search

nodejs / CTC

Node.js Core Technical Committee & Collaborators
80 stars 27 forks source link

Node.js Foundation Core Technical Committee (CTC) Meeting 2017-05-03 #117

Closed Trott closed 7 years ago

Trott commented 7 years ago

Time

UTC Wed 03-May-2017 05:00 (05:00 AM):

Timezone Date/Time
US / Pacific Tue 02-May-2017 22:00 (10:00 PM)
US / Mountain Tue 02-May-2017 23:00 (11:00 PM)
US / Central Wed 03-May-2017 00:00 (12:00 AM)
US / Eastern Wed 03-May-2017 01:00 (01:00 AM)
Amsterdam Wed 03-May-2017 07:00 (07:00 AM)
Moscow Wed 03-May-2017 08:00 (08:00 AM)
Chennai Wed 03-May-2017 10:30 (10:30 AM)
Tokyo Wed 03-May-2017 14:00 (02:00 PM)
Sydney Wed 03-May-2017 15:00 (03:00 PM)

Or in your local time:

Links

Agenda

Extracted from ctc-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

nodejs/node

Invited

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with ctc-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

Uberconference; participants should have the link & numbers, contact me if you don't.

Public participation

We stream our conference call straight to YouTube so anyone can listen to it live, it should start playing at https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live when we turn it on. There's usually a short cat-herding time at the start of the meeting and then occasionally we have some quick private business to attend to before we can start recording & streaming. So be patient and it should show up.

Many of us will be on IRC in #node-dev on Freenode if you'd like to interact, we have a Q/A session scheduled at the end of the meeting if you'd like us to discuss anything in particular. @nodejs/collaborators in particular if there's anything you need from the CTC that's not worth putting on as a separate agenda item, this is a good place for it.

bmeck commented 7 years ago

I'll be there for once!

jasnell commented 7 years ago

I'll be on a flight to Berlin. If they come to a decision point, I am +1 on util.promisify and the throwing on uncaught rejection. However, for the latter I have yet to get through the full pr.

Trott commented 7 years ago

and the throwing on uncaught rejection. However, for the latter I have yet to get through the full pr.

I'm surprised that had a ctc-agenda label applied immediately on opening with no explanation. I thought we generally discourage that. It's been open for 3 days and there seems to be robust discussion in the issue tracker about it, so it would seem to me that putting it on the agenda is premature. Was it an accident/mistake? /cc @Fishrock123?

Trott commented 7 years ago

The number of items on the ctc-review list continues to inch up. Any help getting resolution on these or closing ones that have in fact achieved resolution would be awesome. (Maybe some of you attending the Collaborators Summit this week can figure the right configuration of people to gather in a room to resolve some of these?)

Trott commented 7 years ago

For https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/12630 ("Uniform way to trigger debugger on first line"), we agreed to let it go back to the issue tracker for a week to see where things went.

It is now on the Diagnostics WG meeting agenda for May 11. I propose awaiting the result of the Diagnostics WG discussion. (Maybe they can try to talk about it in the tracker ahead of the meeting to get resolution sooner.) If I understand correctly, we want some resolution before Node.js 8.0.0. That would seem to give enough time?

refack commented 7 years ago

It is now on the Diagnostics WG meeting agenda for May 11

AFAIK @jasnell set the node8 cutoff to May 9th, right? FWIW I'll try to get the vendors to give explicit preference on future syntax...

jasnell commented 7 years ago

@Trott ... If that's the earliest they can resolve it, then ok. But having resolution by the 9th would be best, especially if that requires any semver-major changes. If it can be done as a minor then there is much more flexibility.

jasnell commented 7 years ago

https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/12701 Can likely be taken off ctc-review. I have an open pr that resolves it that will likely land in the next day or so unless there's an objection I haven't seen yet...

refack commented 7 years ago

IMHO you can exchange regression: 3rd party debuggers are incompatible with node8 nighlies with it's solving PR inspector: restore --debug-brk alias for discussion on the current regression.

The wider issues is covered in Uniform way to trigger debugger on first line

Sorry for the brain dumps in both 😳 the more recent comments should be decent summaries...

bnoordhuis commented 7 years ago

The number of items on the ctc-review list continues to inch up.

Unless anyone speaks up in the next 24 hours or so, I'm going to remove the label again from issues that have had it for more than two or three weeks.

Fishrock123 commented 7 years ago

I'm surprised that had a ctc-agenda label applied immediately on opening with no explanation. I thought we generally discourage that. It's been open for 3 days and there seems to be robust discussion in the issue tracker about it, so it would seem to me that putting it on the agenda is premature. Was it an accident/mistake? /cc @Fishrock123?

These options have been discussed for about a year and collectively we don't seem to be able to decide so we might as well talk about it?

mhdawson commented 7 years ago

It's not clear why this one is on the agenda:

Upgrade openssl-1.1.0e for Node-v8 (DO NOT LAND THIS) #11828

I think the decision was made to stick with 1.02 for Node version 8. Is this to discuss for version 9 or is it on the agenda for some other reason ?

mhdawson commented 7 years ago

Its going to be too early for me even though I will be in the UK.

Trott commented 7 years ago

@Trott ... If that's the earliest they can resolve it, then ok. But having resolution by the 9th would be best, especially if that requires any semver-major changes. If it can be done as a minor then there is much more flexibility.

@jasnell If they're up for it, maybe @nodejs/diagnostics can make an effort to come to a resolution asynchronously via GitHub or email to get you the answer sooner. (And/or maybe this is something that can be hashed out at the Collaborators Summit?)

mcollina commented 7 years ago

Regarding stream: move prefixed files into internal/streams it is ready to go, it just need approval and a deprecation number. As far as I understand, deprecations are handled by the ctc.

Trott commented 7 years ago

As far as I understand, deprecations are handled by the ctc.

Cool, thanks for the update. I think you're free to apply a deprecation number as long as you are confident you are not taking an existing number. I've never seen "assign a deprecation number" come up as a CTC item before that I can remember. But @jasnell wrote and mostly manages the deprecation policy, so I'll defer to him on that.

It looks like it has the necessary number of CTC approvals (2) as well as a third "no objection". I'm pretty sure the license boilerplate needs to be restored, but I'll defer again to @jasnell or @williamkapke on that.

@jasnell is the one who added the ctc-review label and also the one who said he wants it to land before 8.0.0, so maybe check in with him if you're at the summit with him this week and get it landed? :-D

jasnell commented 7 years ago

Assign the deprecation number when the pr lands. Deprecations are semver major so make sure you have at least two ctc members signing off and ask for objections from ctc one last time before landing. That's pretty much it.

jasnell commented 7 years ago

The license boilerplate only needs to be in the original files. It does not need to be in any created files or existing files that no longer contain any of the original code.

joyeecheung commented 7 years ago

Have to miss this one because I will be on my way to Berlin😢

Trott commented 7 years ago

Have to miss this one because I will be on my way to Berlin😢

My FOMO about Berlin continues to intensify...

evanlucas commented 7 years ago

I'm going to try hard to make it tonight, but I may fall asleep.

Trott commented 7 years ago

Six people showed up for the meeting. We talked about things on the agenda, but no official business really happened. The meeting was semi-canceled. I'm going to close this as I don't think usable minutes are going to be produced. Feel free to comment if you think it should be re-opened.

ChALkeR commented 7 years ago

Sorry, I missed it — it overlapped with my travel to Berlin.