|
| 1 | +# Node.js Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting 2020-04-23 |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +## Links |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +* **Recording**: https://youtu.be/Da79AzGNiDE |
| 6 | +* **GitHub Issue**: https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/852 |
| 7 | + |
| 8 | +## Present |
| 9 | + |
| 10 | +* Anna Henningsen @addaleax (TSC) |
| 11 | +* James Snell @jasnell (TSC) |
| 12 | +* Matheus Marchini @mmarchini (TSC) |
| 13 | +* Michael Dawson @mhdawson (TSC) |
| 14 | +* Myles Borins @MylesBorins (TSC) |
| 15 | +* Ruben Bridgewater @BridgeAR (TSC) |
| 16 | +* Sam Roberts @sam-github (TSC) |
| 17 | +* Rich Trott @Trott (TSC) |
| 18 | + |
| 19 | +## Agenda |
| 20 | + |
| 21 | +### Announcements |
| 22 | + |
| 23 | +* Myles, Node.js 14 went out this week! Will be our next LTS release. |
| 24 | + |
| 25 | + |
| 26 | +### CPC and Board Meeting Updates |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | +* Board meeting this, week. |
| 29 | + * James asked about DCO side of things. |
| 30 | + |
| 31 | +*Extracted from **tsc-agenda** labeled issues and pull requests from the **nodejs org** prior to the meeting. |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | +### nodejs/node |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +* openssl security release 1.1.1g - vulnerability HIGH [#32846](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/32846) |
| 36 | + * Turns out it does not affect Node.js so no need for discussion. |
| 37 | + |
| 38 | + |
| 39 | +* Nominating @juanarbol as a collaborator [#32621](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/32621) |
| 40 | + * already done, issue closed. |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +* process: Throw exception on --unhandled-rejections=default [#33021](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/33021) |
| 43 | + * There have been a few different PRs. Today Node.js prints a warning and a |
| 44 | + deprecation message |
| 45 | + * There is a strict mode which will through immediately |
| 46 | + * Ruben -> there were 3 different proposals |
| 47 | + * Switch default to strict mode. There were objections so that one was closed because |
| 48 | + tests were failing and different approach might be better. |
| 49 | + * Change defaults so unhandled rejections hook is higher priority, hook and flag |
| 50 | + currently work independently. If you had hook and flag then you would not |
| 51 | + get unhandled exception |
| 52 | + * 33021 adds “force mode”, through exception if there is no hook in place and is |
| 53 | + selected as the new default. |
| 54 | + * All are/were SemVer major. |
| 55 | + * James, none of these implement behaviour that I would like to see. |
| 56 | + * option ok, but not as default. |
| 57 | + * Anna, deprecation warning is actually different from throwing an exception. |
| 58 | + * Original plan was to do survey |
| 59 | + * Matheus: Only people who are affected by the deprecation warning will be broken. With |
| 60 | + proposed change handler would be enough so no command line flag required. One thing |
| 61 | + is that any module can add handler which would cause the override. |
| 62 | + * Need to integrate discuss in the issue. |
| 63 | + * Ruben, prefer that we still have survey. |
| 64 | + * Ruben will write blog post, idea would be to have survey link at the end. |
| 65 | + |
| 66 | +* http: align with stream.Writable [31818](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/31818) |
| 67 | + * Rich has asked for TSC consensus or not on overriding the objection. See |
| 68 | + https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/31818#issuecomment-618180372 |
| 69 | + |
| 70 | +### nodejs/docker-node |
| 71 | + |
| 72 | +* Suggestion for dropping Yarn from Node 14 release [#1238](https://github.com/nodejs/docker-node/issues/1238) |
| 73 | + * Missed window, already released, does not need discussion. |
| 74 | + |
| 75 | +### nodejs/TSC |
| 76 | + |
| 77 | +* Nominations for TSC Chair - Open April 16 through 30th 2020 [#851](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/851) |
| 78 | + * FYI |
| 79 | + |
| 80 | +* Node.js future directions - any interest in online or in person summit? [#797](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/797) |
| 81 | + * Nothing to discuss this week. |
| 82 | + |
| 83 | +### nodejs/admin |
| 84 | + |
| 85 | +* 2nd Director seat- post July 2020 [#496](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/issues/496) |
| 86 | + * Myles -> Made suggested approach, Michael will documented in 496 |
| 87 | + * The Node.js project is happy to continue to provide a director representative and has |
| 88 | + people who are willing to volunteer for the position. If the CPC direction is to no longer have |
| 89 | + the Director seat assigned to the project, the project would like to be consulted/involved in |
| 90 | + the discussion. |
| 91 | + |
| 92 | +## Strategic Initiatives |
| 93 | + |
| 94 | +* V8 Currency |
| 95 | + * No updates from me either. Will probably start working again on the V8 8.3 update PR next week. |
| 96 | + |
| 97 | +* Core Promise APIs |
| 98 | + * No update. |
| 99 | + |
| 100 | +* Build Resources: |
| 101 | + * nothing new to report this week. |
| 102 | + |
| 103 | +* Startup Performance |
| 104 | + * There are two prototypes for including more of the bootstrap process into the startup snapshot, with different designs: nodejs/node#32761 and nodejs/node#32984 . Both are blocked by a V8 issue and there is a WIP in the upstream to fix it . |
| 105 | + * I wrote a design doc about the differences in these design options in these two PRs, as well as some potential options not yet explored. (For this work to land, each of the points in there could take one of the options available on their own). It would be helpful if people interested can give feedback about these options in the doc. |
| 106 | + |
| 107 | +## Upcoming Meetings |
| 108 | + |
| 109 | + |
| 110 | +* **Node.js Foundation Calendar**: https://nodejs.org/calendar |
| 111 | + |
| 112 | + |
| 113 | +Click `+GoogleCalendar` at the bottom right to add to your own Google calendar. |
0 commit comments