►
From YouTube: Cartographer Office Hours - Dec. 13th, 2021
Description
00:00 Intro and updates: Office Hours paused for the holidays, resuming on Jan 10th
00:52 Updates on RFC process from other OSS projects
05:36 RFC 12: Discoverable Input Fields
19:37 Reusable templates across workload/deliverable
A
A
Okay
first
thing
will
be
the
note
taking
role.
I
don't
know
if
anyone
wants
to
volunteer
or
want
me
to
trigger
the
will
of
names.
A
A
I've
been
checking
some
well
several
cncf
projects,
their
contributing
guidelines,
governance,
docs
and
all
that
the
rfc
process
is
not
especially
widespread.
It's
interesting
to
see
very
large
projects
that
leave
a
lot
of
the
criteria
to
use
what
is
a
large
change
to
the
contributor
or
just
to
ask
a
question
in
the
slack
channel.
That's
it
so
it's
interesting
to
see
that
that
we
have
an
receive
process.
A
They
have
also
rfc
process,
and
here
they
have
some
criteria
to
see
if
the
the
change
you're
proposing
actually
fits
into
the
rfc
process,
features
process
changes
anything
that
changed
the
public
api
also
is
considered
something
that
falls
into
rfc
criteria
and
it's
interesting
because
I
I
also
explore
some
projects
outside
the
cncf
umbrella.
For
example,
react.
A
They
also
have
a
rfc
process
in
place
and
again
the
word
feature
is
there
so
kind
of
the
common
thing
between
these
processes
is
that
if
you
are
planning
to
introduce
a
new
feature
that
also
changes
the
public
api,
that's
something
that
goes
under
the
rfc
process,
also
well
removing
features
and
yeah,
for
example,
for
react,
introducing
introduction
of
features
or
some
other
functionality
that
involve
multiple
languages.
A
A
Okay,
before.
A
C
A
With
the
number
the
rs
the
process
issue,
with
earnings
from
other
projects,
let's
say.
D
C
C
A
C
A
A
Cool
anything
else
or
we
can
move
to
the
next
item.
B
Yeah
yeah:
this
has
been
hanging
out
for
a
while
and.
B
B
If,
if
there
isn't
a
sensible
default,
just
align
it
and
expect
that
the
workload
will
provide
it
or
the
supply
chain
will
provide
it,
and
while
josh
thought
that
that
logic
made
sense,
one
of
the
things
that
we
lose
is
well.
The
necessary
parameters
are
were
previously
self-documented.
You
can
just
go
and
see
at
the
top
of
the
spec,
like
here
all
the
parameters
that
are
required
and
instead
of
the
time.
Well,
you
know
this.
This
is
much
more
sensible
and
also
much
more
comprehensive.
B
B
I've
put
an
example
here,
that's
kind
of
like
a
nested
structure.
It
could
also
just
be
a
flat
structure,
so
every
place
where
you
see
you
know
where
you
see
it
at
the
top,
the
template.
It
says
service
account,
name,
workload.spec.service
account
name.
Maybe
we
just
put
that
entire
string
down
in
expected
inputs
right
now.
I've
got
a
nested
structure,
but
I'm
not
tied
to
that
yeah.
Pretty
straightforward.
C
So
I
would
like
to
see
the
defaults
on
ones
that
you
can
supply
alternatives,
so
parameters
that
I
can
fulfill
is
more
useful
than
parameters
that
are
required
all
right.
So
if
they
have
defaults
if,
but
they
can
be
overridden
I'd
like
to
know
about
them
as
well
and
I'd
like
to
know
what
they
default
to
so
I'd
like
to
see
that
added
does
that
make
sense.
B
Isn't
yeah?
Is
there
such
a
thing
now.
B
C
E
B
B
So
that's
the
value
there.
The
second,
the
second
order
value
is
that
then,
when
you
have
the
supply
chains,
reading
these
and
putting
status
on
on
a
supply
chain
that
you
can
parse
this
easy
easy
list
instead
of
having
to
parse
each
individual
template,
it
has
to
be
done
at
some
point.
C
E
C
Really
quite
straightforward
code
right,
so
I
definitely
want
to
see
it
on
supply
chain.
I
didn't
realize
this
was
on
the
template
and
I
propose
that
when
you're
putting
together
the
supply
chain,
you
throw
in
the
templates,
you
want,
you
apply
it
and
you
go.
Oh
now,
I've
got
my
list
of
all
of
the
parameters
I
might
want
to
override
or
fulfill,
and
the
documentation
is
done
there
where
it
like,
where
I
think
it'd
be
most
useful
to
me
as
a
supply
chain.
C
C
C
And
then
the
operator
has
a
little
bit
of
work
to
do.
I
think
that's
what
josh
is
probably
saying
right.
The
operator
has
a
little
bit
of
work
to
do
when
he
goes
to
consume.
He
she
goes
to
consume
this.
They
say:
what's
the
what's
the
parameters,
I
need
to
fulfill
on
this
and
I
feel
the
most
valuable
place
to
document
that
is
in
the
supply
chain.
B
So,
to
be
to
be
clear
or
to
clarify
over
the
top
summary
says,
templates
and
supply
chains
should
report
in
their
status.
What
input
fields
are
expected
from
workload,
so
this
is
no
way
is
meant
to
exclude
supply
chains.
Doing
that,
and
I
can
certainly
write
up
an
example
of
like
here's,
how
a
supply
chain
would
do
it.
B
I
think
that
so
I
then
have
two
questions,
because
one
question
that
I
was
coming
in
with-
and
the
reason
I
put
in
the
example-
was:
what
actually
should
it
look
like,
and
what
should
that
structure
be,
because
I'm
not
totally
sure
about
that
nested
structure
and
the
now
I
have
a
second
question
of
arf
are
other
devs
saying
that
they
think,
including
this.
B
C
We
start
with
supply
chain
personally
yeah,
that's
what
I'm
suggesting
I'm
suggesting
start
with
supply
chain
and
if
anyone
ever
says
on
the
template
says
they'd
really
like
to
see
it
when
they
apply
it,
then
let's
do
that
work,
but
where
huge
value
comes
into
my
mind
is
in
the
supply
chain.
It
will
make.
It
also
help
I'm
sure
I'm
totally
hypothesizing,
but
I
have
high
confidence
in
this
hypothesis
that
anyone
trying
to
build
visualization
or
assistive
tools
who
would
find
the
one
on
the
supply
chain
very
valuable.
C
I
don't
underscore
that
yeah
yeah
looking,
I
mean
yeah,
and
I
definitely
want
to
see
the
default
values.
I
didn't
even
think
beyond
parameters.
All
right,
I
think
you
might
be.
I
think
it
might
be
easier
if
we
you
were
talking
about
the
structure,
I
think
the
structure
could
just
be
exposed
as
keys
like
the
full
key
that
you
would
normally
use
in
a
in
a
template
style
template
a
dollar
parens
template
that
key
would
probably
be
them
more
than
adequate.
C
Flattened,
like
you,
suggested,
with
the
the
keys
being
like
spec
dot.
That's
all
right,
not
spec,
dot,
workload,
dot,
something
or
other
nice.
C
C
C
And
input
all
right.
B
Yeah
so
there's
one
thing
in
terms
of.
B
The
status
that
we
have
here
talks
to
sources.
I
guess
that
goes
away
like
because
the
supply
chain
splicer
need
not
specify
to
someone
to
the
workload
author,
like
here's,
here's
what
values
I'm
passing
between,
so
we're
just
looking
at
a
list
of
the
workload
essentially
metadata,
spec
params.
C
C
And
then
I'll
be
really
curious
to
see
if
we'd
like
it
on
workloads
and
deliveries,
deliverables.
B
Early
early
validation
that
the
first,
like
the
first
thing
through
before
before,
starting
to
stamp,
I
think
I
can
see
if
you've
provided
all
those
values.
I
think.
B
C
Don't
think
it's
the
provided
values
that,
like
I
know
that
we
say
hey,
we
didn't
get
this
value,
I'm
also
not
sure
if
we
list
all
of
the
items
when
we
mess.
So
when
a
workload
misses
like
there's,
five
params
right
and
three
of
them
must
be
provided.
They
don't
have
defaults
all
right
and
if
you
missed
the
first
one,
I'm
not
sure
if
we
bothered
to
list
all
three.
C
F
A
C
Okay,
so
this
one
is
simply
that
those
params
we
were
just
talking
about
the
ones
that
come
from
the
either
the
blueprint,
sorry,
the
workload
or
the
deliverable,
if
I'm
writing
a
template
that
is
capable
of
doing
something
that
would
work
just
as
well
in
a
delivery
as
it
would
in
a
supply
chain.
F
B
C
Yeah
but
I
wouldn't
document
the
ability
to
reference
workload
and
supply
chain.
I
would
just
expect
people
to
reference
the
owner,
and
I
mean
we
don't
have
backward
compellability
concerns
at
this
moment,
but
I
know
people
already
using
it.
So
in
this
case
I'm
just
like:
let's
be
kind,
let's
just
use
an
alias.
C
C
C
Or
is
that
I
mean
it
doesn't
fix
anything
right
because
I
bet
when
you
make
the
other.
I
bet
if
you
made
the
other
like
if
you
made
a
template
and
you
went
oh,
this
only
works
with
supply
chains
because
it
references
workload,
oh
and
they're,
going
to
need
it
over
there
on
delivery.
I'm
pretty
sure
you
would
create
that
template
by
copying
it
renaming
the
the
one
ref
and
then
renaming
your
template
and
completely
ignore
the
same
problem,
which
is
oh.
C
B
I
mean:
would
we
get
a
name
collision
because
it's
totally
mediated
by
cartographer?
So
if
you
have
a
yeah,
if
you
have
a
workload
and
a
deliverable
in
the
same
name,
space
with
the
same
name,
the
supply
chain,
reconciler
is
only
going
to
look
for
the
workload
and
the
the
delivery.
C
C
Add
the
ability,
yeah
or
consider
it
and,
however
they're
architecting
their
end.
To
end
I
mean
the
most
common
cause
of
this
sort
of
scenario
is
that
you
would
name
your
delivery,
the
same
as
your
workload,
all
right,
instead
of
maybe
just
calling
it
that
thing's
delivery
or
realizing
that
you
would
have
this
problem,
I
mean
again,
it
doesn't
apply
to
the
story
either
way.
You'd
have
to
think
to
yourself.
I
need
to
say
something
here.
C
So
I
think
the
action
item
there
is
to
add
a
thing
to
make
sure
that
we
document
making
reusable
templates
and
the
the
risk
that
comes
with
that.
A
A
B
Wanted
to
mention
you
said
that
the
first
meeting
is
going
to
be
the
second
week
of
the
year.
I
wonder
because
of
daniel
and
james
schedules,
if
we
should
make
sure
to
have
a
meeting
the
first
week
of
the
year.