And I want to point out also that note that the factory overhead before this had nothing in it. And that's just to point out that we could do this allocation. That's why we base it on last year's numbers and that's why it's an estimate because we want to be able to allocate it out before maybe there's even stuff in the factory overhead because it's gonna even out at the end of the time period and we'll have to make an adjustment for it. So that's why we have to make the estimate kind of based on last year's numbers. We actually have negative factory overhead. We allocated stuff out before we recorded the factory overhead in this case. And so now we have a negative factory overhead, kind of like negative inventory. We're gonna put the stuff in the factory overhead in the next few journal entries and then we will end up with something close, hopefully, to zero. It should go in the factory overhead and then out of factory overhead. Or in this case, out of factory overhead and then in the factory overhead. But so it should even out by the end of the time period. And so we're putting it in there and then the other side is going in here in the working process. So we're putting it in the working process. Here's working process. What's in working process now? Remember, this was direct labor. I mean, this was direct material. This was direct labor. This is factory overhead. And we're gonna have to then allocate that, of course, to the job because we hit the working process. We need to back this number out by job. Here's how we're gonna back it up over here. Now, how are we calculating this? We're saying direct labor. So in this case, direct labor total was this 218 we did last time, 218 times 0.5. That's how we're coming up with the 109 total. If we wanna break it out by job, then we're just gonna say, okay, here's the direct labor, the 30,000 times 0.5. That's our 15 for job 14. And then we're doing the same thing here. The 120 times 0.5, that's the 60,000 here. And then the 68,000 here, 68,000 times 0.5, that's the 34,000. Now remember, these numbers don't have anything to do with labor, but we used labor in order to see how big each of these jobs are relative to each other. So you notice that this one had labor of 120. The rationale being that we should allocate more to this job based on the fact that direct labor is higher because that would indicate that it's a bigger job. Therefore, we allocated more overhead 60 to here compared to 15, which had much less direct labor. These two aren't directly related. This direct labor indicates the size of the job and therefore the allocation method for the factory overhead. All right, so next time indirect labor paid and assigned to the factory. All right, indirect labor. So we're gonna debit factory overhead. We're gonna credit cash. These are gonna be the types of things that we're gonna have to put into factory overhead, which we already allocated out before. So the factory overhead, indirect labor, once again, we're gonna think about payroll here. This is payroll happening. We're not thinking about payroll taxes. We're debiting instead of payroll expense again, we're debiting factory overhead because it's going into the assets. Last time we debited factory overhead for payroll for the direct labor. And the difference here is that we don't know which job these guys worked on specifically. It might be the supervisors or something that kind of supervised all the jobs or maybe we don't know what they did really, but we need to apply it to the job somehow. So therefore we're gonna put it into factory overhead and then allocate it out using that allocation method we did last time. So we already allocated it out, see? And now we're putting it in, this 14,000 into factory overhead. No effect in this case in the job cost because when we put it into factory overhead, we haven't yet applied it to the job. We haven't put it into work and process. That's the whole point of us putting it in the factory overhead. I don't know which job to put it into. Therefore we couldn't put it into work and process. We're gonna allocate it out as best we can using some kind of ratio. All right, and of course the total here still ties out to the total there and the total there. And next thing that happens amounts applied to factory overhead. So here's all the other stuff that can kind of be in factory overhead. We got the indirect materials. We've got the factory utilities, the factory rent, the depreciation, these are all things that on the factory, anytime something says on the factory, that means it's going into inventory. That's part of the inventory process and either we can apply it directly to the job which means we put it into work and process or we can't, in this case, therefore it's going into factory overhead. So the journal entries related to this then would be materials. We're gonna debit factory overhead, the 14,000, I'm sorry, factory overhead for the 30,000. That's this item here because we did the 14 last time. And then we're going to credit raw materials inventory. It's coming out of the raw materials up here. And we can also see that right there. All right, and so these are gonna be things that we couldn't apply directly like glue or something like that, types of material. We couldn't apply directly to the job. Then we got utilities. So we're gonna debit the factory overhead for the 12. Here it is there. And we're gonna credit cash. This is another one that if you think of utilities you probably think utilities expense. And so what are you doing debiting the factory overhead? Because it's utilities on the factory and therefore it's part of the inventory and we have to capitalize it. So it is in accordance with the accrual matching principle but you may have just memorized that utilities should be debiting utilities expense. So you gotta unlearn that. And then next we have the rent 20,000 to factory overhead. Here's the 20,000. We're gonna credit cash again for paying the rent. And this is another one. You probably think rent expense, right? That's why we're debiting the factory. And again, same thing. We'll rent on the factory when we make inventory. Therefore we have to put it into the cost of the inventory. And then we have the depreciation on the equipment. 30,000 debit. Here it is in the factory overhead and credit accumulated depreciation. Once again, you're probably thinking how do we record depreciation expense since the beginning of time? Debit depreciation expense, credit accumulated. Well,


Hey everybody what's going on it's Eric Johnson from Airtay Throws Nation and in today's video we are going to do some breakdown of the Olympic men's shot put what an amazing competition. Same top three finishers in Tokyo as you had in Rio and of course kind of the same thing. Olympic record again by Ryan Krauser what was more impressive is that every throw we had was over his previous Olympic record. Joe Kovacs again amazing competition and Tom Walsh saved his best competition. Obviously all these men threw basically a meter further than they did in Rio and that is pretty amazing it tells you how much the level of the men's shot has just exploded globally over the last few years. So what we're going to do is kind of take a look look at their kind of techniques what's similar what's different and what makes Ryan Krauser just so incredible as now the world record holder seven centimeters off of his own world record at the Olympic games and we're just going to take a peek at everything so here we go. So let's look at Krauser you know one of the things we talk about obviously the goal with a lot of what we do is that you know the throwing chain reaction system is a way to take something that happens super fast Ryan Krauser all these Olympians you know your pros are your perfect example they're the fastest and they are the best and everything that you're looking at happens super quick and so one of the things that you're doing is we want to be able to create technical consistency and I think that's what's so impressive especially about Ryan Krauser now if you look at Tom Walsh and Joe Kovacs and Darlin Romani they too are you know they're the some of the greatest throwers of all time and they're super consistent but Ryan's consistency has been just up on another notch. So again the one thing we talk about is how do you look at something that happens so quickly and here you know the thing that we look at at Ryan Krauser this is what I refer to as the holy grail of throw that movement around the axis so what what you know when you're kind of looking out there you've got to see we always kind of try to teach there's kind of these points right and this line is essentially going to move slightly you see that and now you're going to see see how that line's there so it starts back here and this is in our system we call you know pillar one is the wind up this is pillar two and so you have to be able to move the body now we talk about there's a there's an optimal position in the upper body there's an optimal position in the lower body how the sweep leg action right is going to work look at you know Ryan's hips look at the shoulders and look at the balance arm right now this is key right look at the knees sometimes people push this knee too far this way and that's not in our opinion how it works what it has to do is be able to get around now the knees going to push into the direction of the throw so so some people you know over the years and again the the the insights and stuff that I like to provide in these videos are just you know my own experience as a thrower and my experiences as a coach and what would work and whatnot so so here's what we call is our pillar two and then again pillar three so he's going to push and that's where we call to drop in right we're not dropping down and some people would argue that crowds are you know drops and this is where they change this rule now here's my thing I'm going to jump around it says that's kind of how I do things but this is I heard we posted up some things everybody's all foul foul they changed the rule one two I always thought it was a stupid rule because nobody's sitting down and throwing you know 22 plus meters nobody sits and then goes that's contrary to how the mechanics and the physics of the sport with an athlete's always moving in so when we look at Joe Kovacs you'll see he's gonna they're all all these guys are pushing off of that sprint leg into them into the middle and you know so I would have everybody who's talking about it that isn't a foul and the reason they deemed it not a foul is because the athlete would be going over well if you're moving into the direction of throw and you're not going to throw 23 meters going backwards and then going forward so that's my argument on it I think there's a down motion where the foot comes but the motion is still always moving forward and that's why I'm glad that the rule was changed and you know and I'm sure if they hadn't changed the rule Ryan would have been able to adjust and he'd probably be thrown just as far that's my opinion him and his dad obviously they've got this dialed they they're they're incredible and he's the greatest ever and so what can what else can you say so here's the key thing that we talk about though again this is kind of where we're dropping in we call this dropping in blind speed pillar three and I think this is what's really interesting some people will say Ryan comes down you know I've had the opportunity to ask Ryan he tries to get this sweep leg out as far as possible and you know this is the other key thing we talk about this this is a counterbalance right so he's got everything moving into the throw look at that direction he is sprinting the shot looks like it's back what's he's doing is getting that lower body ahead so there's a certain window we talk about windows at each pillar right because if we hold this arm back too far you're going to start to mess with that optimal counterbalance so any rate I think here's a perfect example when