Repository navigation
Node.js Foundation Core Technical Committee (CTC) Meeting 2016-11-09 #9507
Description
Activity
PLEASE note both the date and time carefully. We have two meeting times that we rotate between.
Stand up section of the doc is ready to go if any participants want to get a head start on that.
With daylight savings time ending a few days ago in the US, this has become a challenging meeting time for me. And Rod is all but 100% guaranteed to miss it. So someone else needs to be a meeting chair. @mhdawson volunteered in another thread, so maybe they would be good for this one?
I'm the one that put the buffer item on the agenda, so in a nutshell the question is:
- Should we remove (in Node.js version 7) the run-time deprecation of the Buffer constructor called without the
newkeyword with the intention of probably trying again in version 8? See buffer: hard-deprecate calling Buffer without new #8169 for discussion and context. The hope is to achieve consensus one way or the other. Failing that, I believe a call for a vote is appropriate because this is not something we should dither on. It seems to me that @jasnell, @addaleax, and @evanlucas are all in favor of this. No one on the CTC has explicitly said they are opposed to it. So if any CTC members are opposed and there is a chance they won't make the meeting, they should probably say so here or in the issue for it. Otherwise, if no one else voices opposition, it sure seems like there's consensus to do it.
- Should we remove (in Node.js version 7) the run-time deprecation of the Buffer constructor called without the
No one on the CTC has explicitly said they are opposed to it.
I would read #7152 (comment) as @ChALkeR being opposed to it, fwiw.
Starting next week can we please start posting these meeting notices to the CTC repo?
Starting next week can we please start posting these meeting notices to the CTC repo?
I'm personally in favor of that, but I don't think I'd want to start doing it unless the CTC as a group endorsed the move. (Maybe we already have and I just didn't take note of it?) I believe an original motivation for having these sorts of things in the main repo and not in some other repo was to maximize visibility. I think we've reached information-overload on the main repo and moving stuff like this elsewhere makes sense. But that could arguably represent a pretty big ideological shift in how we operate. Maybe this can be added to the agenda for Wednesday for a quick consensus-check?
I won't be able to make it to the meeting today, sorry. This time (5 p.m.) is a bit complicated for me.
Sorry folks, had the time wrong in my calendar. Will join up next week.
minutes for meeting here: nodejs/CTC#31
Minutes landed as : https://github.com/nodejs/CTC/blob/master/meetings/2016-11-09.md closing.
Time
UTC Wed 09-Nov-2016 16:00:
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/CTC
Invited
Notes
The agenda comes from issues labelled with
ctc-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
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.