►
Description
A
C
D
And
I
needed
each
Malcolm
ecosystem
detection
toll
on
the
node.js.
A
poor,
mostly
comments,
nothing
significant
and
I
will
file
dog
Haitian
food
requests
only
eats
just
some
final
enough
to
make
sure
that
it
doesn't
breathe
in
unneeded
files
and
next
to
this
grease,
but
I
think
he's
not
here
so
colon.
E
F
G
H
J
I've
been
working
to
move
the
Linux
one
into
the
release,
the
is
adding
a
machine
there
and
adding
it
into
the
jobs
in
figuring
the
new
ax
machines.
We
finally
got
from
osu
OSL,
adding
them
to
see
I
and
working
to
get
them
into
the
regular
regression
jobs
working
on
presentations
for
note,
interactive
for
the
build
workgroup
tips
and
ports,
modem,
workgroup
and
learning
a
few
key
ours.
Reading
commenting
on
issues
participating
in
the
LTS
and
build
workgroups
and
participating
in
the
discussion
and
activity
on
the
VI,
stable
proof
of
concept.
L
Been
working
on
a
dock
for
for
the
earliest
working
group,
for
maintaining
the
Viet
branch
and
also
looking
at
hotter
things
of
the
backboards
upstream
to
see
if
there's
something
you
need
to
be
back
forty
two
nodes
and
finding
the
tribulation
cook
to
actually
report
and
working
with
the
dev
tools
team
on
some
beauty.
Inspector
updates
and
fixes
next
would
be
mine.
B
Hey
so
I'm
doing
some
more
in-depth
4.5
testing.
There
was
a
potential
regression
that
showed
up
earlier
today,
I'll
talk
more
about
that
later.
Working
on
the
ABI
smoke
testing
job.
That
goes
into
the
next
point,
which
is
trying
to
get
5.1
landed
on
these
six
point
x
and
then
just
been
doing
some
work
with
the
build
group
and
johan
and
looking
at
j
unit
reporters
for
some
of
our
jobs
and
stuff
that
can
fix
some
of
the
lag
that
we've
been
having
in
CI
and
on
trevor
was.
A
A
Great,
let's
move
on
to
ripping
through
the
previous
meeting
stuff.
So
first
item
was
on
ax
being
nominated.
We
voted
her
in
she's
here,
ray
I.
Don't
think,
there's
anything
more
to
do
on
that
reverting
the
FS
changes
and
the
real
path
stuff
people
who
are
working
on
that.
Do
we
have
anything
we
need
to
talk
about
today
about
that
or
is
that
all
stuff
that's
moving
slowly
but
surely
and
conversation
would
be
on
github.
A
B
Yes,
so
earlier
today,
well,
I
was
just
I've
been
using
d45,
as
my
local
instance.
I
had
Bauer
kind
of
blow
up
on
me
well
trying
to
install
some
stuff,
so
I'm
going
to
be
digging
into
that.
Originally,
the
LTS
working
group
was
talking
about
doing
the
release
next
to
day,
with
an
announcement
this
week
to
give
some
people
some
heads
up
and
that's
just
temporarily
put
on
hold
until
I
can
figure
out.
If
this
is
an
environment
thing
and
if
it's
reproducible.
A
J
J
A
H
J
A
A
A
B
H
B
A
H
M
M
So
that
means
like
all
right
and
other
methods
that
live
on
you.
A
right
will
return
about,
for
instance,
whereas
now
they
don't
also
currently
it's
impossible
to
properly
inherit
from
buffer,
which
people
have
expressed.
Developers
have
expressed
desire
to
do,
and
so
too
additionally
accommodate
that
we
need
to
do
the
same.
It
is
possible
to
properly
inherit
from
it
and
preserve
like
backwards
compatibility
in
terms
of
API,
the
the
key
issue.
M
If
that
inheriting
will
force
the
use
of
new
and
that's
the
limping
breaking
change
that
prevents
exploration
of
other
alternatives
like
alternative,
do
we
just
cut
out
the
old
API
that
we've
said
that
we
don't
want
people
using
anymore?
Do
we
use
a
diff
occasion
cycle
notice
than
that,
because
there's
no
way
to
deprecate
the
use
of
new
right?
It's
just
a
clean
break,
so
a
decision
needs
to
be
made
about
how
we're
going
to
proceed
with
that
and
once
the
decision
is
there,
we
will
have
the
avenue
of
options
that
we
can
take.
