Node.js Foundation Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting 2018-08-01

[mhdawson]

Time

UTC Wed 01-Aug-2018 14:00 (02:00 PM):

Timezone	Date/Time
US / Pacific	Wed 01-Aug-2018 07:00 (07:00 AM)
US / Mountain	Wed 01-Aug-2018 08:00 (08:00 AM)
US / Central	Wed 01-Aug-2018 09:00 (09:00 AM)
US / Eastern	Wed 01-Aug-2018 10:00 (10:00 AM)
London	Wed 01-Aug-2018 15:00 (03:00 PM)
Amsterdam	Wed 01-Aug-2018 16:00 (04:00 PM)
Moscow	Wed 01-Aug-2018 17:00 (05:00 PM)
Chennai	Wed 01-Aug-2018 19:30 (07:30 PM)
Hangzhou	Wed 01-Aug-2018 22:00 (10:00 PM)
Tokyo	Wed 01-Aug-2018 23:00 (11:00 PM)
Sydney	Thu 02-Aug-2018 00:00 (12:00 AM)

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Technical%20Steering%20Committee%20(TSC)+Meeting+2018-08-01&iso=20180801T14
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=02PM+UTC%2C+Aug+01%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10SswyOK4RYZ9R8UK6Ryn6CDuP90lG0wFHIEyzX9U3o0/edit

Agenda

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

nodejs/build

• Request for elevated permissions #1337

nodejs/node

• Collaborator nomination - gdams #21934
• Password Hashing API #21766
• tty: make _read throw ERR_TTY_WRITABLE_NOT_READABLE #21654
• doc: remove 2 unused error codes from errors.md #21491
• [v10.x] Revert "http: always emit close on req and res" #21809

nodejs/docker-node

• Image without npm nor yarn #404

nodejs/TSC

• Move meetings times to 12,16,21 #570
• Proposal: add all new core modules under a scope? (too late for http2) #389

nodejs/admin

• Policy tweak #188

nodejs/user-feedback

• 2018-07-16 Public User Feedback Meeting - General User Feedback #74

Recurring agenda items

• Tracking issue for updating TSC on Board Meetings #476
• Strategic Initiatives - Tracking Issue #423

Invited

• Anna Henningsen @addaleax (TSC)
• Сковорода Никита Андреевич @ChALkeR (TSC)
• Colin Ihrig @cjihrig (TSC)
• Daniel Bevenius @danbev (TSC)
• Franziska Hinkelmann @fhinkel (TSC)
• Gibson Fahnestock @gibfahn (TSC)
• Jeremiah Senkpiel @Fishrock123 (TSC)
• James M Snell @jasnell (TSC)
• Joyee Cheung @joyeecheung (TSC)
• Matteo Collina @mcollina (TSC)
• Michael Dawson @mhdawson (TSC)
• Myles Borins @MylesBorins (TSC)
• Ali Ijaz Sheikh @ofrobots (TSC)
• Rod Vagg @rvagg (TSC)
• Michaël Zasso @targos (TSC)
• Sakthipriyan Vairamani @thefourtheye (TSC)
• Timothy Gu @TimothyGu (TSC)
• Rich Trott @Trott (TSC)

Observers/Guests

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with tsc-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

Zoom link: https://zoom.us/j/611357642
Regular password

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 TSC that's not worth putting on as a separate agenda item, this is a good place for that

[benjamingr]

We have an API discussion request at nodejs/node#21857 - not sure if it has to be this week (I think it can wait a week) and I also wouldn't mind joining to explain the whole thing since it is the result of the summit work (alternatively, I think @mcollina who was present can also present it adequately)

[mcollina]

@jasnell and myself will not be able to participate in this meeting as we will both be in New York City.

I've added #21654 as tsc-agenda, but maybe we could talk about that next week.

@benjamingr I can definitely champion nodejs/node#21857 at the following meeting.

[benjamingr]

@mcollina great, that's awesome to hear - thanks a ton! Just to make sure we're on the same page: The current contents is just promiseEvents. Currently it's added as a util but there are two things to bring up:

• Where should it be added? Currently it's at util, but before we considered async_hooks (which the async_hooks team didn't like), Promise, process etc. Alternatives also good.
• Is the current API desirable?

The most important capability for me that's added is the ability to solve the "reject after resolve" case which currently has exception swallowing potential. I can also point you to the slide from the summit or the use-cases thing if you'd like.

[fhinkel]

I'll be chairing.

[mhdawson]

@fhinkel thanks :)

[Trott]

As usual during daylight savings, this time is impossible for me.

For the announcements section: @rubys will be onboarded as a Collaborator later this week.

To weigh in on the things on the agenda:

• Request for elevated permissions: I defer to @maclover7 and others as to whether it can be removed from the agenda going forward.
• Nominating gdams: 🎉
• Password API: Worth delegating to @nodejs/security-wg for a recommendation?
• tty: make _read throw ERR_TTY_WRITABLE_NOT_READABLE: If @addaleax or anyone else objects, I strongly recommend she go with the red X to make sure it doesn't get landed over objections accidentally.
• doc: remove 2 unused error codes from errors.md: I am in favor of the PR for the reasons explained in doc: remove 2 unused error codes from errors.md node#21491 (comment). I would say I'm closer to +1 at this point rather than the +0.5 I put in the comment.
• Image without npm nor yarn: Not 100% sure why @bnb put this on the TSC agenda, TBH. I'm certainly for allowing the Docker WG to do whatever they think is best in terms of making images available with or without certain features.
• Moving meeting times: YES!
• Proposal: add all new core modules under a scope? (too late for http2): I've removed the tsc-agenda label as I believe there is a PR that is hopefully seeing some movement (and if it's not, then let's tag that). Ping @ljharb in case they want to put it back on the agenda (in which case definitely indicate what you want the TSC to decide). I'm for namespacing future modules. I'm opposed to planning on breaking currently unscoped modules. Everything else is up for debate as far as I'm concerned.
• Policy tweak: Landed!

[Trott]

By the way, with so many things on the agenda 😞it's probably worth it for someone to aggressively go through and encourage people to remove stuff that can be removed. (No one is allowed to remove anything from the agenda other than the person who put it on there. That's in our governance. So don't remove it unilaterally.)

After that, it's probably worth it for the TSC to decide at or before the start of the meeting which items need to be discussed first and which can wait for another week.

[MylesBorins]

I've moved the board tracking issue and the update on initiatives to their own section recurring agenda items and placed them at the end so they don't block other conversation

[ljharb]

@Trott yes, i'd like the TSC to decide that new core modules will indeed go under a scope, so that we can begin the process of debating a specific implementation in a PR (that i'm happy to file/modify). I don't think the current PR is sufficient to create movement.

[Trott]

Moderation Team report for the week:

• Closed and locked one issue that was nonsensical/off-topic/possibly spam. Moderation issue 223.

That's it!

@nodejs/moderation @nodejs/tsc @nodejs/community-committee

[targos]

I added nodejs/node#21809 back to the agenda. I'm going to release node 10.8.0 today and there are concerns in the PR about the change. See nodejs/node#21809 (comment).

[Trott]

An addendum for the Moderation Team report: We received an email from Mozilla requesting that we fill out a survey on behalf of the project for some research they're doing. The questions asked for publicly-available information (Do we have a code of conduct? Do we have an enforcement policy? How many serious/trivial incidents to we address over a period of time, which can be ascertained from reading these public reports that I post almost ever week, that sort of stuff). @bnb filled out the survey. There was a brief conversation on the team with agreement that no private information would be given in the survey answers.