Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Spec 3.0 Meeting, 16 UTC Wednesday March 2 2022 #270

Closed
asyncapi-bot opened this issue Feb 28, 2022 · 10 comments
Closed

Spec 3.0 Meeting, 16 UTC Wednesday March 2 2022 #270

asyncapi-bot opened this issue Feb 28, 2022 · 10 comments
Labels

Comments

@asyncapi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

asyncapi-bot commented Feb 28, 2022

This is the meeting for community member involved in works related to 3.0 release of AsyncAPI Specification.

The meeting takes place bi-weekly on Wednesdays. First and third week every month until release. Recordings from the previous meetings are available in this playlist on YouTube.

This time we meet at 16 UTC

Join this mailing list to get an always-up-to-date invite to the meeting in your calendar. You can also check AsyncAPI Calendar.

This meeting is a live-stream that goes to the following social media:

You can also join live the meeting on Zoom .

Agenda

Don't wait for the meeting to discuss topics that already have issues. Feel free to comment on them earlier.

  1. Q&A
  2. Quick recap of discussion around Defining a collection of applications  spec#658 - @jonaslagoni
  3. Updates on feat!: split out definitions spec-json-schemas#128 - @jonaslagoni
  4. Quick update on Move binding JSON schema files to main JSON schema repository bindings#113 - @jonaslagoni
  5. Place for your topic
  6. Q&A

Recording

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ax_AzRDlrls

@smoya
Copy link
Member

smoya commented Mar 2, 2022

Unfortunately, I can't attend this one due to a conflict with a personal matter I should attend!

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Member

I want to give a quick recap of the discussion we had this Monday about a collection of applications: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vl8Nn3GOJiE

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Member

I want to ask about the progress for asyncapi/spec-json-schemas#128

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Member

jonaslagoni commented Mar 2, 2022

Tagging current champions @magicmatatjahu @damaru-inc @char0n @Fannon @jessemenning, any progress/updates/discussions you want to do?

@magicmatatjahu
Copy link
Member

@jonaslagoni I don't have anything :)

@jonaslagoni jonaslagoni changed the title Spec 3.0 Meeting, 16 UTC Wednesday March 3 2022 Spec 3.0 Meeting, 16 UTC Wednesday March 2 2022 Mar 2, 2022
@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Member

I would like to give a little update on: asyncapi/bindings#113

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Member

Recording is out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ax_AzRDlrls

@char0n
Copy link

char0n commented Mar 7, 2022

@jonaslagoni sorry for late response. Regarding championing from my side around asyncapi/spec#699. I've aligned in the issue the course of action for 3.0.0 release of the spec. There is no update on this, nothing changed since I written it. I'll start pushing the issue very soon through the RFC Contribution stages, if that's OK.

@jonaslagoni
Copy link
Member

@jonaslagoni sorry for late response. Regarding championing from my side around asyncapi/spec#699. I've aligned in the issue the course of action for 3.0.0 release of the spec. There is no update on this, nothing changed since I written it. I'll start pushing the issue very soon through the RFC Contribution stages, if that's OK.

👍

If you want to update folks on what you are working on and status, feel free to add it to the next agenda: #282 🎉 :)

@char0n
Copy link

char0n commented Mar 7, 2022

If you want to update folks on what you are working on and status, feel free to add it to the next agenda: #282 tada :)

OK thanks. I'll issue a PR against branches described in asyncapi/spec#691 (comment) and it to #282 agenda.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants