►
From YouTube: Velero Community Meeting - Dec 10, 2019
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
Hi
everyone
and
welcome
to
this
week's
Valero
community
meeting
slash
open
discussion.
We've
got
the
full
staff
here
today
and
we
get
a
bunch
of
amazing
community
members.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
for
joining
I'll
be
sharing
my
screen,
so
we
can
go
through
some
of
the
status
updates.
If
you
have
any
questions,
please
just
unmute
yourself
and
speak
if
you
can't
if
your
mic
is
broken
or
at
a
place
that
doesn't
work
for
you,
please
just
type
in
the
chat,
and
we
will
be
more
than
happy
to
discuss
those
things
with
you.
A
B
Yeah
so
follow
up
to
our
little
impromptu
meeting
on
the
CSI
integration
last
week.
I
believe
I've
got
all
the
feedback
we
got
from
our
meeting
last
week
integrated
into
the
document
yesterday,
I
included
some
of
the
diagrams
for
each
of
the
plugins
and
I
think
we're
at
a
point
where
I'm
I'm
ready
to
call
the
document
pretty
well
done.
B
So,
hopefully,
I
can
get
some
tests
committed
this
week
and
next
week
to
help
get
that
get
those
tests
more
populated.
Since
some
of
the
changes
that
went
in
for
beta
for
Valero
itself
we're
gonna
move
over
to
github
actions
instead
of
Travis
I've
got
an
issue
in
the
backlog
for
that
and
I
plan.
To
do
some
investigation
on
that
today
there
may
be
some
changes
to
the
to
how
we
do
builds
since
we
have
a
build
container
image
and
I
think
github
actions.
B
A
B
That
correct
right,
that's
correct
part
and
part
of
that
is
to
kind
of
get
on
get
on
par
with
some
of
the
other
Tom
zoo,
open
source
projects.
Although
other
teams
have
picked
circle
CI,
a
lot
of
people
are
just
leaving.
Travis
Travis
is
kind
of
stagnated
and
they're.
Also,
recent
changes
have
been
kind
of
hostile
towards
open
source
projects.
The
tansu
organization
is
fine,
but
for
github
organizations
with
mixed
private
and
public
repos.
B
You
may
be
in
for
a
surprise
with
how
they're
doing
billing
and
you
may
suddenly
find
that
you
can't
build
anymore,
so
we're
we're
moving
to
this
new
reply
form.
We
looked
at
it
when
it
was
in
beta,
but
because
it
was
in
beta,
we
decided.
Let's
not
it's
not
test-drive
this
for
them
and
I
think
I
haven't
looked
at
it,
but
I
think
Sam
foo
on
our
octant
team
has
moved
over
to
github
actions.
B
I
know
he
was
talking
to
their
team
at
cube
con,
but
I
want
to
pick
his
brains
on
two
on
this
but
yeah,
but
the
plan
is
move
over
to
github
actions
be
done
with
it.
We
will
not
have
Travis
CI,
all
of
our
CI
will
be
done
here
and
I.
Don't
know
if
will
do
and
end
tests
here.
If
we
get
to
the
point
where
we're
like
building
kind
clusters
and
running
bolero
in
it
that
I
think
Sam
has
done
some
investigation
there.
B
But
when
that
point
comes
well,
we'll
ask
okay
awesome
and
then
my
last
thing
was
just
a
just
kind
of
to
remind
folks
that
weren't
on
the
call
last
week,
I
saw
open
ups
that
adopted
this,
but
you
can
add
the
Valero
plug
in
github
topic
to
your
repo,
and
that
will
you'll
appear
on
that
github
topic.
This
is
a
dynamic
list
that
you'll
get
added
to.
B
A
B
Right,
yeah-
and
this
doesn't
in
this-
like-
we
have
a
look
at
a
supported
list
of
plugins
in
our
documentation
with
like
jumping
off
pointing
to
other
people's
documentation,
but
that
makes
us
kind
of
a
blocker.
So
this
we
can.
You
rely
on
github
infrastructure
and
it's
a
little
bit
more
rich,
and
this
is
something
we
stole
from
the
octan
team.
They
they
use
that
for
discovery
of
aachen,
plugins
so
yep.
B
A
B
Yeah
I
think
I
think
we'll
be
mad
and
sad
and
I
think
it's
very
much
like
a
yeah
like
Carly
I,
said
they'll
show
up
I
think
this
is
equivalent
to
like
a
hashtag
on
social
media.
It
stands
to
reason
that
could
be.
It
could
be
misused,
yeah.
So
there's
nothing.
We
can
do
to
remove
it
right.
Yeah,
yeah
I
think
we
might
be
able
to
go
to
github
and
say
hey.
B
Somebody
is
using
this
maliciously
if
it's
like
I,
don't
know
if
we
can
say
hey
like
we
don't
like
that
that
that
thing
that
Jonas
is
hovering
over
that
curate.
This
topic,
we,
the
Valero
developers,
can't
use
the
curate
this
topic,
because
that
adds
like
metadata
and
like
more
info
to
it.
But
community
members
are
welcome
to
do
that,
like
descriptions
and
images
and
links,
but
I
think
that's
separate
from
somebody.
I,
don't
know
adding
adding
velaro
plug
into
something
completely
unrelated
to
you.
Valero
and
kubernetes
I.
B
D
B
When
I
was
playing
with
it
in
in
the
beta
yeah,
we
did
they,
they
had
build
status
and
things
like
that.
I
need
to
review
the
documentation.
Some
more
and
like
I,
said
I.
Think
it's
either
it's
one
of
octants
on
a
buoy
or
contour
uses
it
already
so
I'm
gonna
I
was
gonna.
Take
a
look
at
theirs.
Excuse
me,
set
up
before
I,
dug
too
deep
into
just
reading
their
dock
to
github
action
documentation.
So
once
I
have
once
I'm
armed
with
that
information,
I
was
gonna
toss
it
in
the
issue.
E
D
B
From
what
I
saw
when
I
was
playing
with
it
like
on
my
private
repos
during
the
beta
it,
it
fed
quite
a
bit
of
rich
data
in
during
the
beta.
They
were
actually
like
changing
the
configuration
around
pretty
late
in
the
process.
So
that
was
part
of
why
I
wasn't
like
hey,
let's
move
to
it
during
the
beta
but
I
think
in
terms
of
actually
reporting
statuses
and
and
filtering
into
the
updates
at
the
bottom
of
a
PR
they're,
using
a
lot
of
those
hooks
that
they
that
other
CI
systems
already
use.
D
F
G
F
B
B
C
B
C
Then
I
guess,
following
up
to
that
I
mean
we
have
a
you
know
we
have
a
PR
and
to
add
PowerPC,
docker
builds
and
folks
have
asked
for
arm.
Docker
builds
as
well,
so
it
would,
you
know,
would
be
nice
if,
if
we're
able
to
do
that
on
get
up
actions,
I
would
imagine
that
we
can
but
be
good
thing
to
confirm.
A
G
Okay,
so
the
helm
charts
for
the
little
has
been
updated
with
instructions
for
Valera
1.2.
It
mainly
the
values
file
that
the
yellow
file
has.
The
examples
commented
out
examples
of
how
to
fill
out
that
fire,
especially
how
to
add
plugins
just
by
re
the
path
to
the
container
images
right
there
on
that
pile.
G
G
And
no
other,
so
my
next
book
bullets
is
another
helm
related
thing.
So
for
version
3.0
of
helm,
they
want
the
charge
to
be
moved
to
a
different
repository.
So
this
is
something
we
need
to
think
about.
Do
we
add
a
folder?
Do
we
add
a
folder
Valera?
Do
we
open
a
new
repository
on
one
tenzou
organization
because
in
anyway
one
one
reason
they
want
to
do?
That
is
it's
written
in
that
description?
It's
a!
It's
really
high
churn
that
repository
so
I.
Had
the
experience
of
I
submitted
a
PR
very
quickly.
H
B
Yep
makes
sense
to
me,
just
out
of
curiosity
is
is:
is
it
an
option
to
include
like
a
charts
subdirectory
in
the
Valero
repo
yeah.
H
H
One
way
of
doing
it
I
mean
so
the
repositories
are
separate
from
where
it
is
in
github.
So
as
long
as
there's
some
CI
scrape
that
takes
that
packages
it
and
then
pushes
it
up
to
repository,
oh
I
see
so
you
have
to
have
a
separate
repository
anyway
yeah.
So
we
have
to
set
up
a
bucket
somewhere
or
we
can
serve
it
from
github
pages
or
something
like
that.
But
we'd
have
to
figure
that
out.
A
H
A
Well,
Harbor
is
a
CNC
iPhone
project,
right,
yeah
and
ignite
separately
yeah,
but
yeah.
We
we
can
definitely
have
the
we
could
have.
The
hound
charts
be
under
one
repository
on
the
plans
to
the
the
VM
or
tansy
org,
and
then
we
could
actually
have
neckla
v
build
out
pages
for
each
project
because
they
would
have
some
directories
right.
So
we
could
have
helmed
by
Rho
dot.
Io
could
then
host
be
at
the
helm,
charts
for
Valero,
for
instance,
and
then
we
have
how
helm
dot
don't.
H
I
will
say
it
will
be
slightly
easier
to
have
things
in
one
repository
cuz,
then,
when
we
go
and
add
it
to
the
home
hub.
We
just
had
one
repository
rabbet
in
multiple
repositories,
but
I
mean
I.
Don't
think,
that's
a
huge
problem
that
it
probably
is
a
little
bit
nicer
to
have
one
repository.
Whatever
works
super.
H
C
H
G
H
G
G
B
G
Yes,
we
have
a
bunch
of
small
and
not
so
small
issues
that
pertain
to
the
flow
of
solar
installation
and
I'm,
putting
together
proposal
that
AB
nari
not
necessarily
coming
up
with
new
ideas,
but
just
gathering
ideas
that
I
think
are
the
the
best
idea
is
based
on
my
bias,
of
course,
I
hope
you
have
some
documented
sure
tomorrow,
but
after
Brad
just
to
share.
What's
what
I've
been
thinking
there,
there
has
been
a
talk
about
there
bunch
of
separate
things
that
I'm
putting
together
in
this
document.
G
So
one
thing
is
about
having
a
pillar
status
like
a
Valera
service
terrorists.
In
that
something
excuse
me
that
I'm
going
to
propose,
we
we
add,
and
what
I
would
like
to
have
two
is
well.
I
would
like
to
propose
the
first
to
have
the
ability
to
create
two
STOVL
air
without
the
backups
are
locations.
We've
talked
about
this
before
and
I
think
that
is
good.
That
could
be
reasonable,
because
we
could
reasonably
think
that
there
would
be
different
workflows.
G
For
example,
a
person
who
we
missed
our
Valero
might
not
might
have
certain
permissions
that
the
person
who's
going
to
create
a
backup,
that's
enough
and
and
the
passion
is
well
so,
which
one
of
these
two
si
operators
will
have
the
permission
to
create
a
backup
start
location
may
will
be
the
same
person.
That
will
create
the
background.
So
if
we
do
that,
we
could
have
make
Assad.
Valero
has
already
in
not
ready
stories
which
would
necessitate
as
having
that
stories
feature
for
the.
G
So,
if
seville
arrow
is
in
the
naan,
bread
is
if,
if
polar,
doesn't
have
any
backups
our
location,
they
would
be
in
an
honorary
status
and
then
like.
