 Hey Dawn. Hey Paris. I was just starting to wonder if we had a meeting because I saw there's a huge thread about meeting times that I didn't read. Oh yeah, no, no, no, that was, that was me trying to figure out maintainer circle stuff and then realizing that we literally have like a million meetings and then it just like snowballed into how can we make this better? Hello everyone watching the recording. Well inside free fall. Yeah, async forever. Like, that's the TLDR there. Oh my God, meetings have just gotten, I don't know, I just have so many zoom meetings and I'm just so, so tired of them. This week has been better. The last two weeks have been better because of the time zone confusion. So you all went to daylight savings. We have not. All my meetings are an hour earlier. So like, instead of being done at 730, I'm done at 630. It's pretty cool. Yeah. I feel like I'm just so overwhelmed that the only time I do get stuff done these days is when I'm in a meeting, you know, or like right before the meeting, it's like high school all over again doing the homework. Still not working. Okay. I'm like doing the homework before the class. Oh yeah, we got a lot done this week because a bunch of my team is in Oregon and it's spring break. So a lot of them have taken the week off. Oh wow. It's been really quiet and I worked on the charter resource doc, Josh. I got a bunch of other stuff. I recorded my cube con talk that is done. Oh wow. Yeah. I'm going to be on holiday the next week. So the deadline is before I come back. So I needed to get it done this week. Yeah. The. Yeah, Carolyn and I have. Not. She's a really nice set of slides though. Yeah, it's been a pain. You had time until April. April 5th or something. Yeah. Yeah. Well, except, except not again, because you know, next weekend is Easter weekend. And a bunch of my older relatives who finally all been vaccinated. So. I'm not going to be working next weekend. Yeah. The, which means that we really need to get our recording done. By Wednesday next week. So. I'm just prepping the agenda right now. Okay. So. Thank you. That going. Sorry, it's been, it's been back to back meetings this morning and for that matter yesterday. Now you know why I'm trying to preach that async life. Yeah, I know, I know the, the, the, we've been, we've been bad about like finalizing things like approving things, et cetera. If it's not. I feel more responsible than that. I mean, as a chair than. On. Then the crew, I think, like, I feel like we as chairs need to just do a better job on. Nagging. I guess. And nagging me and. Ourselves. We can do that too. And get better. Carolyn's here. Who else is here? Oh, just us. Oh, Josh. All right. We've got our agenda. Don't want to talk about what's going on in governance. Actually, before we start, when's our next TOC update meeting? Cause that's the stuff we should. That's going to be next week because they. No, wait. Yeah. It's normally the third week, right? And this week they had an emergency meeting about SIG observability issues. We got postponed until next week. And so we actually need to do the updates. Talk about governance. Talk about governance from a, from a perspective of like what we want to talk to the TOC about and like what's been going on. I'll write a note. We approved and merged the sub project template. So something to let governance know is available. And so that kind of completes the set of governance templates that we plan on. Except of course that last week, somebody pointed out something that was missing from all of the templates. But I, you know, we're going to treat that as a separate change. The, and that doesn't need to be brought up. We can just say we finished the sub project template. So we now have sort of a quote, a complete set of. What do we tell them about review? Cause remember, I thought we were supposed to like graduate before we. Yeah. So, so in those terms, in terms of graduation, the sub project template was actually reviewed by sod. The. I, as far as I know, you know, and I think we need to really write out the process for the sort of different kinds of documents. You know, because as far as I'm concerned. Having either the SIG or a working group. Formerly approve a document and then having one of our. To see liaisons approve it. That feels like sufficient process for me. I mean, that's kind of what we have right now. Yeah. So sod's only approved the sub project. One though, right? And we have about like six other docs that are merged. Right. I don't know the status of any of the other docs. I know that. Earlier on. Sod. No, not sod map. Looked at the other two governance templates. I passed Alina a lot of the stuff yesterday. So I'll catch up with her to see if she can LGT. And the retroactive issue that we have. For the docs that are already completed and merged. Yeah, we should have invited her to this meeting. I've been so. Like, like specifically invited her. She couldn't come. I did. Oh, okay. Oh, good. You're on top of this. The. Not. Hey, Paris. Does this mean going forward? Every single thing we merge has to get it. To see review. Or at least one liaison review. If it's going to end up on the