doc: add CTC meeting minutes 2016-09-07

PR-URL: #8499
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>

Author: joshgav

doc/ctc-meetings/2016-09-07.md

@@ -0,0 +1,245 @@
+# Node Foundation CTC Meeting 2016-09-07
+
+## Links
+
+* **Audio Recording**: TBP
+* **GitHub Issue**: [#8425](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/8425)
+* **Minutes Google Doc**: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GRgBC5Dv5luqlRc6egtxmkrQULJXa3M3CqGqWfoogV8>
+* _Previous Minutes Google Doc_: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qYUOfiiytaZ0-YZVZ1NZX9O-4SE28QNooapOdcjlPqA>
+
+## Present
+
+* Anna Henningsen @addaleax (CTC)
+* Bradley Meck @bmeck (observer/GoDaddy/TC39)
+* Сковорода Никита Андреевич @ChALkeR (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)
+* Julien Gilli @misterdjules (CTC)
+* Ali Ijaz Sheikh @ofrobots (CTC)
+* Rod Vagg @rvagg (CTC)
+* Seth Thompson @s3ththompson (observer/Google)
+* Steven R Loomis @srl295 (observer/IBM/ICU)
+* Myles Borins @TheAlphaNerd (CTC)
+* Trevor Norris @trevnorris (CTC)
+* Rich Trott @Trott (CTC)
+
+## Standup
+
+* Anna Henningsen @addaleax (CTC)
+  * Issues & PR review
+* Bradley Meck @bmeck (observer/GoDaddy/TC39)
+  * Just emails around modules
+* Сковорода Никита Андреевич @ChALkeR (CTC)
+  * Some private ecosystem things
+* Evan Lucas @evanlucas (CTC)
+  * opened PR for adding back --harmony-proxies flag, not much else
+* Jeremiah Senkpiel @Fishrock123 (CTC)
+  * Working on v6.6.0
+  * issue & PRs, Async_Wrap review, some Timers PRs.
+* Fedor Indutny @indutny (CTC)
+  * Reviewing PRs & Fixing bugs (sorry for not joining you today)
+* Josh Gavant @joshgav (observer/Microsoft)
+  * Issues and PRs
+* Michael Dawson @mhdawson (CTC)
+  * Investigating and PRs to move AIX to green in CI
+  * Migration to new set of PPC machines
+  * Addition of linuxOne to nightlies
+  * Moved API work to nodejs/abi-stable-nodenodejs/abi-stable-node-addons-examples
+  * presentations for Node Interactive EU
+* Brian White @mscdex (CTC)
+  * Worked on finding improvements in http code
+  * Commented on issues, reviewed PRs
+* Ali Ijaz Sheikh @ofrobots (CTC)
+  * Wrangle some V8 backports.
+  * Looking at performance w/ new ignition interpreter
+* Rod Vagg @rvagg (CTC)
+  * Raspberry Pi cluster hardware problems, blog post
+* Seth Thompson @s3ththompson (observer/Google)
+  * V8 team working on Ignition interpreter and V8 Inspector migration
+* Steven R Loomis @srl295 (observer/IBM/ICU)
+  * PRs.
+* Myles Borins @TheAlphaNerd (CTC)
+  * Auditing commits for v4.x
+  * Modifying output of testrunner
+  * preparing for interactive EU
+* Trevor Norris @trevnorris (CTC)
+  * AsyncHook (formerly known as AsyncWrap); update embedder API to improve performance
+* Rich Trott @Trott (CTC)
+  * Backporting a few small commits to v4.x
+  * Updating Build and Onboarding docs based on contributor mentoring and onboarding activities
+  * A few test PRs designed to increase test coverage
+
+
+## Agenda
+
+Extracted from **ctc-agenda** labelled issues and pull requests from the **nodejs org** prior to the meeting.
+
+### nodejs/node
+
+* src: add no-op for --harmony-proxies flag [#8395](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/8395)
+
+### nodejs/node-eps
+
+* AsyncWrap public API proposal [#18](https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/pull/18)
+
+
+## Previous Meeting Review
+
+* Process for determining supported platforms [#8265](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/8265)
+  * Build WG will prepare initial list of supported platforms in their next meeting.
+  * Then CTC will review and decide next steps.
+
+* child_process, win: fix shell spawn with AutoRun [#8063](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/8063)
+  * Remove from CTC agenda.
+  * @joshgav to check for opinions within Microsoft.
+  * Ask @joaocgreis in GitHub for more explanation.
+
+* fs: undeprecate existsSync; use access instead of stat for performance [#7455](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/7455)
+  * @trott to ping nodejs/collaborators in that thread. If no response then [fix].
+
+* doc: add Google Analytics tracking. [#6601](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/6601)
+  * Merge!
+
+* Introduce staging branch for stable release streams [#6306](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/6306)
+  * Do this as proposed.
+
+* Move ecosystem detection tool to nodejs org [#7935](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7935)
+  * Prep repo for migration.
+  * Open issue in nodejs/tsc.
+
+* AsyncWrap public API proposal [#18](https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/pull/18)
+  * Trevor to update all code and ask for vote on specific item(s).
+  * CTC to review again once complete.
+
+
+## Minutes
+
+### src: add no-op for --harmony-proxies flag [#8395](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/8395)
+
+We upgraded to V8 5.1 in v6.5. That removed several flags, notably the --harmony-* flags. Many in the ecosystem have hard-coded these flags and as a result are getting errors since v6.5.
+
+@evanlucas added a PR to no-op those flags. There was quite a bit of resistance to that, as it implies that we apply semver semantics to experimental features.
+
+@addaleax: Does anyone have concrete reason to not no-op these flags?
+
+@trott: For clarity, do we mean to no-op them till the next semver-major release?
+
+@addaleax: Yes.
+
+@Fishrock123: This would only ever land in v6.
+
+@evanlucas: Some feel this should be floated on V8.
+
+@trevnorris: Could they?
+
+@ofrobots: Trivial to do it, but this is on 5.1 which is an abandoned upstream.
+
+@trevnorris: We were told we could re-open abandoned branches?
+
+@ofrobots: That’s correct.
+
+@? : Were the flags removed because their behavior is V8's default?
+
+@ofrobots: Yes, support was already there but flags had not yet been removed.
+
+@? : Other flags were removed too.
+
+@addaleax: Main issue is the --harmony flags, I haven’t seen the other flags as issues.
+
+@ofrobots: I’m supportive of adding no-ops for --harmony flags cause they break the ecosystem. Others no.
+
+@Fishrock123: What about strong mode flags?
+
+@ofrobots: Mainstream users are not likely to be using strong mode flags.
+
+@ofrobots: The ones recommended as no-ops I agree should be added back as no-ops.
+
+@rvagg: We can adopt a new policy if we want, for example state that when we upgrade V8 flags may change and you have to do feature detection to address that.
+
+@addaleax: Seems to be that’s what some people want in comments, but it seems that it might not be what people expect.
+
+@rvagg: Many flags unlikely to be used in real code, but some may be used in production code. Ones that are potentially usable in production code, sure.
+
+@trevnorris: Let’s re-add the no-ops and see if people raise issues about the others.
+It would be more pure to backport in V8, but I don’t see why floating it in Node would be an issue.
+
+@addaleax: @bnoordhuis was strongly -1 on floating a patch on V8, but didn’t give a reason.
+
+@misterdjules: what do we mean by floating a patch?
+
+@trevnorris: we don’t even have to let these through to V8, just catch it ourselves.
+
+@Fishrock123: That would be harder.
+
+@ChALkeR: perhaps warn in runtime on unsupported flags for next major?
+
+@rvagg: Colin and Ben had negative positions.
+Is proposal to ask Ali to move forward in V8?
+
+@addaleax: Not expecting a definite decision, hoping to hear from people who are -1. Would be happy if someone put together a PR with all the flags we want to no-op and discuss in next meeting if necessary.
+
+@trev: How long to get a patch on the V8 branch?
+
+@ofrobots: Probably not too long, dependent on me finding a half hour.
+This will be a patch we float on our downstream of V8 5.1. We are the de facto owners of this branch now.
+
+@rvagg: Open a PR, move discussion there, people with negatives can expand on them there.
+
+**Next steps**:
+
+* @ofrobots to float a patch on our branch of V8 5.1 and open a PR. Discussion to continue there.
+* Keep on agenda for next week just in case.
+
+
+### AsyncWrap public API proposal [node-eps#18](https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/pull/18)
+
+@trevnorris: EP is near 100% ready, only thing likely to change is the native C++ API but after doing testing and implementation it’s where it needs to be for all of the goals set for it.
+
+@rvagg: We need to sign off on the EP. Can’t do that today, right?
+
+@trevnorris: No, but EP is there. I’ve updated it with code, examples, stuff like that.
+
+@rvagg: Will there be changes in node-eps#18 between now and next week?
+
+@trevnorris: No, unless some major change comes in.
+
+@trevnorris: No docs yet, Bradley has volunteered.
+
+@rvagg: There will eventually be a discussion of backporting to V4.
+
+@trevnorris: Discussion continues on promise side.
+
+@rvagg: cause we don’t have insight into the microtask queue?
+
+@trevnorris: Yes. It’s proceeding.
+
+@seththompson: V8 team is interested in helping with this. Looks like async/await won’t make cut for v7, gives us more time to work on the right thing here.
+
+**Next steps**:
+
+* Everyone read [node-eps#18](https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/pull/18).
+* Vote next week on Node-EP.
+* Open a PR for implementation in nodejs/node.
+
+
+### Modules
+
+@bmeck: There were several concerns about the rewritten EP for ES6 module compat. Note that we haven’t merged that yet, people are welcome to comment in that issue.
+
+@rvagg: Those who are concerned should definitely get in touch with Bradley (@bmeck).
+
+
+## Q/A on public channels
+
+* Thanks for the heads-up on async/await.
+
+
+## Upcoming Meetings
+
+* CTC: 2016-09-14
+* TSC: 2016-09-08
+* Benchmarking: [Benchmarking#56](https://github.com/nodejs/benchmarking/issues/56)
+* Build: 2016-09-20