 button. It's one minute pass and then it will just get things started. So hopefully everyone can see the slide deck I'm sharing. And as usual, let me find the notes here. The notes are here. I'm going to put this on a chat window. So this will take notes here. But right. So let's get things started. Pretty short list of agenda topics. Just wanted to, I mean, I think we've been working on this for a few months. I mean, when I say we, it's mostly been George. But I think we're getting there in terms of getting the core team page updated. I think it'll be good to get this thing sort of you know, make this go live. And I wanted to remind, I was thinking about doing a blog post about the core team anyways. I mean, we had a slight change in charter, which we haven't necessarily heavily publicized yet. So I think that would be a good thing. And then George and Ben, I don't think I introduced the two of you to the wider community through blog posts. I think there'll be a good opportunity to do all of that. So we'll go through that real quickly. And then I created a like a sample survey. I mean, somebody already took one, I assume it was Benny or somebody else who was we're taking a look at it. But I think we're somewhat close to that one as well. Good. I think there were about seven or eight questions. And I thought of one more over the weekend that we could potentially add. So we'll go through that real quick. And I think back in January, I talked about you know, looking for ways to recognize someone are more regular contributors. So I started with an issue and created an MR to create a like a sort of a badging program for top contributors. So just want to go give you a quick preview of that and working on a couple of things so that you'll probably see on the issue. Obviously, like trying to work with our marketing team to finalize the design for badging. And, you know, I thought it'd be nice to have some fun, like a merchandiser swags to go along with, you know, just a badge to recognize the contributors and we'll talk about any other business topics. I had one listed there in terms of like the May QWERTY meeting, but we can talk about other things as well. Anything else that we should add to the list of topics here? Or everyone okay? Cool. All right. So if that's the case, George, I guess I can just turn things over to you. You can just give us a quick rundown of, I mean, I think people can see the MR and see the work that's been going on for the past few months. But George, if you want to give us a quick update on what you've done so far, I can even stop sharing. And if you want to show us like the preview of what the page is going to look like, you can do that as well. Okay, I have to run the middle month first. But in overall, this will update the core team layout page and also the alumni page. We can see the magic west and add any feedback if you want. Actually uses the same layout as the company team page layout. So I think it will improve the both pages. And I think it's in good shape to merge this and improve smaller bits later. Yeah, just taking notes here. Yeah, I mean, I agree. I think we're at a stage where I mean, it doesn't need to be perfect. Like we're supposed to be iterating. I mean, I think we edited the text. And then also, I think we got some help to also improve the layout as well. Yes, yeah, I think what I'll do is I could probably ask David to merge this. I mean, I can do that as well. But it might make sense to just have David just merge this and just go from there. And then get this done in the next couple of days. But hi, Mr. Remy. I don't know if you have any feedback or concerns or that also sprints us in the description. Sorry for that. So we can see the result in the description of the magic west. The actual result. Yeah. Yeah, maybe we can, if we want to see it live before we merge, we can, I can push the branch to the canary canary problem and so that we have a review app. Yeah, should we do that? So you want to run this live or we want to add something here, Remy? Yeah, I will, I will put the branch just so that we can see it in a review app from the upstream. Okay. Yeah, but the screenshots are ready. I can run this locally if you want. I'm not checking. That's a good idea. I can share my screen if you want. Yeah, let me stop sharing so you can go for it. Let me see. Just waiting for the middleman to start, please. I think you should be seeing an empty tab right now, but just waiting for the middleman to take a while. Yeah, it's always, it's almost there. So this will also use the same YAML file for the team members and I've added, according to Yarex suggestion, another YAML file for the Courtney Malumni members just to not to be mixed with the in regards of performance, I think that's okay. So should we come back to this while we're rating or is it almost done? So it will take a minute or two. Maybe we can go on and come back this time. Yeah, let's do that. So yeah, if you want to stop sharing for a few minutes. Okay. All right, cool. Thanks. It's always hard trying to do a live demo. I'm gonna figure out. Okay, there we go. Cool. So all right, we'll come back to that. And then the other topic that or issue that Vinny raised, I think was before the Courtney meeting last month was getting feedback from the first time contributors. And I think we worked on like a seven or eight questions. And let me open this created a sample survey that we can use. So this is sort of, you know, what people will see. So I think the first several questions are multiple choice like, you know, how long did it take to set up a GDK? You know, were you happy with the response time from any of the deep lab team members? After submitting an MR with the feedback, you know, useful? Were you able to help to get the help you needed? And then rest of the questions are more open ended. You know, what was the most difficult part? Suggestions for improvement? And number seven is I mean, last