 Hey, Ben, how are you? Thanks for joining. Let me reshare. There we go. All right, so thanks for joining and thanks for Yeah, we had to push this out to this week because several of us were at Get Let Commit last week. So without further ado, we'll get started. So I've got a few things on the agenda. Just wanted to do a follow-up on I think we officially closed the Get Let Foss repel on September 23rd. So just did some quick check on MRs that were overclosed, auto closed. So I'll talk to you about that in a bit and then contribute 2020. It's official. It's going to be in Prague. Similar to this year, we are planning to invite wider community members. So I wanted to get your thoughts on that. Again, it's hackathons coming up in about a month. So just go quick because up there. And I think Georgia had a couple of ideas or issues to enhance the web pages for one for the court team and the other was for the heroes pages, I believe. So you can spend some time on that. And obviously, like any other topics that you guys want to add, let me know. And then oh, thanks, people are already jotting down notes there. So I appreciate you guys doing that. So let's move on. So as I noted earlier, I'm this single code-based move that, I mean, I think we started this in earnest in August and I mean, there are a couple of blog posts and announcements and messages on MRs giving heads up about the single, moved to a single code base. And I took a snapshot of MRs that were still open in GitLab FOS, like a day or two before the cutoff around the 23rd. And then you'll see the Google sheet there. There are about 150 MRs that were still acted upon before the auto closing of those MRs. And I think I followed up on about half of them. I mean, what I try to do is follow up on MRs that were open within the last three to four months. And as you can see in that Google sheet, let me just go there so people can see it. I mean, it's not really elegant. I try to write down dates on when some of the MRs were followed up on. I mean, some were done by me and some were done by other reviewers. For example, like Evan Reed did a good job of following up on some of the simple documentation changes to encourage them to open a new MR on GitLab. But as you can tell, I mean, a vast majority of them, I mean, people haven't been, like necessarily have been very responsive when I basically asked them if they were planning on continuing their work on the MRs that were open. I mean, as you can see, there were a lot of them that were open like pretty recently in like early to mid-September. So the fact that, I mean, a lot of the contributors have not been responsive is a little bit of a concern. I think for some of them, like some of the documentation ones that were pretty simple, I think we can ask reviewers or coaches to like a finish, I mean, just open a new MR, just finish up the work. But the concern is, I mean, some of the MRs might be going inactive or going stale. I mean, some of the MRs that are, you know, pretty old, like six months or older, I'm not terribly concerned about that's why I try to focus on MRs that were open from like June and onwards. So just wanted to share that data with you. I wanted to see if anybody had any thoughts or suggestions on how we can address some of these MRs. And I mean, some of you may have been pinged by me directly. I mean, there were some of the MRs that were opened by folks that are on the call. And so you've probably seen those reminders that are that were coming from me, but I don't know if people had other ideas or suggestions on on how to move forward on on some of these contributions. So not sure on specific suggestions, but the ones that you pinged me on, I intend to do just have been super busy recently. So no, no, yeah, it's fine. Yeah, I mean, yeah, you folks out weren't I wasn't too worried about it wasn't because you didn't know how to do on budget. I figured you guys were busy. But sorry, Ben, I mean, I think I'm going to cut you off. Was there anything else or not really? I mean, I would agree with what you just said, though, like the ones that look like they're pretty much done and just really need to get ported over, then we should probably figure out a way to do that. The ones that need a bunch more work. Different story. Yeah, yeah, I agree. So I don't know, maybe Ray it like it could be an evolution of your document there trying to figure out which ones are easy ones that we should just figure out how to get done. Yep. Yeah, it might also be an easy start for people who want to contribute in the next second. So just put over some existing hours. Yeah, cool. Yeah, I mean, thanks for the idea. Probably, you know, it's not too many, although I probably should have spent more more time on this here about like a 75 or so that that I myself or other people have followed up on. So maybe we should do another level of triaging and identify ones that are easy and give contributors our few more days to I mean, like a few days to sort of make a decision on whether they want to continue or not. If they're not responsive, maybe we should just assign them to like reviewers or coaches to sort of finish their work. So I hate to see those like go to waste. We could also think stage managers that they could also help picking this up. Yep. Yep. Cool. Showed down some notes. And the other thing I wanted to see was that if there was a slowdown on contribution right after moved to a single code base. And what I did notice, it wasn't last week, but the week prior week of the September 30th, I did notice that the volume of contribution were down for some reason. And I'm not 100% sure if that's due to the single code base move or I mean, I mean, maybe there are other reasons for lower volumes of contribution. But when I added a link there on the slides to the dashboard, the number of MRs that came in after the cutoff like starting on September 23rd to yesterday was significantly lower than the previous three weeks. So I mean, fortunately, the volume seemed to have picked up to a normal pace, like starting last week. So hopefully that was a, I mean, temporary bled. Is the number of people doing MRs similar? Because I, in some ways, I think the number of MRs is maybe not the best reflection. Like, because like, for example, it could be that, you know, someone who's really active with MRs was, you know, on vacation or busy or something. I know there's weeks where I'll do 10 and then there's three works where I'll do none. Yeah. I mean, that's a good point. I don't think I looked at that, but that's something I can look at. Because I would think if the number of like, you know, the average number we're getting per week has gone down, and that might be a little bit more concerning because, you know, I don't know if people get lost in the process somehow. Right. I mean, overall, I mean, my initial impression, like, especially during the first week, I didn't see any, like a whole lot of slowdown in terms of contributions and a lot of, I mean, I saw like a normal amount of community contribution come in. And then for some reason, like the week after, it sort of, sort of like it was noticeably like slow. I mean, the number of MRs that I had to triage, it seemed like the volume was significantly lower. But maybe that was just a blip. But I mean, that's a good point, Ben. I'll see, also check in terms of the number of contributors, not just contributions. But I mean, starting last week, it seemed to have sort of gone back to normal. I mean, I normally see about like a seven to 10 per day that sort of get labeled by the bot. And that we seem to be back to somewhat the normal volume. So hopefully that hasn't caused a whole lot of confusion. I mean, I don't know if you like people that are on GITR on a regular basis. I mean, there was somebody who posted a few days ago said something about what happened to the CE repo and another community member chimed in and reminded them about the single code base move. So definitely not everyone was aware of it, but hopefully, you know, we're not going to see, I could continue slow down a contribution, but just want to quickly share that and I mean, see if you guys have any thoughts or suggestions. But I mean, so far, like overall, so far, it seems to be good. I mean, there was on a whole lot of impact on like the hackathon, York and others were accommodating around the hackathon contribution. So that was, that was very helpful. So Yeah, as long as it's temporary, perfectly okay. Yeah, I mean, people had to set up or we set up the development environments a little bit at least. So not everybody did have time to do that immediately. I guess, as long as it's not something permanent, it should be okay. Right. Yeah, I mean, I think like, I mean, shortly afterwards, I made the necessary documentation changes and I made a blog post as well that I mean, I know at least one person's ready because somebody reached out to me after the blog post. So hopefully words gotten around and we'll keep watching the number of contributors and contributions in the next couple of releases. Maybe people had just been contributing the single code base challenge for three weeks and now they're at last able to contribute. Yeah, yeah. So yeah, so we'll keep an eye on things and see how things go. But I mean, it's like, like I said, the last week or so, the things look pretty normal, but we'll see if that's not the case. Yeah, I think I've asked this before, but this, the dashboard includes all the repositories under the GitLab world group, right? Yeah, that's a good point. I should have probably just isolated GitLab and not the rest. One point is that, and I think there is a missing repository there from the design system that I'm not seeing and the dashboard you sent, but I think we have the URL a few months ago, but yeah, they should have updated that URL because they noticed that even before I was about to report it to them. But let me just double check. It's possible that there weren't any contributions, but I know at least you've made one or two contributions to the design system, right, during that period. But yeah, let me double check. Moving on. Contribute 2020. So I think it's old news by now, but we'll be in Prague in March. I don't know the dates, but if you click on the page, you'll see it. The plan, and you'll probably all remember, I mean, most of you were in New Orleans several months ago. We had two wider community members join us outside of the core team. Marcel, that was before we joined GitLab at the time and Hiroyuki joined us at the event. So it was nice to have more community members participating with other GitLab team members. And the plan, I mean, we should still have a budget team invite wider community members so that dollars to support a travel shouldn't be an issue. And we definitely want to have more than a couple of people join us at the event. I mean, we did definitely reach out to a lot more people prior to New Orleans, but for whatever reason, a lot of people had conflicts or just were unable to take their take time off to travel to New Orleans. So we'll try to do an outreach a little earlier so people can plan around the event. And the other thing we want to do is we definitely want to invite more diverse group of people. You know, we definitely looked at like contribution in terms of like a code contributions or, but you know, we also have the heroes program where we're trying to recognize a wider pool of, you know, contributors to the community outside of typical contributions through repos. So if you have any suggestions on like a specific individuals or type of people that we need to think about, I would definitely welcome you feedback. And I think what we did for this year's event, I mean, as we're building a list of people that we wanted to invite, I think we ping, I mean, a lot of you folks to validate that lists look reasonable and that we weren't like really missing anything. We'll probably do the same thing. But you know, not necessarily in terms of like specific individuals, but I mean, the group of people or type of people that we may have missed in the past, I mean, I don't know if you have any thoughts on like who else we should be thinking about or reach out to any thoughts or ideas or maybe maybe some people that are localizing heat lab like that are working in in clothing. Yeah, yeah, I mean, I think that these people are kind of invisible. Right. Yeah. Yeah, I definitely agree. I think we try we reach out to a couple of like a proof readers for New Orleans. And then, but I don't think there were that many people that we reached out to maybe it was like a two or three people and and and none of them happened to be available. But yeah, I think localization is something I wasn't good about as well. I mean proof readers is I mean, outside of like this group of people, I don't think many people like even a kid lab are aware of the fact that we have a crowd and platform and and then our our software is available in in in different languages and this completely driven by people outside of kid lab almost entirely. Right. I mean, we we help here and there. But yeah, I mean, that's a good point. And then I mean, I'll talk to John Coughlin about people in the heroes program, but people that have been active in organizing like need ups. I mean, I think those are good, good, good natural candidates. But yeah, if you think of others, even specific individuals, let let me know, or even like David or John Coughlin. And then we'll definitely like factored it in. I mean, I, you know, I think, like, I may not be remembering the figures correctly. I think last year we had budget to like have like 10 people like join us outside of the core team, which which is a pretty decent size budget. But I I think we we want to even go beyond that number and see see how we do it for Prague. Any other thoughts or feedback and let us know and hopefully many of you guys can join us. I mean, for for a lot of you, I mean, fortunately, the travel should be a lot shorter going to Prague. So I mean, we do have a lot of core team members in in Central European time zone. So I go, you know, hopefully just one flight over for a couple of hours should definitely be a lot easier. And yeah, less issues with visa visas as well, hopefully. Okay. So Q4 hackathon, believe it or not, it's I mean, I was just talking to somebody about like the last hackathon, it felt like we just had one like two weeks ago. But that was, I noticed that it's almost like a two weeks ago now. So the next one is coming up. So we'll you'll probably see the same sort of a social campaign on on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook, like we did last time. We thought the social campaign was pretty successful. So pretty much going to use that same template with our social team. And I'll be the plan is to update the hackathon pages like this week with prizes. And I'm finalizing some of the tutorial sessions, although we might add more in the next next few weeks, so you'll probably see the hackathon page updated. Hopefully sometime in the next couple of days. And I mean, again, like appreciate everybody's help last time around, not just with your MRs. But I mean, I was joking with George, I think I woke up like on day two, thinking I'm going to have to triage a lot of the community contributions, but they're pretty much done by George by the time I got up. So that was that was a nice pleasant surprise, especially with the volume of MRs we were getting last time around. And coaching and reviews, I mean, helping with reviews on not just on MRs, but helping people out on Gitter was was obviously pretty successful. I mean, what I did notice on Gitter, the contributor channel, we're now up to like 340, 350. I mean, if you remember like the first hackathon, we had like 40 people on there. So every time we do our hackathon, it seems like we were adding us quite a number of people. And it's slowly becoming a forum where I mean, people are a lot of the contributors are like helping each other and interacting with each other. So your presence there is is is very much appreciated. And I mean, for those of you that that were, I mean, that participated in the last one, I think, obviously, like, yeah, Coco and George, I don't know if you have any other thoughts about what else we might try to do or things that we can improve on for the one next month. But let me feel free to jump in here. Maybe not for the kickoff, but afterwards, I wonder if you already analyze the amount of person that contributed to the previous hackathon and to the next one in order to find out if they repeatedly contributed to the hackathon so that we don't lose persons. Yeah, I mean, that's a good point. Yeah, I mean, if you think about it, there are like a number of people that sort of make make their presence felt like it at hackathons, but do they repeat over and over again? I mean, that's something I haven't like really looked at. But I mean, that's a good point. I mean, there was like, thank you to them, we can always improve. Right, right, right. That's a good point. I mean, like somebody like I mean, a couple of people that won the grand prize from the last time, I mean, they were somewhat new. But we'll see if they, you know, keep coming back for more. That's a good point. I wonder, Ray, on your last topic about, you know, trying to figure out people to invite to contribute if there's some sort of connection with hackathons that we could, we might want to think through, like if some people are really active or like, I don't know if you could use it as a motivating factor or, you know, not sure exactly, but something to think about. Yeah, good point. Oh, and the final thing about on the hackathon. So the next, the start of the hackathon conflicts with the next scheduled court team meeting. So, I mean, one of the, I mean, why don't you just ask if we be okay to, I mean, push out the court team meeting again for to the following week, for November. And I assume for most people it'll be okay, but just wanting to ask if there are any concerns if we did that. Sure. All right. I'll let me write that down. Right. Yeah. I mean, I'd rather have the court team meeting like after, like after the hackathon so we can provide a recap of what happened the previous week or at the hackathon. Cool. So that's just a quick update on the hackathon for enhancements to the web pages. I mean, George, I'll turn things over to you and let you cover those topics. Thank you, Ray. So the first point is about you having a pop-overs in the court team page. We discussed this in the past, similarly to the company team page. It should be relatively easy to, easy to add this using the humble template existing in the team page. I didn't have much time to do this yet, but feel free to jump in in the meantime. I think we have reached the consensus to add this, right? Jakob or Dali? Yes. Yes. And the second one is about making the hero's page more visible. I just noticed that it was hard to get to the list of the hero's page. So just simply adding a button on the header section could help people get faster to the hero's list. Not sure if you have any feedback on this. It could try this in another way, but I think this is the simplest change that could help. Yeah. I'm guessing if as long as like, I mean, John's actually at a different conference another conference this week, but as long as he's okay with it, yeah, I'm sure you can just submit an MR and have John. They read about it at the bottom of the page, but maybe it's hard for some people to locate this. Yeah. Now, I mean, this is actually like, I noticed this too, because we had the hero's booth at Commit last week. And then one of the things I went to show people was the roster of heroes, right? And I had to like really scroll down like all the way to the bottom to get to the page. And that's where I sort of stopped scrolling. And I just left the screen there so people can see the roster of people because I mean, I think that's more important than like other like overview and like a benefits type of stuff that's on the web page, right? So people want to see who the other heroes are. So I think that's more inspiring. So I think this is a good point. I definitely noticed that when David are in the heroes booth. So cool. In the future, we could also swap the heroes list to become the first page and the details on how to become a hero, just a secondary link. So it would be easier to go directly to the people, just like the recording and how you apply in another page. But right, you can discuss this further. Cool. Okay. Yeah, I don't think there are any concerns or objections on either one of them. Cool. Let's just move on and see if people have any other topics or or comments or anything else you guys want to discuss. So I mean, just because you guys had up the heroes page here, kind of out of curiosity, I'm kind of curious like why, like, you know, what some of these people did that got them to become a hero. If that makes sense. Yeah, no, I mean, that's a good question. I mean, we actually got the same type of questions in the booth last week. So I think they're like broadly like a three categories. I mean, one are I mean, people like anybody on the core team that applied, I mean, basically got approved, right? Because because the amount of contribution you guys made for are pretty obvious and well known. The second group of people are people that are very active in organizing like meetups in their local communities. Like, I mean, we had somebody, Adrian, I believe, yeah, Adrian's a name like somebody who's been very actively talking about and organizing get lab meetups in Cape Town. So he joined us in London. So that's one group of people. And I think the third I don't think I met people in that category are people that are doing a lot of write ups, like blogs on on get lab on on get lab sorry. So basically, people that are I mean, spreading the gospel or evangelizing get lab in their local communities or or or, you know, through through their write ups. So those are like the three three broad categories or people just going to conferences and talking about get lab as well. So those are just the main categories. Then I don't know if that helps. Yeah, I mean, it wasn't really that I cared, like per se, it's just like looking at this page is not immediately clear. Some people is, but some people are not like, you know, web engineer developer, right? Like, you know, do they use get lab? Do they talk do talks for get lab like, right? Okay, I see where you get. I mean, I think that's actually a good point. Maybe having a short blurb like a bio on on how they contributed to the get lab community is something that might be helpful. So let me actually pass that on to john. So yeah, and it looks like the page is set up to cut, you know, like we already have a little blurb section. It's just a matter of, I mean, people including myself going in and, you know, adding one but some, some further encouragement along those lines. And then just, you know, because I think it almost looks like some of these people were encouraged to go put an MR with details, but it's like, well, they put in their job title as opposed to their connection to get lab. Right. That's a good point. Because I think that might help other people who are interested in applying. It's like, well, am I qualified? Right. So you get some examples. Right. Yeah. I mean, the other thing I talked to john about, it was also in the future allowing like, like allowing people to nominate other people. Right. Because right now it's all like self nomination. Right. I mean, for example, like Ben, if you wanted to like nominate somebody that we don't know about in the local Southern California area, I mean, I think that would be a good feature to sort of add at some point. But yeah, there's some things that sort of john's been thinking about as well. But no, this is a good point. Like, you know, what their connection is to get lab is probably a good thing to add. So I encourage people to do that as they add themselves on the heroes page. Well, yeah, I think we're up to like john mentioned that we're up to like 39 people, which is cool. So all right. So any other topics or or discussions people want to have? You know, sorry for my voice. Like, it's like weird allergy season going on in Northern California. So I'm a little bit congested. All right. Well, thanks again for for your time and we'll do this again next month. Thank you. Have a good day. Take care. Bye.