Ryan hits you know as he sprints and that sweep leg is going to start really whipping ahead look at the upper bodies kind of slow down right this left arms here is one of the things we teach we teach how we're going to create we call it the rewrap we want to keep that arm from continuing to open a lot of times what a lot of throwers do and you're not going to see it at this level they're going to open that left arm and that left arm kind of either wraps late or sometimes you see them pulling back and in my opinion I'd love to ask Ryan Krauser what what he's thinking and if he's willing to share that but some throwers actually do this and I see that with beginning throws I don't see these guys doing that what I see is that arm holding there and then as the right comes in it gives this kind of appearance that the arms pulling back so that's something think about if you're if you're looking at again these are opinions there's my opinion this is what I think I see but these are the things we've taught a lot of our younger throwers and with a lot of success but these things take years I mean look at look at Ryan's progress over the last five years right he came in exploded won the Olympics he's just been getting so consistent at 22 meters then that started being 2250 plus now he's had you know his last what uh four competitions what trials Olympics and then pre-fontein so he's had his last three and I can't remember we have to meet between two sun and trials but he threw 23 meters there so he's had four out of at least his four five meets where he's over 23 meters pretty amazing obviously so here's where we talk about that's that pillar for this kind of acceleration right you're going to notice this is common this is what all these guys are doing they're all doing in our opinion essentially the same thing they have their nuances in their individual aspects Ryan's the tallest of all these guys and so right here you see him how he gets into that power position so he stays wrapped once that left comes down that the the left arm goes out long you have to take a long path some people are teaching to be very active with this arm and again I agree with that but there are nuances on how this arm has to open but notice it's opening out nice and long Ryan pulls around and he really squares up that left foot the block leg you're going to notice is really getting down there look at the look at the elevation and the pushing of the knee right the elevation of the heel and the knee and I think it's really more focused as the knee turns and watches hip drive through and that's what allows them to get that nice extension over the board so this is his 23 30 and you can see really clean throw big big big throw okay so let's take a peek at let's just play it in slow mo so here we go as we come around boom look at that just I love the punch like if you're a shot put enthusiast you know this is just never gets old it's just it's amazing right you can just definitely kind of lose you can watch and trust me I've already watched this video a gazillion times I think this is what's so awesome about Ryan look at how this is the key the left side pulls and you see how it's turned the lower body is turning and creating that torque right and this is what you want to learn as a discus thrower or you know rotational shot putter you got to create that tension that tension comes up creates that extra stretch reflex and you're going to be able to smash the throw so obviously nobody has really done it better I love how as he gets to this point of throw both feet essentially you know on the ground some people advocate jumping I think that's a mistake there's definitely a lift but you're going to notice here I think this is the key look at Ryan there's not a lot of up right there is some up right he comes down and then he's going to lift and when we teach that we always talk about like there's some exaggerated kind of mental processes but what you're doing physically doesn't match and you learn how to bring those two things together so we teach that there's an elevation but you because you're moving the amount of time up and down is very short but if you're vertically if you if you I think if you're really trying to vertically jump that's a big mistake and I think you can see that here Ryan does not jump right he is working the crap out of the ground and lifting and getting that hip ahead and that gives him that long strike and here's the thing Ryan has probably the shortest left arm so the argument would say is this the best way so I've had throwers that have thrown far with the straight left which you're going to see in Walsh and Kovacs and I've had throwers that you know are throwing 60 plus feet with the big ball at like NAIA level and they will have one in particular so I think it's going to be somewhat of a of a personal preference on what's going to work there clearly I had an opportunity to meet Ryan and his dad his dad's obviously for people may not know Mitch Krauser is a guy who's his coached Ryan right and he works with his dad and I had asked him I said do you guys purposely try to pull that arm in and it said it's really something that's kind of left over from him and his glide years now clearly he has an amazing finish and you know so you you have to look at this is what works best for Ryan Krauser clearly very clearly okay so let's take a look so again that's kind of a quick breakdown on here now let's look at Joe now Joe again here's the here's what's interesting right Joe is 511 Joe is actually I think 510 and three quarters Joe is an absolute monster in the weight room if you've seen some of his stuff he put up a video I think he did like 840 for four reps in the squat like the guy I've seen what he do he posted a video where he did like 705 or for 10 Joe is just an absolute friggin monster maybe one of the strongest if not the strongest athletes in anything so here's where you know you notice Joe again real similarly look at that look at that angle we talked about with Ryan you look at where that knee starts to push ahead that knee can't push ahead until we call it into pillar three he gets active with the left arm he doesn't um open the chest right that's that's the key thing you're going to notice none of these guys are really doing that but they're more active the shot sits on top of you there's some major differences between rotational shot put in discus and so you're going to notice the same thing right we saw this we saw the left arm and the sweep leg with Ryan and now look at it's it's very much the same thing big wide sweep that's going to come around watch Joe get that arm and watch that arm kind of hold the position so he gets that big wrap and then you're going to see him come down again long always got to go out long got to get that down Joe is always more up on the toe but Joe smashes the crap out of this and this is uh 2265 massive throw this would have won every Olympics in history this would have been an Olympic record in every other Olympics so it really just kind of puts into perspective how amazing Joe is and how you know how incredible what what we're seeing and what Ryan crowds June so let's let's play that we'll play Joe here kind of slow mo watch again the same thing boom we'll look at a couple other things as we break down Joe and slow mo again look at I love the the action again watch that aggressive sweep you see that and you see that sweep that lower body really cranking ahead just like you saw with Crouser again it's hard to really express right that these guys are like these performances are amazing so um watch as uh I really love how Joe look at Joe's right leg is ridiculous right like look at that thing just smashing into the throw I mean the lower body just never there's never any delay right watch that right like wham I mean and Joe has the same thing you think you're going to see with all these guys that block arm stops that block arms never back I see a lot of people get taught how to pull how to come up and come down this is not the action on a rotational throw it's out and it stops right boom it's gonna hit and watch I think this is what's what's so impressive again Joe really punches ahead he's got this amazing strike crushes the shot look at that block arm you have to feel that push right you feel this you can't feel this I see a lot of people out there teaching um really active left side which I don't necessarily disagree but I think there's a window and if you get out of that window that's something we talk about in the throwing chain reaction you're out of position you're you're not going to make it so they come around boom it's just like a hard crush that block arm wham and you feel that right and we always equate it to a knockout punch like MMA or boxers basically when they hit right the boxers aren't throwing punches like this they're throwing punches like that and this is the same principles you got to block that block side and deliver bam you want to deliver that big punch so again Joe does that Joe's always so impressive again what do you have five five throws or four throws over 22 meters at the Olympic trials he did the same thing here mass you know ton of throws what I think it was four or five over 22 two over 22 he went 2260 2265 I mean this just just incredible okay so let's take a look at Walsh now Walsh is clearly the one everybody looks at now Walsh these guys are trying to in our opinion it looks like right he's trying to get super he gets more active again this is again what we talk about and we teach these elements we've had had one of my athletes this past year we had more of an offset kind of modeling Walsh and it's it's a definitely a tricky technique but this is what you're looking at again here's that commonality long balance arm big sweep leg this is the this is a system right the knee is really pushing in Walsh has the offset so let's do this I'll play him I'll play Walsh in full speed Walsh is very quick and again Walsh what was it 22 47 and big day I mean you know he was only what seven centimeters off the previous Olympic record so great performance for him um in a in a very good series so but look at this watch now Walsh really cranks it and Walsh gets the orbit a little different so you're going to notice that Walsh again you're going to see where where Ryan and I think Ryan and Joe actually have much more similar technique I think Walsh and Romani they have more attributes that I think they're a little bit more similar they're going to drop their left arm a lot more Ryan and Joe have their arm up and we'll look at a comparison of all four of them in a second but look at Tom he really comes down again you're going to see the same thing he really he gets this big wide knee position here and it really he I think I love the way his left arm comes out you see that that big long position here he's going to come down look at that foot come down whereas you see Joe was a little higher so it always makes me think you know I think when Joe's 2290 that foot was a little lower and 2291 and then uh like 2265 and 70 I think that that foot looks a little higher that that's what it looks like to me again it's always easy for everybody to be armchair quarterback right you can sit here and say all this but this is the Olympic games the stress levels everything it's like it's all the marbles so until you've been in that and I've never been in that situation which is what of course everybody dreams about but what we want to do is you know understand that there's going to be those little nuances and those are little details so I don't know does that add another 30 centimeters to his throat could be maybe that's 2295 right 23 so but look at looking at Walsh again he gets the orbit he gets here again there's that block arm again right we see how it stops now he's got the long arm Joe had the a little bit of a bend but long and here's Walsh again look at the extension see how these guys just really get out over the board okay so let's take a peek at all four of