doc: add 2016-09-28 CTC meeting minutes

PR-URL: #9325
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>

Author: joshgav

doc/ctc-meetings/2016-09-28.md

@@ -0,0 +1,302 @@
+# Node Foundation CTC Meeting 2016-09-28
+
+## Links
+
+* **Audio Recording**: TBP
+* **GitHub Issue**: [#8802](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/8802)
+* **Minutes Google Doc**: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZsLMM29guCBPGh7KhuhZEq6YQCKybiTfTUIXajTBalM/>
+* _Previous Minutes Google Doc_: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-PS20PGCJQIi4_quBHqVgrQNJeJP10NH21wUelcMhfw>
+
+
+## Present
+
+* Anna Henningsen @addaleax (CTC)
+* Сковорода Никита Андреевич @ChALkeR (CTC)
+* Colin Ihrig @cjihrig (CTC)
+* Evan Lucas @evanlucas (CTC)
+* Jeremiah Senkpiel @Fishrock123 (CTC)
+* Tracy Hinds @hackygolucky (observer/Node.js Foundation)
+* Josh Gavant @joshgav (observer/Microsoft)
+* Michael Dawson @mhdawson (CTC)
+* Ali Ijaz Sheikh @ofrobots (CTC)
+* Jenn Turner @renrutnnej (observer/Node.js Foundation)
+* Rod Vagg @rvagg (CTC)
+* Seth Thompson @s3ththompson (observer/Google)
+* Myles Borins @TheAlphaNerd (CTC)
+* Trevor Norris @trevnorris (CTC)
+* Rich Trott @Trott (CTC)
+
+
+## Standup
+
+* Anna Henningsen @addaleax (CTC)
+  * The usual, issues and PR reviews
+* Сковорода Никита Андреевич @ChALkeR (CTC)
+  * Some issue and PR comments and reviews as usual.
+  * Some more work on docs linting.
+* Colin Ihrig @cjihrig (CTC)
+  * Reviewing issues and PRs.
+  * Evan Lucas @evanlucas (CTC)
+  * v6.7.0 release
+  * More work on types eps
+* Jeremiah Senkpiel @Fishrock123 (CTC)
+  * Issue / PR Review … general stuff
+  * Working towards ES Modules prototype implementations with Chris Dickinson
+* Tracy Hinds @hackygolucky (observer/Node.js Foundation)
+  * getting the Outreachy info on website
+* Josh Gavant @joshgav (observer/Microsoft)
+  * helping bring in some new MS contributors
+  * scheduled diag meeting for next week
+* Michael Dawson @mhdawson (CTC)
+  * Finishing off PPC migration
+  * Fixing AIX issues when building from node-private
+  * Some work on ABI-stable node
+  * Misc PR review/lands
+  * Keeping up with issues
+  * Post-mortem nodereport review
+* Brian White @mscdex (CTC)
+  * Worked on various performance improvements in node core
+  * Reviewed PRs, commented on issues
+* Ali Ijaz Sheikh @ofrobots (CTC)
+  * Looking at node+V8 (5.5) integration build failures that seem related to recent parser improvements
+  * Investigating performance with the new interpreter
+  * Working with @matthewloring on FFI
+* Jenn Turner @renrutnnej (observer/Node.js Foundation)
+  * No update, just observing
+* Rod Vagg @rvagg (CTC)
+  * Security releases, supposed to be on vacation
+* Seth Thompson @s3ththompson (observer/Google)
+  * async/await landed in V8 Tip of Tree. on track to ship with V8 5.5
+  * expect a doc from V8 language team on promise hook API to allow microtask introspection in the near future
+* Myles Borins @TheAlphaNerd (CTC)
+  * issue / pr review
+  * helping with security release
+  * backporting inspector
+  * auditing v4 backlog
+  * really have to get to that tap reporter
+  * coming up with outreachy mentor project
+* Trevor Norris @trevnorris (CTC)
+  * AsyncHooks
+* Rich Trott @Trott (CTC)
+  * mentoring more first-time contributors (via Node Todo)
+  * doc, test PRs
+  * ramping up a tiny bit on Build WG stuff, but just a tiny bit
+
+
+## Agenda
+
+Extracted from **ctc-agenda** labelled issues and pull requests from the **nodejs org** prior to the meeting.
