Skip to content

Commit 3114241

Browse files
committed
doc: add TC meeting 2015-02-18 minutes
PR-URL: #1051 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
1 parent bd1bd7e commit 3114241

File tree

1 file changed

+129
-0
lines changed

1 file changed

+129
-0
lines changed

doc/tc-meetings/2015-02-18.md

+129
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
1+
# io.js TC Meeting 2015-02-18
2+
3+
## Links
4+
5+
* **Public YouTube feed**: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeBPYLJ2_Yc
6+
* **Google Plus Event page**: https://plus.google.com/events/ccrkam8uup1k8qbo0fmcea0n2v4
7+
* **GitHub Issue**: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/509
8+
* **Original Minutes Google Doc**: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JnujRu6Rfnp6wvbvwCfxXnsjLySunQ_yah91pkvSFdQ
9+
10+
## Agenda
11+
12+
Extracted from https://github.com/iojs/io.js/labels/tc-agenda prior to meeting.
13+
14+
* util: fixed behavior of isObject() [#822](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/822) / @chrisdickinson / major version release
15+
* Translate installers for OS X and Windows [#819](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/819) / @rvagg / maintenance overhead
16+
* lib: fix process.send() sync i/o regression [#774](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/774) / @bnoordhuis
17+
* Implement unhandled rejection tracking [#758](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/758) / @rvagg / how can we help this land
18+
* Logo / Brand Treatment
19+
[website/181](https://github.com/iojs/website/issues/181) @ mikeal
20+
https://www.behance.net/gallery/23269525/IOJS-logo-concept
21+
* Stability Policy/Statement & Roadmap
22+
[#725](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/725) / @mikeal
23+
[roadmap/14](https://github.com/iojs/roadmap/issues/14) / @mikeal
24+
25+
## Minutes
26+
27+
### Present
28+
29+
* Bert (TC)
30+
* Chris (TC)
31+
* Colin (TC)
32+
* Isaac (TC)
33+
* Trevor (TC)
34+
* Mikeal
35+
* Domenic
36+
* Rod
37+
* Apologies for Ben and Fedor
38+
39+
### Mini stand-up
40+
41+
* Bert: NodeSummit and company stuff, Windows io.js stuff
42+
* Chris: styleguide work, wrangling ESLint, slow week
43+
* Colin: busy with work, porting joyent/node work to io.js
44+
* Domenic: having fun with VM stuff in jsdom, have a release coming soon
45+
* Rod: not as much as usual, preparing for 1.3.0
46+
* Isaac: Node Summit, npm stuff
47+
* Mikeal: i18 groups, >160 new people doing translations, press inquiries because of Node Foundation news, lots of website stuff (i18n & build), roadmap and stability
48+
* Trevor: Some critical stuff on joyent/node, work, moving house
49+
50+
### Review of last meeting
51+
52+
* assert: don't compare object `prototype` property _and_ assert: introduce `deepStrictEqual` / @vkurchatkin
53+
* Release PGP key strategy and policy / @rvagg
54+
* VM bugs? [#548](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/548) / @domenic
55+
56+
### util: fixed behavior of isObject() [#822](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/822) / @chrisdickinson / major version release
57+
58+
* Chris: Requires semver-major, what’s the vibe on bumping major at this stage?
59+
* Chris: isObject() would now return true when checking for functions
60+
* Mikeal: interested in separating “things that break” and “API breakage”
61+
* Chris: consider this a “fix” but is also an API change that could break people’s downstream code
62+
* Isaac: probably want to put off a 2.x release until we have more substantial changes, not to wait for 2 years but have some time frame, like 6 months
63+
* Bert: messaging is off for a 2.0 bump just for this
64+
* Domenic: versions shouldn’t mean the same as they used to, major version bumps should be more casual
65+
* Rod: are we stopping saying that this is compatible with “Node”?
66+
* Mikeal: compatible with past-Node, not joyent/node 0.12+ because we have no control over that
67+
* Mikeal: release channels - standard semver & canary which is everything else
68+
* Chris: +1 for release channels, but not so much on substance of the proposal.
69+
* Rod: concerned about the emotional energy we’re still investing in version numbers when we should be just doing semver
70+
* Mikeal: ignore version numbers, have a “canary” type branch and start releasing on that until we’re confident to merge back in
71+
* Chris: difference between Mikeal’s proposal and the original proposal is having a “canary” branch that stuff gets merged in to and eventually is merged in to master, original proposal merged new stuff in to master and used the time delay as “canary” (like Chrome)
72+
* Rod: proposal is to tag this issue as a milestone for now and punt until we have more substantive changes - no disagreements, passed
73+
74+
### Translate installers for OS X and Windows [#819](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/819) / @rvagg / maintenance overhead
75+
76+
* Rod: concern here is the maintenance overhead in keeping all of the translations in sync, are we happy to have that headache in core?
77+
* Mikeal: let English be the default and let the translation teams be responsible for watching for changes and making updates as appropriate
78+
* Bert: installer framework is largely out of our control for how the mechanics of translations and fallbacks work, -1 on this because it’s just an installer and there are probably better targets for translation
79+
* Mikeal: the translation teams will prioritise for themselves what gets translated.
80+
* Domenic: enable the community as long as it doesn’t add friction
81+
* Bert: if there is no technical issue then OK with landing this, the responsibility for translation will have to be with that community
82+
* Resolution: allow this to land unless there are going to be technical blockers to future installer changes needing to wait for translations to be updated
83+
84+
### lib: fix process.send() sync i/o regression [#774](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/774) / @bnoordhuis
85+
86+
* Ben’s issue, punt till next meeting, note in “known issues” for releases
87+
88+
### Implement unhandled rejection tracking [#758](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/758) / @rvagg / how can we help this land
89+
90+
* Rod: Brought to TC to get some more engagement and help get this landed unless there are any major objections
91+
* Domenic: PR looks good, it’s mainly a matter of code quality, doesn’t add any default handlers which is a good incremental way of adding this
92+
* Trevor discussed concerns about how V8 runs the events, synchronously vs on the micro-task queue
93+
* Trevor: OK with the change because there is almost no overhead if you’re not using Promises or this event, concerned about the disconnect between the V8 API vs what we expect it to be--the PR compensates for V8 behavior.
94+
* Domenic: user-exposed semantics of this PR are good
95+
* Mikeal: concerned about behavior change in the future leading to a
96+
* Rod: proposed resolution is to give the TC’s blessing to that PR for it to land when everyone in there is happy with it
97+
- No objections
98+
99+
### Logo / Brand Treatment
100+
[website/181](https://github.com/iojs/website/issues/181) @ mikeal
101+
https://www.behance.net/gallery/23269525/IOJS-logo-concept
102+
103+
* Mikeal discussed the proposed website changes and logo choice @ https://www.behance.net/gallery/23269525/IOJS-logo-concept
104+
* Some discussion about choice of logo, no strong opinions on design
105+
* Rod: may be best to let the website group make this choice because they are more qualified from a design perspective
106+
* Chris: design group could be asked to come up with a few options and present them for selection
107+
* Mikeal: design by committee sucks, everyone knows this
108+
* Chris: can we come up with some standards and assert them ack to designers - such as number of colors, needs to look good at 16x16 all the way up
109+
* Rod: maybe this group isn’t qualified to even do that, perhaps push it on to the WG
110+
* Discussion on the process of selecting a logo and brand treatment
111+
* Agreed to delegate to the website WG to make this decision
112+
113+
### Stability Policy/Statement & Roadmap
114+
[#725](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/725) / @mikeal
115+
[roadmap/14](https://github.com/iojs/roadmap/issues/14) / @mikeal
116+
117+
* Mikeal: none of this is fixed in stone, we can change it in the future if we decide it won’t work
118+
- one change still to go in is that the wording on stability should be that “we won’t remove an API”
119+
- people are terrified that we’re going to break compatibility and go off in new directions, this is a way of dealing with that
120+
* Bert: concerned about this being a reflection of the way we work rather than enforcing new behaviors
121+
* Discussion around breaking / removing APIs and how firm this policy is going forward
122+
* Rod asked for specific things that need to be resolved now vs punting to a later meeting
123+
* Mikeal: https://github.com/iojs/roadmap/commit/190690a1b5f206c22f64adc3d29d10c4b08cb8cd
124+
* Group discussed presentations, no major objections so the blessing was given for Mikeal to move forward with ratifying that, expect further discussion on the broader topic next meeting.
125+
126+
### Next meeting
127+
128+
* Next week, 25th Feb 2015
129+

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)