There
is
a
comments
in
one
of
the
tickets
that
Steve
suggested.
So
it's
not
my
idea
but
I
like
the
idea
of
making
this,
so
the
validation
for
backups
are
done,
doing,
backup
creation
instead
of
doing
other
startup,
and
if
we,
when
we,
which
is
concerning
to
me
in
terms
of
performance,
but
then
we
also
even
sure,
are
going
to
make
backups
concurrence.
G
In
that
case,
I
wouldn't
be
so
concerned.
So
that's
where
my
head
is
that
so
far,
and
then
there
is
a
whole
separate
thing
with
the
little
plugin
and
provider
is
I,
have
a
very
strong
opinion
on
how
we
could
change
that,
to
make
it
more
understandable
and
I
have
to
write
that
out
for
for
our
to
make
sense
to
other
people.
G
A
Have
a
question
so
if
we
split
up
and
I
think
we
discussed
this
at
a
at
a
previous
community
call,
but
if
we
split
up
install
and
configure
it
makes
it
easier
for
people
to
install
it
and
just
to
have
it
install
and
then
they
can
configure,
as
I
said
it
might
be.
Different
people
with
different
permissions
right
would.
A
G
I
A
G
A
C
Right,
yeah,
just
a
couple
of
updates,
so
we
finalized
planning
for
the
1.3
release
last
week.
So
I've
got
a
link
here
just
to
the
milestone
and
github.
So
there
are
a
couple
of
different
ways
that
you
can
view
this,
but
this
is
kind
of
the
github
native
way.
So
just
looking
at
the
1.3
milestone
looks
like
we've
got
about
19
issues
in
there
right
now.
The
headline
issues
are
the
or
the
headline
features
for
this
release
are
going
to
be
the
two
items
that
Nolan
and
Carly
SIA
already
talked
about.
C
So
first
of
all,
CSI
snapshot
integration,
so
continuing
to
advance
that
and
then
second
of
all
working
on
that
install
and
configure
X.
So
those
will
be
the
top
priority
items
and
then,
beyond
that
we
have
a
collection
of
some
smaller
features,
a
little
bit
of
design
work
on
those
and
a
collection
of
bugs
as
well
so
we're
you
know,
we're
certainly
still
open
to
contributions
from
from
other
folks
as
well.
C
So
if
there
are
other
items
and
the
backlog
that
we
haven't
moved
into
1.3,
but
that
you're
interested
in
working
on
certainly
don't
consider
the
scope
to
be
a
blocker
for
that
and
so
we're.
You
know
as
far
as
timeline
for
the
1.3
release,
I
think,
given
that
we're
sort
of
straddling
the
end
of
the
year
this
will
this
release
will
probably
have
a
slightly
longer
cycle
than
some
of
our
other
ones.
C
A
C
31St
or
something
like
that
got
it
yeah
I
mean
this.
This
still
gives
us
a
full
three
months
once
we
come
back
from
the
end
of
your
holidays,
so
pretty
comfortable
with
it,
but
but
obviously
yeah
we'll
keep
an
eye
on.
It
sounds
good,
so
yeah
that
covers
the
planning
and
then
yesterday
I
was
we
have
a
bug.
That's
in
the
1.3
scope
around
the
potential
memory
leak.
This
was
reported
by
some
of
our
colleagues
from
EMC,
so
I
started.
Digging
into
this
haven't,
haven't
totally
tracked
it
down.
C
It
appears
to
be
related
to
some
of
the
code
that
we
have
for
running
hooks,
so
pre
and
post
hooks
I
as
far
as
I
can
tell
it's
not
being
caused
by
Valero
code
but
potentially
by
some
of
the
libraries
were
using
for
for
executing
those
hooks.
So
I
need
to
do
some
more
digging
here,
but
continuing
to
make
progress
on
this,
and
then
you
know
if
I
get
through
this
or
or
if
I
need
a
break.
I'll
probably
pick
up
some
of
the
other
bugs
or
smaller
features
that
we
have
in
the
backlog.
D
Question
sorry,
other
questions
is
that
memory
leak
on
how
long
was
the
part
running
or
how?
D
How
quickly
does
the
memory
rise,
because,
if
I'm
looking
at
the
graph,
yes
there's
an
increase
but
once
the
after
the
increase,
its
kind
of
sticks
around
there,
238
megabytes
I
think
that's
because
it'll
limit
right
there's
a
limit
on
the
pod.
But
if
there's
a
limit
you
should
see
like
a
drop
and
then
an
increase
right.
D
But
I
would
so
I
expected
if
it
hit
a
limit,
it
would
be
killed,
so
the
consumption
would
drop
to
zero
and
then
you
would
see
like
sawtooth
thought,
of
a
thing
if
they
increases
drastic,
so
I'm
just
curious,
yeah.
H
C
D
D
H
H
This
user
is,
is
kind
of
generating
using
blur
in
store
a
manifest
and
then
passing
it
to
keep
CTO
apply,
and
then
they
get
a
bunch
of
errors
based
on
that
validation
that
happens,
and
so,
if
you
apply
it
with
validate
force,
which
is
kind
of
similar
to
what
bolero
install
is
doing
it
installs
fine
and
things
actually
work
and
the
schema
works.
Fine!
It's
it's
simply!
H
If
you,
if
you
have
this
validation,
they're
happening
in
with
keep
secure,
that's
when
the
issue
happens
and
specifically
for
pre
114
clusters,
so
I,
don't
think
I
had
a
look
if
it
makes
sense
for
Valero
to
do
that,
client-side,
validation
and
I.
Don't
think
it
does
I'm,
not
sure
how
keep
CTO
is
doing
that
specifically,
and
this
server
will
do
its
own
validation
anyway.
So
any
actual
incorrect
errors
will
actually
be
reported
back
with
Valero
install.
So
it
seems
like
it
might
just
be.
H
C
C
H
H
A
A
B
K
Yeah
everyone,
so
thank
you,
Jonas
and
Nolan
for
putting
this
and
Valero
community
meeting
me
as
the
user
I
would
like
prefer
to
like
having
venerable
backups
visit
from
the
kubernetes
event.
I
mean
like
whenever
I
have
an
object
in
my
cabinet
is
cluster
that
is
being
deleted
or
terminated.
I
would
like
mineral
to
like
trigger
backups.
K
K
B
B
So
we've
heard
this
request
before
and
I
think
I
think
it's
a
good
one.
I,
don't
know
that
will
implement
it
immediately,
but
I
think
it's
also
one
that
could
theoretically
live
outside
of
Valero,
at
least
it
could.
It
could
live
outside
of
Valero
and
then
maybe
move
into
Valero
I
envision
this
as
something
like
a
Valero
schedule
which
the
implementation
of
a
Valero
schedule
is.
It
has
the
same.
It
has
the
backup
spec
embedded
in
it,
plus
the
cron
job,
so
I
envision
like
the
data
structure.
B
Being
these
are
the
events
I
watch
for
create
delete,
you
know
whatever
actions
and
then
these
are
the
the
data
types
I'm
interested
in
right.
So
some,
maybe
you
want
to
look
for
everything.
Maybe
you
want
to
look
for
specific
resources,
so
you
want
to
look
for
sto
resources
with
this
specific
thing,
so
I
don't
think
it's
a
bad
idea,
but
I
think
it
in
terms
of
getting
it
into
core
Valero.
It's
probably
something
we'll
have
to
discuss
more,
but
I
think
for
the
time
being
and
could
prob
if
it's
something
you
need
now.
C
Yeah
I
would
I
would
agree
with
that.
I
mean
it
sounds
like
a
cool
feature.
It
definitely
sounds
like
a
controller
that
you
could
write
that
doesn't
really
need
to
be
running
inside
the
Valero
pod
itself.
You
know
potentially
down
the
road.
If
it's
something
we
want
to
package
up
with
Valero,
we
could.
We
could
include
it
there,
but
it
also
could
be,
could
just
be
running
as
its
own
thing
and
essentially
watching
for
these
events
and
then
creating
a
Valero
backup
custom
resource
when
appropriate,
to.
G
B
Sig
storage
has
been
working
on
the
volume
snapshots,
Valero's
been
doing
snapshots
since
its
launch
in
2017,
but
data
protection
goes
beyond
snapshots,
especially
in
on-prem
environments
and
sig
apps.
There's
like
a
kept
out
there
for
doing
an
application
protection
thing,
which
is
it
uses
a
Ciardi
called
I.
Think
it's
just
called
provocation
that
like
defines
this
is
a
root
of
my
application
and
that
defines
all
the
resources
that
would
make
that
up,
and
this
working
group
is
kind
of
meant
to
pull
all
that
stuff
together
and
explore.
B
What
is
data
protection
mean
for
kubernetes?
How
do
we
start
trying
these
things
together
and
so
I
intend
to
be
participating
in
that
for
a
Valero
team
and
I
just
wanted
people
to
know
that
that's
coming
together
and
I
want
to
thank
chain
Ching,
Dave,
Smith,
ochita
and
bringing
that
together
and
on
on
on,
say,
gaps
for
helping
get
that
going
and
Shane.
If
you
want
to
say
anything
more
about
that
feel
free,
no
or
not.
If
you
have
anything
to
add
you.
I
I
B
H
I
I
I
H
I
You
know,
when
is
one
guy
was
say
Oh.
He
still
has
some
questions
on
how
to
do
this
upgrade
from
other
data
he's.
Do
you
want
this
meeting
slot
so
that
don't
get
lost,
because
this
data
protection,
one
group-
will
be
the
hell're?
There
are
large
scope,
so
you
probably
won't
have
time
to
cover
those
details.
I
think
that
make
sense.
So
we
will
sort
out
that
meeting
time
issue.
Okay,.
H
I
I
H
B
I
A
H
A
All
right
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
time
for
the
Q&A,
so
we
have
a
question
from
Kieran
and
then
we'll
see
if
we
can
talk
about
the
the
docks
PR
as
well,
but
I
want
to
move
over
to
your
Kieran
right
now
so
Karen.
You
got
a
question
here
regarding
CSC
D,
on
production,
like
environment,
using
bolero.
F
Thanks
Janice,
so
this
is
like
a
follow-up
to
the.
What
of
the
use
case
is
that
a
product
last
week?
So
this
is
an
on-premise
setup,
and
this
comes
from
one
of
the
openly
beers
users
and
I'm.
Looking
for
some
recommendations
or
inputs
on
how
to
use
velaro,
in
this
case,
I
added
a
few
more
details
into
that
document.
We
could
either
take
it
out
right
now
or
like
oh
we'll,
do
it
offline
just
in
the
interest
of
the
time
I.
F
So
the
user
has
this
environment
that
is
running
on
premise,
and
it
basically
has
this
different
namespaces
created
and,
let's
say,
like
there's
a
production
namespace
with
multiple
applications
that
are
running.
You
know
in
that
one
and
he
wants
to
trigger
AC
ICD
pipeline
by
effectively
cloning
that
all
those
applications,
along
with
data
into
a
different
namespace
and
once
the
CCD
is
completed
in
case.
Everything
is
fine,
just
go
ahead
and
delete
it
or
leave
that
for
a
little
longer
you
get.
Some
issues
need
to
be
resolved
out
of
the
C
ICD
pipeline
right.
F
The
back-up
is,
it
depends
on
the
plugin
at
least
like
openly
B,
as
I
had
I.
