diff --git a/meeting-notes/2020/Q2/2020-06-30--gui-and-browsers-biweekly.md b/meeting-notes/2020/Q2/2020-06-30--gui-and-browsers-biweekly.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..91bb094e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meeting-notes/2020/Q2/2020-06-30--gui-and-browsers-biweekly.md
@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+ # IPFS GUI and Browsers 2020-06-30
+
+A biweekly discussion and show & tell around IPFS GUIs and Web Browsers
+
+* Details: https://github.com/ipfs/team-mgmt/issues/790
+
+## Participants
+
+- @lidel
+- @jessicaschilling 
+- @olizilla
+- @gozala
+- @vascosantos
+
+## Recording
+
+- https://youtu.be/N1Pfc-AVrvI
+
+## Agenda
+
+- Nominate notetaker  : olizilla!!!
+
+- [IPFS Web/GUI 2020 Q3 OKRs](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KVe3JCsfB-l47-DE5gvk7bT0Yly_EAPrHCi-8kCthy4/edit#gid=2125992746)
+    - focus on user interfaces for pinning services and defining and delivering the api changes needed (responsibilty shared with core impls)
+
+- [wip] [Pinning Service API Spec](https://github.com/ipfs/pinning-services-api-spec) 
+    - ETA between 6th and 13th of July to finalize the spec
+    - looking for feedback: feel free to fill issues in [ipfs/pinning-services-api-spec](https://github.com/ipfs/pinning-services-api-spec) repo
+    - [Pinning service features survey](https://ipfscommunity.typeform.com/to/qQLALuQW): will get the word out today on Twitter, Reddit, HN
+        - May keep out of the newsletter if possible: we have several other surveys in flight
+    - looking to make the api surface as small as possible that we can all agree on
+    - probably dont want to require specific auth mechanisms
+    - For additional context, [Epic with GUI work for integrating PinnignServices into WebUI](https://github.com/ipfs/ipfs-gui/issues/91)
+    - Q: What happens if the network fails while pinning to a remote?
+        - it will happen in go-ipfs, but is a good question, needs follow up with Jake
+    - Q: seems more complex than we would need for a first pass
+        - it is a exploration of what is the most complex scenario, can we support that, so we dont box ourselves in / so we know what we may need to support and dont cause ourselves issues with mvp feature set
+    - Q: are there opportunities to rethink the ui/ux in the future? What is the process?
+        - We should track the feedback. if we want to do something substantially different we need to define that now.
+        - icon design changes is fine.
+        - what is a substantive change?
+        - e.g how google shows who has access to a thing
+
+- [Improving File Add](https://github.com/ipfs/js-ipfs/issues/3029)
+    - Will have desing review meeting
+    - Have patch for webui (but having trouble with bundler right now)
+    - Have also beginnings of patch for js-ipfs
+    - gozala proposed a desing review with core-impls... we could do everything in browser or we could tweak the http-api changes. The patch assumes we wont do
+    - js-ipfs does a bunch of normalizations... which means we need to buffer, and we loose perf optimisations.
+        - i have a patch for that but it is large.
+        - i have a smaller change which but gets us less improvement.
+        - bundler is not picking up the dep. eyes plz!
+
+
+## Highlights
+
+> This section includes releases and selected announcements.
+
+- ipfs-webui [v2.10.0](https://github.com/ipfs-shipyard/ipfs-webui/releases/tag/v2.10.0) & [v2.10.1](https://github.com/ipfs-shipyard/ipfs-webui/releases/tag/v2.10.1)
+- ipfs-companion [v2.13.1](https://github.com/ipfs-shipyard/ipfs-companion/releases/tag/v2.13.1)