►
From YouTube: Velero Community Meeting - November 29, 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
Right,
hello:
everyone
today
is
November
29th
and
I'm
Orlando
and
I'm
the
community
manager
for
Valero,
that's
official
community
meeting.
So
please
follow
the
code
of
conduct
and
practice
practically
just
be
nice
to
each
other.
A
I've
added
the
link
to
the
meeting
minutes
in
the
chat.
I'm
gonna
sell
it
once
again.
If
someone
else
wants
to
to
add
themselves
with
that,
I'm
gonna
share
what
we
have
for
today.
A
All
right,
I
can
see
some
topics,
so
let's
go
from
last
added
script.
B
Oh
yeah
I,
just
briefly
just
gonna
mention
110,
was
released
earlier
this
morning,
so
that
is
now
out
there
and
I
also
noticed
194
rc.2
was
put
out
as
well,
so
I
release
candidate
for
another
update
to
the
one
nine
series
and
for
myself
in
particular
again
the
item
action
plug
and
design
that
we
talked
about
last
time
still
needs.
B
The
final
review
on
that
I
did
make
some
updates,
based
on
some
API
suggested
changes
from
some
other
maintainers
and
I
did
also
the
past
week
updated
the
individual
plugin
API
to
design
documents
to
reflect
that
operation.
Progress,
struct
change
as
well
I
think
we're
still
hoping
to
get
this
merged
sometime
in
the
next
week
that
once
that
design
is
merged
in
those
plugin
API
V2
design,
docs
emerge,
then
I
can
actually
get
started
in
submitting
implementation
PR's
for
all
this,
which
I
hope
to
get
going
in
early
December.
B
A
Nice
and
congratulations
on
110.
was
that,
like
coordinated
release,
everything
was
fine
with
the
release.
B
I
I
wasn't
actually
involved
in
the
final
bits
of
it.
I
just
was
noticing
kind
of
checking
the
email.
This
morning
you
know
the
RCT
was
out
last
week.
B
I
think
I
think
I
think
I
see
that
two
was
released
just
after
the
community
meeting
last
week,
and
you
know
the
the
team
in
Beijing,
you
know
was
continuing
to
test
that
and
so
I
don't
I'm,
not
sure.
If
I
think
I
think
there
were
no
additional
changes
made
to
the
rc2
so
that
but
I
haven't
confirmed
that
and
I
usually
there's
any
changes
to
a
release
candidate.
B
Then
there's
another
list
candidate
out
and
when
we
finally
got
a
release
candidate
that
passes
all
the
tests
and
or
no
changes,
then
the
release
goes
out
with
the
exact
same
image,
but
as
an
I
actually
was
not
directly
involved
in
this
final
release.
Process
I
just
noticed
that
it
was
released
and
also
the
associated
plugins
I.
Just
wanted
to
make
note
of
that
here
that
this
release
did
make
it
out
the
door
today.
A
A
B
You're
getting
out
there
now,
you
know
we
we've
communication
up
to
now
has
still
been.
You
know.
The
hope
is
to
get
this
out.
You
know
end
of
November
or
beginning
of
December
at
the
latest
and
again
we
had
the
the
second
release
candidate
out
last
Wednesday.
B
So
you
know
I
was
kind
of
hoping
it
would
be
out
in
our
first
part
of
this
week.
So
I
guess
it
would
have
been
more
of
a
surprise
if
it
didn't
come
out
this
week.
So
that
was
good.
A
Nice
all
right,
I'm,
going
to
work
on
the
notifications
towards
all
the
social
places
that
we
do
normally
then
okay
I
have
one
for
today
just
to
to
discuss
briefly.
A
2017
is
like
holiday,
so
I
suppose
we
won't
have
meeting
at
that
date,
but
many
folks
are
going
to
take
some
days
off
before
that.
So
are
we
gonna
skip
20th
as
well,
it's
like
in
the
other
time
zone.
How
are
you
feeling
about
this?
One.
B
Yeah
so
certainly
the
27th
is
a
holiday
for
for
us
at
Red
Hat
as
well.
The
20th
is
not
officially
a
holiday,
but
again,
like
you
said,
a
lot
of
people
are
out.
I
would
say
if
the
majority
of
the
team
Beijing
is
going
to
be
working
that
day.
Maybe
it
makes
sense
to
have
it
anyway,
but
you
know
certainly
from
my
point
of
view,
if
we
don't
have
it
that
week,
I
don't
think
anything
essential
is
going
to
be
discussed
there.
B
Would
be
fine,
so
I,
guess
I'm
kind
of
neutral
on
that
if
they
have
a
meeting,
I'll
probably
join
it.
But
if
there's
no
meeting,
that's
fine
on
the
20th
okay,
I'm.
A
Going
to
leave
that
then
Beijing
team
to
to
discuss
that.
B
A
So
yeah
yeah
27
is
off
right.
I
just
wanted
to
mention
it:
okay,
cool
I,
don't
have
anything
as
of
now
anything
else.
On
this
one
I
can
see
Armstrong
I'm.
Sorry,
if
I'm
mispronouncing
your
name,
that's
it.
C
Yeah
so
I
just
wanted
to
discuss
on
this
particular
PR
I
had
raised
on
the
chat
thread.
We
had
discussions
with
shubham
and
black
piglet
I'm,
not
sure
about
his
name,
but
so,
basically,
as
of
today,
right
like
we
have
the
field
for
snapshot
volumes
which
we
send
in
our
backup,
CRS
and
in
restore.
We
have
restore
PVS
those
two
flags
we
have,
but
if
you
see
the
CSI
plugin
right,
the
CSI
plugin
honors,
the
snapshot
volume
sent
in
the
backup
payload,
but
during
restore
the
restore
pv's
flag,
is
not
honored.
C
So
even
if
you
say,
restore
PVS
is
false.
The
CSI
plugin
by
default
always
does
a
restore
of
the
previous
like
there's
no
way
to
stop
it
using
that
flag.
So
basically,
this
is
just
to
bring
parity
in
the
API
like
if
in
during
backup
the
customer
like
if
a
user
can
choose
if
they
want
to
backup,
PVS
or
not
backup.
Similarly,
during
restore
the
user
should
have
an
option
to
say:
I,
don't
want
to
restore
PVS,
which
is
not
possible
as
of
today
in
the
CSI
plugin.
C
So
so,
on
this
chat,
like
I,
said
we
discussed
with
shubham
and
black
black
piglet,
but
we
could
not
come
to
a
conclusion
so
I,
like
kind
of
joined.
This
call
to
see
if
we
can
come
to
some
conclusion
around
this
particular
PR
or
issue.
B
Yeah
and
unfortunately,
neither
of
them
are
on
this
call,
which
is
kind
of,
can
make
it
hard
to
have
a
conclusion.
You
know
just
because
the
two
people
that
have
been
nurse
weighing
in
so
far
are
not
available
right
now,
I
I
I've
seen
this
VR
I
kind
of
saw
the
comments.
I
really
haven't
done
a
lot
of
thinking
about
it
in
detail.
Yet
I
think
this
might
be
a
good
discussion
topic
to
bring
up
at
one
of
the
meetings
the
division,
time
zone
meetings.
B
Unfortunately,
shubham
is
also
out
the
next
couple
of
weeks.
I,
don't
think
he
will
be
back
next
Tuesday
when
we
have
that
meeting
on
the
with
the
Beijing
maintainers,
so
I
I
I
think
we
need
to
continue
this
I
just
I,
don't
think
the
people
that
need
you
know
the
the
people
that
kind
of
need
to
weigh
in
are
available
in
the
call
today
is
so
I
think
we
should
probably
bring
this
up
in
a
future
meeting.
A
B
C
Yeah,
so
how
would
you
suggest,
like
I,
take
this
forward
like?
Should
we
make
wait
for
the
next
meeting,
or
do
you
want
to
discuss
this
over
chat
with
these
folks,
because
I'm
I'm
kind
of
the
community
I'm.
B
Ordinarily
I'd
say
next
week
could
be
the
perfect
time
to
bring
it
up.
I
just
I
just
know
that
shubham
is
out
for
the
next
week.
I
think
he
returns
on
the
10th
of
December.
We
might,
it
might
be
worth
bringing
up
say
once
he's
back
on
on
slack,
we
can
kind
of
initiate
a
discussion
on
slack
to
see
if
anyone
has
any
any,
you
know
opinions
to
weigh
in
there
and
if
that
doesn't
really
go
anywhere,
maybe
at
a
future
meeting
bring
it
up
again.
B
I
mean
you
know,
you
know
110
just
got
released
today,
so
this
is
in
any
case.
This
is
something
we're
talking
about
on
the
111
time
period.
So
you
know,
the
difference
between
working
out
today
versus
in
a
couple
of
weeks
is
not
going
to
really
affect
you
know
when
it
would
make
it
into
release.
C
B
C
So
we
are,
depending
on
the
CSI
plugin
and,
like
I,
said
right
as
of
right
now,
if
even
if
the
restore
PV
is
flag,
if
you
even
like
I
just
want
to
weigh
which
is
like
proper
API
level,
support
which
says,
if
I
don't
want
to
restore
a
PV,
the
CSI
plugin
should
not
kind
of
do
it
right,
like
it
just
I
want
that
to
be
more
accurate.
It
was
a
surprise
for
us
as
well.
When
we
were
trying
to
use
it.
We
went
through
a
bunch
of
debugging.
Why,
like?
C
C
B
Also
I
wonder:
I
I
haven't
looked
into
this
again
this
this
aspect
on
The
Rustic
side
of
things,
if
you're
using
rustic
for
your
PV
backup
and
restore
I,
suspect
that
this
flag
is
not
necessarily
used
there
either,
but
I
could
be
wrong
again
because
I
haven't
looked
into
it.
Have
you
have
you
looked
at
The,
Rustic
side?
In
other
words,
is
this
just
native
snapshots
to
do
this
now
or
is
it
snapshots
and
rustic,
and
the
only
thing
missing
is
CSI.
C
C
B
And
then
that
question
comes
up
again,
I
guess
and
you
know,
even
setting
aside
what
the
intent
was
when
this
was
created.
You
know
originally
I
guess
we
need
to
look
at
actual
real
world
use
cases
and
you've
got
one
here
where
you,
you
know
that
that
this
change
makes
sense.
For
you
know,
I
I
make
I
guess
we
should
identify.
You
know.
Are
there
use
cases
where
your
change
is
not
relevant,
but
what
it?
B
What
is
done
now
is
desirable,
for
example,
and
if
we
can't
come
up
with
any
again
that's
another
reason
to
suggest
to
this
change.
But
if
there's
a
use
case
that
your
change
is
going
to
break,
then
we
need
to
keep
that
in
mind
as
well,
but
I
just
don't
know
what
those
are
I
think
I
think
we
need
to
take
a
step
back
and
say
what
is
the
real
requirement
here
what's
needed
and
what
are
the
various
use
cases
that
we're.
B
Solve
to
make
just
to
make
sure
that,
if
we're
going
to
make
a
change
to
fix
your
use
case,
we're
not
breaking
your
use
case
for
someone
else.
That
is
depending
on
the
current
functionality.
C
Just
a
very
basic
use
case
I
said
right
like
if,
if
I
want
to
do
a
resource,
but
I
don't
want
to
reach
your
PVS
in
the
CSA
plugin,
there's
no
way
to
do
that
as
an
API
I
can
go
and
manually
try
to
figure
out,
should
I
block
register
of
the
PVC
API
Group,
or
something
like
that,
but
again
right
that
figure
out
should
I.
What
should
I
really
block
should
I
block
volume,
separate
content
should
I
block
PVC
should
I
block
PV.
That
is
not
trivial.
So
it's
a
very
basic
use
case.
C
B
Yeah
and
the
other
Factor
here
is
that
you
know
this
flag.
When
it
was
created,
there
was
no
CSI
plug-in,
and
so
it
wasn't,
it
wasn't
relevant
in
the
decision.
That's
why
I'm
saying,
let's
look
at
what
you
know
where
is
rustic
in
this?
What
is
does
this
flag
affect
restitutes,
because
that
might
inform
the
use
cases?
You
know
to
figure
out
what
this
was
intended
for
as
well
and
again,
you
know
kind
of
help
us
figure
out
whether
whether
this
is.
C
Scott,
even
before
we
go
to
Rustic
right,
if
you
Olin,
when
you
go
to
the
previous
page,
where
we
were
going
through
the
discussion,
if
you
see
right,
if
it,
if
the
this
piece
of
code
is
already
honoring,
the
snapshot
volume
slack
then
like
it's
it's
already
there
right,
there
is
Snapshot
volumes
and
registered
TVs
are
in
combination
in
some
sense.
If
it
is
honoring
one,
then
it
should
naturally
honor
the
other
one
right.
If
you
go
to
the
can
you
go
slightly
below,
we
have
some
code
Snippets
at
the
bottom
yeah
this.
C
This
link
that
I've
put
right
yeah
this
this
code,
snippet
that
I've
put
snippet
of
dot
snapshot
volumes.
This
is
already
honored
in
the
CSI
plugin,
so
all
I'm
saying
is:
if
this
one
flag
you
are
supporting
and
the
other
you're
not
supporting
it.
It's
not
correct
right
like
because
even
the
first
one
was
built
for
cloud
scenarios
like
the
cloud
plugin
scenarios
yeah
so
also
rest
pick
I
mean
restrict,
is
another
conversation
we
can
have,
but
like
I'm,
just
saying,
if
you
have
one,
then
have
the
other
by
natural
thing,
right
or
otherwise.
C
B
So
so
I
think
the
other
question
relating
to
that
then
the
next
thing
we
do
need
to
answer
and-
and
the
answer
may
be
simple-
you
know-
that's
not
relevant,
but
you
know.
Is
there
a
use
case
where
we
want
what's
there
now?
In
other
words,
does
the
change
you're
proposing
is
there?
Is
there
any
case
that
that
breaks
for
someone
and
the
answer
may
be?
No?
If
the
answer
is
no,
then
I
think
this
is
an
easier
thing
to
say:
hey.
We
just
need
to
make
this.
You
know
consistent.
B
B
I
can't
think
of
anything
obvious
right
now,
but
but
again,
I
think
we
should
just
make
sure
that
we're
we
answer
that
question
to
make
sure
that
you
know
someone
doesn't
get
this
updated
and
surprised.
This
isn't
working
for
me
anymore,
because
I
was
relying
on
that
particular.
C
B
C
Side,
yeah
I
know
one
fix
for
that.
What
we
can
do
is
basically
the
nature
of
that
flag
right.
If,
if
the
flag-
let's
say,
for
example,
the
existing
person
who's
using
it
is
sitting,
is
at
empty
or
true,
then
basically
empty.
We
can
map
to
true
so
that
any
existing
use
cases
where
they're
not
using
the
flag
it
does
not
break,
but
for
Falls
they
need
to
explicitly
kind
of
pass
it.
Now.
C
If
a
some
user
comes
and
says
we
have
set
it
to
false,
we
were
still
expecting
it
to
restore
and
you
break
it
like.
No,
that's
might
not
be
valid
right.
I
mean
we
can
discuss
more
in
depth
when
you
folks
get
a
chance
to
go
through
the
pr,
perhaps
but
right
yeah,
just
one
workaround
we
can
think
of
which
does
not
break
any
user
scenario
map
null
to
through
that.
We
can
do
so
that
no
existing
scenario
is
broken.
Yeah.
B
Yeah
and
again
this
is
starting
into
the
weeds.
Sorry
I
just
want
to
make
a
quick
comment
and
then
we
can
move
on,
but
that
that
will
depend
on
whether
we're
currently
doing
I
I.
Don't
you
know
if,
if
it's
a
Boolean,
that's
that's
as
a
pointer
like
like
we,
for
example,
some
of.
B
Of
ours
are
that
way,
then
you
can
do
that.
Sometimes
it's
just
straight
at
Boolean,
where
you
know
empty,
is
the
same
as
false,
and
this
really
you.
B
B
Oh
I
just
see
here
that
yeah
I
guess
snapshot
volumes
is
a
oh.
No,
it
is
okay
got
it,
yes,
so
so
so
so
the
null
is
different
than
balls
here.
So
we
have
that
option
too.
Once
we
start
digging
into
possible
solutions.
A
This
do
you
think
it
makes
sense
to
assign
black
piglet
into
this
one
for
review
or.
B
B
Commented
on
it
I
think
it
would
make
sense
to
to
have
him
look
at
it
again,
as
I
said,
and
certainly
he's
now,
that
110
is
out
and
that's
another
thing
by
the
way,
I
think
some
of
these
things
hadn't
been
looked
at
as
much
over
the
last
couple
of
weeks,
because.
B
The
team
has
been
kind
of
focusing
on
getting
110
tested
out
the
door,
and
that's
happened
now
so
I
think
there'll
be
some
more
free
time
now
to
sort
of
go
back
to
some
of
these
things.
A
All
right,
thank
you
if
nothing
else,
I
think
we
can
drop
for
today.
Thank
you.
Everyone
I
hope
you
have
a
great
rest
of
the
day
and
talk
to
you
next
time
by
the
way.
I'm
gonna.
Add
that
thing
to
the
upcoming
meeting,
so
our
folks
from
Beijing
that
needs
to
be
to
review
it.
They
can
have
it
in
their
agenda
for
next
time.