►
From YouTube: Velero Community Meeting - October 12, 2022
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
A
Okay,
we
can
stop
me,
you
know.
Let
me
share.
A
Okay,
hello,
everyone-
this
is
meeting
on
October
tops
the
first
track
the
status,
so
we
are
planning
another
minor
release
for
1.9
1.9.3
and
the
timelines
still
to
be
the
to
be
decided.
A
So
so
the
the
issues
to
include
it's
still
open
and
for
and
for
we
contain
and
for
the
roadmap
we
will
reach
the
app
cities
next
Wednesday
right
now.
There
is
no
plan
to
change
the
the
change
change
the
time
and
we
will
review
the
the
issues
and
the
open
issues
and
the
items
later
and
if
there
is
anything,
I
need
to
change
the
web
update.
A
Okay,
yeah
for
for
copy
our
integration,
everything
Sim
soundtrack
and
the
the
phone
Task
is
almost
down
and
we
will
share
the
result
later
and
for
the
volume,
backup
and
resource
refactor.
We
have
almost
downed
the
primary
parts
and
after
that
there
will
be
no
major
code
changes.
A
That's
for
the
overall
status
and
personally,
myself
is
working
on
the
Poland
backup
and
result
refactor
and
I've
finished
the
volume
result.
You
need
help
container,
rename
refactor
and
submitted
another
PR.
B
B
I
was
working
on
issue
5085,
which
is
about
modifying
the
sub
command
of
Valero
CLI
and
the
pr
about
it
has
been
merged.
Yeah,
okay,.
C
Oh
yeah,
I
I
have
refined
the
PRS
for
the
mass
include
in
the
backup
of
Micron
plugin
and
thanks
Scott
and
Siobhan
for
the
quick
review
and
they're
merged
also
handled
an
issue
regarding
a
KMS
irn
setting
in
AWS
turns
out.
We
don't
need
any
code
change.
I
I
just
submit
a
small
PR
to
clarify
that
in
the
documentation
and
I
I
have
started
reviewing
the
pr
for
the
async
item,
action,
plugin
and
all
the
V2,
plugin
and
API
designs.
C
I
just
want
to
say
sorry
to
Scott
and
shubham
for
the
delay,
I
I
believe
soon
and
has
have
done
some
review
already
and
I'll
I'll
check
with
them,
and
hopefully
we
can
have
this
PR
submerged
soon
and
if
there
are
any
questions,
I'll
reach
out
for
you
guys
to
discuss
I'm.
Sorry
again,
that's
all
my
status.
B
Yeah
I'm
still
reviewing
the
era:
plugin
PR
your
service
principle
to
do
the
authentication
and
authorization
and
the
second
item
I'm,
going
to
verify
whether
CSI
plugin
can
pick
up
error
disks
from
multiple
resource
groups.
Currently
the
either
the
error
with
error.
Plugin
can
only
backup
the
error
disk
from
one
resource
groups,
but
there
is
some
requirements
that
need
the
mineral
Community
to
back
up
the
periodics
from
multiple
or
just
group,
so
I'm
going
to
I'm
going
to
try
to
verify
whether
CSL
plugin
can
meet
the
requirement.
Yeah.
Okay,.
B
D
Yeah,
so
the
first
things
listed
here
are
just
a
reminder
for
the
the
opening
PRS
that
need
review.
There
haven't
been
any
changes
to
the
async
item
action
last
week
or
so
I
will
mention
or
regarding
the
backup
item
action.
Plugin
I
do
need
to
make
a
small
change
to
that
tomorrow.
D
I
realized
when
I
I'm,
starting
an
implementation,
kind
of
a
draft
invitation
to
the
back
of
item
action.
V2,
obviously,
that's
subject
to
change.
If
we
change
the
design
before
final
update,
but
I
just
wanted
to
kind
of
get
an
initial
implementation
for
one
of
the
PRS
up.
There
I
hope
there's
no
PR
yet
for
that
for
the
backup,
automation,
V2,
but
one
thing
I
discovered
as
I
started
going
through
this.
D
Comparing
the
the
item,
action,
plug-in
design
and
the
API
design
is
that
I
actually
forgot
a
couple
of
fields:
the
the
new
structure,
the
operation,
progress
structure,
my
PR
5382
references
that
the
operation
progress,
I,
forg,
I'm,
missing
two
Fields.
Basically,
we
have
a
tie
a
couple
of
time
stamps,
one
for
when
it
started,
and
one
for
last
update,
so
I
need
to
add
those
two
Fields.
D
If
you
look
at
the
message
operation,
progress
line,
69
yeah,
it's
a
little
little
yeah,
but
further
down
969
through
74
at
the
bottom
of
the
page,
here
yeah
right
there,
so
there's
two
more
Fields
missing
a
timestamp
for
when
this
was
started
and
a
time
stamp
for
the
last
update,
and
so
I
will
update
this
PR
again,
probably
tomorrow,
with
that
fix
that
those
two
fields
are
already
in
the
item.
D
Action
progress
overall
feature
design,
I
just
missed
them
when
I
created
the
specific
API
plug-in
design
here.
So
I
will
update
this
with
that
change
and
that
may
also
filter
through
into
the
other
two
restart
the
restore
item.
Action
and
the
value
of
snapshotter
I
think
lists
that
structure.
It's
not
additional
work.
For
those
say
it's
the
same.
Struct
that's
going
to
go
in
the
shared
file
that
will
be
used
by
all
three
of
them,
because
all
three
of
the
plugins
they're
gonna
use,
use
the
same
format
for
updating
progress.
D
So
I
just
need
up
that
update
that
PR
tomorrow
that
those
fields
are
already
in
the
async
action
design
kind
of
the
big
design.
They
were
just
missing
in
the
the
more
specific,
detailed
plug-in,
API
design,
so
hopefully,
tomorrow
I
will
update
that
and
I
will
post
a
draft
PR
for
the
implementation
of
this
first
backup
out
of
action
V2.
B
D
So
when
I
do
create
that
PR
I'll
I'll
post
it
as
a
draft
just
so
it's
clear
to
everybody
that
it's
not
ready
for
the
final
review
feel
free
to
review.
You
know
if
you,
if
you
have
time,
but
it's
not,
you
know,
ready
to
merge
yet
until
we
actually
have
that
approved
design
and
until
we
Branch
for
110.
B
D
D
Think
the
general
consensus
for
those
attending
was
that
the
proposal,
the
most
recent
proposal
was,
was
generally
favorable
and
basically
there's
two
there's
two
aspects:
there's
the
time
change
part
which
is
we
want
to
move
the
North
America
Centric
meeting
two
hours
earlier,
that'll
make
it
still
inconvenient
for
Beijing,
but
close
enough
that
if
you
need
to
join
occasionally,
for
you
know
discussing
issues
you
can
because
it
won't
be
at
you
know
midnight
anymore
it'll,
be
you
know,
I
guess:
it'll
be
10
p.m.
D
Instead,
so
that
will
improve
things
a
little
bit
there
there's
no
one
time,
that's
ideal
for
all
of
us,
unfortunately,
which
is
why
we're
having
this
discussion
and
the
other
change
was
instead
of
doing
the
first
Wednesday.
Second
Tuesday,
you
know
thing
where
some
months
they're
out
of
sync
and
then
there's
the
fifth.
When
there's
a
fifth
Tuesday
Wednesday,
we
don't
have
a
meeting
is
to
switch
to
just
to
bi-weekly.
So
we.
D
About
first,
second,
third
or
fourth,
you
know
Wednesday
or
Tuesday
anymore,
or
it's
just
the
one
week,
it'll
be
the
North
America
time
zone,
meeting
at
10,
A.M,
sorry
yeah,
which
will
be,
which
would
be
10
p.m,
fishing
time,
and
then
the
next
week
will
be
this
current
time.
Slot
8
A.M
for
you
and
8
P.M
here
and
then
we'll
just
alternate
those
in
a
week
to
week.
D
So
we
won't
have
missed
meetings
anymore
and
we
won't
have
weeks
where
the
calendar
wants
to
put
two
meetings
in
the
same
week,
and
that's
that's
the
current
proposal
and
again,
if
there's
any
other
feedback
as
to
is
there
anything
to
do
to
make
this
better
I
mean
you
know,
as
one
of
the
comments
here
was
you
know
again,
you
know,
10
pm
is
still
late
for
Beijing.
D
This
is
clearly
not
an
ideal
time,
for
you
know
your
time
zone
there,
but
the
idea
is
to
make
it
slightly
less
inconvenient
so
that
if
it
was
a,
there
was
an
important
meeting
that
someone
wanted
to
join.
They
could
the
problem
is
that
if
we
make
it
early
enough
to
be
more
convenient,
say
you
know
10
10
or
rather
8
PM,
instead
of
10
p.m.
That
makes
it
too
early
for
West
Coast
U.S
time.
D
That's
the
kind
of
problem
there
is
that,
because
this
moves
the
meeting
to
10
a.m,
East
Coast
U.S
time,
which
is
where
the
majority
of
developers
in
North
America
are.
But
we
still
have
people
who
I
know
from
Dell
that
you
know
want
to
join
meetings,
sometimes
as
well
and
that's
7
A.M
in
North
U.S
West
Coast,
whereas
if
we
moved
it
to
8
PM
Beijing
time,
that
would
be
5am.
D
So
you
know
again,
there's
no
there's
no
one
time
that
works
for
everybody.
This
was
an
attempt
to
make
things.
D
You
know
a
little
bit
better
for
the
people
that
current
times
were
bad
for,
but
not
significantly
worse
for
other
people
and
I,
don't
know
whether
Orlin
is
at
the
point,
where
he's
ready
to
make
the
change.
I
guess
but
I
just
wanted
to
mention
it
here
in
case
there
was
any
additional
feedback
and
again,
if
there
is
additional
feedback,
I
would
say
put
it
on
the
discussion
here.
D
I
mean
you
can
mention
it
now
as
well.
But
the
point
is
that
not
everybody
is
on
the
call.
Now,
for
example,
Orlin
is
not
on
this
call,
because
I
think
it's
three
in
the
morning
in
this
time
zone,
so
you
know,
he's
clearly
not
going
to
be
joining
this
meeting
anyway.
So
anyway.
D
That's
that's
so
I
just
wanted
to
bring
it
up
here,
since
it
was
mentioned
last
week
and
I'm
hoping
that
we
can
get
these
changes
made
relatively
soon,
so
we
can
kind
of
start
to
get
a
little
more
participation
and
one
of
the
problems
we
had
with
the
North
American
meeting
is
that
you
know
there
have
been
weeks
where
there's
just
hardly
anyone
there,
because
you
know
it's
several
of
us
from
Red
Hat
and
maybe
someone
from
Dell
and
that's
pretty
much
it,
and
this
might
change,
might
make
it
a
little
bit
easier
for
others
to
participate
in
those
meetings.
C
Yeah
yeah
thanks
God
to
throughout
this
again
in
this
community
meeting,
I
think
for
Beijing
folks.
We
have
already
doing
some
discussion
on
this
topic.
Actually,
the
proposal
you
just
mentioned
here
is
something
that
the
Beijing
Focus
have
already,
which
agreement
on
that,
so
okay,
yeah,
so
I
think
we
should
be
okay
for
changing
the
time
to
that
proposal.
So
that's
our
opinions,
think
so,
if
anything
else
which.
B
C
It
which
proposal
sorry,
when
you
open
this
link,
oh
yeah,.
D
That's
that
last
I
think
that
last
comment
was
yeah
and
and
that's
what
we
were
kind
of
basically
when
we
brought
it
up
last
week
and
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
it
sounds
like
we're
getting
closer
to
consensus
here,
just
to
suggest
that
you
know
this
set
of
times
and
again,
there's
two
changes.
D
There's
the
time
part,
but
there's
also
moving
into
bi-weekly
to
avoid
the
kind
of
confusing
scheduling,
because
the
current
calendar
invites
are,
you
know
the
first
Wednesday
and
then
the
second
it's
Tuesday,
and
then
the
third
Wednesday,
and
you
know
it
they're
just
several
times
a
year
where
that
results
in
kind
of
calendar
chaos
and
it
doesn't
work
because
of
the
different
time
zones
and
the
the
months
that
have
five
Tuesdays
or
whatever
so
making
it.
Bi-Weekly
is
going
to
simplify
that
as
well.
I'm
hopeful,
at
least.
D
But
yeah
the
the
big
question
that
I
still
don't
have
an
answer
to
and
I
guess
I
can
ping
Ireland
about
this
tomorrow
is
and
okay,
if
we're
all
agreeing
on
this,
and
when
do
we
make
the
change,
do
you
know?
Do
we
start
that
next
week?
Do
we
start
that
first
of
next
month
you
know
at
some
point
I
think
I
I
don't
know
if
Orland
owns
those
calendar
advice
but
whoever's
managing
those
invites.
D
You
know
we
just
need
to
make
that
change
and
then
update
the
Community
website
as
well
to
make
it
clear.
C
Yeah
I
think
only
you
managing
only
kind
of
need
to
manage
and
just
imitation
I
think
yeah
yeah.
He
don't
know
this
oh
of
this
schedule.
So
if
we
will
reaching
a
agreement.
B
C
This
we
can
ask
only
to
do
some
change
based
on
the
proposal.
B
A
So
I
already
decided
that
or
we
need
to
wait
for
other
maintenance.
D
Well,
I
think
I
know
last
week
when
we
had
the
call
on
the
again
the
sort
of
North
American
scheduled
side,
with
the
exception
of
Dave
all
of
the
maintainers.
In
those
time
zones
were
there,
which
is
just
basically
shubham
and
myself
and
and
we
both
had
agreed
that
that
works
for
us.
So
if
everybody
in
Beijing
also
agrees
that
this
works
for
them,
I
think
we're
at
the
point
on
the
maintainer
side,
where
we've
we
now
have
everyone's
input
and
in
terms
of
other
community
members
that
are
regularly
attending
the
meeting.
D
You
know
I
know
some
people
from
Delaware.
Are
you
know
here
as
well
as
in
the
other
meetings
and
the
I?
Think
the
the
my
understanding
last
week
when
that
was
mentioned,
was
that
you
know
they
were
pretty
much
okay
with
this
as
well
so
I,
you
know,
I
didn't
really
see.
I
didn't
hear
any
objections
saying
no,
we
don't
want
this.
We
want
something
else.
C
D
And
to
be
clear,
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
expectation
that
you
join
every
meeting.
The
reason
for
moving
into
10
versus
midnight
is
to
make
it
possible
to
join
when
you
feel
you
need
to
join
so
we
can
have
those
conversations,
but
at
the
same
time
I
don't
think,
there's
an
expectation
that
you
know
you,
everybody,
that's
a
maintainer.
Imaging
comes
every
single
meeting
at
10
pm.
That's
not
really
reasonable,
but
this
is
hopefully
to
make
it
possible
to
join.
Just
just
like
you
know,
for
those
of
us
on
the
North
America
side.
D
D
Of
my
normal
work
schedule,
and
that's
fine
so
with
the
thinking
behind
the
the
bi-weekly
is
hopefully
there's
at
least
two
meetings
a
month
that
everyone
can
be.
You
know
clear
on
always
making
and
then
the
other
two
they
can
make
as
a
as
they're
available
and
as
it's
appropriate
for
you
know
what
they're
working
on.
B
D
Right
and
and
it's
that's
gonna-
it's
that's
really
a
small,
because
right
now
we
kind
of
have
by
way
we
see,
except
that
we
skip
the
fifth
Tuesday
of
the
month
if
there
are
five,
because
the
way
the
way
it's
currently
scheduled
is
that
the
first
and
third
Tuesdays
are,
you
know
North
America
and
the
second
and
fourth
Wednesdays,
just
because
it's
Wednesday
morning
raising
time,
even
though
it's
Tuesday
night
for
us,
but
because
it's
the
meeting
scheduled
in
the
Beijing
time
zone.
D
So
again,
there
were
two
problems
with
that.
One
was
that
we
ended
up
not
having
a
meeting.
You
know
any
time
of
the
month
had
a
fifth
Tuesday
or
Wednesday,
and
the
other
problem
with
that
was
that
sometimes,
especially
you
know,
when
the
first
of
the
month
was
a
a
Wednesday,
you
ended
up
where
the
first
Wednesday
and
I
think
it
was
like
the
second
Wednesday
and
the
first
Tuesday
happened
in
the
same
week,
and
so
the
calendar
invite
ended
up
having
us
scheduled.
D
You
know
twice
in
one
day
and
then
not
the
next
week
and
with
the
bi-weekly
setup.
We
avoid
all
that,
instead
of
worrying
about
what's
the
first
or
third
or
second
or
whatever
Tuesday
of
the
month,
we
just
pick
a
start
date
and
say:
okay,
this,
this
week's
meeting
is
8
p.m,
at
ambition
time
and
then
every
two
weeks
from
today.
D
A
Okay
generally,
as
soon
as
we
can
already
know
and
to
and
then
tell
down
the
the
new
schedule.
A
D
Gonna
make
sure
that
we
update
both
the
community
website,
as
well
as
the
slack
notification.
B
D
A
And
is
there
anything
we
want
to
discuss
from
anyone.
A
If,
if
not,
I
have
one
small
question
about
the
the
more
sorry
I
didn't
put
in
the
discuss
this
current
topic?
That
is
right.
Now
we
have
the
backup
item
actually
two
to
add
some
upload
progress
and
then
for
the
overall
data
mover
process
we
will
have.
We
will
need
to
you,
know,
to
attach
the
CSS
Empire
to
support
and
then
launch
the
the
the
underlying
module
to
move
the
data.
A
So
for
that
part
which
what
is
the
plan
or
what
which
PR
we
will
include
so.
D
I
think
so
you.
A
D
Basically,
the
the
actual
data
movement
part,
as
you
mentioned,
that
that
would
be
handled
by
a
different
controller,
but
the
way
that
interacts
the
plugins
is
that
the
the
plug-in
would
so
so,
for
example,
the
back
of
item
action
plugin
would
create
a
daily
mover
custom
resource
and
that
would
trigger
that
other
controller
to
start
doing
data
movements
and
then
it
would
use
the
ID
of
that
Resource
as
the
operation
ID
to
return
back
to
Valero.
D
So
the
the
interaction
between
that
and
the
plug-in
API
design
changes
is
basically
the
backup
item
action
in
the
restorative
action.
Plugins
are
going
to
be
sending
that
ID
back
to
Valero
the
backup
and
restore
controller
to
so
that
we
have.
That
gets
added
that
to
that
list
of
ongoing
operations,
because
the
plug-in
stops.
You
know
the
plugin
creates
that
CR
and
then
the
other
controller
is
doing
data
movement
and
then
the
plug-in
returns
control
back
to
Valero
to
back
up
the
next
item.
D
So
the
interaction
with
the
plugins
is-
and
that's
that's
where
the
you
know.
We
passed
that
operation
ID
because
we
created
the
CR
and
then
we
have
the
progress
function
that
Valero
will
call
after
it
finishes
going
through
all
the
Backup
backup
items
to
check
progress
for.
So,
if
you
had,
you
know,
30
volumes
that
you're
using
data
movement
for
you
might
have
you'll,
have
a
30
of
these
operation,
IDs
and
plugins
that
were
storing
and
then
Valero
then
goes
back
and
calls
all
these
to
say:
hey.
D
D
You
know
if
everything's
done,
we
move
it
to
completed
and
if
it's,
if
we're
still
waiting,
then
we
move
that
to
that
new
state
and
then
I
can't
remember.
I'll
stop
I
had
to
forget
the
exact
name
of
the
state,
but
basically
where
Valero
was
completed
with
the
backup,
but
waiting
for
data
movement
or
other
plugins
to
finish,
and
it
can
go
on
to
start
the
next
backup.
D
When
we
call
back
in
progress,
they
can
use
that
to
then
query
to
do
a
you
know:
cluster
get
Call
to
determine
the
progress
on
the
data
mode
because
the
data
mover
is
going
to
go
and
take
that
CR
and
it's
going
to
have
a
you
know:
PVC
ID
and
a
you
know:
the
object,
store,
location
and
all
the
information
that
it
needs
for
that
data
movement
to
copy
the
file
over
or
copy
the
contents.
Rather
over.
D
You
know
this
is
going
to
be
okay,
I
guess
it
would
be
the
CSI
backup,
item
action,
plugin
that
we'll
be
doing
this
and
then
so
it.
So
when
you
pass
progress
back
into
that
plug-in
later,
it
can
look
up
that
data
move,
move
it
back
up
resource
to
see.
Okay
data
set
is
done
or
the
status
says
it's
still
in
progress
and
here's
our
here's
where
we
are
and
then
then
that
progress
returns
back
to
Valero.
A
Yeah
and
for
the
for
the
for
the
controller
to
process
the
the
data
more
CR,
so
we
still
need
some
design,
for
example,
whether
we
attach
all
the
same
shots
into
one.
You
know
one
part
or
handled
by
by
in
parallel
or
to
have
just
handlebot
one
by
one,
and
how
do
we
handle
that
data
moment
for
like
how
do
we
move
the
data?
So
for
that
part
we
still
seems,
or
we
still
need
some
PRS.
So
what
is
the
plan
for
that?
Pr.
D
B
D
B
D
And
then,
once
that
design
is
approved,
then
we
start
implementing
that.
Yes,.
D
And,
and
that's
something
again,
this
the
async
action
plug-in
design
is
something
we
need.
First.
D
Yes,
so
yes,
so
the
point
is
that
the
data
mover
and
the
async
action
plugin.
Those
are
you
know,
you
know
one
depends
on
the
other,
but
you
know
we
don't
have
to
have
data
mover
for
the
async
action
to
make
sense.
So,
depending
on
how
long
it
takes
us
to
get
the
Danny
mover
and
everything
together,
you
know
it
is
possible
that
those
two
both
make
it
into
the
same
Valero
release
and
they
get
released
together.
D
It's
also
possible
that
we
might
have
one
release
that
has
the
new
plug-in
design
and
implementation,
but
the
Upstream
Valero
data
mover
itself
may
not
be
implemented
yet.
But
the
fact
that
we
have
a
plug-in
design,
that's
implemented
means
that
you
know
someone.
That's
using
Valero
can
Implement
their
own
data
mover
using
the
plug-in
design
if
Valero
doesn't
have
it
yet,
but
at
the
same
time
when,
when
Valero
finally
gets
the
data
to
move
it
together,
really
implemented
that
will
be
built.
On
top
of
this
P2
plug-in
changes.
C
D
Another
approach
would
be
to
have
a
shorter
release
cycle
that
completely
cuts
off
to
any
mover
and
just
because
the
item
action
stuff
and
then
we
do
a
follow-on
112.
You
know
soon.
Afterwards
it
includes
data
mover,
that's
one
thing,
I
know,
because
one
thing
we're
doing
on
the
oadp
side
at
Red
Hat
is
that
you
know
we're
building
our
for
our
current
release,
where
we
were
building
our
own
data
mover
that
just
uses
the
existing
CSA
plugin.
D
So
it's
blocking,
and
so
you
know,
there's
some
performance
concerns
with
that,
and
you
know
one
thing
from
our
timeline
is
that
you
know:
once
we
have
the
async
action
plugin
and
the
Valero
release,
we
can
modify
our
existing
outside
of
Upstream
Valero
data
mover
to
use
that
and
then
eventually,
once
Valero's
data
mover
is,
you
know,
released
into
Upstream.
Then
we
can,
you
know,
use
that
instead,
but
get
getting
the
async
stuff
implemented
and
released
as
soon
as
possible.
It
allows
us
to
fix
that
performance
issue.
D
We
have
with
the
blocking
on
CSI
plugins,
you
know
earlier,
and
then
we
can
follow
up
with
with
Valero
kind
of
in
the
next
release
to
get
that
data
mover
in
place.
So
that's
another
way
of
you
know
doing
it
there.
So.
B
C
Good,
that's
allowed
for
this
update.
That
makes
sense,
but
I'll
I
think
we
may
discuss
in
the
UF.
Have
the
win?
Pradeep
has
a
chance
to
join
and.
D
Yeah
yeah,
that
makes
sense,
I
I,
just
I,
just
I,
just
wanna.
You
know
you
mentioned
possible,
you
know
lengthening,
you
know
111
process
I
just
wanted
to
mention
it
because
you
know
kind
of
our
thinking
of
red
hat
talking
to
Shivam
and
others
is.
Was
that
because
we
originally
wanted
the
async
action
in
110
it
slipped.
For
you
know
obvious
reasons.
You
know
you
know
we
weren't
able
to
fit
it
in,
but
we've
been
waiting
on
that
for
some
other
functionality,
so
I'm
hoping
to
get
111.
D
C
Wanted
to
make
sure
that
yeah
I
think
that's
a
make.
Some
valid
points
thanks,
Scott
and
yeah
I'll
certainly
bring
that
out.
When
you
know,
I
have
a
chance
to
talk
about
pretty.
B
A
If
not
I
think
we
can
ask
stop
here
for
today
meeting
thanks,
Edward
everyone
and
are
good
and
the
evening.
Thank.