Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Node.js Foundation Core Technical Committee (CTC) Meeting 2016-08-24 #8242

Closed
Trott opened this issue Aug 23, 2016 · 15 comments
Closed

Node.js Foundation Core Technical Committee (CTC) Meeting 2016-08-24 #8242

Trott opened this issue Aug 23, 2016 · 15 comments

Comments

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Aug 23, 2016 •
edited
Loading

Time

UTC Wed 24-Aug-2016 20:00:

Timezone Date/Time
US / Pacific Wed 24-Aug-2016 13:00
US / Mountain Wed 24-Aug-2016 14:00
US / Central Wed 24-Aug-2016 15:00
US / Eastern Wed 24-Aug-2016 16:00
Amsterdam Wed 24-Aug-2016 22:00
Berlin Wed 24-Aug-2016 22:00
Moscow Wed 24-Aug-2016 23:00
Tokyo Thu 25-Aug-2016 05:00
Sydney Thu 25-Aug-2016 06:00

Or in your local time:

Links

Agenda

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

nodejs/node

  • CTC membership nomination: @thealphanerd #8058
  • buffer: hard-deprecate Buffer constructor #7152
  • fs: don't alter user provided options object #7831
  • fs: undeprecate existsSync; use access instead of stat for performance #7455
  • doc: add Google Analytics tracking. #6601
  • Introduce staging branch for stable release streams #6306
  • Seek legal advice on LICENSE and copyright blocks in code #3979

nodejs/api

  • Landing node-eps for ABI stable module and location for PoC code #28

Invited

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with ctc-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

Uberconference; participants should have the link
& numbers, contact me if you don't.

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 CTC that's not worth
putting on as a separate agenda item, this is a good place for it.
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Aug 23, 2016

Standup section of the new doc is ready to be filled out for anyone looking to get a jump.

This meeting will be happening in 23 hours from now.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Aug 23, 2016

Reminder to @nodejs/ctc members: We will be voting on the nomination of @thealphanerd to the CTC this week so please come prepared!

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Aug 23, 2016 •
edited
Loading

@nodejs/ctc:

Biggest thing of note to be prepared for, in my opinion at least:

Important next-step item that I don't think happened:

  • @jasnell was going to set up a Doodle poll so we could set up an additional meeting specifically for modules. If that's happened, could someone drop a link in here? If it hasn't happened and your name rhymes with Rames Rell, consider doing it posthaste. If it hasn't happened and your name does not rhyme with Rames Rell, consider asking someone whose name rhymes with Rames Rell if they would mind if you took it on and just did it. This is especially true if your GitHub handle is @bmeck , since there's not much point in having that meeting without Bradley.

Also of note:

  • We will be voting on adding @thealphanerd to the CTC. If you won't be attending, it would be nice to at least register your vote here on that subject. (My opinion only. I just think it's nice if everyone votes on membership issues. It's cool, even admirable, to abstain when you don't have an opinion. It seems like the one thing we should all have opinions on is membership, though. Again, my opinion only.)

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Aug 23, 2016 •
edited
Loading

Doodle for Modules Meeting: http://doodle.com/poll/s4gcm28vmrdd3bqd :-)

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Aug 23, 2016

Added Jenn Turner @renrutnnej (observer/Node.js Foundation) as an observer this week.

@ofrobots
Copy link
Contributor

I won't be able to make it to the meeting. +1 vote on the CTC nomination for @thealphanerd.

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Aug 23, 2016

I won't be able to make it tomorrow and next week.

@evanlucas
Copy link
Contributor

Sending my regrets for tomorrow. +1 on Myles joining the CTC though.

@joshgav
Copy link
Contributor

joshgav commented Aug 24, 2016

Notes from last week including summary of Buffer discussion: #8245

General nit: "Node-EP" stands for Node Enhancement Proposal, I assume a la JEP for Java. The "s" is to indicate plural, not part of the acronym. That is all :)

@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

Probably won't be able to make it. +1 on @thealphanerd.

@rvagg
Copy link
Member

rvagg commented Aug 24, 2016

@Trott would you mind leading this one?

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

I should be there but just in case connectivity turns out to be an issue +1 on @thealphanerd

@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Aug 24, 2016

@Trott would you mind leading this one?

Sure, anytime.

@hackygolucky
Copy link
Contributor

I'm running a Node Live this evening and will on site for prep during the
call. The only relevant thing I can think that folks would want to know
right now that I'm working on is searching for Core mentor(s) for the
Node.js project with Outreachy nodejs/education#7

I'm sorry I can't be on the call today(unless it's very quick at the
beginning), but I'm happy to answer questions if someone wants to ping me
on irc as hackygolucky or email me.

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Rich Trott notifications@github.com
wrote:

@Trott https://github.com/Trott would you mind leading this one?

Sure, anytime.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#8242 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB46oBnz5PzCMJ7L_MhFbMLEbaI73-dIks5qjI63gaJpZM4JrYdN
.

@chrisdickinson
Copy link
Contributor

I won't be available for the meeting today. +1 on @thealphanerd (:tada:!)

@rvagg rvagg mentioned this issue Aug 24, 2016
Closed
@jasnell jasnell closed this as completed Aug 26, 2016
Fishrock123 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Oct 5, 2016
@dfabulich @Fishrock123
fs,doc: undeprecate existsSync
7b5ffa4 
This has been dragged through various long discussions and has been
elevated to the CTC multiple times.

As noted in
#7455 (comment),
while this API is still generally considered an anti-pattern, there are
still use-cases it is best suited for, such as checking if a git rebase
is in progress by looking if ".git/rebase-apply/rebasing" exists.

The general consensus is to undeprecate just the sync version, given
that the async version still has the "arguments order inconsistency"
problem.

The consensus at the two last CTC meetings this came up at was also
to undeprecate existsSync() but keep exists() deprecated.
See: #8242 &
#8330

(Description write-up by @Fishrock123)

Fixes: #1592
Refs: #4217
Refs: #7455
PR-URL: #8364

Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ilkka Myller <ilkka.myller@nodefield.com>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Сковорода Никита Андреевич <chalkerx@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this issue Oct 6, 2016
@dfabulich @jasnell
fs,doc: undeprecate existsSync
9d09bdd 
This has been dragged through various long discussions and has been
elevated to the CTC multiple times.

As noted in
#7455 (comment),
while this API is still generally considered an anti-pattern, there are
still use-cases it is best suited for, such as checking if a git rebase
is in progress by looking if ".git/rebase-apply/rebasing" exists.

The general consensus is to undeprecate just the sync version, given
that the async version still has the "arguments order inconsistency"
problem.

The consensus at the two last CTC meetings this came up at was also
to undeprecate existsSync() but keep exists() deprecated.
See: #8242 &
#8330

(Description write-up by @Fishrock123)

Fixes: #1592
Refs: #4217
Refs: #7455
PR-URL: #8364

Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ilkka Myller <ilkka.myller@nodefield.com>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Сковорода Никита Андреевич <chalkerx@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Fishrock123 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Oct 11, 2016
@dfabulich @Fishrock123
fs,doc: undeprecate existsSync
14e2d67 
This has been dragged through various long discussions and has been
elevated to the CTC multiple times.

As noted in
#7455 (comment),
while this API is still generally considered an anti-pattern, there are
still use-cases it is best suited for, such as checking if a git rebase
is in progress by looking if ".git/rebase-apply/rebasing" exists.

The general consensus is to undeprecate just the sync version, given
that the async version still has the "arguments order inconsistency"
problem.

The consensus at the two last CTC meetings this came up at was also
to undeprecate existsSync() but keep exists() deprecated.
See: #8242 &
#8330

(Description write-up by @Fishrock123)

Fixes: #1592
Refs: #4217
Refs: #7455
PR-URL: #8364

Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ilkka Myller <ilkka.myller@nodefield.com>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Сковорода Никита Андреевич <chalkerx@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests