Node.js Foundation Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting 2018-05-23 #544
Comments
|
I'm chairing this week. |
|
I won't be able to make it this week – team event. |
|
I'd like to request that nodejs/i18n#77 be added to this meeting's agenda. Status: The new @nodejs-crowdin GitHub user exists and has admin access to nodejs/i18n and no other repos. Admin access to the repo is required by Crowdin (not just write access) and org-level approval is also required to be able to integrate with the nodejs/i18n repo. I contend that this is a low-risk approval to make, as @nodejs-crowdin's privileges are limited to a single repo. See nodejs/i18n#77 (comment) wherein @Trott acknowledges having denied the initial request and offers to approve the request pending TSC consideration. |
FWIW, I'm 👍 on the requested access here. If you're a TSC member that has an opinion on this, it would be great to use the 👍 or 👎 reactions so we can establish consensus or lack thereof ahead of the meeting. |
|
I would also like to request that nodejs/github-bot#171 be added to the agenda. I don't have permissions to add labels to the Summary: We want to enable Travis CI on the nodejs/i18n repo. |
|
I’ll probably miss the meeting because it’s too late, but it’s probably worth mentioning nodejs/node#20876 at some point. :) |
|
As usual, I can't make it to this time slot due to class. |
|
I'm at a conference and will make it if I can, but quite possibly will not be able to. |
|
@addaleax if you're up for it - I think it would be great to add the worker PR to the summit and do a session about it. What I have in mind is getting a bunch of people to read the code together and review it so we can iron questions and problems out with you being accessible for questions. |
|
@zeke why do those topics need to be added to the TSC agenda? Are they controversial? Have you tried resolving them on the issue tracker instead? |
@fhinkel I agree that it could be resolved without needing to go to the meeting and I'm kind of hoping to do that in #544 (comment) with the request for emoji reactions. The approval needs to be done by an org owner, which is (basically) TSC. This is similar (although not identical, so kind of an undocumented grey area) to approving a bot. There was a request that was denied (by me) but I left a comment in the issue indicating that once all the information was gathered, the request could be escalated to TSC for approval. See nodejs/i18n#77 (comment). So, @zeke put it on the agenda because I told him to. :-D IMO, it's appropriate to be on the agenda, even if all we do is ask that people who haven't weighed in to please do so. To be blunt, I think a pretty big percentage of the TSC will ignore or not see requests like this if they're not on the agenda. (We don't even bother listing |
|
Speaking of Currently 9 open issues and pull requests labeled |
|
(Removed |
|
Moderation Team update: No Moderation team actions taken this week! By the way, those "no action taken" things are meant as "no actions taken in accordance with the Moderation Policy" so no one was blocked and that sort of thing. However, a subset of the Moderation Team does talk (and there is a weekly meeting as well) and try to facilitate things and we notify each other to watch certain conversations and ask for feedback from each other on how we're handling things. So it's not like we're not doing anything, but it's mostly acting as individuals and not bringing to bear policy when it's not called for. (This paragraph is me speaking for myself only.) @nodejs/moderation @nodejs/tsc @nodejs/community-committee |
|
@Trott re: moderation team, I'm finding that we're able to spot situations much earlier on and de-escalate them a lot better than a few months ago. I've also noticed we discuss possible scenarios ahead of time and prepare for them pretty well. Less escalated stuff -> less stuff to report. That's just my take. |
|
@Trott, not listing the TSC review items was probably lost when I went to automatically generating the issue. If we think it is important to review in the meeting we can probably update to meeting generation tool to capture/add that list. (It is another reason to get to the point where we have template for both the meeting and minutes as we could then just adjust the templates to include a link and maybe the effort is better spent on that). I know you'll probably not like this suggestion but we could immediately create a tracking issue so that we'd get a reminder to review every meeting. |
I think adding the review of I'm not that concerned about it, to be honest. It's easy enough to post a link in a comment like I did above. And although 9 tsc-review items is more than I'd like to see, it's also less than I expected to see, so there's good news too. :-D |
|
(That said, adding that search link to the template would be 👍.) |
|
I'm going to have to pass tonights meeting, it's been a long day and a little too late for me. |
|
Minutes in #546 |
Time
UTC Wed 23-May-2018 22:00 (10:00 PM):
Or in your local time:
Links
Agenda
Extracted from tsc-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.
nodejs/node
nodejs/TSC
Invited
Observers
Notes
The agenda comes from issues labelled with
tsc-agendaacross 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
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: