doc: add technical values document #35145

mhdawson · 2020-09-10T15:59:17Z

As part of the next-10 we found
we needed to capture the project's technical values/priorities as
a starting point before discussing key technologies/areas for the
next 10 years of Node.js

This is a first cut that the team put together. The discussion
took place in a few meetings as well as this
PR. We believe the doc
should live in the core node repository as it is intended to
reflect the agreement of the collaborator base.

I think this is a good starting point but we also
acknowledge that only a small subset of the Node.js collaborators
have participated/commented so far. This PR should be a good
way to get additional review/input from the larger set
of Node.js collaborators.

Signed-off-by: Michael Dawson mdawson@devrus.com

Checklist

make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
documentation is changed or added
commit message follows commit guidelines

gittysachin

Would be great to have the technical values/prioritization document before the key discussion about new technology implementation or any area of future Node.js

mhdawson · 2020-09-10T21:58:41Z

@gittysachin that was what we ended up thinking based on the discussion in the next-10 team and what led to the creation of this initial version of that.

mmarchini · 2020-09-10T22:16:01Z

this feels like one of those times where @nodejs/collaborators is appropriate

TECHNICAL_VALUES_AND_PRIORITIZATION.md

Trott · 2020-09-11T03:26:07Z

I think we should be exceptionally stingy with the root-level all-caps file and would prefer this go in doc/guides/technical-values.md or similar.

TECHNICAL_VALUES_AND_PRIORITIZATION.md

mhdawson · 2020-09-14T21:52:51Z

@Trott I think I'm ok with it being in guides since it does have a visible path through the README.md

GeoffreyBooth · 2020-09-15T04:23:38Z

Two thoughts:

What is “API currency”?
I see and appreciate the reference to Web APIs. I’m not sure if we need to say anything more, but I think perhaps the biggest driver of Node’s popularity has been the fact that it’s a JavaScript runtime and there’s tremendous value in having code that can run in both browsers and on the server, or at least that apps can share the same language between client and server. I think maintaining compatibility with the browser environments as much as possible is an important technical value to maintain.

doc/guides/technical-values.md

mhdawson · 2020-09-17T17:21:53Z

@GeoffreyBooth updated to use clearer wording for "currency",

In terms of:

I see and appreciate the reference to Web APIs. I’m not sure if we need to say anything more, but I think perhaps the biggest driver of Node’s popularity has been the fact that it’s a JavaScript runtime and there’s tremendous value in having code that can run in both browsers and on the server, or at least that apps can share the same language between client and server. I think maintaining compatibility with the browser environments as much as possible is an important technical value to maintain.

I think we discussed that in the next-10 meetings and stopped short of mentioning that specifically. Since you mentioned as "thoughts" as opposed to an objection I'm going to land the current text and maybe you can PR in a suggested addition that covers that and we can use the PR to discuss.

mhdawson · 2020-09-17T17:23:39Z

As doc only I guess I did not need to request the CI, linters seem to have complete so I think I'm good to land.

nodejs-github-bot · 2020-09-17T17:24:29Z

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/33157/

As part of the [next-10](https://github.com/nodejs/next-10) we found we needed to capture the project's technical values/priorities as a starting point before discussing key technologies/areas for the next 10 years of Node.js This is a first cut that the team put together. The discussion took place in a few meetings as well as this [PR](nodejs/next-10#11). We believe the doc should live in the core node repository as it is intended to reflect the agreement of the collaborator base. I think this is a good starting point but we also acknowledge that only a small subset of the Node.js collaborators have participated/commented so far. This PR should be a good way to get additional review/input from the larger set of Node.js collaborators. Signed-off-by: Michael Dawson <mdawson@devrus.com> PR-URL: #35145 Reviewed-By: Christopher Hiller <boneskull@boneskull.com> Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat <trivikr.dev@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <riclau@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <Bethany.Griggs@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Anto Aravinth <anto.aravinth.cse@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <daijiro.wachi@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: Ruy Adorno <ruyadorno@github.com> Reviewed-By: Andrey Pechkurov <apechkurov@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Coe <bencoe@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Tobias Nießen <tniessen@tnie.de> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Pranshu Srivastava <rexagod@gmail.com>

mhdawson · 2020-09-17T17:33:25Z

Landed in fe293e9

Going to leave open until we hear back with @GeoffreyBooth that he's ok with my suggested approach to his comment on browser compatibility in case I need to take some other action.

GeoffreyBooth · 2020-09-17T17:53:02Z

Landed in fe293e9

Going to leave open until we hear back with @GeoffreyBooth that he’s ok with my suggested approach to his comment on browser compatibility in case I need to take some other action.

Yes, it’s not an objection, just a suggestion. Was there a reason it was left out when you discussed it in those meetings?

mhdawson · 2020-09-18T20:15:15Z

@GeoffreyBooth If I remember correctly it came down being related to your comment I’m not sure if we need to say anything more and that there is not necessarily agreement across the project that compatibility with the browser environments is always the right path so we just left it at what was there.

As part of the [next-10](https://github.com/nodejs/next-10) we found we needed to capture the project's technical values/priorities as a starting point before discussing key technologies/areas for the next 10 years of Node.js This is a first cut that the team put together. The discussion took place in a few meetings as well as this [PR](nodejs/next-10#11). We believe the doc should live in the core node repository as it is intended to reflect the agreement of the collaborator base. I think this is a good starting point but we also acknowledge that only a small subset of the Node.js collaborators have participated/commented so far. This PR should be a good way to get additional review/input from the larger set of Node.js collaborators. Signed-off-by: Michael Dawson <mdawson@devrus.com> PR-URL: #35145 Reviewed-By: Christopher Hiller <boneskull@boneskull.com> Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat <trivikr.dev@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <riclau@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <Bethany.Griggs@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Anto Aravinth <anto.aravinth.cse@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <daijiro.wachi@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: Ruy Adorno <ruyadorno@github.com> Reviewed-By: Andrey Pechkurov <apechkurov@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Coe <bencoe@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Tobias Nießen <tniessen@tnie.de> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Pranshu Srivastava <rexagod@gmail.com>

mhdawson · 2020-09-21T22:19:06Z

Going to close, @GeoffreyBooth just let me know if I should do anything else to follow up on your comments.

As part of the [next-10](https://github.com/nodejs/next-10) we found we needed to capture the project's technical values/priorities as a starting point before discussing key technologies/areas for the next 10 years of Node.js This is a first cut that the team put together. The discussion took place in a few meetings as well as this [PR](nodejs/next-10#11). We believe the doc should live in the core node repository as it is intended to reflect the agreement of the collaborator base. I think this is a good starting point but we also acknowledge that only a small subset of the Node.js collaborators have participated/commented so far. This PR should be a good way to get additional review/input from the larger set of Node.js collaborators. Signed-off-by: Michael Dawson <mdawson@devrus.com> PR-URL: #35145 Reviewed-By: Christopher Hiller <boneskull@boneskull.com> Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat <trivikr.dev@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <riclau@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <Bethany.Griggs@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Anto Aravinth <anto.aravinth.cse@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <daijiro.wachi@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: Ruy Adorno <ruyadorno@github.com> Reviewed-By: Andrey Pechkurov <apechkurov@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Coe <bencoe@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Tobias Nießen <tniessen@tnie.de> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Pranshu Srivastava <rexagod@gmail.com>

As part of the [next-10](https://github.com/nodejs/next-10) we found we needed to capture the project's technical values/priorities as a starting point before discussing key technologies/areas for the next 10 years of Node.js This is a first cut that the team put together. The discussion took place in a few meetings as well as this [PR](nodejs/next-10#11). We believe the doc should live in the core node repository as it is intended to reflect the agreement of the collaborator base. I think this is a good starting point but we also acknowledge that only a small subset of the Node.js collaborators have participated/commented so far. This PR should be a good way to get additional review/input from the larger set of Node.js collaborators. Signed-off-by: Michael Dawson <mdawson@devrus.com> PR-URL: nodejs#35145 Reviewed-By: Christopher Hiller <boneskull@boneskull.com> Reviewed-By: Trivikram Kamat <trivikr.dev@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <riclau@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <Bethany.Griggs@uk.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Anto Aravinth <anto.aravinth.cse@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <daijiro.wachi@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: Ruy Adorno <ruyadorno@github.com> Reviewed-By: Andrey Pechkurov <apechkurov@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Ash Cripps <acripps@redhat.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Coe <bencoe@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Tobias Nießen <tniessen@tnie.de> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Pranshu Srivastava <rexagod@gmail.com>

nodejs-github-bot added the doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. label Sep 10, 2020

mhdawson added the tsc-agenda Issues and PRs to discuss during the meetings of the TSC. label Sep 10, 2020

gittysachin reviewed Sep 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

boneskull approved these changes Sep 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

trivikr approved these changes Sep 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

lholmquist approved these changes Sep 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

richardlau approved these changes Sep 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

BethGriggs approved these changes Sep 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

antsmartian approved these changes Sep 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

watilde approved these changes Sep 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

Qard approved these changes Sep 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

ruyadorno approved these changes Sep 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

Trott reviewed Sep 11, 2020

View reviewed changes