Think
I
need
to
make
some
changes
where
I
need
to
have
some
way
to
say
that
this
is
a
local
snapshot
or
typical
use
case
is
taking
a
backup,
but
this
is
a
slightly
different
use
case
where
you
just
need
to
take
a
local
snapshot
and
then
now
restore
it.
Oh
just
wondering
if
there
are
any
other
inputs
or
the
other
question
was
about
the
parallel
snapshots.
I.
F
C
Yeah
today
it
goes
sequentially,
so
one
snapshot
at
a
time
and
it's
you
know
it's.
We've
talked
about
various
kind
of
flavors
of
that
issue
with
snapshots
you
know,
or
our
underlying
assumption
is
that
they're
relatively
quick
operations,
and
so
we
have
it
highly
prioritized,
adding
adding
parallelization.
Therefore,
the
the
snapshots
themselves.
C
F
F
I
spoke
to
someone
about
this
regarding
a
community
repository
that
we
can
create
to
have
solutions
on
taking
application
consistent
snapshots
by
trying
to
set
up
some
hooks
now
like,
for
example,
like
say,
post
based
right,
is
there
any
rapport,
that's
already
created
for
these
sample
things
that
we
can
put
up
or
like
some
documentation
that
we
can
add
around
creating
applications
for
specific
applications,
with
examples
into
some
books,
etc.
I.
A
Think
we
we
talked
about
adding
more
documentation
around
specific
use
cases
and
I
think
that
could
go
in
there,
where
you
have
an
application
application
specific
use
case
right
so
yeah
we,
we
don't
have
a
separate
repo
for
that.
The
plan
was
to
add
that
to
essentially
looking
FAQ
or
similar
documentation,
piece
talking
about
specific
use
cases
would
that
work.
Yeah.
F
A
D
D
C
Absolutely
I've
had
a
few
contributions
over
the
last
week
or
two
so
in
no
particular
order.
The
first
one
we
have
ears
from
Dinesh,
so
this
contributor
added
support
for
the
AWS
profile
environment
variable
when
using
rustic,
so
we've
had
we've
had
support
for
using
different
AWS
credentials,
profiles
in
Valero,
but
it
wasn't
actually
properly
flowing
through
to
rustic
so
that
if
you
had
multiple
backup
storage
locations,
each
one
using
a
different
AWS
profile
and
you're
using
rustic
for
backups,
essentially
a
wooden
wall
hook
together.
So
Dinesh
added
support
for
this.
C
We
had
a
adopt
PR
command
from
Shashank,
eight
five,
five
who
updated
or
arrested
Doc's,
specifically
for
when
running
on
open
shift,
4.1
or
later
just
clarifying
some
of
the
setup
instructions
there.
So
I
really
appreciate
that
update
and
then
the
third
one
we
have
here
is
from
Cognos
who
sort
of
fixed
a
bug
or
added
a
feature
depending
on
how
you
look
at
it
to
support
essentially
pulling
the
rustic
restore
helper
container
image
from
a
private
registry
that
uses
a
custom
court.
C
So
we
had
some
some
kind
of
buggy
logic
in
some
of
our
validation.
Go
that
wouldn't
allow
custom
ports
to
be
specified
on
the
container
registry.
So
this
has
now
been
fixed
and
we've
got
a
nice
set
a
unit
test
to
make
sure
that
that
code
actually
works
as
expected.
So
thanks
a
lot
cognos
appreciate
that
contribution.
A
Olson
yeah,
thank
you
to
all
contributors.
Thank
you
Steve
for
for
the
the
shoutouts
here.
Thank
you
everyone
for
joining
today.
If
you
have
any
other
questions
or
comments,
you
know
where
we
are
in
slack,
so
just
hit
us
up
there
I'll
make
sure
that
this
gets
posted
posthaste
up
to
YouTube
as
well.
So
you
can
view
it
there
if
there
is
anything
that
you
missed
throughout
the
call
and
with
that,
thank
everyone
and
have
a
fantastic
rest
of
your
week.