Inclusion in WinterCG Runtime Keys Proposal

[Ethan-Arrowood]

Hello!

Wanted to share that I've published the draft for the runtime-keys proposal. It is heavily inspired by Node's existing usage of the node key as documented here: https://nodejs.org/dist/latest-v16.x/docs/api/packages.html#conditional-exports . I've included a section for Node.js in the proposal here: https://github.com/wintercg/runtime-keys/pull/2/files#diff-5e793325cd2bfc452e268a4aa2f02b4024dd9584bd1db3c2595f61f1ecf7b985R76-R84 and would like to get someone from either this working group or the TSC to essentially sign off on it. Let me know if you have any questions or feedback. Please also feel free to get involved in the proposal PR. Thank you!

[Ethan-Arrowood]

@nodejs/tooling / @nodejs/tsc bump - want to get someone's sign off here before we proceed with the initial spec. Again, I don't see any conflict but want explicit acknowledgment before proceeding 😄

[jasnell]

/cc @nodejs/tsc

[aduh95]

I've added my 👍 on the linked issue as it looks good to me personally. I've added tsc-agenda label so we can discuss if there's a consensus for signing this off officially.

[mhdawson]

Looks fine to me

[joyeecheung]

LGTM

[Trott]

At the TSC meeting today, nine TSC members had no concerns/objections. @mhdawson @Trott @GeoffreyBooth @cjihrig @aduh95 @BethGriggs @danielleadams @joyeecheung @tniessen

Is that enough for you to move forward?

@nodejs/TSC A few other pile-on 👍 reactions would be good to get this over the informal 50% threshold.

[Ethan-Arrowood]

Thank you yes this is plenty sufficient for us to proceed. Thank you!

[Trott]

Thank you yes this is plenty sufficient for us to proceed. Thank you!

OK, I'm assuming this can be closed, but if I'm wrong and there's more to do here, by all means, re-open or leave a comment.