised
to
be
merged
in
the
near
future
and
then
we'll
we'll
start
cutting
releases
that
are
stored
on
github
container
registry.
C
H
No,
I
don't
that's
a
good
question.
We
probably
should
move
them
consistently.
I
know
like
after
we
move
cap
controller.
The
next
thing
is
to
move
secret
gen
controller.
I
would
imagine
we'll
just
move
everything
to
be
consistent.
I
think
that's
part
of
the
vision
is
to
get
rid
of
the
docker
hub
account
management
eventually,
but
that's
not
necessarily.
G
I'll
just
add
into
that
neil
has
or
worked
on
a
quick
story
for
basically
removing
proxy
credentials
that
were
showing
up
in
some
cap
controller
logs.
So
we
had
a
small
issue
with
just
basically
that
we
would
actually
like
log
the
proxy
in
and
of
itself,
and
that
basically
did
not
account
for
the
fact
that
you
know
there
can
be
credentials
actually
as
part
of
that
proxy
format
that
were
included
in
those
logs.
So
there's
been
a
quick
pr.
That's
been
put
in
to
just
basically
remove
that
information.
A
B
Yeah,
this
topic
came
up
from
some
conversation.
I
had
with
some
people
that
might
be
here,
but
we
talked
about
how
it
can
be
challenging
to
get
docs
prs
to
land,
probably
due
to
a
number
of
things.
So
maybe
maybe
it's
worth
elaborating
on
what?
What
are
the
problems
that
we
are
facing?
Maybe
before
we
try
to
solve
it?
C
H
I
think
stuff
can
linger
right,
so
it's
like
you
can
put
like,
because
we
don't
have
deadlines.
You
could
say
so
right
like
if
you
go.
Look
at
the
carvill
website
right
now,
there's
like
quite
a
number
of
open
pr's.
Some
of
them
are,
are
pretty
old.
Some
of
them
are
from
this
week
and
the
in
in
none
of
those
cases.
Is
it
really
clear
like
right?
H
D
Yeah,
that's
that's
been
my
experience
with
an
image
package
which
is
you
know
the
last
two
things
I
talked
about
the
debug
flag,
the
windows
bug
each
of
them
as
part
of
the
stories
working
on
them.
We
deemed
it
necessary
to
add
documentation,
so
the
actual
code
change
pr
was
approved
by
image
package
approver.
D
Similarly,
when
we
raised
a
pr
for
the
carville
documentation
and
kavel
repo,
the
person
who
approved
it
was
also
the
you
know,
image
package
approver.
So
that's
how
the
model
that
we,
that
you
know
we
used
and
it
seemed
to
work
well,
meaning
that
it
got
merged
before
the
release.
So
we
could
link
the
release,
notes
to
the
documentation.
C
So
I've
heard
kind
of
two
positions
on
that
one
is
put
it
in
draft
and
then,
when
you're
ready
to
go,
put
it
in
draft
so
that
it
doesn't
get
merged
accidentally
ahead
of
time
and
then,
when
you're
ready
to
go,
pull
it
out
of
draft
and
have
it
merged
like
we
have
that
be
part
of
the
release
process.
So
there's
some
kind
of
approval
before
that
moment
and
then
the
other
is
well.
If
you
put
a
version
caveat
in
the
docs,
then
you
can
merge
at
any
time.
C
And
then
to
complicate
things,
we
actually
had
a
proposal
to
talk
about
a
way
of
using
versioned
docs
went
through
a
whole
process,
approved
the
proposal,
but
there's
work
to
to
be
done
to
like
make
that
a
thing,
and
we
haven't
done
that
work.
So
there's
sort
of
some
ambiguity
around.
How
do
we
handle
versions.
F
F
B
B
B
C
A
I've
been
told
that
that
that's
kind
of
in
the
works-
and
I
think
the
dark
writer
would
be
under
my
team,
like
under
jonas's
team,
because
it
seems
like
a
lot
of
the
dark
writers
are
on
the
cet
team.
So
I
think
it's
dap
budget,
but
under
us
or
some
something
weird
like
that.
But
I
know
that
he
has
talked
to
pulkit
and
others,
and
I
think
there
is
approval.
B
Cool
check
and
done
cool
well
for
now.
I
think,
there's
there's
some
level
of
acceptance.
Writing
docs
are
challenging,
but
there
is
a
next
step
here
is.
Could
we
could
we
find
someone
who's
more
dedicated,
more
experienced
here,
so
the
next
one
I
had?
I
think
it's
along
the
lines
of
kind
of
one.
So
there's
like
two
ones
here.
One
is
a
pr
I
guess
done
and
then
the
other
one
is
when
it's
done.
When
do
we
merge
them?
So
maybe
we'll
start
with.
When
is
a
pr
done.
H
You
know
all
voice,
I
agree
with
it
enough
dimitri
who's,
not
here,
and
I
I
agree
with
it
enough
to
repeat
it
said.
Basically,
even
bad
docs
are
better
than
missing
docs
and
so
the
the
argument
is
like
you
know,
we
should
merge
quickly
and
then
go
ahead
and
revise,
but
that
that
we
might
be
lingering
too
long
in
the
like.
B
C
C
H
B
Cool
and
then,
as
for
the
the
other
one,
when
do
we
merge
them?
I
think
the
couple
things
were
mentioned
using
the
draft
to
signal
a
pr
is
not
yet
ready
to
merge.
I
think
that's
a
great
strategy.
The
version
doc
proposal
is
probably
like
the
real
long-term
solution.
It's
not
yet
prioritized,
but
is.
Is
there
anything
else
here
that
folks
want
to
share.
C
Yeah
I
I
kind
of
dug
what
neil
was
sharing
that
like
you
could.
Even
just
I
mean
especially
if
you're
putting
inversion
caveats
around
stuff,
then
it's
that
helps
it
from
being
in
some
way
ambiguous
and
so
then
there's
no
timing.
And
so
then
you
just
do
it
it's
easier
to
not
miss,
because
if
you
write
it
and
you're
like
hey,
that's
good
enough,
it's
got
the
virtual
cowbetch
merchant
you're
not
trying
to
remember
to
do
that
later.
F
A
C
A
A
H
I
can
talk
through
that
real
quick.
Actually,
do
you
mind
if
I,
if
I
share
a
screen,
so
that
I
think
that's
the
pull
request
link
is
in
the
minutes,
and
I
wanted
to
not
in
great
detail
but
briefly
like
at
a
table
of
contents
level,
the
the
contents
of
this
document.
It
is
it's
under
this
shared
docs.
I
honestly,
I
don't
know
how
to
navigate
to
this
page
from
our
actual
home
page,
but
I
do
know
how
to
type
shared
docs
latest.
H
Maybe
we
need
to
link
anyways
the
this.
I
everyone
on
the
team
has
been
through
at
least
one
discussion
of
this
previously
and
but
you
know,
if
someone
is
actually
watching
this
recording
first
of
all,
hi,
I'm
surprised,
but,
second
of
all,
maybe
you
care
what's
what's
on
here,
that
you
know,
there's
information
about
how
to
name
things,
how
to
structure
the
code
and
like
we
have
some
some
opinions
about
when
to
be
dry
and
when
not
to
be
a
little
bit
of
planning.
There's
in
some
ways.
H
B
B
I
have
I,
I
think,
the
last
question
which
today
we've
had
some
really
great
discussions.
At
times
I
felt
that
we've
hit
the
discussion
part
of
this
meeting
and
haven't
had
time
or
haven't,
had
things
that
we
want
to
chat
about.
A
quick
search
of
our
backlog
tells
me
of
our
cumulative
backlog.
Tells
me
we
have
more
than
120
issues
with
the
discussion
label.
What,
if
we
used
this
time
to
start
slowly
going
through
those
and
like
having
the
discussion
to
clarify
what
we
want?
Some
of
these
issues
to
be.
H
So
I
guess
I'm
curious
what
the
expectation
would
be.
Would
it
be
like,
and
today
we're
we're
just
talking
about
ytt
issues
you
can
drop.
If
that's
not
going
to
be
helpful
for
you
or
would
it
be
like
you
know
today
we're
going
to
do
one
from
ytt
one
from
cap
controller
and
the
point
is,
you
know,
mesh
a
little.
B
Yeah,
that's
a
good
point.
I
I
guess
I
just
added
a
note
here
that
we'd
want
to
ensure
the
folks
in
the
meeting.
Are
the
quote
unquote
right
folks
for
the
discussion-
and
I
do
agree,
probably
like
blocking
them
together
by
some
sort
of
domain
or
some
interest
would
probably
be
more
effective
than
just
like
a
grab
bag
of
things.
So
so
yeah,
maybe
maybe
there's
a
little
more
preparation
here.
That's
needed
to
make
sure
that
we
invite
you
know
any
any
of
the
right
people,
but
something
something
to
consider.
D
Yeah
I'd
be
willing
to
try
it
out,
but
I'd
be
skeptical
like
mainly
because
I'm
wondering
if
we
have
all
the
right
stakeholders
as
well,
so
a
lot
of
these
issues,
at
least
when
which
package
discussions
came
from
outside
folk.
You
know
who
are
using
the
tool
and
it
might
be
two
or
three
outside
folk.