►
From YouTube: 2022-01-19-Next 10 years of Node.js
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
So
welcome
to
the
node.js
next
10
meeting
for
january
19th,
2022
we'll
follow
the
agenda
agenda
that
we
have
tagged
in
the
issue
in
the
repo
which
is
oops.
I
thought
I
had
it
up
here,
just
a
sec.
Let
me
open
it
up.
It
is
issue
number
109
and
before
we
get
started
anybody
have
any
announcements
they'd
like
to
share.
A
I
guess
it's
worth
it:
it's
worth
making
sure
everybody's
aware
that
we
do
have
a
mini
summit
scheduled
next
week
to
dive
into
documentation
and
into
modern
http.
So
that's
on
the
node.js
calendar.
It's
scheduled,
for.
Let
me
just
pull
up
the
time
10
eastern
on
thursday,
the
27th.
So
you
know,
if
you
have
an
interest
in
what
the
project
needs
to
be
doing,
to
be
successful,
going
forward
on
those
two
areas
that
that's
a
way
to
get
involved
and
help
share
and
move
that
forward.
A
So
the
first
thing
on
the
agenda
is
node.js
node
build
39672,
which
is
provide
pre-built,
node.js
images
or
cache,
and
I
think
tyranny
you've
been
leading
that
moving.
That
forward.
Do
you
want
to
jump
in
with
where
we're
at?
Are
there
any
blocking
issues
or
anything
like
that?.
B
Oh
boy,
I
just
see-
I
just
saw
that
the
oh
prebuilt's
nice,
sorry,
I'm
looking
at
the
issue
and
I
just
thought
there
was
anything
right
now
we're
so
I've
built
it.
It's
functional.
B
We're
working
on
getting
the
node
node.js
user
on
docker
hub,
so
we
can
actually
publish
the
docker
image
because,
right
now
the
node.js
image
is
just
floating
kind
of
on
its
own
and
there's
no
like
organization
that
the
node.js
project
has
so
trying
to
trademark
claim
the
empty
completely
empty,
like
we're
not
like
taking
away
someone's
account
node.js
user
that
is
listed
as
like
location,
taiwan,
it's
not
it's
not
owned
by
the
project,
presently
yeah!
So
that's!
Basically,
the
blocker
is
just
being
able
to
publish
the
image.
B
Once
we
can
seems
good,
our
existing
images
are
published
somewhere
else.
I
guess
well.
So,
as
far
as
I
can
tell
the
only
unless
we
have
alternative
images,
the
the
node.js
image
is
a
special
image
that
is
kind
of
it's
owned
by
docker,
but
it's
like
outside
of
an
org
or
a
user.
It's
just
a
named
image.
Okay,.
A
A
A
A
B
We
would
be
publishing
directly
to
this,
and
it
would
be
automatic,
through
from
it
would
be
automatic
from
the
github
repo.
A
Okay,
that
that
sounds
good,
because
I
think
this
may
be
the
first
instance,
but
the
project
having
like
an
org,
we
can
publish
docker
images
to
sounds
like
a
generally
good
thing
kind
of
like
how
we
can
publish
npm
packages
and
so
forth.
Although
I
guess
we
don't
anyway,
let's
not
go
into
that,
but
this
is
a
generally
good
thing
yeah,
so
do
you
have.
B
A
B
No
clue
how
long
that's
gonna
take
I've
been
trying
to
poke
at
it,
but
I've
really
not
like
it
doesn't
feel
like
I'm
making
progress
on
that.
I'll,
be
honest,
I'm
trying
to
make
make
it
happen,
but
it
does
not
feel
like
it's
progressing
so
yeah.
What's
sort
of
the
next
step
on
that,
like
I
mean,
the
next
step
is
having
the
foundation
reach
out
to
docker.
B
I've
been
trying
trying
to
make
that
happen,
but
having
the
foundation
reach
out
to
docker
and
say:
hey,
please
give
us
this
org,
it's
our
trademark
and
then
docker's,
saying:
okay,
here's
your
the
store
gets
your
trademark
and
then
the
docker
team
and
the
tsc
will
jointly
own
the
docker
org
we'll
go
from
there.
A
D
B
Yeah,
looking
back
there's
a
message
I
didn't
see,
apparently
from
from
brian
saying
this
may
be
a
challenge,
since
it
required
proof
of
ownership
to
do
a
trademark
claim
we're
currently
licensing
it
from
samsung.
I
think
we
can
make
this
happen
that
might
require
a
few
weeks
I'll
follow
up
with
them
again
this
week.
Sure,
okay.
A
A
B
Yeah,
I
feel
that
it
feels
icky
but
yeah
you're
right.
I
I'm.
B
B
B
Yeah
yeah,
I
agree
like
node.js
official
or
something
like
that.
C
A
Yeah
like
we
could,
you
know,
because
even
this
is
kind
of
like
a
it's,
not
node
images
like
so
something
even
like
node.js
utilities
would.
B
A
A
B
I
mean
yes,
so
it's
it's,
you
can
build
it
yourself
from.
I
think
it's
dev
container
from
node.js
dev
container
on
github
and
ceo.
I
need
to
change
the
that
doesn't.
B
Yeah,
so
it's
it's
not
published
because
it
builds
nightly
and
since
it's
not
published
like
it,
was
being
published
on
my
personal
account,
I'm
happy
to
continue
publishing
it
there
but,
like
I
didn't
think
that
was
a
probably
a
good
thing
to
do
automatically
publishing
to
my
personal
account
from
the
node.org
yeah.
So
it
makes
it
slightly
less
useful.
B
A
Good,
but
I
think
if
you
get
you
know,
follow
up,
try
and
get
a
sense
of
like.
Is
it
a
week's
thing
or
is
it
a
month's
thing?
If
it's
a
month's
thing,
I
I
would
suggest,
like
my
initial
thought,
is
like
why
don't
we
just
pick
something
like
node.js
utilities
or
something
we
can
always
publish
it
in
a
better
place?
D
B
Yes,
that
is
the
that
is
part
of
the
intent
is
when
you
launch
code
spaces
from
the
node
repo.
It
has
the
warm
cache.
B
And
that
that
that
comes
via
a
pr
where
you,
basically
it's
a
basic
docker
file
in
in
node
core
that
would
be,
like
you
know,
pointed
to
by
the
dev
container
dev
container.json
file.
I
think
I
have
a
pr
for
that.
If
not
I
have
it.
I
haven't
before.
B
Yeah
I
once
and
once
that's
added
I
I
will
well
yeah
that
part.
I
don't
know
because.
C
B
Have
to
be
in
in
org
to
to
be
able
to
use
code
spaces
so
like
it
would
be
like
limited
to
collaborators
right
or
be
limited
to
members.
Even.
B
We
do
get,
we
do
get
some
entitlement
to
some
number
of
code
spaces
minutes
in
the
org,
no
we'll
probably
blow
through
those
but
yeah.
We
do
have
some
entitlement
in
the
free
tier.
A
B
And
perhaps
this
is
the
thing
that
pushes
us
up
to
up
to
the
enterprise
plan
for
free,
so.
A
A
If
not,
okay,
let's
I
I
tagged.
I
just
added
this
one
now
I
didn't.
I
didn't
have
a
tag
for
the
agenda,
but
I
did
want
to
mention
it
here.
Let
me
switch
that
to
everyone.
You
know.
One
of
the
actions
out
of
the
last
mini
summit
was
to
document
what
we
discussed
in
terms
of
the
flow
for
supporting
type
generation.
A
I
haven't
looked
recently
but
like
it
would
be
good.
I
mentioned
it
here
because
a
bunch
some
of
the
people
were
here.
So
if
people
had
a
chance
to
take
a
look
and
approve,
that
would
be
great.
I
think
it's
important
in
that
this
documents,
like
we've,
had
that
question
a
number
of
times
like
well.
Should
we
create
types
ourselves?
A
Should
we
support
the
brain
types
and
this
documents,
our
current
understanding,
what
that
is,
and
it's
a
good
place
where
we
can
also
refer
to
in
the
future
the
say
the
work
that
we
do
and
you
know
tyranny's
doing
to
help
get
the
you
know
more
structured,
jason
in
place
better
documentation.
We
can
document
the
flow
in
the
tool
there,
because
right
now
we
do
generate
json,
but
I
don't
think
it's
documented
anymore.
A
So
I
think
this
is
also
a
good
place
to
get
that
done
so
anyway,
just
wanted
to
say
if
people
can
take
a
look
and
hopefully
review
to
help
get
that
landed,
it
would
be
great
yeah
and
if
anybody
had
time
to
do
this,
do
a
similar
pr
for
the
discussion
we
had
on
single
executable
binaries.
A
That
would
be
great,
like
I
think
we
had
a
really
good
discussion.