them so what we have are we have Joe and Ryan this is obviously your gold and silver um go team USA and you you're gonna notice that what we did is we we have these guys synced at release right and same thing here we have Tom and darling Romani we have them synced up at release so here here we go watch you know Romani look at how he really gets ahead now Romani apparently um had some injuries and again you didn't hear about that he came out he couldn't throw for an extended period of time the lockdown in Brazil was quite extensive at a certain point um and so he had a hard time and so it was pretty awesome that he came out and had a big performance at the Olympics now again notice what I talked about with these these guys um we'll look at we'll look at the same thing they're all here's darlin you know he Romani has this he opens more and the sweep leg turns over the majority of throwers in my opinion could not get away with that this guy's a massive dude uh I think I heard Crouser say that this guy's about 360 pounds 370 pounds um Joe's you know 330 Ryan's like 320 and Tom I think is like right around 300 pounds himself now I think he's at least 285-290 if he's not three so here's the thing notice these two kind of with their more active left side and notice Joe and Ryan right and you're going to notice this is where Joe really speeds up and that's how a guy who's 511 is able to throw distances that are you know within a foot and a half of a guy who's six seven at this you know level um so but you'll notice here again as they start to wrap and accelerate here these guys wrap lower right watch darlin's arm is high and then it comes down and look at Walsh's arm come down these guys both come down this is where I said these guys are more similar and you're going to notice here you're going to see Joe and Ryan right very much similar with the same arm position higher up so what happens is these guys come here but they all finish long and darlin looks like he's pulling off like you know if you looked at darlin's 2261 I think this PR again he had that squared up a little bit more right and that's the difference between you know 2180 and you know 2260 is he was more squared up and punching it a little bit more like what you would see Joe do it I think this is what you saw more of Romani when he hit his PR but again you know look at the differences again here's the similar they're all moving the lower body watch right here we'll focus on Tom and darlin look at the look at the arm position look at the delivery leg they both get the the block foot down they're squaring up look at the look at the left arm he gets a little bit of a bend pulls the head a little bit Tom stays on it stays really nice block really pulling you see Tom really getting around the axis right let me switch that tool okay so you really see Tom like right this kind of thing but look at how they're all extended now let's go and look at Joe and Ryan you see this look at how like again longer arm slight little bend more of a bend but you see how it stops we always say it stops at the body line and then that's how the guys are able to hit that punch like I was explaining earlier so again you know just a little breakdown this is just kind of you know these are the things we see now again we look at things like you said it's that pillar one what are you doing in the start these are the things that make a huge difference each of these guys in a perfect example right a lot of similarities lots of individual aspects that's one of the big things that we teach in our system we want to teach you how to see the throw understand the throw that's what the six pillars of our throwing chain reaction system do we're trying to make sure that you are learning the throw and you find works best for you right like this this is slightly different but watch when they get to this position right well these guys now start to look really similar and then once they all come through right they're all basically getting into that very similar power position and so let's look at Krauser and Kovacs right you see them again really squaring up and punching and all these guys create that great extension so I'm jumping around a little bit but the point is again you have to understand what works for you individually right that's the key now they're all in our argument is always that these guys hit the same six pillars but they have their individual nuances that optimize what they're going to do at each position for them joes five eleven darlin romani is like six two i think six maybe six three ish tom walsh is right around i think six two and ryan six seven so we got different heights but mechanically um what's going to enable them to work fast what enables tom was always the the lightest of of the four he was like in terms of body weight now i think he still has some big bench all these guys are like you know big time benches ryan his height is probably making up for the fact because he's probably not as strong as some of these guys but he's incredibly strong so strength is a factor all these guys have amazing strength levels but the key is you have to understand what's going to work what are those details that work best for you and that i think is one of the best things you can take away from looking at the olympics looking at how good these guys are um their performances are amazing it was just always fun to watch i think the olympics we're going to be covering some of the other events as well i'll do some of these hopefully you guys like this so i'm going to stop talking because i've talked forever and i could talk forever about this stuff i'm such a fan i have such an appreciation for what these athletes do and what their coaches do you know uh mitch krauser with his dad ashley kovacs for joe um i don't know who darlin's coach is and i know i think it's dale stevenson for tom but you remember the key thing is that all these guys have um coaches that have gotten them there that's a really key thing that's a big thing again part of our big focus at at ferritae throw's nation with our throwing chain reaction is that we're trying to help more coaches we've seen that just remember you don't get there on your own you got to have uh you know your partner your coach is going to be your your right hand and you none of these guys be there without that i think they'd be the first to tell you that so congratulations to all these throwers and their coaches the olympics was just fantastic to watch it's going to be really exciting you guys again we're going to put this video out there's going to be a handful of diamond league meets left krauser just came off a pre-fontein and through another 23 plus meter throw um so just incredible to watch but congratulations to everybody hopefully you guys liked what we covered in today's video a little bit long but um i can talk about this forever and hopefully you guys enjoyed watching if you have anything you'd like to see or anything specific maybe i'd like you'd like to have broken down or specific parts of the throw be sure to throw that in the comments be sure to check the links to check out our throwing chain reaction system if you're looking for how to understand the why and how to see and coach and uh figure out specifically the individual need for each athlete you coach or if you're coaching yourself that's all there so we thank you and we will see you on the next video take care hopefully you guys enjoyed today's video as you can see there's a lot that goes into what we do with the throwing chain reaction system if you would like to learn more about how to structure your practices and find the things that help unlock your potential click the link below and we will see you on the next video


In this video, I'm going to show you how to create a beautiful countdown timer like this which you can show to the online audience before the event begins. Let's get started. If you have not watched my earlier video on OBS Studio and Virtual Camera, I highly recommend you watch that first because we will be using that as the basis for this video. The link to the video is in the description below. In the previous video, we learn how to create a scene with a web camera and PowerPoint. To create a countdown timer, we need different elements in our scene. Let's start by creating a new scene. We start by clicking on the plus sign here at the bottom and let's give a name to the scene. I will call it countdown timer. Click OK. Now we have a blank canvas. Let's start adding the elements. The first thing we need is a video. There are many websites that allow you to download free videos. My favorite is this one, pexels.com. The link to this website is in the description of the video. You can search for any kind of video and you can download it to your PC. For example, if I want to search for bouncing balls, click search and it will give you different videos that you can download related to that search. The video that I'm going to use for a countdown project is this one. As we can see, we can download it for free and we have different resolutions available for us. I will download the high resolution, the full HD one. Click on the free download button and the video will be downloaded to my PC. To add the video as one of the sources for a countdown timer video, I will come to the sources, click plus and choose media source. We can give a name to our source. Let's call it video and click OK. Click on the browse button and navigate to your folder where you have stored the video. In my case, it's on the desktop. I click on it, click open. An important setting that you need to enable is this loop option. Make sure it is ticked. This will make sure that once the video reaches the end, it will restart and continue playing. And there we have it. A first source in the countdown timer. If you want to add any image or logo, we can follow the same process. Click on the plus. This time we will choose image. Again give a name to your image. Let's call it logo. Click OK. Click browse. To your folder where you have stored the image, select it and click open and choose OK. You can move the image around. You can resize it. If this is a corporate logo and the company has branding guidelines, make sure you follow all branding guidelines when using the logo in your presentation. Next, let us add some text. Click plus and this time choose text. Give a name to your text. Let's call it heading. Click OK. And in this section, I will type the text that I want to appear on the screen. I will type photography workshop. Click OK. I can resize the text, make it small or big and position it properly on the screen. Let's add one more text. Again, click plus text. This time we will call it subheading. Click OK. And let's say the text will be we'll start in dot dot dot click OK. Move it around, resize it, position it. And finally, we will put a timer here. So click plus, again add text and we will call it timer text. Click OK. And let's say I want the timer to be shown as hours, minutes and seconds. Click OK. Move it around and resize it, make it big, position it properly. The final thing we need to do is activate this timer. And we do that by clicking on tools, scripts, and we have a script here for a countdown timer. Enter the duration for your countdown timer. Let's say the event will start in 30 minutes and select where the text should be shown. In this case, we want to show it in the timer text, that is the text that I created and the final text, how it should appear once the timer is done. And as you can see, we have a countdown in progress. And the final step is to start our virtual camera. And we do that by clicking here, start virtual camera. And this is what will be now visible in your Zoom meetings if you set your video camera to OBS virtual camera. There you have it, a countdown timer created using OBS, which can be projected as a virtual camera in your Zoom or other online meetings. If you like this tutorial, make sure you like this video and subscribe to the channel.


This is the place where Camffit's story begins. The village of Mola in Zimbabwe. I went there to do a study into the reasons why girls were not at school. This was the place where the Tonga people were shifted when the Kareeb Adam was built in 1956. I was expecting to find resistance to the idea of girls' education from parents because everything I had read told me that that was the reality behind girls' exclusions. But what I found was poverty, deep poverty, and a rational decision making which meant that boys who had the best chance of paid work were favoured. So it wasn't the poverty of the culture of the families. It was rather the pernicious culture of poverty and it was all around me. I could see it in the thin frames of young mothers. I could see it in the distended bellies of the children. And so we began with 32 girls and in the intervening years we have grown into five countries to support 1,260,000 girls. Over that period not one single family has turned down the offer of support for their girls. Not one, not Christians, not Muslims. How have we done it? Well, we put girls at the centre. They are our primary clients. And we recognise that around her there is poverty, but there are other forms of capital. We dignify and extend those forms of capital. So parents and families are not reminded of what they do not have but they are reminded what they can bring to the table. The social capital in the family, the care of the children, the social capital in the family, the care and the love of families, their encouragement to girls, their preparedness to make sure that they have time to study at home. The institutional capital of the communities, 5,065 partner schools that we work with. It's churches, the mosques, the chieftancies. Chiefs are among the strongest advocates. We work with them to support the education of girls and also to speak out against child marriage, knowledge capital. You know, I saw a sign on a headmaster's wall in Dimbabwe and it said, somewhere in the world there is a committee discussing your life and you were not invited. Now in every community we have a committee, a broad-based committee that comes to the table to design and implement with us. One of the greatest achievements I think of Camford is the emergence of Cammer, an alumni of extraordinary young educated women who are now driving change. Cammer members are lawyers, doctors, teachers and they are set to grow to 190,000 over the next five years. They understand poverty because they've lived it and they have escaped from it through education and their philanthropists, they're bringing new financial capital to the table and they have supported themselves from their own incomes, 63,274 children in 2013 alone, change makers from within. Here's one of the Cammer members, Ruka. Ruka decided that what her community needed was high quality protein available in her community of Northern Ghana and so she established a chicken farm which has grown substantially. Last year she won the Mandela Washington Scholarship and was awarded by President Obama. And here Dr Runiraro Machungaidzi. She is our first doctor, one of the first 32 and here she is working with patients and she is changing her hospital from within. She says to nurses perhaps who are unkind don't speak to that woman that way. She could be my mother. Abigail, often very young, brought up by her very poor grandmother. Now she is one of the 15 youth advisers to the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, on education. And Angeline McWenderry. Angeline, whom I've known since she was a small child now, married, Angeline Mormirwa. She is here speaking at Brookings. She is our director of Southern and East Africa. And here she was speaking alongside Michelle Obama. Extraordinary young women, all of whom from a background of deep rural poverty. We cannot afford to neglect the potential of girls and young women. Every problem that we face can be solved through the education of girls, child mortality, maternal mortality, food insecurity, child marriage. There is no problem that is easier to solve than through girls' education. So join us because when you educate a girl everything changes. Thank you.


Hi, everyone. I'm Joe for Jaspy's casebreaks.com, coming at you with a pack of 2020 Polini Mosaic football. Hobby pack break number seven. Three different dice rolls happening here. First of all, we're giving away five spots within this break. So we only sold 27 outright, top five after the randomizer. We'll get some extra spots. Then we'll do the break itself with the second dice roll and the third and final dice roll. That's the big one. Three Jaspy's high end hit pack spots given away at the end of the break. Big thanks to this group for making it happen. Let's do the first dice roll with these names. Top five after 12. Good luck. One, two, three, four, five. And 12th and final time. Top five is gonna be Matt, Matt, Sean, Kym, and Steve Birch. All right, so congrats to the top five, little buy one, get one scenario going your way. Now, the rest of you, don't worry. I know you didn't get the extra spots, but you're still part of the action. All right, now let's do the break itself. Let's gather all the names again. And let's match you up with the team. All teams are in. Let's roll it, randomized names and teams. Four and a three, seven times. One, two, three, seven times, four of the teams. And seven and final time. All right, there's the first half of the list right here and the second half of the list right over there. No trades, let's print and rip. We've got a Levy on Bell Silver and a Michael Thomas, 36 out of 49 Pro Bowl for the Saints. That's gonna be Daniel, the Saints. All right, now, let's see who's gonna win those, I mean, you can win a $600 spot from this break. That'd be pretty incredible. Fingers crossed, everybody. It's only the top three. Top three after 11, six and a five, 11 times. Good luck, one, two, three, four, five, six, and a five, seven, eight, nine, 10, and 11th and final time. All right, good luck, everybody. Spot four, that's the saddest spot. Everyone's sad on this list right here. Four is the saddest spot, very close, but just not quite. There is another chance to get in, though. If you wanna take a look at the next filler on jaspyscasebreaks.com. Four through 32, thanks for taking the risk. Appreciate it, but only the top three can get in, top three, really happy. Time is happy, real happy. So is Alan Murdock. Oh, and Nico, you got in. There you go, Nico. Top three after 11, there you go. We'll see you for that hit pack break, maybe a little bit later tonight, jaspyscasebreaks.com. Bye-bye.


So weird. All right. So on that note, Dan asked me to run the meeting today. I think you had a conflict and unavoidable conflict for today. So this is the 26th of September meeting on a Wednesday and this is the CUBE conformance workgroup. Thanks for everybody for attending. I did put a link to the Google doc that has the agenda in the chat. If you don't have it, you can ask me and I'll post it again. I'm going to go look at, so people are adding their names in for the attendees. And let's see the agenda. So the first person on the agenda is Doug. And it's a question about the frequency of the calls.  Yeah. So this topic actually does tie into the next one. So I don't be surprised if they kind of get merged together a little bit. I was thinking that with the amount of activity going on, at least recently relative to conformance, some of the PRs that have been submitted and stuff, I feel like we need to have more often than monthly phone calls just to get everybody in sync on the same page and make sure that we're all headed in the same direction. So I'm wondering what people thought about changing the frequency that calls to be at least weekly for the time being until we run out of things to talk about. And then we could stagger it more. Was that one of the robots? It's trying to take over. Tim, your hand is raced. So I don't know if that makes a lot of sense as someone who has way too many meetings already. Maybe it might be slightly selfish, but I also think it's in earnest because I think this group is responsible for the higher level picture and objective, but not necessarily the low level execution, other than to verify it, I think periodically. And that's part of what those other meetings on SIGARCH, as well as folks when we talk during SIG testing, we kind of go back and forth on these topics. And that's part of also the reason why I put up the separate team for notification on PRs and issues. You could just slash CC at the team. So that way we can all stay informed. Now, do I think monthly is enough? I struggle to find a balance there. So I think weekly might be too much is just what I'm saying. Yeah, so this is the part where it kind of leads into the next topic, which is, and this could just be me. So if it is me, just don't want to go away. I'm okay with that. I'm a little confused about the relationship between us and SIGARCH, because I kind of was assuming that we were responsible for producing the performance docs and setting up the testing and automation and all this stuff, everything that we're doing right now. And that SIGARCH would be like it is with other groups within Kubernetes, which they're more of an oversight committee, right? Make sure people go in the right direction, have questions. Do the answer, they go to SIGARCH. Now, we may be slightly different in the sense that SIGARCH architecture has more of a formalized approval process. In particular, we know that they approve our upgrading of tests and performance tests and stuff like that. But if it's as you described him, which is SIGARCH is where kind of like the work gets done, then I'm kind of confused as to what we do, because I thought it was almost the exact opposite, right? Well, we do the work. If some of those guys from SIGARCH are interested in our stuff, then they'll join our phone calls. But we really only talk to SIGARCH, but we need their input on something or review on something. And so I'm kind of confused about the relationship here. So in our little read me for the working group, it says that the charter of this working group is to define the process around certifying Kubernetes conformance. But it's SIG architecture that earns the definition of conformance. So a lot of the process discussion and Google Doc stuff that you've seen flying around has been us trying to refine that definition and describe how to refine that definition. And then finally, SIG testing is the place where we work on the mechanics of how the conformance tests work. So I share your question. I'm not, which to me goes back to, I'm not sure that a weekly cadence makes a lot of sense for this group. I have historically viewed this meeting as a useful checkpoint to report that progress on the higher level bigger picture perspective. I have a meta point where like over time, as we start to, because William is not here, but at least I don't see him here. But he had originally defined the idea over time of starting to approach different aspects of conformance through profiles, right? But we haven't even really gotten there, right? Like we need to deal with just the base and get that done and get it cleaner and more hardened. We've kind of spun the drain several times on the details around it. I think we just need to execute on that piece first and then revisit the process for profiles once we actually have the first step done. So, so, so I agree with you. I definitely don't want more phone calls. I guess part of it is, Aaron, you there mentioned, sort of, we now have three