►
Description
A
A
Okay,
great
so
he's
working.
Okay,
welcome
to
the
notary
foundation,
CTC
meeting
for
the
24th
of
May
2017,
sorry
for
the
delay.
That
was
my
fault
two
computers
here
broadcasting
and
haven't
done
broadcasting
for
a
couple
of
months
now,
yet
we've
got
a
small
group
and
a
small
agenda,
so
we
can
plow
through
it.
We
have
on
the
line
today,
myself
rod
bag.
We
got
sakura
peon
from
india,
Joey
Chung
from
China
and
Henningsen
from
Germany
Michael
zezo
from
where
are
you
Michael
you're?
In
Switzerland?
A
A
A
A
No
announcements:
can
you
guys
hear
me
on
the
in
uber
conference?
Yes,
I
could
begin.
Thank
you.
So
let's
have
a
look
at
the
previous
engine
agenda.
So
a
meeting
I
wasn't
in
had
to
skip
this
one,
the
identify
last
week
the
things
that
were
dealt
with
was
looking
at
string.
Dakota
bring
that
into
the
foundation,
that's
a
dependency
of
readable
stream.
A
There
was
a
discussion
about
the
early
exit
process
on
Hunter,
unhandled
promise
rejections,
so
I'm
not
sure
the
outcome
of
that
was
that
was
issue
number
one,
two,
seven,
three
four
and
the
inspector
restoring
the
debug
break,
alias
that
had
been
sort
of
dropped.
That
was
issued
a
one
two
five.
Eighty
there
was
discussion
about
open
SSL.
A
One
point
one
point:
zero,
a
possibly
landing
on
node
version;
eight,
that's
not
going
to
happen,
but
it's
interesting
anyway
to
talk
about
open,
SSL,
1.1
and
the
whether
it
will
land,
node,
nine
or
ten
issue
number
one,
one
eight
to
eight.
That
was
the
discussion,
but
that's
it's
been
closed,
I
believe
and
then
something
else
on
the
agenda
today
was
up
inverting
the
dependency
between
core
and
readable
stream
and
we'll
get
to
that
again
today,
and
there
was
an
update
on
8.0
point.
Oh
there
is
another
there's
a
release
candidate
out
of
that
today.
A
If
you
would
like
to
download
that
so
today's
meeting,
we
have
issue
number
one:
three:
zero,
zero,
five
one:
three:
zero
zero
five
on
the
node
core
repo,
which
is
titled
override
override
ur,
will
keep
alive
behavior
for
agent.
So
I'm
not
sure.
If
there's
anyone
here
to
discuss
the
this
with
authority,
but
I've
been
here.
But
the
idea
here
is
just
to
provide
another
method
on
on
the
agent
object,
so
that
when
you
override
and
make
a
custom
agent,
you
can
implement
some
new
behaviors
that
are
otherwise
tricky
to
do.
A
D
C
A
This
is
in
the
node
EPS
repo
issue,
number
49
or
pull
request
number
49,
which
is
about
inverting,
the
defendant
dependency
between
core
and
readable
stream.
Something
we've
been
talking
about
since,
like
before
I
ojs
days,
and
there
is
a
little
bit
of
discussion
in
that
and
also
the
issue
for
this
meeting.
Some
concerns
about
the
different
aims
of
the
groups.
So
is
the
readable
stream
the
right
place
that
the
right
team
or
the
des
streams
team
the
right
team
to
manage
that
core
code,
or
are
they
too
focused
on
browser
compatibility
and
backward
compatibility?
A
Matéo,
unfortunately,
can't
be
here
to
talk
about
this,
but
does
anybody
have
any
new
to
add
anything
new?
To
add
this
I'll
say
just
add
some
flavor
that
I
think
this
is
a
good
idea.
I've
been
pushing
for
this
from
the
beginning
and
I.
Actually,
one
of
the
main
reasons
is
that
streams
is
an
area
that
the
core
group,
the
CTC
and
the
collaborators,
have
very
little
expertise.