M
N
M
N
Believe
what
Evan
was
referring
to
us
the
most
talking
some
other
issue?
Well,
we
discussed
that
we
could
work
around
that
using
the
reflect
a
p.I
and
checking
using
a
normal
function,
basically,
whether
that
was
a
new
call
or
cold
without
new
and
fixing
that
up
internally
there
were
performance
concerns
at
in
the
word
that
ended.
I.
Think
the
last
I
heard
was
that
inversed
opinion
would
try
to
work
on
something
there
didn't
hear
back
or
see
any
PR.
So
far,.
A
A
Like
the
particular
is
about
like
how
we
want
to
proceed,
I
don't
know
if
we
need
to
talk
about
that
here
now,
because
that
seems
like
something
that
can
happen
on
the
on
the
github
repo
and
we
have
a
lot
to
talk
about
today,
but
so
I
guess
I
want
to
interject.
If
I
can
and
ask
James
since
James
put
the
ctc
agenda
on
this
issue,
what
the
hoped-for
outcome
of
this
conversation
is.
I
really
are
you
looking
in
today
or
now.
H
We
can
result
in
github
conversation
what
I,
when
I'm
hoping
was
hoping
to
get
out
of
this
conversation
here.
This
is:
are
there
any
glaring
reasons
why
we
absolutely
would
not
do
this
right
if
they
shouldn't
down
to
the
technical
details
that,
okay,
that
you
know
it's
just
a
matter
of
figuring
out
the
right
way
and
okay,
we
can
observe
s.
H
D
D
K
A
All
right
I'd
like
to
move
that
we
we
move
on
to
the
next
item
unless,
unless,
unless
there's
a,
you
know
a
particular
wrinkle
that
can't
be
can't
be
discussed
on
github,
just
because
I
want
to
get
through
everything,
I
want
to
be
mindful
of
everyone's
time,
but
I
don't
want
to
pay
short
shrift
to
this.
If
there's
something
that
was
hope
for
out
of
the
conversation
that
hasn't
been
serviced
yet
well,.
A
Mean
I
guess
what
I
would
like
to
see
is.
We
could
discuss
more
on
github
in
the
next
week
and
if
we
need
to
make
a
decision
soon,
we
could
put
it
on
next
week's
agenda
and
sort
of
like
do
what
we
did
with
the.
What
WG
URL
issue,
which
is,
you
know,
give
everybody
a
week's
notice
that
they
better,
you
know,
do
their
homework,
so
they
come
prepared
for
the
conversation.
That's.
M
A
D
Put
dad
from
the
east
I
think
that
we
could
match
that
now.
It's
already
broken
three
other
food
class
and
then
that
Budapest
was
done
by
James
and
it's
going
to
heartbreak,
gulp
ahh
and
everything
then
depends
on
God
and
without
a
sensible
error
message
and
it's
going
to
break
some
models
that
are
not
updated
for
a
long
time
like
unzip
people
so
emigrate
to
another.
Unzip
module
is
a
strange
name.
That
is
yet
another
n0t.
D
Several
month,
like
I,
mean
about
two
and
a
half
month.
The
usage
of
such
model
model
stood
up
twice
and
allowed
to
use
is
going
to
happen
soon
and
gulp
is
currently
responsible
for,
like
forty,
two
percent
of
usage
of
models
that
required
to
do
percents
of
usage
of
all
graceful
reservations
are
so
what
we're
going
to
be
broken
by
this
boat
request
is
all
graceful,
face,
versions
and
everything
that
depends
on
them.
That's
mostly
gulp
and
some
other
boat
models,
icon,
zip
and
unzip,
and
transport
stuff,
I
posted
to
east.
Could
we
chat.
O
D
They
just
don't
want
update
it
in
russian
tea
of
God
and
because
they
don't
want
to
bump
sender
money
to
assemble
major
version
I
in
a
summer
minor,
rational.
Well,
they
are
going
to
update
it
in
gulp
version,
for
it's
already
fixed
in
gulp
version,
for
but
God
pressure
for
is
not
yet
inst.
It's
going
to
be
this
soon,
but
there
is
no
estimation
date,
but
each
should
happen
somewhere
around
note
version.
7
is
if
not
before,
okay.
O
H
B
So
one
thing
that
I
that
I
want
to
say
in
looking
at
this.
You
know
faded
comments
that,
because
note
7
is
not
LTS
that
essentially
it
shouldn't
be
a
big
deal,
but
more
or
less
like
when
golf
before
comes
out.
There
will
be
a
transition
period
of
me,
people
moving
from
three
to
four
and
I
think,
even
though
seven
is
in
LTS
we're
going
to
have
a
whole
bunch
of
people.
B
17
comes
out
that
are
going
to
be
upset
if
their
projects
are
broken
and
our
can
necessarily
want
to
take
the
time
or
have
the
time
to
upgrade
to
gulp.
For
so
in
no
way
do
I
think
that
that
should
block
us
from
doing
it.
But
I
do
think
that
maybe
it
might
make
sense-
and
please
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
to
kind
of
try
and
push
the
Gulf
project
and
vital
FS
to
maybe
consider
having
some
sort
of
backwards
compatibility
to
make
that
upgrade
process.
A
little
less
painful
on
the
community.
B
D
D
Another
note
graceful
of
s
now
he
shows
a
virgin
avonin
saying
that
it
would
be
broken
on
an
odious
version
starting
from
gresham
co7.
So
I,
don't
think
that
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
break
the
promise
because
I
then
the
future
implications
warrants
will
be
today.
Did
you
teach
let's
see
Rose
here
I'm
now
talking
not
about
the
warden
from
the
nausea
side,
about
about
the
burden
that
happens
on
the
installation,
time
of
base
profess
elation,
3
and
2?
It
says
that
it
is
going
to
be
broken
in
node.js
fashion.
Seven.
O
O
H
O
I'm,
sorry,
just
replied:
damped
I
think
you've
been
quite
good
at
reaching
out
to
their
product
that
still
use
old.
First
of
gradual
efest.
You
look
at
the
list
of
linked
issue,
so
it's
it's
massive
okay,
yeah
finishing
my
father,
I
guess:
I!
Don't
really
understand
the
point
of
the
girl
maintainer
saying
that
they
don't
want
to
update
graceful
of
s.
B
Think
what
we
could
do
that
could
maybe
help
would
be
offering
some
of
our
resources
that
we
have
with
canary
in
the
gold
line,
and
even
just
resources
like
myself
to
put
time
on
to
it.
If
we
could
get
an
upgrade
in
for
them
and
show
an
upgrade
path,
that's
not
going
to
break
the
ecosystem,
we
might
be
able
to
get
them
more
interested
in
it.
D
A
Okay,
are
there?
Is
there
anything
else
to
discuss
about
this,
or
would
there
be
any
objections
to
moving
on?
It
sounds
like.
Maybe
we
want
to
do
leave
this
on
the
agenda
for
next
week,
just
in
case
anything
comes
up,
and
so
we
can
get
a
little
report
back
for
miles,
but
otherwise
is
there
anything
we
need
to
talk
about
on
this
today.
Right
now,.
H
A
I
would
also
like
to
propose
that
we
I
mean
I,
know
there's
stuff
on
this
agenda
right
now,
but
we
we
have.
We
did
you
know
two
weeks
ago
say
we're
going
to
set
aside
a
good
chunk
of
time
to
talk
about
the
what
WG
URL
issue.
So
if
it's
okay
with
any
with
everybody,
I
would
like
to
jump
ahead
to
that
issue
at
this
time.
Are
there
any
objections
to
that.
H
H
It's
would
be
an
undocumented
experimental
thing,
landed
in
master
I,
don't
see
the
point,
let's
point
in
pulling
it
back
to
v6,
yet
so
sit
master
for
now
and
then
go
out
with
v7,
really
where
we
were
currently
stands
and
the
biggest
thing
is
just
knowing
are
there?
Are
there
any
objections
or
preparing
or
and
does.
M
A
H
G
F
H
H
A
H
P
A
Okay,
so
what's
anybody?
Oh
sorry,
did
somebody
say
something?
No,
unless
somebody
has
something
they
want
to
say:
oak
tracey,
no
she's
back,
okay.
She
left
him
she's
back,
okay,
great
okay,
unless
somebody
has
something
else
to
say
on
that,
let's
go
back
to
the
items
I
skipped
I
messed
up
or
whatever
gosh.
You
just
tell
me
what
the
next
item
is
good.
Now,
I'm,
confused
I.
C
H
H
The
we
would
assess
it
before
and
decided
to
hold
off
landing
it
until
where
we
were
closer
to
cutting
seven
because
of
other
error,
handling
changes
that
occurred
and
want
to
make
things
too
complicated.
So
this
is
just
kind
of
revisiting
that
doing
what
to
land
this
for
seven,
do
we
want
to
wait
after
seven
goes
out
and
not
mind
it
after
eight
yeah
we're
not
have
a
gone
released
till
eight,
because
it
is
December.
Major
change
just
want
to
see
where
people
are
Attalus.
Currently,
if
it,
if
it's,
let's
wait
longer
than
that's
all.
A
M
H
M
H
I
would
say
I
don't
want
it
to
go
what
we
wanted
to
go
too
long,
because
if
we
do
want
to
get
it
in
where
this
is
where
this
Lantern
piece
of
it,
then
we
need
to
try
to
get
it
sometime
this
month
of
it
when
we
start
looking
at
the
actual
setting
the
v7
branch,
alright
we're
only
looking,
maybe
about
a
month
left
half
away.
So,
okay.
G
It
was
I
post
this
on
the
issue
too,
but
I'm
wondering
if
it's
required
to
do
this
alongside
a
similar
version
for
c++
errors
might
be
easier
to
do
the
Jos
layer
first
and
then
we
vote
I.
Just
think
we
should
keep
in
mind
whatever
we
do
should
be
roughly
Mirabal
in
terms
of
their
identification
sentox
to
the
C++
arrows
to
ideally
I.
H
G
A
B
We
don't
we
can
push
this
till
next
week.
It's
not
really
time
sensitive
I
was
just
looking
at
what
was
going
on
in
the
64
release
and
some
of
the
conflicts
and
stuff,
and
it
just
left
me
feeling
like
if
we
had
a
staging
branch
and
if
we
were
actively
moving
things
to
staging,
we
could
avoid
stuff
like
this.
Blocking
a
release
also
was
just
thinking
as
we
are
going
to
start,
having
more
release
lines
and
multiple
LTS
release
lines.
B
G
I
not
really
sure
how
this
would
like
make
the
V
6.4
final
thing
better.
Already,
people
can
lose
like
a
stage
commits
the
b6
point,
X
and
sometimes
very
rarely,
I.
Do
it
sometimes
very
rarely
rod?
Does
it
like
that's
something
that
you
can
already
do,
but
usually
people
don't
get
around
to
actually
doing
that.
Yeah.
B
I
think,
like
the
only
thing
I
would
say
to
that
is
like
it
can
do
it,
but
it
serves
the
exact
same
purposes.
Staging
so
I
think
just
having
the
same
language
between
all
the
brain,
we'll
just
make
it
as
a
project
like
easier
to
become
a
habit.
If
it's
the
same
thing
all
the
time,
then
it's
not
a
little
bit
different
between
the
different
releases.
That
was
my
thought
process.
I
think.
L
O
G
Mean
I,
I
bided
the
argument
that
it
can
be
confusing
to
know
which
to
branch
the
target
we
could
totally
do
it
for
the
hot
I
think.
Otherwise,
it's
just
an
unnecessary
headache,
because
in
most
cases,
especially
since
we
do
one
to
two
weeks
usually
for
for
current
releases,
that's
going
to
end
it
you're
going
to
end
up
in
a
point
where
most
of
the
time
it's
going
to
end
up
being
like
we
do
it
now.
G
So
all
Elvis
stuff
is
going
to
get
merged
when
you're
doing
released
so
you're
going
to
merge
into
stable
and
you're
gonna
more
or
less
immediately
move
the
staging
onto
the
regular
branch
to
do
a
release.
That
is
not
really
going
to
be
a
difference,
though
I
don't
think,
except
for
like
where
PRS
target,
which
I
fella.
M
A
A
Cool,
so
why
don't
we?
Why
don't
we
unless
someone
objects,
why
don't
we
just
agree
to
do
this?
Let's
bring
this
conversation
back
to
the
repo
miles,
has
reanimated
the
issue
and
if,
in
the
next
week,
there's
no
consensus
on
yes
do
this
or
no
don't
do
this
then
it'll,
you
know
it'll
be
back
on
the
agenda.
We
can
talk
about.
It
then
does
anybody
think
that's
not
a
good
way
to
go.
C
So
we
discussed
last
week
that
we
need
to
rethink
how
we're
going
to
deal
with
modules,
particularly
we
cannot
match
babbles
semantics,
so
we're
already
at
a
point
where,
whatever
happens
in
the
future,
will
require
at
the
very
minimum
people
using
Babel
to
recompile
in
order
to
reach
the
same
semantics,
that
node
will
be
exposing
for
ES
modules.
Under
that
blanket.
C
Just
a
small
review
is
a
there's,
no
real
way
for
us
to
support
named
imports
from
common
J's
modules,
so
common
J's
modules,
in
fact,
any
non
es
module,
so
JSON
C++
modules,
etc,
are
just
going
to
produce
a
module
with
a
default
export.
Only
so
there
won't
be
named
properties
like
people
would
expect
from
Babel.
So
no
more
import
read
file
from
FS.
We
just
simply
cannot
do
it.
The
other
is
top-level
await
is
eventually
going
to
be
coming,
which
means
es
modules
are
actually
an
asynchronous
construct.
At
that
point,
top-level
wait.
C
Basic
lady
will
take
any
promise
and
pause
module
loading
at
that
point,
just
like
an
async
function
and
then
resume
it.
So
that
is
coming
along
side
with
a
sibling
proposal
for
an
import
function.
The
import
function
is
basically
a
syntactic
way
to
invoke
the
loader
dynamically.
So
it's
a
function
using
the
import
keyword.
It
returns
a
promise.
You
can
await
it
in
order
to
do
conditional
loading
for
things
like
trying
to
load,
if
you're
in
debug
mode
or
trying
to
determine
the
path
for
a
c++
module.
C
Magic
variables,
like
under
under
file
name
under
under
dear
name,
remove,
require
from
es
modules
because
we'll
have
the
import
function
and
some
other
stuff
I
made
it
just
that
I've
linked
in
the
agenda.
If
you
want
to
talks
with
me
about
it,
I'm
sure
there
would
be
plenty
of
lengthy
talks
about
it,
but
just
my
feeling,
the
way
things
are
going,
we
we
would
do
a
better
service
to
the
community
and
trying
to
match
browsers,
rather
than
trying
to
get
the
spec
to
work
with
our
semantics
that
currently
exists.
So,
okay.
A
A
C
Basically,
in
order
to
support
modules,
we
actually
have
to
use
an
entirely
separate
registry
mechanism,
and
that's
going
to
be
the
big
thing
for
the
CTC
is
basically
approving
that
we
have
a
second
entirely
independent
registry
object
that
we're
going
to
be
using
the
what
WG
registry
for
that's,
not
a
small
topic,
I'm,
actually
having
a
call
with
transpiler
Zahn
Friday
to
discuss
things.
If
anybody
wants
to
join
in
on
that
and
discuss
their
feelings
feel
free
to
join
me.
Let
me
know
yeah.
A
M
C
Okay,
I
can
go
briefly
into
that.
We've
only
got
one
minute,
but
basically
new
features
are
going
to
be
targeting
the
module
grammar
almost
exclusively.
So,
if
you
actually
read
the
spec,
a
weight
is
not
reserved
in
the
script
goal.
The
fact
that
you
will
get
a
weight
in
a
script
goal
would
be
a
language
extension
kind
of
like
how
v8
was
reluctant
to
put
constant
to
this
non
strict
mode.
C
A
Q
A
G
H
Goodness
regard
to
the
the
URL
question:
yes
yeah,
we
still
need
to
figure
out
a
distinct
process,
I'm
monitoring
the
URL
spec
building
actively.
Probably
what
we'll
do
is
whenever
they
do
have
a
cam
major
change.
Will
this
have
to
treat
it
as
a
major
is
a
temper
major,
my
person,
but
we
really
needed
to
take
a
look.
I
need
to
get
more
of
a
sense
on
how
just
what
their
their
process
is
like
for,
actually
delivering
a
kind
of
changes
and
how
often
they
happen
and
I'm
still
kind
watching
them.
A
All
right,
well,
I,
guess
I
want
to
just
thank
Jeremiah
for
being
the
for
handling
all
the
streaming,
and
thank
you
and
hey
stuff
all
the
time
and
thanks
Josh
for
handling
the
minutes
and
I
think
we're
done
unless
somebody
has
something
we
need
to
talk
about
before
we
sign
off.
I
do
want
to.
I
have
two
items
for
the
private
part
after
we're
done
streaming.