different groups. If I got that right, we have this group, SIG architecture and SIG testing and each one of them sort of have a different set of responsibilities for the complete picture. And it's not clear to me, as I'm looking to schedule my week and my wonderful list of phone calls that I have to join, which one I need to join when for what particular topic. And I guess part of my push was for having a weekly call here was to try to get those conformance discussions into just one meeting as opposed to spread across potentially three meetings. And maybe that's the wrong approach. But that's kind of where my head was at. So I'm open to other ideas to resolve it. But I'm just looking for something that says I don't need to track three different forget me for using our term working groups, just to talk about conformance. Yeah, this is a deep outreach from Bobby. Actually, I have a similar concern as well. You know, Doug, I think you brought it up. This is a very good point because a lot of activity going on. So we need to I mean, at least in this working group, though, at least we need to summarize, you know, what's going on, because there might be an impact on the way we doing conformance now, the car may may want to impact our current certification status as well. Though. So yeah, go ahead. What is the what is the sheer volume of activity that is going on that is overwhelming you guys? Well, I think I look at the PRs and all the documents kind of going on in the I think the document which you published, Aaron. So there's a lot of things. I mean, I know they're very relevant. I'm not questioning that. But I think so at least maybe, I don't know, not weekly meeting or maybe biweekly, biweekly meeting, but at least kind of summarize, is there like a impact major impact on the end end user like a company wise, you know, like so I've seen like, I've definitely seen a lot of engagement around that one document which has been discussed at Sega architecture on a weekly basis as we look to refine the definition of what conformance is. I'm curious what other PRs have been crossing your radar or that have been necessary across your radar that you're finding you're not able to keep up with? Yeah, go ahead. Well, I was gonna say for me, it's less about the specific work items because you're right. Right now there may not be a long list of things to track. For me, it's more of the what don't I know is going on, right? So for example, if something comes up in sick testing related to conformance, how do I know that? Right? Do I now need to monitor their agenda doc, join their meetings just in case something comes up? I see people in Sega architecture all the time to check their agenda doc before every single meeting to see if something might come up there. That's that's the part that worries me is the unknown. That's why I created the teams. So that way when we have when we need global notification for something that does cut across horizontally, you can add the team and then the team will be globally notified. You know, obviously, at this stage of the game of being involved in Kubernetes for, I don't know, like for human years, I don't even know that like, filtering and separation of concerns is something that I often invoke, just because I can't be involved in everything, there's just too much noise. So be using jurisprudence of when to add the team and when not to is usually the way I operate. Yeah, so I, I guess I have tried to operate as a liaison between those sundry groups, because like, I have to attend say testing on a weekly basis. And I show up here as sort of the touch point to make sure that concerns are being raised and addressed appropriately. I think this group's concerns probably are more overlapped with Sega architecture. If you have a lot of like Brad went on an epic, I don't even know how many minute rant about profiles and fragmentation where like we were all in violent agreement, and it took us about 20 minutes to realize that fact in Sega architecture. And that was more about the what is conformance when it comes to a definition perspective. And I agree, like this group has a lot of opinions there, but that's the forum to discuss it, right? This is like when it comes time to do profiles, how are we going to run through the process of certifying profiles? There was a lot of time and energy spent here around like the legal framework. And this is a language of certification, right? Yeah, I think I mentioned somewhere also that the Sega architecture is coming up with the documentation saying go do this and we will all endeavor to do the things in the document in some form or fashion. In one thing or the other, it definitely it's not going to be in one spot. It's going to be spread over different areas. So and as long as the people who are actually doing the work use the correct labels and notify the correct mailing list and attend the meetings, I think we should be fine. So that's the way I see it. And we are not yet there are some thoughts in there. It's a living document. This is a distillation of the things that happened over the last couple of months, if not more. So it contains the learnings from running the conformance tests across including the OpenStack provider, the AWS ones and all the new people who are reporting stuff to TestGrid. So please treat it that way and not as like, oh my God, what is happening kind of thing, please. Well, I think, yeah, I think what we're saying is just to kind of summarize. Okay, I just had two questions. One is more of a technical one, a process kind of question for Tim. You had mentioned when there is a topic like a PR or something that comes up that concerns this working group that they should tag it with the slash conformance WG team, whatever. Just as a, just my understanding, how do you guys actually manage that? Because I suspect I'm on the team. Actually, maybe I'm not, I don't know. But if that's just who I am, I'll then obviously get a GitHub email about that. But how do I know that that is related to conformance, as opposed to all the other thousands of emails I get a day from GitHub? How do you guys manage that? So I have, I have filters for filters that have filters. It's the add team mentioned and then what the team is. So it's like, it's not pretty. What I've created over the past four years is not is a Rube Goldberg machine for GitHub notification. I would love for you to share that with us at some point, Tim, because I think it's not, it's not a pretty thing. It's not even like consistent. I have sounds like that sounds like the rest of open source. I don't want to share it because I have to clean up all these hacks first. The fire hose guys. Yeah, all have the same problem. The other thing is not unique here. So the other thing I was going to say is that I have tried to use a label called area slash conformance, which is available in the test info repo, where the testing stuff happens, the community repo where the doc stuff happens, and the Kubernetes repo where the conformance tests are actually written. And then what we could do is have pull requests that automatically touch certain directories get automatically labeled with the area conformance label. We have the mechanisms in place to do that today for like docs that touch different six directories automatically get labeled with that sig. So it's not necessarily the same thing as a push notification. But it does give you a set of queries that you can run on a daily basis weekly basis, whatever cadence makes sense for you to keep up with that valuable work. It's not quite as rib Goldberg ish as Tim's method. And so that's why he created the team to try and be more of a push notification, especially to try and raise the bat signal if it seems like we really need folks attention. But that's not as easy to automatically apply as labels are. Okay, so that helps me a little. Thank you. Let me get my second question, which is, I like concrete examples to wrap my head around things. So Aaron, since you brought or me was Tim somebody brought up the notion of the profiles. Um, so when we actually sit down have a discussion about whether we need profiles at all, where does that discussion happen? Is that that's that is here? Okay, that is here. So like we would define what is it mean for a profile to be conformant and what is the process by which, and then we would have to go back and get that okayed by arch, right? Like, it'd be like, what is the process that we want to follow for defining X, then they'd be like, okay, we can say that X makes sense, right? So it and then how you certify it and how you do all the legal wrangling around it and what it means to be in and out of certification and all the other jurisprudence that's associated with it falls on our shoulders here in this group is that's, you know, it's definitely underneath Dan's purview for what it means to boot somebody out of certification, what it means to certify, etc. Okay, cool. Thank you. That's the answer I was hoping to hear. Okay, cool. Thank you. I would like personally, I'd love to live in a world where we don't talk about profiles for a while, because there's so much other functionality we need to cover first and foremost. I agree. I just use that as an example of a topic that I think that I want to get clarity on where it gets discussed. So thank you. So I cut off D pack too.  No, I think, no, I think that's fine. I think the dog pretty much covered everything. Yeah. Thanks. Okay, back to you, Brad. So oh, yeah, I was just gonna say, I mean, would it make sense twice a month? Is the problem that you're thinking once a month is, well, you wait a month and you feel like everything just kind of blindside you because we only met once a month, or we still feel, well, twice a month would be a little more frequency to have some discussion. I think from my point of view, it seems like there's a lot of interesting stuff going on in CIG Arc.  So I said, well, I might as well go double dip, right? And cover for CIG doc and then cover since there's so much conformance discussion going on. That's kind of how I resolved to do it, which is to cover the two out of the three and just assume Aaron's got the whole testing thing covered. You know, I think it's hard for somebody to come and show up and kind of get a clear view of, okay, what's done in the one group versus what's done in the other group, maybe because it's not well documented, maybe because it's just kind of tribal knowledge. And I don't know how to solve that beyond even myself just kind of going to both meetings. Yeah, to answer your question, Brad, I personally don't think once a month is very useful, to be honest. I think if you're only meeting once a month, it's almost not worth meeting at all, to be honest. It's been my experience. That's why I would at least like every other week kind of thing. If nothing else, just to sync up verbally with everybody else about what's going on, what people think they should be working on, what things are going well, what things need attention, because otherwise I'm not sure how that happens. I'm not sure what other mechanisms would make it as productive, put it that way. Let me ask a different question. How are the people on this call actually helping with defining new test suites or new features to be added to basically the conformance test suite? Is that work happening here? Are the people here on this call discussing, okay, we need to add these kinds of tests and those kinds of tests are missing or this feature needs to be tested? Is that happening here or elsewhere? I would hope it would happen here. I don't think it's happened yet, but I'd like for it to happen here. I think that's where the whole clarity around what is process and what is what just Dim's mention actually. So I'm going to confuse as well. So when I think Tim mentioned that what we discussed in this working group is the process thing. So, yeah, it's a profile, obviously one good example of that. But other than that, but just Dim's mention. The reason I'm asking is it seems that so far this group has been doing the post work in the sense that everything is done and the main KK repository after that, people take that output and try to do something with it here. That is what I have seen. I mean, I've heard at least that this group is doing. And if it needs to change to say, okay, we are going to be full fully invested in actually make driving changes to the test suite that is in main KK repository, then we should not. We should still, you know, do the separation of concerns that Tim was saying that we need to have like an actual SIG or a working group in Kubernetes and use this group the way it is currently is. So a little bit of history. One thing that we did do and take ownership for the first release is, you know, making sure that, you know, that the plan was to go document the test. So once we did an analysis and said, okay, well, these are the ones all labeled conformance and make sure they're labeled, you know, they were already labeled and they seem like to make that they were the right test. Somebody to go in and add a little of all the descriptions that were in the spreadsheets and put them all into the code, right? So we did take some ownership there. I mean, I know myself personally did a large number of those trying to get, you know, some notion of a reference documentation for the test. And so that's kind of where the split was before on the first release dim. So it seemed like did we write end-to-end test? No. Were we trying to add the conformance piece, whether it was that window dressing of creating the references or, you know, the other thing, you know, the Sonobui came up through this group, right? Those kinds of things. Those all come, those kinds of topics of, oh, we should use this for the document. That's what at least I remember, Tim, historically, that we did. Yeah, there was a lot of individual things to get us ramped up and moving to get us to the point where we could have a means by which to have a process, right? And because before it was kind of, there wasn't anything there.  Tim and I worked on a bunch of the other details with getting containers auto spun up and getting the information out so we could actually do certification. Because before it was just kind of a little bit hodgeprojury and you actually assisted on some of the introspective work to run the containers inside of the cluster versus external, right? So there's been a lot of details and I think we can probably coordinate execution on some of these things if there's common awareness that, you know, these things exist. So as a working group, we don't, or as a, because we're not really part of the Kubernetes project, we're kind of external to it. Right, that's why I was saying that, Tim. It's like, it, I want us to be like, okay, we want to drive the change that we would like to see to happen and not like be the people who say, okay, don't do this, don't do that kind of thing, right? Yeah, I mean, I want us to be proactive in discussing the things that we need to drive and actually helping with making things happen. Like a concrete example of one of those things I want to do is Matt Liggett and I, and Erin brought it up in the last conversation too, is that I don't want Heptio and I don't want us to own the kube conformance container. I want that to be published as a separate thing in the KK repo. So that way Sonobu uses it, sure it's great, it's a way to run it, but it's not, you know, we don't own it and it's part of every release so anybody can work on any version of it at any point in time. And that's the canonical location is in KK. That's one work item for sure that I want to accomplish and could use help on to get that done. Now there's other, there are other changes to the upstream test suite that need to get made in order for us to be good stewards of other people's clusters, right, that have existed, that exist in different portions of the Sonobu repo but they shouldn't. I have like the tag that says fix upstream and the Sonobu repo and I've just leave it as a backlog item because if I file it in KK it's like lost in the noise and was paying attention to it. Like one of the things that I wanted to do just to get concrete examples is auto labeling of the entire dependency chain of all the containers and everything else that gets spun from the test suite. So cleaning up is as simple as deleting a label selector because currently it spins a bunch of namespaces and the cleaning up and the terminating can take a long time on foreign environments and you know it's part of the end-to-end test suite for auto running and test infra, you know they just nuke the cluster at the end so you don't care but if you're running on somebody's environment how long it takes to clean up and being good stewards in that environment matters a lot so we need to make sure that we do those types of things. So I can come up with a list of action items that I know that I'm, I could use help with that I think would be good for the CNCF conformance effort right but I don't exactly know you know I could make the issues in KK and tag this team right that's one process that we could follow for how to get this stuff done but we didn't really have that team before so before it just kind of lived in their own separate locations. But to Doug's specific question you know I don't know if we want to do thumbs up or thumbs down like we do and sick docs but you know there are people as the majority of people thinking that meeting five monthly is too much so you're inching about that dims or I don't want to talk about the frequency of meetings unless we actually put our foot to the ground and actually accomplish some stuff. If we if we say we want to create and curate a backlog that we can execute on then I'm happy to help facilitate that because I have a backlog. I just think no one really cared. So exactly Tim so we need to care about this if we need to have a meeting we can schedule meetings I don't want it to just take up meeting time just because you know. Yeah for me I'm trying to think of like what is what is it that you are trying to achieve Doug that reduced meeting cadence is impeding. So from for me it's like I said a lot of it is I don't know where things are being discussed and I would like more discussions to happen within this working group so for example in my opinion almost everything that was discussed in sick architecture should have first been discussed within this group and then take our preferred answer to sick architecture for approval but again that's with me not completely understanding the various roles. I would like to have these discussions here talk about what are the things we want to do going forward. Tim mentioned he has a backlog of backlog of things. It would have been nice if we had a regular meeting so that could have come up earlier so Tim could ask do people want to see my backlog where should I put this backlog work items so that people can know where to pick them off to work on them. We discussed this last month where Tim really wished super hard for a backlog and I thought we were in agreement we could we could have Tim file issues here. I also would love to put together a backlog from a fleshing out the definition of Kubernetes conformance perspective but first I need to like refine the definition so that I can then put down what our priorities are for filling things out but we did loosely speaking have a discussion last month and got agreement from this group that we wanted to head in the direction of pod coverage. So I feel like we've we've been covering and addressing the things you're talking about and it could be the reason you're not hearing so many discussions this month is because we've been busy with other things I don't know from my perspective I'm not really drowning in notifications related to conformance. I've been like wrangling the conformance definition doc has been a lot of fun and I hope to not have to go through that iteration again. I don't know how long it took Serenibus to put together the first iteration but this feels like at least as long but I suspect that like we'll probably you'll probably hear more conversations as we ramp up to Kud Khan Shanghai right you've been involved in ongoing discussions about how we're going to present intros and deep ties and things of that nature so to me I just don't want to have more meetings for meeting sick especially when I hear phrases like syncing up that sounds like airtime and and I liked him already regularly attend a bunch of meetings throughout the week I view this more as it's the right cadence for syncing up about topics at the right level. So how does how does this sound as a proposal for doing this we I can file issues in the CNCF repo that are generic enough that we mentioned last time that I could use help with that are generic enough that they apply to everyone who's working on conformancy things on different environments right I'll try to make sure that Sonobuy specific stuff lives over there and anything that follows the ET test suite and features around that would be filed here it'd be kind of weird because they're really eat to eat test suite stuff I don't really want to file it in the KK repo because it's just like noise factory but I'll file them here so they're pertain to this area right of conformance. That'd be good and like I said I'm not interested in phone calls sake of phone calls I just I was a little confused as to what's going on where and it maybe it's because there has been so little traffic on activity that I got the sense that there are things going on that I'm unaware of and maybe I was just wrong maybe everything was focused on that one yeah we were all drowning in really stuff Doug come on other than that it was just that dog okay no that's fine that's fine yeah again I want to do things like for example the Sonobuy supporting arm right we did multi arc in 112 where all the conformance test suite now works again arm and other architectures now I want to do the Sonobuy plus arm so people who are testing can do that too and I want that to be you know part of this group if there is people from here willing to do the work that is okay so sounds like you know it's we'll stick with what we got we'll keep it in once a month I think if I can get more clarity of when this group is going to go get approval from SIGARC or when SIGARC is going to say oh this is time for the conformance folks to get involved and get their approval and I'm not going to lie to I think that will help me in the future to kind of get a good feel I think it was more of just a oh they're discussing that over there did not know I mean I mean there there were examples I mean of things that that that you know right or wrong it felt like oh the hey that's where the discussion is going to be well that's the meeting I'll go attend that doesn't really matter but it was just I think that was part of you know Doug's point of wow I kind of thought that would have been over here and okay it's not you know but let's let's go figure it out but as we're going forward I think trying to understand you know the cadence of when the conformance needs to go to SIGARC or the SIGARC thinks they want