question is basically, would you would you do this again? And the other question that I thought of adding after number six probably is, you know, I wanted to get a feel for why they wanted to contribute to get lab in the first place. I'll make that open that ended as well. I thought about making the multiple choice, but I think the list will get really long. So I think we can just make it open ended. And then if we see a trend, we can turn that into multiple choice as well. But that's sort of you know, it's pretty quick and simple. I mean, I've used SurveyMonkey in the past and I mean, it's pretty nice. And even in terms of reporting, it charts our graphs for multiple choice type of questions and also allows you to export reports into a spreadsheet like a Google sheet. So it makes management pretty simple. So not sure if you, I mean, feel free to even take the survey if you want to. I think I'll be able to delete any of the responses that I get as part of the test. But that's sort of what the survey looks like. And I'm just going to see, you know, if you guys had any other questions or or thoughts or wait a second, I'm not even sharing right now. Sorry about that. But so, yeah, sorry. So I guess you didn't necessarily see the questions that are that are listed here and then what the format looks like. But any questions or thoughts on this? And I think I mentioned this last time, I send out an email to people who contribute for the first time to offer them our, you know, MOG with the hashtag that says my first MR merged. And it's been kind of fun seeing people kind of tweet that on the on the Twitter. So I'm pleasantly surprised a number of people who've done that. You know, when I ask them to do it over email. When I send that email out once a month, I could definitely add a link to the survey and just, you know, make it clear that it's voluntary, but, you know, look to get people's feedback on their experience when they contributed for the first time. And, you know, it will be anonymous. I want to keep it anonymous. So the responses will be honest. But just want to see if you guys have any thoughts or questions. I mean, definitely want to keep it pretty short. I don't want this to be like intrusive. The survey is like asking 20 questions like nobody will take them. So I definitely want to keep it under like, you know, eight or nine questions. But yeah, I think that that's super cool. Yeah, seven questions. Yeah, I mean, we'll see what the response rates are. I mean, typically the last couple of months, the first time contributor has been anywhere between like 30 to 50 people. So, you know, even if like the response rate is like 15, 20 percent, we might get some decent sense in the next couple of months. But yeah, I think it's pretty cool. One question that I think might be interesting would probably be were you satisfied with response time for your MR? Yeah, so I have that. Yeah, sorry. I scrolled through this one when I was sharing. But yeah, that was like number two. Were you happy with the response time from GitLab team members? Yeah. But yeah, I mean, like I said, feel free to like a click on the survey link. And if you want to actually test the survey by taking the survey, I mean, that's completely fine. I'll probably just, you know, what I think I already, I think I mentioned, I already got like, I'm guessing it was Vinny who already like respond, like, you know, he submitted the survey response. But I mean, feel free to do that. You're not going to hurt anything. I just admitted it. Cool. All right. Thanks. Cool. Okay. So, it sounds like people are pretty much in agreement. I mean, I'll, I won't send this out just, I mean, just just now. I probably won't be reaching out to the first sign contributors from 11.8 until probably next week or so anyways. But if you have any questions in the meantime between now and like maybe under the weight, feel free to let me know. Cool. Okay. So, all right, George, are you ready or? Yes, we can. Okay, cool. All right. Let me go back and let me stop sharing now. So, I think you can see the screen now. Yep. So, this is the new core team layout, the page layout. So, it includes a header section where it's, and also some two paragraphs below. The core team members, I've used some partial data, if you remember, I asked you about this to just use only some partial data on your profiles and your and the winners. Yeah. Yeah, it looks nice. That's it more or less. I think it will improve the overall layout. And I also have the alumni, the core team alumni page, which includes the past members and also the section that mentions that past team members that are now employees, some of them. I've also used the same partial template for those two. So, cool. Yeah, I think it looks really nice. That's it. We're going to take another look and add any feedback or move this forward this to David and Merz. Yeah, that works for me. I mean, for people that are on the call right now, it's like, I mean, I'd like to be, you know, people to be able to sort of get a preview of the page as well before it gets merged. And then, well, maybe we'll just, you know, ask David to merge it by the end of the week if there is no other feedback. But yeah, that might be a good thing to do. Like Remy was suggesting, just allow people to review it through the review app. All right. Yeah, I just have a question about the alumni page. I see that we are changing the path. I just want to make sure that the old path redirects to the new path. You mean the URL path? Yeah. I think it will live. I can try this. I think it will redirect. So it uses the same part again. I'm not sure about if this is supposed to rewrite the URL. The type slash community, it should go to slash core team slash alumni. Yeah, I think it should. So we should probably make a redirect from community slash alumni. So yeah. Yes, I think core team slash. Yeah, I think it's similar to how we do it for just the slash alumni page. Indeed. And the core team, I think redirects there. Yes. Core team redirects to slash community slash core team. It should work the same way. So if you can pinpoint where this, I think the redirect works. This will go to here eventually. Cool. Good. Okay, cool. Yeah, I just edited it out there. Make sure that redirect works. Okay. I can stop sharing an array if you want to go more. Yeah. Cool. Thanks. Cool. Looks good. Let me actually share this time. There we go. Hit the share button. Cool. All right. So it looks good. I think we're ready to move on both of those items. So the last major topic is recognizing top contributors. In terms of code contributions, obviously there are other ways to contribute to GitLab, but specifically for the people that have been making regular code contributions, I wanted to figure out a way to sort of recognize these people. So you see the relevant issue there, and then I'll think I'll just go to the preview page for the page that I'm working. I mean, it's still pretty rough. Working with the marketing team, as you'll see on the issue to get the banner going, and also develop some sort of a badge or icon for each of the categories. So, I mean, starting with 2018, I just wanted to recognize what I think are more regular contributors in terms of code. So you'll see, I mean, I don't mean just to be a ranking, but I wanted to have a grouping of people in like three tiers. I mean, David and I initially talked about goals, silver and bronze, like like you do in sports or Olympics, but then we realized that my confused people in terms of our like a product hearing. So we've been experimenting with different terminology, like the top category is mastered, and you have expert, and then you have like advanced. I was at a scale conference in LA over the weekend, and I was attended a session that was run by somebody responsible for opensource.com, and they have a lot more, like they probably have like 10 different tiers. So the other, I mean, terms they use are like a superstars or stars. So, well, we'll probably try to finalize the terminology, but this is sort of like a 30 or 40 people that I sort of wanted to recognize in terms of making contributions. I mean, obviously, near the top, like Vitality and George, you did an insane amount of have merged MRs. But I mean, there are lots of other people here that a lot of names that you recognize that are that have been making like a regular contributions. And I think I mentioned like a number, like a number of MR, like in terms like number five is sort of is sort of a you know, a threshold for for for the advanced here, because thinking that I mean, this requires people to make at least at least have one like merge MRs like every other month, roughly speaking. So I thought that was sort of a reasonable place to start. So that's sort of, I mean, what I wanted to share with you and the other stats that you'll see here is the number of people that have made contributions last year was, you know, over 400. And the total number of MRs, merged MRs were, you know, 1464. So I mean, pretty high number of contributions. But this is one of the like things that I hopefully we can launch in the next couple of weeks. But it's been starting to do some background work over the last last couple of weeks. But just wanted to share that with all of you and get your take on it. George, it looks like you're about to say something, but yes, you're right. And does this include the contributions to only the GitLab C project? No, this is that's a good question. I should be pretty specific. So let me look at my dashboard. So include CEE, omnibus, GDK and runner. And I don't know why I'm blanking out. So give me a second here. Second. So ECE omnibus, runner, GDK, pages and shell. That's sort of the projects that I've been tracking. I should probably I could probably include more, but that's sort of so it goes beyond CEE. But if you look at the numbers, you know, obviously CEE is going to be much larger than some of the other projects that I mentioned. Yeah, I mean, the other like, I mean, speaking of projects, the other app that I've noticed recently that I would or I've been seeing more community contribution is actually GitR. And I think George, you you've had number of contributions there too. And then I mean, interesting thing is like GitR, I mean, they don't follow like our traditional milestones that we have at GitLab. So the slicing of data for GitR is a little bit more challenging, but I mean, I need to talk to Eric at some point, but I definitely noticed a jump or bump in that project over the last three or four weeks, which which is interesting. Cool. I mean, what do you guys think of these like a terminology or categories like master, expert in advance? Does that seem reasonable to you guys or do you think that's horrible? Like I, you know, yeah, yeah, if you didn't have the product category, gold, silver and bronze, I think that would have been a good thing to go with. But go ahead. Sorry. Yeah, I am reading the discussion in the issue. Yeah, I see that we have some some other suggestions from Marcel. Right. And I'm not a fan of master, expert in advance. I think we can probably have something. I don't know. I have, I'm not sure I see the difference between the three levels. We could at first sight, we could omit them all together or maybe just list the contributors and also maybe that's yeah. But I mean, so if the challenge is like we want to badge these like a group of people, right? I mean, rather than just having one. So I mean, I'm looking at the issue here. So I mean, obviously difference between superstar and star is like pretty clear. I think I don't know if you notice a difference with like an enthusiast, for example. Yeah. So when I saw that presentation from the open source.com person, I was drawn to superstar versus star. But Remy, I can see what you're saying like master versus expert, like it's not necessarily clear which level is higher. Right. So I mean, enthusiast, like that's sort of the level you get before you become a sports star, I guess, but you know, maybe that makes more a little bit more logical sense. But yeah, I mean, that's a good feedback. Yeah, I would try to give a suggestion in the issue. Okay. Okay. Yeah, they'll be great. So yeah, I'm trying to like a close this pretty quickly because I mean, as you saw like a comment from, I mean, I guess it's not this specific issue. I opened a separate marketing issue with Yarek and and also loop to create the badging and the preferences to have our terminology nailed them pretty quickly. So I completely understand. In that case, I think going with superstar, star and enthusiast would be better than expert and master at the moment. Okay. I need to think about if, if I can come up with something better than that about I think if you need to merge it quickly, then that's better than master expert at once. Okay. Okay. Good, good feedback. Yeah, I mean, we don't have to like, you know, I mean, we can also like obviously like iterate next year. But that doesn't mean we need to, we can do a sloppy job just from the get go. Yeah, I mean, you if you link on this like open source.com pagers, they have, I mean, they have like, I swear, like about a dozen different levels. I think that's a bit much. But yeah, that's how they do it. But I mean, they've been very successful, right? They, I mean, the interesting thing about open source.com that I didn't realize was that this is just all honorary thing. You don't even get a t-shirt or any swag at the end of this. I mean, obviously, they are dealing with a lot bigger volume of people. But, but despite that, it's been very successful, which is pretty impressive. So it's, it's all about, you know, reputation in the community. Cool. Thanks for appreciate the feedback. So I guess there's a slight preference for, for this option versus, you know, what I have on the, on the web page, which is fine. Cool. Yeah, I mean, so hopefully this is, you know, obviously, we, you know, we've had a court team for, for a long time. But I mean, this is another way of sort of, you know, widening the reach of people that we recognize for good contributions they made, made to the community and get lab. Cool. And then, yeah, the threshold is sort of, I mean, somewhat, you know, arbitrary. But I mean, I thought these were like reasonable starting point. So that's sort of the threshold for different levels there. Cool. Anything else or ready to move on? Cool. Okay. On the last slide, I mean, the only item that I had, I had, I was kind of looking ahead for the next couple of months. And they realize our May court team meeting coincides with Contribute in New Orleans. And I think all four of us on the call today will be there. And then I think the only court team members that are not going to be able to make it are Jacopo and Vitaly. So, you know, if it's okay, everybody will could probably just cancel the call that, that month and then, you know, resume in June, if there are no objections. Yeah, offense. Was it? Yeah, that's fine. Just, just to note that I won't be there, actually. Oh, okay. Oh, that's too bad. Is this the first, like a summit or Contribute, you're missing, Remy, or? Yes. Yeah. Okay. That's too bad. Yeah, it turned out like I, it's like I was talking to a number of other GitLab team members, there are several of them who can't make it for various reasons, but I mean, it does happen. Cool. Okay. Any other topics or anything else that we want to discuss? We've got about 10 minutes left. I can give a quick update about slack access for court team members. Yes. So, I mean, the tickets with the infrastructure team, so they just need to implement what we have on the handbook update MR. So, it's been pushed out another, like, I mean, they work through these sprints and I mean, I understand they have a lot of things to do, but hopefully, I mean, you can see it on the issue that it's been pushed out again, but hopefully it'll be done by, like, a 23rd of this month, but that's sort of where things stand. And let me try to find the issue. Right. I think we agreed on a solution that treats pretty much everybody the same. It doesn't matter if it's a court team member or a good lab employee. If he doesn't need access to the information, then he isn't invited in the channel and can't join it. Right. So, I think that's a better solution versus just preventing the court team from accessing some channels. Right. So, yeah. And then you probably saw on the handbook update MR that I created for Slack access and CID has already, like, approved it. I mean, that's actually been, like, probably about a month ago. So, and then nobody else has chimed in, I don't believe. So, in terms of policy, I don't think there's any disagreement. So, I think we're good to go. I think it just needs to be implemented technically. But, and I'll finally found the issue. So, like, here's the issue on their infrastructure. You know, feel free to chime in and ask what if this will actually be implemented at this sprint time frame. If you want to do that. Yeah, I mean, I think we can even merge the handbook because in the end, the technical side is just making sure that everybody follows the handbook. It's not enabling something which just. Okay. Yeah. I mean, I guess we could do that. Actually, Takuya actually asked the same question and my, you know, reply to him was, well, I'm actually trying to wait until it's closer to implementation. But I guess there's no harm in merging the handbook. So, and I can definitely ask David to do that since we already have a thumbs up from CID. Give myself an action item. Anything else? Looks like we're good. George, thanks for all the work on the Quartz event alumni pages. And thank you for all the feedback. Cool. All right. All right. Have a good day in Europe. I'll talk to you guys again soon. Great. Cheers. Bye.