+
+### nodejs/CTC
+
+* Scheduling Meetings [#14](https://github.com/nodejs/CTC/issues/14)
+
+### nodejs/node
+
+* meta: update NODE_MODULE_VERSION to 51 [#8808](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/8808)
+* General v7.0.0 / v6 LTS Planning / Discussion
+
+
+## Previous Meeting Review
+
+* deps: update V8 to 5.4 [#8317](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/8317)
+* Scheduling Meetings [#14](https://github.com/nodejs/CTC/issues/14)
+* Decide on what problem points for ES Modules we care about the most. [#15](https://github.com/nodejs/CTC/issues/15)
+
+
+## Minutes
+
+### Scheduling Meetings [ctc#14](https://github.com/nodejs/CTC/issues/14)
+
+@trott: This is a status report. Initial proposal was to dive in and start rotating meetings. Some were on board, some were concerned. Nikita started Google spreadsheet to figure things out.
+
+One proposal is to move back one hour (12pm Pacific) which would be a mild improvement for Ben and Nikita.
+
+Input received from NA and EU but not Asia and Australia. Once we have that information we can figure out what might work.
+
+---
+
+### meta: update NODE_MODULE_VERSION to 51 [#8808](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/8808)
+
+`process.versions.modules` == 48 for v6.7.0.
+
+Set in build script, we bump this number for each semver-minor. We’d update to 49, but Electron has been bumping in between, so we need to go to 51.
+
+@thealphanerd: Had a way to do this in the past, but never landed a version of V8 on master [before a release]. So those using master cannot rely on this check.
+
+Proposal is to add this to master now and v7.x when released. But should we wait to bump till the actual release?
+
+@rvagg: If you’re using master, it’s been a bit “buyer beware” in the past.
+
+@thealphanerd: Node-pre-gyp uses the module version number to determine whether to pull the pre-built binary or to rebuild. So that’s causing problems.
+
+@ofrobots: Is there a disadvantage to doing this now?
+
+@rvagg: Doesn’t seem to be.
+
+@joshgav: Any concern that we’d have to bump again at v7.x release?
+
+@rvagg: We’ll just bump again.
+
+@addaleax: We should watch what Electron is doing cause they pull in every V8 version.
+
+@trevnorris: Could it happen that newer version of V8 has a lower module version number?
+
+@trott: if module version mapped to V8 version we could always be in sync.
+
+@ofrobots: Problem is that ABI is more than just V8. Also, we’re moving to a VM-neutral API/ABI in the future and that will remove the relationship to a V8 version.
+
+@rvagg: We should coordinate with Electron and draw from the same pool of numbers.
+
+@ofrobots: A good point for a bump would be when we bring a new V8 into master.
+
+@rvagg: This would make testing those nightlies easier.
+
+@trevnorris: Sounds to me that we can’t map reliably map a version of Node to a version of V8. So pulling from the same pool as Electron might be misleading to developers. If the number in Electron doesn’t match a Node version there would be a conflict.
+
+@rvagg: People are tracking which module versions map to what, so they could follow this too.
+
+@trevnorris: Maybe we can give Electron the minor numbers.
+
+@rvagg: NW.js also had a similar issue.
+
+@thealphanerd: Electron bumped to 5.1 in an ABI-breaking way, so we have two versions of Node ABIs out there, cause they needed to stay closer to Chromium.
+
+@rvagg: They don’t need to keep up with the latest version of V8.
+
+@thealphanerd: Let’s talk offline.
+
+@rvagg: Back to GitHub? Or do we need to decide now?
+
+@thealphanerd : PR has a lot of LGTMs, would like to see this land today or tomorrow so we can unbreak master.
+
+@ofrobots: Two points - one, what to do now; two, what to do going forward?
+
+Ali and Myles will work on a policy going forward.
+
+@rvagg: Might belong in LTS repo as we’ve been doing a lot of versioning stuff there.
+
+**Next steps**:
+
+* If there are objections raise them in the issue, otherwise ready to merge.
+
+---
+
+### General v7.0.0 / v6 LTS Planning / Discussion
+
+@Fishrock123: Make sure all are in the loop.
+
+Throw v0.10 in too since it’s end of life at end of October.
+
+@rvagg: LTS map says *first* of October. Some people expect that cause the docs say that.
+
+@Fishrock123: We discussed keeping it alive till end of December like v0.12, cause that’s when OpenSSL is EOL’ed.
+
+@mhdawson: If the doc says Oct 1 what’s the downside to sticking with that?
+
+@rvagg: We may have communicated Oct 31 through some channels, so some people may expect that.
+
+Or perhaps when v7.x is first released.
+
+Having said that, it’s been >2 years, so people have had time to migrate.
+
+@rvagg: Originally 0.12 was slated for EOL in April 2017, we moved it back because of the OpenSSL issue.
+
+@Fishrock123: Official LTS policy is target date is when the next release/LTS is cut. That’s usually midway through month.
+
+@rvagg: Push to LTS WG to resolve ASAP.
+
+@rvagg: James pushing another beta later this week or early next week.
+
+@Fishrock123: v7.x is now on semver-major freeze.
+
+@rvagg: There are some semver-major commits in master which aren’t in v7 release.
+
+@Fishrock123: Might still need to update? Might have been left out by James intentionally?
+
+@thealphanerd: Not a ton of semver-major things on master. There are the V8 upgrades (patches), and a move of a method to fs/internal.
+
+Big one is npm@4 coming through the pipeline 1-2 weeks before Node release, should we include that.
+
+@rvagg: npm@3 had problems originally so we delayed. Should we do the same for npm@4?
+
+@addaleax: I’d feel comfortable with landing it. Kat said they aren’t concerned if 4 is included now or not.
+
+@Fishrock123: Things which are deprecated in v4 will still be deprecated (not removed) in v5, so we could bump all the way to v5 in a later release.
+
+@rvagg: We don’t have to synchronize all these dates to one, we can be flexible if needed.
+
+@thealphanerd: If we have a date other than late October it might be a good idea to offer a date.
+
+@ofrobots: Tentatively Oct 18 is the target stable date for V8 5.4. As tentative as usual, not clear till the last moment. Low chance that V8 will be moving a lot around Oct 18. Haven’t seen this date slip by more than 1-2 days. Very low chance that V8 will destablizie us.
+
+@thealphanerd: Oct 25 as a tentative date for v7.x?
+
+@rvagg: Ali and Seth, what’s the risk of setting that date now?
+
+@ofrobots: Close to Oct 18 I can highlight any potential risk.
+
+@rvagg: Let’s say that - 25th is tentative date, we’ll communicate if there’s any change. Any objections? (No.)
+
+That will also be the day we switch v6 to LTS.
+
+@thealphanerd: Doing release of v6 LTS earlier might be helpful so we have that out of the way for potential v7 issues.
+
+@rvagg: Discussion on this will move to LTS WG. Join the LTS WG on Monday to discuss.
+
+@thealphanerd: Could use someone to be responsible for v6 LTS, please volunteer.
+
+@rvagg: It’s been helpful to have a single person for v4 LTS, but we need to find a model that scales in the future.
+
+@Fishrock123: Would be helpful to schedule LTS a week earlier to avoid problems.
+
+---
+
+### Supported platforms proposal from  Build WG [#488](https://github.com/nodejs/build/issues/488)
+
+Current proposal: <https://github.com/nodejs/build/issues/488#issuecomment-250155697>
+
+@trott should make a CTC agenda item next week?
+
+@rvagg: Give input on that issue before it comes to CTC. Build WG must review and sign off on as well.
+
+@rvagg: Some discussion about tiers, this affects OS vendors.
+
+---
+
+### Other
+
+@thealphanerd: Node.js is going to be working with Outreachy project to help people from underrepresented groups get involved.
+
+We need projects for these people to work on in 3 months. If you can think of good parts of the project to assign… would love to hear your suggestions.
+
+@rvagg: GitHub thread?
+
+@hackygolucky: I’ll create a new one and ping @nodejs/collaborators.
+
+@rvagg: Are we getting a satisfactory response on the call for mentors?
+
+@hackygolucky: 5 primary mentors and a number of supplementals. 4 sponsors, which means we can accept 4 mentees.
+
+@rvagg: If someone wants to be a supplemental is that still open?
+
+@hackygolucky: Thread is still open: https://github.com/nodejs/education/issues/7
+
+---
+
+## Q/A on public channels
+
+None.
+
+---
+
+## Upcoming Meetings
+
+* CTC: 2016-10-05
+* TSC: 2016-10-06
+* Build: 2016-10-11
+* Diagnostics: 2016-10-05, 12pm Pacific
+* Benchmarking:
+* LTS: 2016-10-03
+* Post-Mortem:
+* API: