►
Description
A
B
C
G
H
Spending
a
good
amount
of
time
doing
any
PI
documentation
updates,
based
on
comments.
A
few
PRS
for
a
couple
of
test
additions
for
an
EP
I
did
a
nightly
benchmark,
run
of
the
on
the
canary
and
did
the
comparison
against.
What's
a
masters
still
need
to
do
a
few
more
of
those
but
gave
some
initial
results
and
just
the
regular
ongoing
work
of
issues
PRS
and
Lance
Bryan's?
Next,
it's.
A
I
A
Sure
looks
sure,
looks
like
it
take
a
sec.
The
peons
out
here.
Trevor
is
not
here,
yep.
Just
me,
okay,
so
along
with
James
and
Anna
and
Tracy
Hines,
they
did
be
and
help
from
a
few
collaborators
like
Brian
English
and
excuse
me
Joe
Doyle.
We
did
the
code
and
learn
in
Oakland.
It
was
a
small
but
I
think
really
successful
and
I'll
just
leave
it
at
that.
Did
we
miss
anybody?
I
think
Evans
showed
up.
While
we
were
doing
this.
A
A
A
A
D
A
Already
did
it
great
okay,
then
I'm
not
going
to
bother
SuperDuper.
We
have
two
other
issues,
and
then
we
have
the
inspector
bug
break
thing
that
Raphael
Ackerman
put
wants
us
to
discuss
and
the
LTS
locking
of
the
staging
branches
that
I
think
miles
at
least
wants
us
to
mention,
and
is
there
anything
else
that
we
need
to
have
on
the
agenda
today
before
we
move
on
to
one
of
those
two
topics.
A
I
I
I
So
right
now
we
have
a
v4x
staging
of
the
6x
staging
and,
if
you
7,
X
staging
there
will
assume,
via
the
8
staging
what
we
are
proposing
as
a
backporting
team,
which
was
a
great
upon
by
the
LTS
working
group
as
well,
was
it
the
LTS
branches,
staging
branches
and
release
branches
would
or
not
I?
Guess
we
only
discussed
the
staging
regice
that
the
LTS
staging
branches
would
be
locked
with
only
permissions
to
people
from
the
backporting
team
on
being
able
to
push
to
it.
I
There
were
some
very
light
pushback
around
whether
or
not
that
would
slow
down
the
workflow
with
the
number
of
people
who
overlap
between
CTC
the
release
team
in
the
back
porting
team.
We
do
not
believe
that
there
will
be
any
sort
of
you
know.
Slow
down
to
or
extra
process
was
introduced.
This
is
more
about
basically
the
sanity
of
the
branch
like
if
we
know
that
that
branch
is
stable
and
every
commit
that's
honest
has
been
audited.
We
can
move
a
lot
faster
with
the
releases.
I
A
A
I
Thing
that
just
dawned
on
me
that
I
am
thinking
that
maybe
we
should
do
as
well,
but
I'm
more
than
happy
to
punt
it
off
to
an
issue,
so
we
can
actually
discuss.
It
would
be
that
perhaps
the
release
branches,
v6,
X,
4,
X,
8,
X,
etc
should
actually
be
locked
only
to
the
release
team.
But
I'll
start
a
separate
issue
about
that.
I
And
you
know
we
can
make
sure
that
there's
that
that
that
actually
gives
everyone
a
chance
to
see
it
an
objective
based
problems
but
I'm
just
going
to
one
more
time,
throw
it
out
there.
If
no
one
has
any
objections
to
locking
the
staging
branches
I
plan
to
make
an
official
team
for
the
back
part
team
and
assign
those
permissions.
After
this
meeting.
J
I
A
G
In
miles
his
direction,
I
did
look
over
the
issue
beforehand,
so
I
can
take
a
shot
here
when
we
added
inspect
well,
let's
go
back
a
little
bit.
We
had
debug
and
debug
BRK
debug
BRK
did
a
little
hack,
hacky
magic
to
inject
a
debugger
state
or
something
to
me.
It
stopped
on
the
first
line.
When
we
add,
when
inspect
was
added
with
inspector
that
wasn't
added.
So
by
default
the
inspector
was
turned
on,
but
not
it
wasn't.
G
It
didn't
break
on
the
first
line,
which
sometimes
people
want
people
want
that,
so
they
can
set
other
breakpoints
whatever.
So
at
first
people
were
just
using
inspect
and
dash
debug
break
to
kind
of
get
both
of
those
things
somewhere
along
the
way.
It
was
actually
me
that
added
a
PR
for
inspect
break
or
be
arcade
kind
of
parallel.
The
debug
break
and
actually
Eugene
Ostrow
of
from
Google
I'll,
actually
put
in
a
better
way
to
do
that
than
the
way
we
were
doing
it
back
in
the
day.
G
I
You
Megan
this
one:
yeah
I
can
China
off
it
here,
Josh,
because
I've
been
following
the
issue
a
little
closely
the
last
couple
days
so
I
think
at
a
really
high
level.
The
challenge
was
so
severe
who
are
using.
The
protocol
are
having
to
do
like
some
sort
of
version
sniffing
to
figure
out
what
version
it
is.
I
It
was
like
reimplemented
debug
break
that
you
know
this
is
the
stuff
that
josh
has
already
gone
over.
I.
Think
that
truthfully,
we
should
push
this
back
to
the
issue.
I,
don't
think
that
we'll
have
any
problems
reaching
consensus
in
there
I
think
it's
just
good
for
us
to
be
aware
of
this,
and
the
fact
that
if
we
want
to
make
any
cember
major
changes,
you
know
we
have
less
than
two
weeks
to
kind
of
to
kind
of
put
that
together
again
I'll
just
state
at
a
high
level.
H
Yeah
I
think
I
was
in
part
of
that
discussion.
That
accurately
reflects
what
I,
remember
and
I,
like
the
suggestion
you
made,
which
is
like.
Let's
choose
what
we
think
it
should
be,
regardless
of
what
we
have
today
and
then
try
and
make
that
the
consistent
story,
as
opposed
to
choosing
one
of
the
one
of
the
existing
ones,
none
of
which
seems
to
be
great.
A
Okay,
so
it
sounds
like
we
probably
want
to
let
this
brew
on
in
the
github
issue
tracker
for
another
week
and
hopefully
there'll
be
a
resolution
there
and
if
not,
you
know
at
that
point
we
can
look
at
it
again
and
either
decide
that
we
want
to
make
a
decision
or
refer
it
to
LT
s
or
refer
to
Diagnostics
or
whatever
we
want
to
do
at
that
time.
Is
that
an
accurate
taking
of
the
temperature
of
the
body
right
now.
A
All
right,
then,
let's,
let's
do
that-
let's
see
where
it
is
in
another
week
or
so,
and
and
hopefully
I.
We
get
some
resolution
in
the
in
the
in
the
issue.
We're
at
the
point
of
the
meeting
then,
where
we
take
questions
before
so,
while
we're
waiting
for
questions
to
come
in
I
want
to
thank
your
Amaya
for
streaming.
A
If
you
are
a
member
of
CDC
or
TSE
or
one
of
the
working
groups,
you
might
be
interested
in
the
tc39
meetup
on
May
22nd
in
New
York.
Otherwise,
the
next
CTC
meeting
will
be
one
week
from
today.
Quote-Unquote
it
might
be
a
different
day,
depending
on
your
time.
Zone
will
be
a
different
day
for
me,
but
it
will
be
at
a
500
UTC
rather
than
this
one
started
at
8:00
p.m.
20,
2100
UTC,.
F
E
A
Ye-Yeah
and
it's
a
it's
a
time
that
we're
looking
at
changing
anyway,
so
yeah
there's
a
really
good
chance
that
that
will
be
a
sparsely
attended
meeting
if
it
happens,
but
that's
the
way
these
things
go.
Sometimes,
ok.
Do
we
anything
else.
Anybody
wants
to
add
before
we
ask
Jeremiah.
If
we
have
any
questions.
E
A
Good
I
think
it's
talking
about
an
issue:
no
GS
/
CTC
issues,
1
1,
0,
1
10.
He
I
think
he
discusses
I,
think
it's
in
there.
He
discusses
having
talked
with,
maybe
it's
not
in
there
made
somewhere
else.
I
thought,
having
discussed
with
with
people
on
a
v8
actually
miles,
I
think
you
talk
to
him
about
this
as
well.
It.
E
A
I
A
I
H
D
Well,
it's
just
one
way
to
build
it
and
then,
of
course
everybody
can
keep
using
chip
I
think
in
the
close
future.
There
won't
be
anything
in
GN
that
we
can't
one
on
one
copy
and
paste
into
jibs.
So
it's
not
that
just
because
it's
not
officially
supported
anymore.
We
have
to
stop
using
it.
It's
just
that.
We
can't
promise
that
it
will
work
for
the
next
10
years
with
everything
new
that
we
do,
but
it
will
just
work
for
quite
a
much
longer
while
I'm
pretty
sure
about
that.
D
I
I
was
under
the
impression
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
the
idea
was
is
like
there's
two
different
problems
that
we
need
to
solve.
One
of
the
problems
is
building
note
itself
and
the
other
problem
is
our
native
module
ecosystem.
So
the
moving
from
chip
to
GN
is
explicitly
for
solving
the
problem
of
building
node
itself,
which
has
completely
potential
to
the
ecosystem
issue
with
chip
to
us.
I
would
like
to
scope
this.
I
Be
that
if
we
take,
if
we
either
fork
chip
or
get
a
hand
off
of
JIP,
would
a
then
make
it
to
the
chromium
project
no
longer
needs
to
maintain
it,
which
would
be
a
benefit
to
them.
B
would
allow
us
to
remove
a
bunch
of
things
from
it
that
we
don't
need
and
also
potentially
create.
You
know
a
plan
towards
fedoras
chip
GA
s,
project,
where
we
would
no
longer
necessarily
need
the
Python
to
dependency.
So
this
would
be
a
two-stage
thing.
D
I
D
G
D
And
about
the
initial
question
whether
we
give
commission
to
a
handle
for
anything,
I
think
this
just
we
as
the
CDC
would
have
to
discuss
this
and
think
it
through,
but
in
general,
there's
no
problem
and
an
open
source
project
and
stripping
down
the
parts
that
we
don't
need
for
node
and
it's
also
not
a
v8
or
so
to
be.
A
team
would
be
the
wrong
people
to
ask
about
handing
it
off.
Yeah.
H
E
A
A
H
Yeah
yeah,
they
were
every
time.
I
looked
in,
like
I,
only
looked
at
about
five
or
six,
but
every
one
I
looked
into.
It
was
something
like
that
like
well.
We
think
this
might
change
the
edge
case
behavior,
so
we'll
make
its
number
major
or
yeah
we're
changing
an
error
message.
You
know
things
that
we
really
don't
expect
most
people
to
run
into,
but
we're
conservative,
which
is
good
and
they're
there
for
Marcus
number
major
I.