►
From YouTube: Package Maintenance Team meeting - June 16 2020
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
A
B
Yeah
we
had
a
very
short
discussion
there
regarding
over
to
be
put
into
the
copyright
right,
I'm,
not
sure.
If
we
ever
came
to
a
conclusion
there
and
also
I
think
I
have
one
remaining
question
there
and
then
we
also
had
a
question
whether
we
need
the
author's
file
itself
and
I'm,
not
sure
whether
we
had
a
conclusion
there,
either
I.
A
B
So
I
think
what
Brian
said
is
copyright
notices
are
not
mandatory
in
order
for
the
contributor
to
retain
ownership
of
their
copyright.
So
I
think
what
this
effectively
means
is
that
we
can
put
down
whatever
we
like,
but
the
copyright
belongs
to,
whoever
it
belongs.
It's
nice
for
the
person
looking
into
the
license
file,
I,
guess
to
know
who
these
people
are
yeah,
mm-hmm,
so
I
guess
I!
Guess
there
is
a
point
of
that,
and
mainly
for
communication,
but
I
think
one
of
the
questions
there.
C
B
I,
don't
know
so
my
concern
there
is
that
this
is
a
maintenance
burden
that
needs
to
be
usually
only
done
once
or
when
the
repo
is
created.
Yeah.
However,
this
is
in
a
broader
organization.
This
is
something
that
needs
to
be
regularly
verified,
that
it
is
still
the
case
and
that
all
the
things
are
correct
and
then
in
place,
which
is
a
burden
and
I
would
very
much
like
to
avoid
that
burden
for
people
who
will
come
after
me,
yeah.
A
B
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
B
D
C
D
A
E
Dovetails
or
is
related
to
another
agenda
item
about
the
Axios
outreach
and
what
I
did
from
our
last
conversation.
I'm
gonna
paste
this
into
the
chat.
I
didn't
want
to
do
anything
in
those
issues
yet,
but
I
created
an
issue
from
our
last
conversation
that
just
pasted
effectively
initially
for
an
issue
but
effectively.
E
This
would
be
a
chance
to
maybe
give
us
an
opportunity
to
define
what
a
process
might
look
like
for
what
I've
dubbed
an
RH
a
request
for
help
and
in
that
new
issue,
I
made
you'll
notice
that
on
Twitter
I
found
two
more
requests
from
lodash
and
RIA
testing
library,
probably
most
famously
known
for
react
testing
library,
but
both
of
them
went
on
we're
on
Twitter,
saying,
hey,
I
need
help
with
my
packages.
I
need
help
with
maintenance
and
similar
to
them,
the
other
team's
reaching
out
for
the
issues.
I
thought
it'd
be
great.
E
If
we
had
something
even
if
right
now,
it's
just
like
hey
go
to
our
Docs.
Here's
our
you
know
table
of
contents,
then,
as
we
add
like
the
status
right
as
all
other
tools
right,
the
proposal
is
maybe
we
just
add
something
to
the
readme.
That's
like
are
you
a
package
author?
How
do
you
get
started
because
there's
nothing
in
the
readme?
E
That's
actually
like
actionable
it's
how
to
join,
but
not
necessarily
because
there's
that
I
kind
of
noticed
it
in
the
not
to
digress
too
much,
but
from
the
collab
summit
doc
that
I
was
reading
it's
kind
of
like
we
have
two
audiences
I
think
and
they
probably
overlap,
but
we
maybe
have
two
audiences.
We
have.
E
Maybe
someone
like
myself,
who
wants
to
help
the
team
help
other
people
versus
someone
who
is
an
actual
package
like
I,
don't
have
time
to
help
in
a
team
I
just
want
whatever
the
team's
come
up
with
and
a
planet
my
project.
So
maybe
this
issue
is
more
like
if
you're
in
the
latter
category,
where
I
need
help
managing
my
project,
I
don't
have
time
to
contribute
to
making
other
projects
better.
So
so
yes,
missus
in
rfh
or
requests
for
help
process,
I
suppose
is
the
simplest
distillation.
E
Then
if
we
figure
that
out,
then
we
can
go
to
those
issues
and
be
like
hey.
We
added
something
to
read
me:
give
this
a
go
and
then
here's
a
way
to
give
us
feedback
right.
Okay
and
then
you
can
also
do
that
with
people
on
Twitter
or
other
chats,
like
hey
check
out
this
section
of
our
readme
yeah.
So
I
guess
it's
more
of
a
discussion
on
you
know.
E
A
E
E
I
think
it's
similar
to
how
we
took
a
baby
step.
Let's
just
get
like
a
table
of
contents
for
our
Docs.
We
could
at
least
maybe
link
after
the
contents
from
the
readme
yep,
so
yeah
I'm,
not
a
I'm,
not
opposed
to
fake
kind
of
you
know,
but
I
think,
maybe
just
at
least
for
the
discussion.
Part
I,
guess
I'd
be
curious.
Well,
I
guess
would
be
good
to
know
if
anybody
else
has
any
thoughts
on
this
rfh
approach
and
you
know
having
some
little
actionable
set
of
resources.
E
A
I
cuz
I
could
also
see
like
saying,
if
there's
a
particular
area
that
you
think
you
need
more,
you
know
it
would
be
good
to
have
a
best
practices
doc,
please
let
us
know
like
we
could
call
out
at
least
a
few
of
those
things,
and
and
were
you
thinking
of
a
place
that
they
could
like
PR
in
their
project?
Does
one
that's
looking
for
help
I.
E
Guess
that's
well,
I
guess
I
could
be
part
of
it
is
right,
so
it's
like.
So
if
we
go
to
the
readme
and
then
we
add
some
splinter
section
like
yeah
getting
started
or
you
know
our
resources
or
something
like
that,
you
know
I'd
say
the
first
one
is
a
link
to
the
docs
right.
Most
people
don't
even
know
that
we
have
the
doc
writer
room
right,
yeah
so
get
that
started
then
maybe
say
like
also
we're
experimenting
with
some
sort
of
automation.
E
Here's
links
to
this
project
in
this
project
yep
and
then
I
suppose
from
there
we
could
also
say
we
have
a
survey.
If
you
want
to
open
a
PR,
you
can
fill
out
the
survey
yourself
and
submit
the
results
back
and
then
we
can
just
kind
of
collect
them.
So
there's
a
kind
of
a
process
for
giving
feedback,
be
like
hey,
I,
really,
love
the
docs
and
I
really
love
the
tools,
but
it
would
be
really
awesome
for
me
is
blah
yeah.
That's.
C
A
Thinking
like
the
sort
of
real,
though
you
know,
the
the
the
super
grand
scheme
was
like
if
we
could
get
enough
people
involved,
and
we
could
help
manage
a
list
of
things
that
you
know.
Maintainer
x'
wanted
help
with
a
first
step
on
that
could
be
just
maintaining
a
list
of
like
you
know.
Twitter
would
be
one
way
of
getting
that
out,
but
another
one
would
be
like
here
the
projects
that
have
actually
expressed
a
request
for
help,
and
it's
just
another
place
where
we
could.
You
know
evangelize
a
little
bit
that
those
yeah.
C
E
Could
then
PR
themselves
into
that
list?
Yeah,
you
know
either
a
separate
doc
or
write
in
the
read
B
do
whatever
we
ended
up
doing
and
I
think
another
interesting
point
just
food
for
thought
on
this,
as
we
discussed
about
in
the
kind
of
the
Axios
issue
is
if
what
is
our?
What
are
the
expectations
around
this
group
in
terms
of
help,
like
probably
not
going
to
be
able
to
come
and
actually
start
managing
your
repo
and
your
work?
E
C
E
E
If
you
don't
find
what
you
need
through
an
issue
so
yeah
so
yeah,
so
what
I
could
do
if
it
sounds
like
there's
an
openness
to
it.
I
could
certainly
kick
off
a
PR
for
by
the
time
we
meet
next
time,
just
to
cut
a
stuff
out,
or
you
know,
scaffold
out
with
that
section
of
the
readme
might
look
like,
and
you.
C
E
Doesn't
have
to
be
a
lot
just
to
get
it
going
and
then,
what's
that
in
a
soul,
the
notion
has
overcome
you
know
can
just
be
as
easy
as
another
pull
request
for
that
for
changes
and
updates
and
then
I
figured.
What
I
really
want
to
do
is
be
able
to
go
back
to
those
issues
and
say:
hey:
we've
got
something
now.
Why
don't
you
start
all
right
be
able
to
close
it
and
be
like
if
you've
got
something?
That's
missing
open
an
issue?
That's
Gia
like
right!
Oh
we
really
with
what
we've
seen.
E
E
This
hasn't
well
this
this
one's
still
a
similar
status.
It's
just
really
looking
for
feedback.
I
did
do
a
little
grammar
phrasing
tweaking
yesterday,
just
some
of
the
sentences
were
a
little
awkward
on
revisiting
but
I'd,
say
99%.
The
content
is
still
intact
from
that
first
draft.
So
if
you've
already
reviewed
it,
it's
really
just
a
little
bit
in
the
overview.
Otherwise
everything
else
is
still
the
same,
so
yeah
just
hoping
that.
E
Maybe
we
get
something
like
that
in
in
time
for
collab
summit
and
really
be
able
to
show
off
those
Docs
is
like
hey
here's.
You
know
our
first
volley
for
you.
You
have
happened,
authors
and
kind
of
do
a
little
revealed
and
you
know
even
preview.
The
best
pose
yeah
when
is
collab,
so
is
it
July?
It's.
A
Next
week,
okay
Oh
it'll,
be
it's
like
Monday
is
the
is
the
sort
of
new
collaborators
day
and
then
Tuesday
Wednesday
is
the
main
conference
and
Thursday
Friday
is
the
clobb
summit
and
I
think
it's
the.
E
I
think
I
commented
in
the
Google
Doc.
That
was
a
was
it
Greg.
It
started
that
I
think
apologies
if
I
got
the
name
wrong.
I
dropped
a
couple
links
to
the
governance
PR
the
table
of
contents
and
I
think
this
issue.
So
even
though
there
may
be
work
in
progress
they're
still
available.
If
we
want
to
showcase
any
of
those
elements
during
the
collapse
of
its.
So
with
me,
yeah.
E
A
E
A
A
C
C
I'll
give
a
quick
update
so
since
lost
meetings,
I've
opened
to
PR,
but
had
the
prototype
I
demoed
in
the
last
meetings,
I'm
currently
working
on
a
very
small
quick
prototype
for
the
web'
result
function
as
well,
which
will
return
the
CI
result
run
I
should
have
a
draft
PR
open
for
that
today.
At
some
point,
once
I've
figured
out
how
to
get
the
testing,
so
what
we've
done
it
I
think
that's
it
for
now
for
the
updates
at
glass
meeting,
unless
you
want
to
add
any
conventions.
D
A
B
I
was
going
to
look
at
it
and
then
yeah
I
have
some
time
just
and
on
it
over
the
next
month
or
so
so
I
would
be
happy
to
help
out
any
way.
I
can
and
should
we
have
a
spin-off
session
to
to
basically
dig
into
some
details
there
and
the
next
steps
and
like
once
once
the
initial
PR
and
then
and
then
it's
easier
for
multiple
people
to
start
working
on
it.
But
even
then
should
we
try
to
do
some
API
design
before
we
go
ahead
and
sort
of
sketch
out.
D
D
Just
thinking
we've
got
the
this
such
OpenGL
session
next
week,
maybe
we'll
let
that
happen,
and
then
we've
got
the
following
package:
maintenance
meeting
the
following
Tuesday.
So
then,
maybe
after
then
in
terms
of
timings,
so
it
might
be
the
case.
We
don't
need
one,
because
we're
gonna
have
a
couple
of
hours
of
meetings
before
then
anyway.
So
that's
my
dog.
A
Okay,
the
next
one
is
pkgs
org,
4w
4wg,
supported
tooling.
That
one
is
currently
at
the
point
where
we
work
through
the
the
governance
that
we
proposed
and
the
there
is
an
issue
now
actually
there's
a
related
issue
right:
the
draft
governance.
So
that's
three,
three
eight
and
maybe
I-
should
just
put
that
in
the
notes
here.
A
A
A
Okay,
so
let's
move
to
the
next
one,
which
is
next
steps
on
support
levels
in
package,
Jason
that
one
we're
just
trying
to
get
the
tool
far
enough
along
I
just
need
to
get
back
to
land.
The
initial
PR
rebates,
the
PR
I
was
working
on,
and
then
there
were
a
couple
more
things
that
we
talked
about
in
terms
of
checking
out
the
the
output
parsing
and
then
hopefully,
we'll
we'll
be
pretty
close
to
having
what
we
need
to
start.
Promoting
that.
E
Added
this
towards
the
end
of
yesterday,
posting
the
link
for
anybody
out
there,
the
stream
that's
curious.
There
is
some
good
good
first
issue
type
items
in
our
for
our
documentation,
just
review,
writing
and
creating
there's
some
of
our
Doc's
that
are
authored
but
considered
in
a
draft
status.
So
it
created
a
top-level
issue
to
kind
of
corral
them
made
the
little
check
boxes.
So
if
anybody
would
like
to
help
out
that
you
know
you're
in
general,
that
is
there
yep
yeah.
That's.
E
E
I
mean
I
didn't
go
into
each
of
them
in
depth,
so
there
may
be
varying
degrees
of
you
know
completeness,
but
I
think
you
know.
Most
of
them
are
probably
you
know
good
enough.
You
know.
Maybe
just
one
final
draft
is
the:
if
someone
submits
it
to
move
it
out
and
you
know
just
keep
improving
it
from
there.
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
established
criteria
for
what
you
know
tip
something
out
of
drafts
into
ready,
but
maybe
it's
just
more
of
like
a
a
governance
thing
like
yes,
this
is
something
we
all
agree.
C
E
Formal
or
not,
but
yeah,
probably
some
low-hanging
fruit
I
mean
it's
all
in
the
table
of
contents.
Anyway.
I
think
it's
just
noted
as
a
draft,
but
you
know
it's
a
decent
chunk
of
the
doc,
so
you
know
but
yeah.
If
we
just
took
one
that
we
like
to
probably
all
maybe
I'll
say
Oh
something
an
easy
point
for
lab.
Somebody
can
do.