website, it does. Yeah. Because they want to make, we want to make sure that it hears to the values of the TOC is. Trying to portray. I mean, we are an advisory group of them. So we're advisory. We're advising them that these things are. I'm just checking on what I should be holding off on merging. Or like. Yeah. We should add them as, as a code owner or something. I'm not sure. Because. Well, I can't. Hard to tell right now what needs it. Yeah. Well, Do you want to set up a branch structure for this? Cause that would be the, that the standard sort of get way to do things. Is to actually have a, you know, a publication branch. And that, that none of us, you know, merge things to the publication branch until they've been approved. By our liaison. I'm down with that. That's like amazing. I just don't think we've gotten there yet. Cause like, I think our first step was to update the charter with what we want. And then do the, do the next bit. So I'm down with that. Whatever you decide there. Carolyn. So what branch are you pulling from for the website? Website is ruining my will to keep working sometimes. Cause it's so long. Right now it's in a branch called website. It's on two repos, you know, you are reviewed the one that's on the website. You are reviewed the one that's on the website. It's on two repos, you know, you are reviewed the one that's on CNCF contribute and he wants it so that. It can get merged and not assume that the website is live, which changes a bunch of links. So I need to go fix that. And that's not easy. So I need to do some thinking about how that'll look and work. Cause in the meantime, that like kind of breaks what we wanted the website to look like. This may be a couple PRs. Do you want to, do you want to share that out? Because I mean, to be perfectly blunt, I'm willing to appeal your horse decision sometimes. Okay. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. Cause like, I feel like decisions are not final. We keep trying to stage this somehow and then rolling it out without impacting anything, but we also want a whole bunch of review to happen, but the review is not happening. So like it's going to stay stock for a very long time. And like, so when I first did it, we kind of talked about, we're just going to merge these two PRs at the same time and have a website. We don't switch over the domain, but the website's live. It's going to be hosted at the URL. It's going to be hosted at, it's going to be hosted at the URL. If you don't merge them at the same time, or you don't flip the domain or whatever, like basically in a day or something, you're going to end up with weird links that go, don't go to the right place. Cause they assume it's going to be hosted at the URL it's hosted at. So it makes sense. But like in the meantime, it's like, can you read it on the GitHub or does it have to be rendered in the site? Yeah. Yeah. So I'm just, I'm just, I'm just, I'm just causing a bunch of stuff to just be going nowhere. And I don't think I've gotten a review on anything from the PR to SIG, contributor strategies repo. Can you do me a favor and lazy link those PRs on either in the chat. And I'll. Yeah. Sure that this gets done today. Yeah. Yeah. And please share those conversations, and I'll see you on the next one. Yeah. Yeah. Plus one. Because, because really, I mean, honestly, you know, I've been in the position before with stuff like dev stats where I have. Gone to, to see our Aida over. Okay. Because he's asked me for things that would have involved, you know, 80 hours of work by somebody. Yeah. Like if it'd been small and I thought maybe it would be small, but like, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, I'm recording the fact of switching from reading it on GitHub to reading it on a well-known domain is making this difficult. So I've linked both PRs. Because there's always lag between when I ask people for reviews and when I've rebased it last on, on the main branch, like we shouldn't actually merge these immediately because it probably needs more rebasing because more stuff is moved around. So if we get approvals, then I'll do another rebase and like update everything, but it's getting to be a lot of work to rebase it over and over and over again. Why don't you tell us where those files need to be? Because I mean, our directory structure, for example, is, is was fairly arbitrary and for initial convenience, it's not like we're attached. So with, let me share my screen. Let's look at what the structure should be. Is let me just go to the branch on a set it up so that we have a website directory and a bunch of stuff is, is actually going in this now. Because this is what gets rendered off of Hugo. So for maintainers, we have a section about community and that's like, we're project health went because project health went live, but I think we have a couple more as well. So this is where things would end up needing to be and they wouldn't quite be directly one to one underneath each working group anymore. So like I'm behind because there were files that you don't have been added since that would need to be brought into the content directory. Why are there two files called paperwork checklist? I messed up. Okay. I'm like, well, my first thought was, did I do that? No, it looks like I sort of thing I would do. No, it's like I type out. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. No, and I actually need to go through that because the paperwork checklist specifically needs to not be on the website yet. That is specifically not approved. That led off to an argument between me and Liz Rice about the ten box form being the canonical source of information. Okay. Yeah. Move it then. Yeah, we can't, we can't publish that yet. Yeah, but the trick is essentially content needs to be in here. And then if we want something to be a draft that isn't live yet, it's, it's. You put it in the markdown. Okay. So I don't know which ones in these is the draft yet. I mean, but essentially you'd put like one of these would be draft true. Okay. And then it wouldn't go be published to the site, but it would at least be in the right spot. So when we're ready to flip it, we don't have to move a file. Okay. So we could, we could use branches or not use branches. Just use the draft tag. Yeah. I mean, my inclinations use branches because often I'm editing several files at the same time. So, but I mean, you can still edit it. It felt like, felt like using the draft tag, then it would work too. It's just right now we've been iteratively merging things into a folder called draft. You know, yeah. So the folder is not really work right. Yeah. So one thing you can do is if you put draft on this, it won't get published, but it can at least be in the main branch and collaborate and work on it over time. Because our drafts live for months and having a long standing branch. I think would be hard to manage. Not really. But, but, but we can, if you want to do that management. Yes. It, it, right. We can enable both paths. Yeah. That's what I'm saying. Um, the, um, so. Okay. That's fine. So I mean, I think one of the things that we can do ahead of resolving, you know, the E horror requirements and everything else is, um, let's move our actual documentation structure. To match the website structure. So you're not rebasing all the time. Plus one. Do you want to do that outside of this? Poor cross. Cause this did. You know, basically do a bunch of the moves or. Okay. That's fine. I can just rebase and move things. And then if we merge this first. That's fine. And that means, by the way, that's something to put in our update to the DOC. Which is, Hey, we're rearranging the website. We're rearranging our repository to match the structure needed by the website, which means some of your old links won't work. Yeah. And, and I'll, I'll, um, if you needle me after today, because the rest of my day is 100% back to back meetings. Um, I, I will also add that to like, our rebate and stuff. Yeah, because there's no reason to keep adding this work on to you. So that's fine. Cause we're going to do it eventually. And if we do it now, then that's less work to do later. Agreed. Yeah. Yeah. So I can do one more rebase right now. And then, uh, Nudge everybody. And then if we. We merge it. I mean, like nothing goes live, right? And then, you know, we can just kind of move forward. Not have to worry about this. Okay. Um, Wow. So that got off on the website, but, but I think what else? Oh, for governance. Uh, we're now working in a draft, uh, Dawn primarily, um, uh, is working on a draft of. Charter suggestions. Um, you know, advice to, um, projects on creating charter information. Um, uh, which we're vaguely looking, once we actually have this board for it, vaguely looking at, at adding to the list of CNCF requirements. Um, I think we can do that for a say, graduated projects. I just dropped the link in the notes. Yeah. But we want to have the, what is the charter? How do you write one before we start telling projects that they need to have one. Even though I realized the CNCF way is to use the tool. In the reverse order. So if you have any feedback on that doc, that would be great. Did you get a chance to look at it, Josh? I saw you were in the. Yes. Yeah. I opened it up. I looked at it. Um, and it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was something that we talked about. And that was about as far as I got. Okay. Yeah. Cause I, I reorganized it into those. Um, you know, into multiple sections. Cause I had everything kind of. Yeah. Together. So I think it's, I think it's a lot better organized now. And a little clearer. All right. Last call for governance alcohol. I think that's it. It's what we've been doing governance. You to bomb. Um, obviously feel free to continue with website stuff on, but anything else you want to mention to TFC. Um, which is putting together to keep contact, I guess. That's the, that's the biggest thing. Remember, we're going to record early next week. To be honest, like I had lost people on my team. And I have way too many things on my plate right now. So I haven't been able to do much around contributor growth. I've been doing it for a long time. I've been doing it for a long time. I've been doing it for a long time. I've been doing it for a long time. I've been doing it for a long time. I know the feeling I've had a wreck open. To have somebody split red hats, cloud native projects with me. Yeah. And I was just informed last month that the wreck got stolen by somebody else. Yeah. Yeah. We lost the wreck. And I'm not getting it back, but I still have. Twice as many commitments. As we did with more people. So. Uh-huh. It's been really, I'm just letting you know, like where I'm at. I've been working on this and now it's been taken away from me. Yeah. So. I'm sorry. Go ahead, Josh. I was going to add something to contribute to growth, but go ahead. I was just going to say a, how can I personally help? I mean, obviously professionally, how can I help and be. How can we put a. Word out horn on anything that you're working on that you want to see more help with. So, you know, I'm not sure if it's going to be a good idea to add additional reviews and like edit and contribute to these, these docs that we're writing right now. So if other people. To do that. Yeah. Yeah. That'd be really helpful. Cause I know. I feel like my participation is holding up. The contributor ladder. For example. I. From my perspective, you actually did give us some feedback on the contributor ladder. I'm actually waiting for Karen's full feedback. much as mine. So that's the other thing. But, but my goal is for us to approve the contributor ladder by next week's contributor growth. So I'm gonna, gonna ping her about it again. And because the thing is it's not like, it's not like a document doesn't have a lot of her input already. It's just, I really need her to do a final check on it because I made a lot of changes last round. The, so I'd like to finalize that next week because it's, you know, a it's something a bunch of organizations been asking for be I've already put it into play with an existing project because they couldn't wait. And, and also several governance templates have references to the contributor ladder. So kind of, you know, between all of those things, we kind of want it yesterday. So I'd like to get it to being approved by the working group on Tuesday. And then the remaining pending thing being to us to see liaison approval. If we want to try to approve it by Tuesday, we need to get the edits in of changing maintain our specializations to an additional document that isn't the template. Okay, right. And so our last discussion of that on Slack was I was suggesting that we don't actually do the additional document at all. Scrap all that because I was trying to write the additional document and I was finding it impossible to write. And when you find something impossible to write, it's often because it turns out it was actually a bad idea. And so my suggestion for that is I just put that in as a note in the main document saying, Hey, you might have these maintainer specializations depending on your project. And there's a list of them. But the actual requirements for them are going to be very specific to your project. Because like I started out with, say, documentation maintainer because I have a good example that from Kubernetes. And I'm like, okay, let me take the Kubernetes requirements for documentation maintainer and try to make them generic. And when I eliminated everything that was specific to Kubernetes, I was left with nothing. So the and so I'm like, you know, I don't think this is really something we can template. I think if projects do need specialty maintainer types, but they're very tied to how the project operates. Is the most important piece there just to tell them to document? I feel like yeah, that I feel like that is the most important part to hit home is like as long as there is something written about the actual ladder. I think the reason why we originally wanted to try to include content like this somewhere is output from our group is because people are familiar with I'm a maintainer Iceland code. But these other types of activities and roles aren't getting adequate representation or are being downplayed compared to code. And so it was an aspiration to somehow try to help address that, I guess. But if it's not working, I don't want this to hold up the whole ladder. Yeah, well, the thing is, for a smaller project, if you look at what I have in there is the definition of maintainer in general. That does not exclude documentation. Right. It doesn't say nowhere on it. Does it say that a maintainer has to write code or review code? It says that they have to review stuff. Yeah, but but it's very generic in saying what stuff is. And yeah, and I think I think advocating for having calling out non-code roles is something that really belongs in an advisory document, which we can write later. OK, so maybe let's just add, I'll add something that says we want something that just talks about non-code roles. Yeah, because one of our big to-dos is that we actually ought to have a more narrative advisory document to go with each one of our templates, like all of them. And so that could go in there, right? As we could say, hey, here's some examples. Here's the Kubernetes documentation maintainer. Here's the program manager for Linkerdee. Here's all of these other roles that people have. But these are we're only going to link because they're not templatable. I think adding that as resources at the bottom and exhaustive list of other people's templates that we think are awesome resources and examples is required. Like, I feel like that's in practice, you know? So, yeah, I think, like, especially like the Porter, Kubernetes, et cetera. I think that would be really good. So we also have the contributor framework that Catherine and folks have been working on that also is kind of review lists, and that's also, again, me as well. So I'm going to put some eyeballs on that based on what I'm seeing and what we know now that we have contributor ladder. As well as a draft of the recruiting playbook. It sounds like we're going in this direction where we want this contributor framework to be this umbrella and then have all of these other contributor related docs, not necessarily governance. But those two docs specifically included inside of those and inside of that framework model. Do I have that correct? Just trying to look at this. I don't know. I haven't been working on the framework. So, okay. Because I look, I think I'm going to figure out our content strategy, to be honest. What you laid out isn't actually something we ever explicitly said. Yeah, that's exactly. So that's why I'm bringing it up right now, because that's kind of where I'm seeing this evolving and going. Because the framework that Catherine put together is sort of this like umbrella of all of the different kinds of sections. And it seems kind of like what you're doing for governance too, where you just break off each section with like, there's the narrative and then there's the templates. That's just what it looks like from just a higher level. I did review the framework part too. I'm just waiting to hear back. So I'll get us some more eyes. We'll call them, I want to call them community eyes. Not ugly eyes. Like end user feedback eyes. And then sounds like that's it for contributor growth. And then obviously eyeballs on the recruiting draft as well. All right. Next is maintainer circle, which y'all saw on a thread yesterday with us going back and forth as to what the heck we're going to do here. And what the heck we're going to do here really means a lot of the maintainers have been saying to me that they have had hard time following maintainer circle and that they want dedicated invites and that they want to be invited. And all these other things. And the problem that we had before and we couldn't reach consensus on is like, should we have a dedicated meeting for this? A lot of people said no, no more meetings. Let's try to incorporate it in our meetings. And then we try to do this like every other meeting thing, which doesn't work for Google calendars. So it's kind of like problem statement. How can we get them a dedicated invite without having a ton of overhead? So what we came to is what we have in the thread. So we'll start that. I think we said I guess of May. So I don't think anybody here is going to see any differences or changes until then. But we will have a dedicated meeting for maintainer circle and that's really it. I'm looking for another host. I'm sort of this like, I feel like I'm playing this role right now where I'm the backup. If we don't have anybody else, then I'll step in. But I'd like to start really making this sort of like a, for us like maintainer done event kind of a thing. Yeah. And well, I can help host an individual event. I cannot track down and find speakers for things. At least, you know, not anytime before August because a good portion of my main redhead students are tracking down and finding speakers for things right now. And the good news is I have, we have managing grief and law set right now. But it's not set set, but we need to confirm. We have a psychologist that works with maintainers, not just like maintain, but folks in tech, but she has experience. She talked to cube con once. So she's going to talk about that. And then we have a maintainer that I won't name that is going to come and probably do a fireside chat about her experience with managing open source for in a time where something not great happened to her child. So I think that'll be pretty nice. She feels like she has a lot of lessons learned from that experience. And so that's that. So you could host that one, Josh. It sounds kind of like uber depressing, but I think it might be uber worth it because it's not a conversation that we talk a lot about, but it's stuff that we obviously deal with, especially in this pandemic. So I can pretty much spoon you stuff if you want to host, Josh. Okay, what date is that? We don't have one yet. We need to make it up. So that's the one I think we'll have whatever that May date is that we figure out for the new one. Make sure just let's not do the first week of May. Yeah, I know. That's cube con. Yeah, yeah, that's good. Yes, I added just in the notes. I keep getting asked this question on can maintainers outside of CNCF projects attend. I think it'd be great if we could just address that in the invite or on the page so that we're not trying to, because it seems really unclear right now. So well, do we want to vote on it? I mean, as of right now, I said no. Okay, could we just put that then on the invite or something? So people. But you know, I mean, I'm open to hearing other thoughts. There's a couple of arguments for yes and before one of them might not be valid. So I guess one of the questions is what is attendance been like out of just the CNCF maintenance? We see about nine to 12 people each time, including the homeless speaker. Yeah, we start off with 20 to 25. I also think that's because we haven't had a dedicated way of advertising or promotion. So I think that's huge. So right, so getting more attendees just for the sake of having a large enough group for there to be conversational synergies. Not necessarily something we need. Or is it? I'm asking. I don't know. Well, I know I'm asking you because I've only made one of these things so far. And that one did have a lot of conversation. I feel like once we get a good amount of CNCF folks, I mean, there's 60 plus projects, right? A thousand maintainers. Most of the maintainers still have no idea that this exists. So that's the only thing. I mean, and the other thing is like most of the maintainers are sharing really personal stories during the fireside chat part. And I guess they would have to be OK with outside folks that don't abide by our code of conduct coming in and potentially tweeting their stories. So given those, the only other group I feel like we should consider is what I would call pre-CNCF projects. That is projects that have already announced their intention to apply for Sandbox. I'm not saying we necessarily should do those. I'm saying that would be the outside group to consider. I think given what you're saying now, we don't want to consider opening this up to any maintainer anywhere. Yeah, I think mine just had to do really with the code of conduct. I have a quick question. The CNCF has the ability to message all the maintainers. Have they done that and notified people about maintainers? Just once. Just once. Not something that they want to do regularly. Yeah, OK. Which is another reason to have a reliable schedule. That's kind of like their CubeCon hotline, and that's really it. Oh, because I get something every month or two about open talks with people at the CNCF and support staff. Yeah, I don't know anything about that one. I don't see those. Oh, yeah, I get an email from the CNCF every month about it. You get that if you signed up for the CNCF Speaker Bureau? No, no, it's not that one. It's a line of support between maintainers of the CNCF project and the support staff. So like Amy and everybody. Incubated project. Oh, the Project Sync. Yeah, Project Sync. Thanks. Yeah, I wasn't quite sure what it was called. Yeah, I usually attend those. And if we have a maintainer circle coming up that I know the schedule for, I mention it to people. Great. And for that matter, if we remind, if we have one schedule, we remind Amy about it. She'll mention it. OK. Sorry, I was just trying to think of more avenues when we were already connecting with maintainers. Yeah. Yeah, it's a good idea. I wanted to honestly, I wanted the just the calendar invite on that distro. Meaning like invite maintainers at and then you have it on an optional on your calendar. If you want to come, you come. That's kind of what I always envisioned this as just like an open door for CNCF maintainers. All thousand if they want to come in, they can come in. But I know I do see like, I feel like it's been exclusive due to the fact of our reaches only so far. So that's definitely been I meant I was talking to Karen about that extensively too when she was when she was you know. One of the other things that we can do once we work out the issues with making the website public is, of course, have a page on the contributor website for this. Oh, whatever. So people place for people to find the schedule. Yep. The so yep. OK. That's it for that. And then so met a group stuff that I captured for us for some actions. I'm going to quickly draft some of the charter graduation review stuff that we talked about today. That incorporates the like the TOC liaison stuff, like having one LGTM there. And then also update the TOC with the new structure to match the website. And then Josh, I think you said something about helping out with some kind of GitHub setup, if I recall. Yeah. There is an open pool or actually I'm sorry, there is an open issue for you to do the pool request workflow anyway. Right. And and that was partly dependent on what we were doing with the documents for the website. So yep. Doing PR flow. And then did I miss anything as far as meta group stuff that needs to get done? Oh, actually new calendar invites. Amy, I'm actually looking through our issues right now to to make sure nothing is falling through the gaps. So to finish up with the calendar thing. So Paris's proposal, which I think we can go forward with was that we're going to do maintainer circle once a month on what are we doing it in the first of the third week of the month? I've forgotten. I'm going to I'm getting out the exact what we said so that we don't do. And then and then do this meeting only on the alternate two weeks. So basically we only be having this meeting every four weeks that depends on our ability to do queue clearing asynchronously. And if that really doesn't work out, then I'll be proposing adding a half hour queue clearing meeting at a different time. But hopefully we don't have to do that. Let's we and let me and you can we can attack like some kind of slack stand up together too. We can like rally the troops. So it is a guess that would be the other right. That would be the other way to do this would be slack stand up and that would be very much better for people who are in non US time zone. So so the official is first Thursday maintainer circle because first Tuesday is always sick updates with TOC. And then third Thursday are sick meeting here. And then you know some kind of revolving slack stand up. You know if we're actually doing a slack stand up, we could theoretically do that once a week. Yeah, I mean that's fine with me. So all we need to do is just post items that are currently pending and who's currently responsible for them. And then that person could comment on what status is. The because in a lot of cases people just need to be reminded that they hadn't finished their review on something. Yeah, and the good news is most of our issues are done. I'm like going through them right now. I'm looking at them right now, half of them. So we've got 26 issues open. I'm gonna say half are closed and done. What do we what day of week we want to do that on? I feel like I don't want to. I want to do it earlier than Thursday just because you know for like dawn this is Thursday night. And I you know and if you know somebody's European and they're taking Friday off, then they're basically getting a ping on something. They're not going to get until next week. So maybe like to do it on the Tuesdays that we don't have groups that we don't. Yeah, I like that idea. Okay. All right. Now let's document it. So I stand up on Tuesdays that are group days. And then Paris to send a note to mailing list what changes. All right. Yay team. Everybody's tired. I think I have a very good idea actually. Yeah. Oh my gosh. So did anybody actually see that horrendous PR that I did the other day that dims got me out of? No. Oh yeah. What was it one of the things where you rebass and you end up dragging in the entire history of the project? I'm familiar. I'm intimately familiar. I've never done that. I have not laughed that hard. This is another repo last week. It was all in a mess. It was a mess y'all. It was like wait. I think I just checked everything in. We have all been there. Dim St. My particular favorite one was where I did a rebase that somehow backed out every commit in the project from the last six months. That's beautiful. That would be a lovely thing to do if I know how I did it. Because there are times when you actually want to do that and you end up spending an entire weekend doing that. And I'm like if I had any idea how I did this that would be a good get trick to keep around. But I have no idea how I did it. If you have a stale main and you rebase on main and then push up, you can delete hundreds and thousands of commits that have happened since you last did it. Yes. Yeah. Yeah y'all. Yikes. Never done that either. You have no idea. It took me so much to say to send that in Slack. I'm sitting there like should I send this? I need to send this. If it's any consolation, I have done that despite the fact that I have also been paid $400 an hour to fix somebody else's get repo. It doesn't. Git is a tool with notably absent guardrails. It's like Star Wars in the bottomless pits. It doesn't take a single character out of place, can get you to a place where you can't figure out how you got there or how to get back. Honestly, that's where I am with one of the PRs that's in the key right now. Recruiting, because there's a maintainer circle like weird update to it. Yeah. It's called Recruiting Guide. And I have no idea how that, like I just have no idea. It's usually because you were switching branches around and couldn't keep track of what you'd added. Yes. And I accidentally, I must have like a command save or something. So for what it's worth, if you're doing your Git actions in Bash, I have a set of Bash profile scripts that give you little tags on your command line that say like how many changes you have that you've added and how many you haven't added and how many you haven't uploaded. Yeah. Yeah. That's a really good visual cue for me because sometimes I'll look at that and I'll be like, wait, oh, I have 11 unsafe changes here. I need to save those before I switch branches. That's exactly what it is. Yeah. So. So embarrassing. It's slow recording. Yeah. Welcome to our Git clinic. Welcome to our Git clinic. Yeah. You know, Git was designed to suit Linus Torvald's personal workflow. And the fact that the rest of us are using it is kind of one of these industry accidents. He didn't mean it to work for anyone, anyone else. I'm getting off here. I'm going to save 15 minutes before my next meeting. It's like, oh, what do I do? Bathroom break. Can't wait to see y'all in person. Whenever that. See you soon. Bye, everybody.