A
Shared
expertise
in
and
interest
in,
maintaining
and
the
streams
group
has
all
the
people
that
care
about
this
stuff
and
really
understand
it
and
and
I
think
they'd
be
better
place
to
manage
the
core
stuff
and
the
fact
that
they,
their
mission,
has
been
about
compatibility
in
new
zealand
and
browsers
and
backward
compatibility
is
simply
a
fact
that
the
result
of
them
not
having
any
authority
over
the
core
stuff.
They
have
to
come
through
the
normal
collaborator
chain.
But
I'm
plus
one
on
this
move.
Anyone.
C
A
A
C
A
So
I
think
what
needs
to
have
my
opinion.
Money's
to
happen
is
simply
that
somebody
needs
corporate
vote
at
some
point
after
node
eight
goes
out
and
resolve,
and
the
two
sides
need
to
put
up
their
best
cases,
which
I
actually
think
is
being
done.
There.
Andreas
is
and
Matteo
again
doing
a
good
job
in
there
discussing
the
issue.
A
Right
well,
I'll
mention
quickly
the
CTC
review
items
that
if
anyone
wants
to
look
at
them,
who's
listening
in
or
anyone
on
the
call
who
hasn't
seen
these
already
this
issue
a
number
one
to
zero
100,
which
is
excess
process
on
unhandled
promise.
Rejection
cleanup
that
needs
attention
from
CTC
issue
number
one:
two:
seven
zero
one,
which
is
confirmation
that
the
stability
definition
is
correct,
we're
still
circling
around
getting
that
pinned
down
and
then
there's
the
other
unhandled
projection
is
Eagle
II
except
the
one
thing
was
on
last
week's
agenda.
A
A
C
A
A
To
make
google
calendar,
you
can
Pellman
all
the
working
groups
and
whatnot
in
it.
There's
a
CTC
meeting
next
week,
of
course,
and
the
TSE
meeting
is
scheduled
for
tomorrow
at
the
normal
TSE
meeting
time.
I
believe,
or
is
it
changed
it's
not
on
the
calendar
so
something's
wrong
there?
Maybe
it's
been
rescheduled,
there's
also
a
Diagnostics
working
group
meeting
happening
in
two
days
and
there's
also
a
community
committee
meeting
happening
a
little
bit
after
that
as
well.
A
A
C
A
A
A
A
100
anyway,
it's
an
old
to
point
something
about
2.5,
no
you're
right.
Sorry,
it
is
two
point
five,
but
that's
end-of-life
like
now,
and
if
we're
going
to
go
ahead
with
version
node
version
eight
on
that
we're
going
to
have
to
keep
on
supporting
that
for
the
life
of
version
eight.
So
the
suggestion
was
to
move
to
CentOS
six
for
building
node
version,
eight
and
Beyond,
and
that
gives
us
Lib
C
compatibility.
Two
point:
one
point:
two
I
won't
belabor
here,
but
issue
number
seven,
my
Nate
in
the
build
repo
that
really
needs
to
get.
A
C
C
B
D
A
I
think
it
would
be,
it
would
be
wrong
of
us
to
midstream
break
everyone's
binary,
so
you
know
people
don't
nvm
or
whatever
else
they
do
and
they
it
just
starts
working
on
the
machine
like
that's.
That
really
is
simply
a
major
territory,
so
it
would
have
to
happen
I
think
in
it.
It's
simpler,
major
change.
My
concern
is
simply
that
we're
going
into
an
and
node
eight
LTS
period,
so
three
years
from
now
we're
going
to
be
supporting
no
date,
and
so
that's
another
three
years
of
CentOS
five.
A
Okay,
that
anyway,
so
Dagobert
discussion
can
happen
in
there.
I'll
try
and
push
forward
that
discussion
and
I'll,
and
even
fire
up
a
release
machine
for
that
just
to
attach
it,
so
we
can
be
prepared-
and
maybe
even
do
some
testing
I'll
take
that
one
anyway
thanks
everyone
for
joining
thanks
for
listening
in
everybody,
bye
bye
for
now.