diff --git a/meetings/2024-04-24.md b/meetings/2024-04-24.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..3c3df17f --- /dev/null +++ b/meetings/2024-04-24.md @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@ +# Node.js Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting 2024-04-24 + +## Links + +* **Recording**: +* **GitHub Issue**: + +## Present + +* Antoine du Hamel @aduh95 (voting member) +* Yagiz Nizipli @anonrig (voting member) +* Benjamin Gruenbaum @benjamingr (voting member) +* Ruben Bridgewater @BridgeAR (voting member) +* Joyee Cheung @joyeecheung (voting member) +* Chengzhong Wu @legendecas (voting member) +* Matteo Collina @mcollina (voting member) +* Michael Dawson @mhdawson (voting member) +* Moshe Atlow @MoLow (voting member) +* Rafael Gonzaga @RafaelGSS (voting member) +* Richard Lau @richardlau (voting member) +* Robert Nagy @ronag (voting member) +* Ruy Adorno @ruyadorno (voting member) +* Paolo Insogna @ShogunPanda (voting member) +* Michaël Zasso @targos (voting member) +* Rich Trott @Trott (regular member) + +## Agenda + +### Announcements + +* Next major (22) release is in progress today. + +### CPC and Board Meeting Updates + +*Extracted from **tsc-agenda** labeled issues and pull requests from the **nodejs org** prior to the meeting. + +* No updates this week + +### nodejs/node + +* lib,src: remove --experimental-policy [#52583](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/52583) + * Was added as an FYI for awareness, proposal is to remove it. + * Of the 13 TSC members in the meeting, there were no concerns. Richard mentioned that + we should doc deprecate as soon as possible. + * was doc deprecated in based on the suggestion + * Also going to be discussed in next security-wg as there had been some interest from the + Microsoft in terms of the feature. + +* tools: change inactive limit to 9 months [#52459](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/52459) + * Yagiz - want to explain reasoning, originally was towards security. But realized that main + motivation is not security but something else. In reality the bar to stay as an active + collaborator is very low, committing one commit or reviewing one commit. So easy to + extend. This gives the false view that Node.js has lots of maintainers, also gives false + view of what kind of support people can expect. It is easy to come back from Emeritus. + * Pushing now for 9 months to see where the TSC stands + * As Michael mentioned, concern may be that life events may make the 9 months too short + * Benjamin, if security is the issue, other approaches such as limiting who really needs commit + bit versus removing collaborators + * Benjamin, In terms of the view of collaborators, reviews are most important to me, so making + sure we can retain maximum reviews may push against removing people + * Joyee, if we want to depend only on commit queue, we need people maintaining the commit + queue it is not stable enough to depend on. + * Matteo: Is the ability to run jenkins is it tied to the commit bit or the ability to write to the repo + * Richard, today there is a group which determines both write access and ability to launch CI + runs + * For request CI, it would be based on the same team + * Benjamin, getting reviews is already hard, keeping people as collaborators I think will help + getting reviews + * Joyee, can still ping subsystem teams + * Benjamin, there are some areas where we are thin on people, chance of getting a review is a + lot better while they are still part of the project. + * Yagiz, to summarize we have 100 collaborators, if become inactive move to emeritus. Home + page advertises that it’s not. Don’t think 12 months is right, also don’t think 9 months is right. + Is it fair to other collaborators to make it appear that people are contributing when they are + not? + * Benjamin, what if we keep the duration, but increase the requirement the amount of work + * Ruy, reminds people about conversations in the past. There are people who contribute in + many areas but never get to be core collaborators + * Matteo, going to propose an experiment. We list the number of people that have passed the + 9 month barrier (as well as 6 month, etc in terms of what people want to propose) and at the + mark of 12 we see how many of them have returned, then we will have actionable data to + work on. + * Benjamin, what if we ask people after 6 months, and automatically remove after 12 + * Yagiz, have been a TSC member for a year, and a collaborator a year before that. Don’t remember + a person to come back. 2 or 3 weeks bargained and compromised on 12. Called for vote as + I believe the worst decision is better than no decision. Need more strong and opinionated + Pushback in the TSC so believe we should vote. + * Antoine, if you call for vote with any data to back up claim, then believe likely lose vote, just + FYI. + * Matteo, don’t believe that changing this improves security posture, that is not a reason + +* deps,lib,src: add experimental web storage [#52435](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/52435) + * On the board meeting agenda to ask about getting approval for License. + * Meeting is this Friday + +### nodejs/TSC + +* Update meeting times? [#1528](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/1528) + * Michael will propose times based on updated data + +* Node.js Collaborator Spotlight Proposal [#1474](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/1474) + * FYI, now documented and open for nominations + +### nodejs/admin + +* Events / Collaborator Summits for 2024 [#814](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/issues/814) + * Next step is to run survey to see who can make it. + +## Strategic Initiatives +* skipped as we ran out of time + +## Upcoming Meetings + +* **Node.js Project Calendar**: + +Click `+GoogleCalendar` at the bottom right to add to your own Google calendar.