search

joyent / nodejs-advisory-board

Meeting Minutes and Working Group Discussions
http://nodeadvisoryboard.com
MIT License
158 stars 22 forks source link

Response to reconciliation proposal? #28

Closed runvnc closed 9 years ago

runvnc commented 9 years ago

Hi, whats the response to the reconciliation proposal? Or, since it wasnt posted on this repo, does that mean it does not exist and doesnt need to be addressed directly?

ben-page commented 9 years ago

@runvnc Let's not jump to conclusions. Hopefully, they will discuss it here.

https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/978

mikeal commented 9 years ago

For reference, this was posted to joyent/node https://github.com/joyent/node/issues/9295 and was closed/locked as off-topic with a pointer to this repository for discussion. However, I would encourage people to comment on the proposal itself iojs/io.js#978 so that we can incorporate feedback in to the proposal. It is still a draft and should be a conversation not an ultimatum so I wouldn't want the JNAB to "respond" to it, I would prefer them to participate in the process of drafting it along with the rest of the community.

isaacs commented 9 years ago

Suggested questions to spur discussion, as I suggested (and got much head-nodding in response to) at the last JNAB meeting: https://groups.google.com/a/nodejs.org/d/msg/advisoryboard/1SgXQzyMTso/xhAf2klcELQJ

I would really like to see some collaboration from the Node.js team on this. Specifically, @tjfontaine.

fengmk2 commented 9 years ago

Ping JNAB members.

piscisaureus commented 9 years ago

See https://github.com/joyent/nodejs-advisory-board/pull/30.