to get the the conformance's input on something as we decide to do another really I think that's just the confusion people have does that seem like a fair way to kind of wrap that topic up so I think we can and I'll work on the thing we'll stick with that and I'll mention hey let's let's let's see if it's clear for when you know one group is going to the other and that hopefully that helps with the interlock the next topic is I think that we were covering was the status of a get repo and issues to track outstanding work items Tim you had alluded to that just a few minutes ago I think correct I started writing an issue inside of the CNC of conformance repo and the problem there is that I don't it doesn't I can't reference and label all the things I want to so I'm actually writing an issue inside of the KK repo and adding the team and adding the conformance label and I'm going to see A or B which is cleaner okay yeah I like you using the main KK repository it's already it's not like it's already drowning so a little bit more is not going to as long as you have the label and the team that's all that matters yeah also I was interested in trying to figure out how are we with the things that for example HPA Hacker is leading here with increasing the coverage or things of that sort that's why I showed up here yes I don't I personally don't have much that I can share there but I think hippie because I think hippie sort of subsumed some of the work that I've been doing in the background for the past month like making sure we get audit logs automatically generated on the conformance test grid and stuff like that but I did I like I forget if I mentioned it last meeting but I know I proved it with a PR I submitted to hippie that like now that we're not counting deprecated fields as part of API coverage our API coverage is looking a little bit better and I have numbers that can prove that we did more in Q3 than we did for the past three quarters on raising coverage and hippie you had some PRs for for sending things in the HTTP headers all that gotten there's nothing left to be merged I'm still experimenting because getting the data where we can all have different analysis processes and it really required a change in where that data goes and once we started having the I could go and transition into the updates I guess is kind of answering your question let's go ahead the the so we'll back up just slightly I didn't get to present last time but user agent instead of doing the really in depth stack trace and embedding that inside the user agent we decided to simplify that to be the string of the test so now it's not in the UI but it will be soon where you can drop down and see for an individual test ED test what endpoints did it hit and a little bit later when we start combining together the work that Catherine is doing you'll be able to see what lines of code on the client side and on the server side hopefully that a particular ED test is hitting and those will be that's some meaningful insight I believe and then pass that I dropped a link but I haven't had any conversation on it we had a UX UI designer come in and create some possible UI updates and I just if you're interested let me know which ones are prioritized because it's not something we focus on until we have more data but if there's something in there that looks interesting let let me know that's in the project UX area for API snoop also we I think we presented to sick testing but and it's it's it was interesting because it was just moments before the call that we started going oh my gosh all the data is available in test grid finally and so we manually pulled that in and was able to show that increase in coverage for the different 1.9 1.10 and so on the interesting things around the user agent being there for the test obviously won't be there until like 1.12 and later I believe but we'll find some way to to kind of put that together and this is where this this big long list of wow we are now pushing data via proud jobs to test grid via gubernator to gcs and that's just beautiful currently I'm looking at bringing in conformance all and having the drop downs dynamically allocate from the the test grid definitions so that we can pull in the latest and possibly the we need to kind of chat about what what we want the audit logs being available obviously via that or what that possible or we're looking at processing those all in node so that we can do it all in browser possibly where you're if you want to do UI stuff you can just pull out you know check out API snoop pull up an instance and you're pulling the data and you can do your own thoughts and processes and renderings or analysis it's not there yet but katherines code and the and the coverage stuff is in the middle of getting a proud job and I am so excited to have that available to start looking at we're also going to instead of pushing the backtrace fuck a pop of stuff via the user agent I think we're going to try to do matching it with the audit so you got your audit header and the audit the audit ID so each API request you will be going to pair that with some type of data getting dumped onto the the node and we'll put that into GCS so that we can do post analysis on that and have lots of different approaches so the API snoop will again pull all of these things together and from a checkout so everybody can start participating in creating the visualizations and different approaches to stuff all of this so far is focusing on Kubernetes and the ED conformance suite but what would be really interesting is to start applying this approach to lots of different applications particularly those within the CNCF where we allow them to continuously generate this style of logging whether it's integrating Catherine's approach or integrate an API snoops fuck a pop of stack trace stuff what's going to be really cool is we can start using this this large set of data to start looking at pattern recognition for common use cases for Kubernetes both on what client libraries and what lines of code and what overlaps on client and server side and which which group should be talking to one another and which groups we could possibly refactor some things and then of course the big thing here within our group is a possible guidance for writing tests and so when we start seeing these patterns not only will we see identify the patterns possibly with machine learning or other other tools we're going to apply but we could probably generate tests that and I don't know we need to actually get the data to deal but that's that's kind of the dream and open that up for discussion and the questions sorry somebody else was talking I was just saying did you want to give a demo sometime because let's describe a lot of cool stuff sure I think a lot of this like the UI thing is there and it's not much more than going to apisnoup.cncf.io and if you click on the drop-down all of it's manual and it's not all in GitHub yet because we had a transition in staff so we have and now we're we're refactoring that I've got Zach Mendeville who's doing a refactoring actually this week so that it will be inside the API Snoop repo and pulling the data from the from GCS I think part of it has been syncing together like creating the data so we've gotten really intimately familiar with test infra and kube test and all the various ways to spin a clusters and I I realized it didn't scale for me or the API Snoop team to try to be spinning all this up we needed to to offload that and yep is a quick question here so we are just talking about the end to end test making calls to the API server right yes and not any of the interactions between the different Kubernetes components so with the with Catherine's code it is capturing those interactions and when the different components are talking to one another right now we're missing the stuff for not GRP for like back to I forget exactly how it's architected but the the node itself right the communication back I think I would love to find a way to include that information with like because we don't have audit for that but there's something and we should find a way to you know so here's a concrete example of where we could file an issue the the auto was pushed out of 112 the dynamic audit log capabilities but we're absolutely trying to push very hard to get dynamic audit log enabled for 113 and if we want to and if we want to add that as a feature for part of the conformance submission is to have that as part of it I don't know what exactly we do with it yet we could mine it but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's like gives you a thumbs up or thumbs down it could give you pathological behavior if you're trying to diagnose problems but we could absolutely you know have a feature requests that we could submit to enable it as part of this submission and you know enable it for a so no blue run or for put it somewhere inside the test automation I don't exactly know where we live for upstream stuff but you know we could figure that out but really that's an example of something like that I'm excited for go ahead I was just gonna say yeah this so this is the sort of stuff that like I haven't had time to give a sufficiently in depth update or like I didn't have anything ready for it by this week I will probably have something ready by next month where we'll walk through not just this but we'll walk through when hippie was referencing Catherine's work she's done a bunch of things one is an alternate view of the rings of color that she see generally into something where you can drill down by group and table to see specific API coverage for specific endpoints and then like we talked about last month the idea of looking at code coverage or line coverage is a proxy for progress as opposed to API coverage for progress because we're getting close to about done on API coverage at least for pod related things but even like the circle graph while cool at the highest of high levels doesn't necessarily give me actionable what are the pod API endpoints that aren't quite covered if I download a csv and do some analysis or if I look at an alternate table I can I can drill into that so that's sort of the direction that this is headed and I'll be talking about next month and I'm really really glad hippie is leveraging the the conformance test grid thing that was sort of my dream to make sure that we've got like we've got instructions on how people can continuously run conformance tests for their cloud provider of choice and so today we've got results from by where we were still working on alibaba and by do I think but by do digital ocean and gc open stack I think I thought Gardner was around here somewhere they may have dropped out but I I really to me conformance is a one shot pr submission is neat but I don't trust it as an engineer I want to make sure that it's actually continuously passing all the time especially as patch releases get rolled out that's yep that's up to the provider to determine that's one of those boundary lines because people have built out automation that's totally up to them yes correct did we have another topic here to cover or is this a new someone else's topic about the expand included the capix and that analysis all together right here I kind of went through it but where we're we're all on on just the conformance suite being able to know how we what we need to write next and what those tests might look like would involve actually engaging with the community of large and seeing what other Kubernetes API consumers are you doing and using and if we apply the same same process to I would say let's just grab all the CNCF tools as one one one thing all those projects and see what endpoints they're hitting in the and the ways that they're hitting it particularly looking at the stack traces and using that data to see wow there is some really common patterns over and over again and not only do we have the source code for how all those applications or anything similar we could probably auto generate at least a framework for people to to go through and write a test I'm not saying auto generate and it happens automatically but suggesting some really straightforward patterns for increasing our coverage to make those tests available I think that's what I'm actually most excited about is connecting it even if it's not describing the test it's saying this application and group should be talking to this application and group and this group within Kubernetes and finding to encourage the conversations yep okay cool that's excellent are we ready to move to Srinni's topic on the agenda okay Srinni go ahead yeah before that I have a question on the the thing that we decided in this meeting about moving all the work items all the issues into KK back with the proper tags so Tim I've seen that the one you created just now is it going to be like we assign a sick to and move all the existing issues from the CNCF repo back to KK or I don't see a need for sorry okay yeah Tim was black go ahead I thought you you were doing something else then but yeah I'm finally an issue go ahead talk okay so the way I was saying it was for people who find the git repository for conformance if they have to file an issue we'll still they'll still go ahead and do what they usually do is like I saw a repo I go create an issue that I think is relevant to that repository and do that right so this what Tim is probably doing is doing the backlog that we all jointly need to work on you know in improving the common pool of stuff that we are going to reuse and in a shape into the the program that we are running here right so that's that's why it makes sense to keep the backlog in the main KK repository so we can show other people like this is the stuff that we expect this is why we are asking you to do for example the dynamic audit laws or whatever you know this is the reason why instead of pointing to a an external repository and trying to do that it seems better to just keep it in the main KK repository I'm confused so picking on just from the performance issue list missing conformance stocks for 110 and 111 I think Aaron opened up that one if we were to open up that issue today as a brand new issue would it be under the conformance repo or under the KK repo that conformance repo because that's where it belongs to right now right I don't know what I'm asking yeah so it is related to the stuff which is in that repository so yeah okay what it doesn't need to be in the main Kubernetes repository so that is directly my question basically there is work that our group is going to do which is related to conformance nothing to do with any of the six then that's why I was saying that our group needs to be into two pieces one doing the work for outbound and one the inbound stuff which is actually trying to do stuff that we need to work on for the next release so I mean to be honest it's probably going to span repos right like the backlog is not going to have a canonical location just like Kubernetes Kubernetes doesn't have a canonical location it's got many repos that the data is split across the data the data is split across a ton of that stuff so if you try to file docs updates it goes in the docs slash website repo right and you know for kubadm issues that goes in the kubadm repo etc etc etc I think the thing that we should probably do is as part of maybe the next meeting the next time we meet is to have a list of these different backlogs and identify a key stakeholder to just basically walk through the details of what's in those backlogs and if anybody's going to volunteer to jump on the hand grenades that exist to get the execution done yeah and it makes sense I mean you've got a backlog and there's there's items there and their items you're aware of and items that need to get done and then at the same time you've got the the conformance repo where if somebody wants to go open up an issue that might be a little more user friendly from an external facing point of view if it's just a purely conformance related issue is that kind of how you're thinking about it Tim? yeah you can also use the cncf repo as the parent and then all the children get federated across the other repositories so if you wanted to say an umbrella would be like make end-to-end tests cleaner or something it could break down into several issues and you know that could be federated across that and make the docs better another generic thing which could be several issues filed against it referenced okay does that answer your question Sreen? yeah it kind of makes sense I mean like one of the examples is right now we're going to enhance part-spec tests and in that case we should have a tracking item probably at the cncf repo level and then have individual ETE related issues or into whatever the other sake it will go into right so so like another great concrete example of an issue that like I have with the docs but I don't necessarily feel like following in this repo is the fact that the code that walks through all of the conformance tests and tries to parse out based on the going abstracts abstract syntax tree whether or not it is a test worthy of being can worthy of being picked up to be listed in that conformance list checks of everything is a string which means that we can't use table-based tests to iterate through and and define conformance test cases for a variety of conditions so we need to figure out how to reauthor and rearchitect tests to fit that pattern whether we mandate that conformance tests must always be described with a single string or whether or not we need to update the the lexer parser whatever you want to call it to figure out a different way of deriving the metadata and documentation information and that to me sounded like it was just sort of too fine-grained for this group to hash out a lot but it'll be it's documented in KK issues intact as area conformance right now right yeah that's uh yeah that's tenacious but the problem that I actually when I discussed that with you and I I did do some experiment on that because I believe that we still have to build some of these tools by ourselves although that's that may be somebody else's responsibility but like generation of this conformance doc is something that we took on and the parsing the test probably makes sense in a way for us I would view it as similar to this group iterating on and deciding to use son of boy as the recommended way in its documented submission process for conformance results similarly this group wants to find a way to automatically generate documentation for all of the conformance tests with just written descriptions of what it is that they do and so right now they have tapped to an engineer Matt Liggett to write this hand-coded tool and then you helped him out serenity of us and that lives in Kubernetes repo but it could be that the ultimate final solution would better be suited to to be like something some other vendor provides or some other out-of-tree tool or whatever right yeah could be but currently the approach we took is we we do some tooling which we I don't think we can get away without doing some tooling around to make the conformance work progress this is one of the examples of such tooling so um yeah to answer your actual question that you know it's Brian Grant also commented in the architecture meeting that we should keep it at the individual test level parsing rather than if there are table tests that you need to group and have conformance documentation at the test level I did live with it a little bit but it is ordered to do with syntax parsing it's not runtime parsing so yeah I was just trying to use that as a as another concrete example those kind of the problems we need to discuss in this group right still it's valid for us to figure out what kind of tooling we need yeah we can't have a single repository for sure it's going to spread all over the place so we better get used to it I agree with that I mean that's not the the point I'm trying to say how much of responsibility we take to build the tooling that's why I said it's tangential discussion but still we need to consider about building some of the toolings by ourselves I guess great by the way the only point if we go on the only point I wanted to discuss today is automating the process of the publishing of the Confirmance document for each of the releases essentially the idea that I briefly discussed with Erin and then I went on the idea is to to generate the Confirmance document as part of the quick release step and it will be placed as part of the tar ball Kubernetes tar ball that will be the release release only for the major and the minor releases because that's what I think we should do and then have automated PR generated against the CNCF website where this document will will go I have played with that and we can do that we do use go GitHub API and we can leverage that that's used by testing for today so the document PR will be released for each like 12 113 against the CNCF repo where it will be placed under slash doc whatever the location we currently picked just looking for any comments from the group to one comment one question so the question would be like where is your written description of this proposed way of doing things so that I could comment I have opened a PR sorry I haven't opened a PR I have opened an issue in CNCF so I can I can this is the automate the generation of conformance document that's right okay right so it's just like it sounds like he just rattled off a proposal there and typically I would expect to see that proposal in the get in the in a follow up comment in this issue or get a Google doc or something the only other point would be make quick release not sure if that's the right target because I think that's built for every I think you probably if you're talking about wanting it done only for minor and major releases you probably want that done as the make release target not make quick release right but then my question is why do we actually need to do that can we because all the artifacts are available in various places that that are generated by the release process as well as you know we already we also have the get repository branches and tags so why does this actually have to live in the make release or make quick release this is an artifact generated on top of the normal bit process so conformance document is generated is this already in for 112 no no it's not so it's not going to go in in 112 for sure no it's not going to go in 112 for now what we are doing is we are manually generating the conformance document and pushing it out to CNC website right so I'm proposing an automated way of doing that yeah I mean we have publishing bots kind of scenarios where we work on repositories and we generate artifacts that go elsewhere so we can use that pattern and we have the list of releases and that we need to generate this for and if we find a new release then the bot will wake up and do something like that right so it sounds like I gotta run shortly yeah we gotta get out so we should iterate on in a proposal so if you can link that and maybe CC Dimms and myself Surya Vasudev that's good perfect and on that we are out of time thank you everybody for joining bye everyone