We
came
out
with
what
we
thought
the
model
would
make
sense
for
the
the
the
project
to
do
that.
That's
sort
of
independent
from
whether
we
have
people
who
are
volunteering
to
do
it.
I
still
think
it
would
be
useful
to
document
the
discussion
and
agreement
that
we
had
that
says
we
had
this
disagreement.
This
is
the
model
that
we
think
actually
makes
sense
and
like
that
would
be
in
the
maintaining
guide
to
say
like
if
we
were
going
to
do
something.
A
This
is
how
we
should
be
doing
it,
and
then
it
did
happen.
We
could
expand
that
to
document
what
we
actually
do
right
so
anyway,
just
mention
that
is
like
that's
another
outcome
from
the
last
summit.
That
is
a
good
good
action
for
somebody
to
pick
up
if
they
had
time.
A
I
didn't
put
on
the
the
agenda
either,
but,
like
you
know,
it's
probably
worth
just
mentioning,
I
know
I
know
we've
had
the
discussion
about
like
using
the
document
parser
or
moving
that
forward.
I
think
that's,
that's.
You
know
still
something
this
team
should
help
to
try
and
to
make
happen,
and
I
know
tierney
is,
is
gonna
has
been
looking
at
the
the
style
guide
stuff.
So
I
think
that's
our
next
step
on
that.
I
don't
know
that.
There's
anything
to
sort
of
discuss
on
that
front.
No.
B
I
don't
think
there's
any
I.
I
have
a
pending
thing
to
do
that
list
and
I
just
haven't.
I
haven't
been
able
to
get
to
that.
Unfortunately,
but
yeah.
I
might.
A
Then
this
team
might
be
able
to
help
like
the
like,
because
it's
kind
of
thing
once
we
we
get
the
certain
infrastructure
pieces,
then
a
bunch
of
people
could
do
things
right
and
we
could
talk
about
like
because
even
somebody
mentioned
things
like
google
summer
of
docs
and
I'm
wondering
like.
Could
we
as
a
team,
try
and
take
on
supporting
an
effort
there
to?
I
don't
know
if
that
program
could
be
used
to
support
the
changes
we
need
to
make
on
that
front.
A
It's
kind
of
like
once
we
unblock
the
key
things.
This
team
could
sort
of
see
it
as
an
initiative
that
we're
following
up
to
see
if
we're
making
progress
on
but
yeah,
otherwise,
today
nothing
to
discuss
the
next
one
was.
I
think
we
could
spend
the
rest
of
the
time.
Well,
we
got
lots
of
time.
So
maybe
we
don't
necessarily
maybe
we'll
end
early,
but
I
think
we
should
spend
the
rest
of
the
time
unless
people
have
other
things
to
kind
of,
say:
okay
mini
summit.
Are
we
set?
A
A
That
we
got
we've
got
a
few
people
chiming
in
that
that
say,
they'll
be
there
from
the
documentation
front.
I
I
don't
know
who
else
you
know
who,
what
groups
or
or
other
people
that
we
think
we
should
specifically
be
sort
of
saying,
hey.
You
know
you're
active
in
docs.
Are
you
interested
in
getting
involved
in
this
discussion.
B
I
mean
yeah
outside
of
rich,
I'm
not
sure.
D
B
B
The
yeah,
it's
the
documentation,
dean,
not
docs,
and
I
think
most
of
the
people
are
either
inactive
or
active
and
would
show
up
if
it's
something
that
they're
gonna
show
up
to.
A
A
A
B
I
did
put
something
out,
but
I
could
put
another
thing
out.
D
A
It's
okay,
so
we
talked
a
bit
about
docs
commented
them
we'll
do
that
we'll
do
the
general
call
on
the
modern
http?
I
think
we
have
a
few
people
again
and
just.
A
Okay,
so
basically
yeah
we'll
we'll
try
and
tweet
out
some
more.
We
I
think
throughout
mentions
were
probably
done.
Did
I
think
I
think
I'd
created
a
discussion
item.
A
Okay,
no,
we
did
that
there,
so
I
I
guess
you
know
just
this.
Unless
anybody
has
any
other
ideas
of
how
to
promote
it,
the
social
media
would
be
good
and
other
than
that.
I
think
we've
we're
out
of
ideas.
B
I
can
reach
out
to
what's
his
name
who's,
the
person
axel
or
oh
no.
I
was
thinking
of
the
javascript
weekly
and
node
weekly
that
have
like
a
hundred
eighty
thousand
and
seventy
thousand
subscribers
respectively.
Yeah.
B
Runs
them
it's
cooper
press
and
then
he
it's
like
mostly
one
person,
peter
cooper
and
then
there's
apparently
other
people,
but
mostly
peter
cooper.
A
That
that's
a
really
good
point
that
it
would
be
nice
like
this
is
this.
You
know
it'd
be
nice.
If
there
was
a
way
that,
like
say
through
the
social
team,
we
could
get
stuff
to
them
right
like
it's,
so
it's
not
just
random
people
reaching
out
to
them.
It's
kind
of
like
the
node
project
is
saying:
hey,
here's
something
that's
newsworthy
you
might
want
to
include.
B
Yeah,
no,
he
it
that's.
I
don't
know
if
we
need
an
official
process
for
that,
but,
like
at
least
I
know,
cooper,
press
peter
cooper
is
always
always
interested
in
hearing
things
and
he'll
include
stuff.
If
we
ask,
because
I'm
just.
A
B
D
So
there's
es
next
news:
still
I
could
go
through
and
figure
it
out.
Maybe
we
should
just
make
an
issue,
so
we
can
yeah.
A
Right
like,
I
think
it
would
be
good
if
we
built
a
list
of
ones.
We
think
would
be
useful
for
this
kind
of
thing
and
then
it
might
be
as
simple
as
we
have
that
list
and
when
we
want
it,
when
it's
something
like
this,
that
makes
sense
the
dm
from
the
node.js.
I
don't
know
turn
if
you
did
it
under
your
own
account,
because
you
know
that.
A
B
A
But
like
we
could,
we
could
do
something
where
it
comes
from
the
node.js
node.jsorg
account
or
an
email
from
the
node.js,
which
would
probably
help
us
get
through
those
spam
filters
or
whatever,
and
you
know
be
a
recreatable
sustainable
way
to
do
this.
And
it
makes
a
lot
of
sense
because
they'll
probably.
A
For
right,
exactly
like
it's
not
like
we're,
it's
just
that
it's
like
here's,
a
credible
source,
they're,
probably
not
a
block
on
their
spam
filters
or
whatever
right,
yep.
Okay,
yeah
bradley
you're
gonna
open
an
issue
to
put
that
list
in
somewhere
or
yeah.
A
A
If
not,
then
I
think
we're
we
we'll
done
what
we
can
hopefully
we'll
get
last
time.
I
think
it
was
very
successful.
We
had
a
good
participation,
so
let's
keep
our
fingers
crossed
this
time
again
and
I
think
we
could
close
out
for
today.
Unless
there's
other
agenda
items,
people
think
we
can
talk
about.
C
Not
really
I
just
saw
for
the
there
will
be
a
collab
submit
in
june.
Should
we
plan
something
to
to
have
a
next
10
meetings
there
or
yes,.
A
Yeah,
I
think
that's
a
really
good
place
to
you
know
it's
yeah.
We
should
have
a
session.
I
think
you
know
we
could
easily
start
with
like
here's,
where
what
here's,
what
we've
already
been
through
a
little
bit,
here's
what
we've
documented
in
terms
of
like
here's,
the
things
that
we
documented
as
being
important
to
the
project
and
actually
use
that
as
a
review
point
to
say
like
is
this
still
valid?
Are
there
other
things?
A
And
then
you
know,
sort
of
a
review
it'd
be
the
collaborator
sub
would
be
an
ideal
place
to
sort
of
do
a
yearly
review
of
like
this.
What
we
think
is
important
for
the
the
future
success
still
that
we've
documented
still
makes
sense,
if
yes,
great,
if
not
up
up
and
then
dive
into
like
one
or
two
topics
like
we're
doing
in
the
mini
summit.
So
yeah,
that's.
C
Right
because
I
think
we
we
started
the
next
10
during
the
summit
in
in
montreal
two
three
years
ago
now,
so
it
could
be
great
to
have
a
feedback
of
the
last
two
years
with
what
we
did
and
what
we
plan
to
do.
Yeah
and.
A
It'd
be
a
good
place
to
find
other
people
who
would
be
interested
in
participating
so
so
yeah.
Definitely
I
I've
been.
I
know
that
there's
the
you
know
we're
planning
for
that.
In
terms
of
the
thing
I
don't
know,
if,
like
our
node
project,
planning,
has
ramped
up
or
started
yet
but
yeah,
we
should,
as
a
team,
submit
something
there
for
sure.