►
From YouTube: 2020-10-8-Node.js Technical Steering Committee meeting
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
technical
steering
committee
meeting
for
october
8
2020.
we'll
follow
the
agenda,
as
was
identified
in
issue
935
in
the
tse
repo.
Before
we
get
to
the
issues
that
were
tagged,
does
anybody
have
any
announcements
that
that
yeah
that
they'd
like
to
share.
B
I
I
have
an
announcement
michael.
I
I'm
excited
to
share
with
everyone
watching
that
beth
has
cut
the
15.0.0
rc1
and
it
comes
shipped
with
npm
7rc3.
B
So
if
you
want
to
play
with
you
know
the
future
today,
you
can
install
it.
If
you
check
my
twitter
at
miles
bourne's,
I
showed
how
to
install
the
rc
via
nvm,
but
you
can
also
go
to
our
downloads
page
and
download
package
installer.msi
and
if
you
have
any
issues,
feel
free
to
just
app
me
and
I'll
be
happy
to
try
to
help
you
figure
out
how
to
do
it.
A
A
A
Although
I
I
will
mention
that
there
were
a
number
of
things
where
the
votes
have
concluded
recently
in
terms
of
guidance
and
some
of,
and
in
particular
you
know,
some
of
the
the
things
that
we've
asked
for
so
we
should
be
seeing
those
publicly
documented
and
I'll
point
people
to
them
once
that
happens,
I
don't
know
mayor
if
you
had
any
other
cpc.
A
A
Okay
thanks,
so
let's
move
on
to
the
issues
that
were
tagged
in
the
agenda.
The
first
couple
are
ones
which
weren't
tagged,
but
there
was
a
comment
in
the
issue.
Basically,
you
know
asking
if
we
could
get
some
prs
landed
in
into
15.0.0,
so
I
thought
at
least
mention
them
here
as
an
fyi.
D
A
A
A
And
you
know,
I
think
the
call
out
here
is
like
there
wasn't
necessarily
a
specific
question
on
these.
I
can
see
that
you
know
there's
a
couple
of
reviews
on
one
of
them
actually
two
tse
reviews
on
34055
and
thirty,
four,
nine
six
two:
there
aren't
any
reviews
so
and
they
do
seem
to
be
related.
So
I
guess
the
the
ask
is
that
tse
members
go
and
take
a
look
since
the
you
know,
december
majors
need
tc
tc
approvals
just
to
land
in
the
first
place,.
A
If
not,
okay,
let's
move
on
to
the
next
one,
which
is
three
five.
Four
nine
six,
it's
lib
add
event
target
related
browser
globals,
I'm
just
opening
up
that
one
again
to
see
specifically
why
it
was
agent
added
to
the
agenda.
Is
it
land?
A
A
A
A
B
A
quick
point
of
order.
We
have
some
people
who
need
to
be
promoted.
A
So
I
guess
on
this
one:
are
there
any
objections.
A
A
I
think
beth
had
added
this
on
to
the
agenda
at
one
point
as
an
fyi
and
also
to
mention
the
the
one
where
we
were.
You
know
the
issue
related
to
the
deprecation
warning
I
don't
know
does
somebody
know
has
that
I
think
that's
been
backed
out
at
this
point.
I'm
just
not
100.
B
Sure
the
process.umask
deprecation
warning
was
backed
out
on
master
and
that
change
that
removed
the
warning
landed
in
the
latest
rc
for
15.
A
B
And
then
for
folks
who
are
who
are
watching,
it
is
currently
the
8th
of
october,
and
I
believe
that
this
scheduled
release
date
for
this
is
the
20th.
So
a
week,
tuesday.
A
B
There
are
rc's
that
you
can
use
if
you
go
and
check
that,
as
I
was
mentioning
before
so
you
know
the
more
real
world
usage
that
we
can
get
from
folks,
the
you
know
better.
We
can
feel
about
things
absolutely.
A
If
not
we'll
move
on
to
the
next
one,
which
is
rename
default,
bratz
branch
from
master
domain
or
something
similar,
we've
had
this
on
the
agenda
for
quite
a
while.
I
know
miles
you've
been
tracking,
what's
been
going
on
on
the
github
side
in
terms
of
tooling
and
support,
and
I
think
last
time
you
mentioned,
you
were
going
to
take
a
look
at
maybe
node.js
dev.
If
I
remember
correctly
as
a
next
step.
B
Yeah
still
just
like
I've
been
too
busy
with
a
few
other
things
I
haven't
had
time
to
dig
in.
We
did
switch
the
modules
repo
recently,
I
think
we're
just
like
kind
of
slowly
moving
repos
over.
It
feels
to
me
like
we
need
to
at
least
get
like
15
out
of
the
door
before
we
can
even
start
like
really
thinking
about
this
for
the
node.js
node
repo,
because
just
like
we
have
enough
on
our
plates
right
now,
but
yeah
yeah.
I
think
the
node.js.
B
would
be
the
probably
better
bet
than
nodejs.org
because
it
has
like.
I
know
all
the
integrations
at
least
there
for
keeping
the
continuous
deployment
going.
So
that
can
be
a
next
step
of
something
that
we
dig
into
sounds.
A
Week:
okay,
if
not,
let's
move
on
to
the
next
one,
which
is
just
been
removed.
A
A
You're
a
little
bit
quiet.
Can
you
just
if
you
can
increase
your
volume
a
little
bit,
that'd
be
good.
B
C
C
A
D
B
Oh,
this
is
the
diagnostics
channel,
if
I
recall
correctly,
and
maybe
mary,
you
have
an
update
on
this-
I've
been
watching
this
from
like
10
000
feet,
because
I
just
don't
know
that
system
well
enough
to
really
like
help
from
an
engineering
capacity,
but
it
seemed
like
there
was
some
contention
on
the
implementation
and
that
it
was
like
non
like
a
non-trivial
fix.
B
I'm
looking
here
right
now
and
I
see
a
sign
off
from
james,
so
I
think
we
need
what
like
one
more
tfc
sign
off
and
no
tfc
tsc
objections
to
putting
it
on
15.
If
we
want
to
see
it
land.
C
C
C
A
A
C
Yeah,
if
it's
experimental,
even
if
it's
somewhere
major,
we
can
include
15.
C
No,
so
it's
it
was
flag.
That
first
has
some
very
major
because
it
adds
a
new
module
to
be
imported.
A
C
That's
a
good
question:
we
have
precedence
on
that
we've
diagnostics
report.
We
just
need
to
look
what
we
did
for
diagnostics
report
and
I
think
we
can
do
the
same
here.
A
Okay,
that
makes
sense
to
me,
I
mean
we,
we
have
a
little
bit
of
time.
So
one
of
the
related
issues
that
came
out
of
that
too
was
does.
It
actually
make
sense
to
have
a
top-level
module
called
experimental
or
something
that
we
could
put
things
into
without
having
to
add
a
new
module,
and
then
I
think
the
path
was
suggested
like
then
we
would
like
when
they
moved
to
non-experimental,
they
would
live
in
both
for
a
while,
whatever
their
target
top-level
module
was
along
with
the
experimental
one.
A
A
A
Okay,
so
mary
you're,
going
to
take
a
look
at
whether
we
you
know
we
could
do
it
potentially
later
in
in
15
versus
having
to
get
it
in
15.0
right.
C
A
A
Okay,
any
other
things
like
that
that
we
should
talk
about
before
we
move
to
to
the
stretch,
reviewing
the
strategic
initiatives.
A
If
not,
okay,
so
modules
anything
miles,
anything
on
the
modules
front.
B
Yeah,
so
we
released
a
few
new
features
out
on
14
recently,
including
the
super
exciting
ability
to
now
do
named
exports
from
common
js
modules.
Not
all
modules
are
supported,
but
a
good
subsection
of
them
are
that
are
able
to
be
statically
analyzed.
B
B
We
recently
did
a
really
big
revamp
of
the
documentation
as
well,
so
for
those
of
you
who,
like
aren't
super
familiar
with
all
of
this
we've
gone
ahead
and
because
a
lot
of
the
features
that
we've
implemented
work
for
both
common
js
and
esn,
we've
we've
refactored
the
documentation
to
make
sure
that
there's
kind
of
like
a
whole
set
of
documentation
just
on
like
package
authoring
that
talks
about
all
these
new
features
and
then
separately
a
doc,
that's
specific
to
cgs
and
a
dock.
That's
specific
to
esm.
B
The
majority
of
these
changes
went
out
in
12.19
and
the
release
team
working
group
met
today
and
worked
out.
The
final
couple
releases
and
dates
for
for
12.x,
including
one
more
semverminer
that
we're
going
to
put
out
before
it
goes
to
maintenance
that
is
going
to
end
up
having
the
last
few
of
these
changes.
So
by
the
time
12
goes
into
maintenance,
12
and
14
will
have
more
or
less
the
exact
same
implementation
of
modules.
B
I
think
modulo
about
top
level
of
weight,
I
think,
will
be
the
biggest
difference
between
12
and
14,
because
the
version
of
v8
and
12,
unfortunately
doesn't
support
top
level
weight.
But
you
know
we're
not
quite
there
yet
to
put
a
stamp
on
it
and
call
it
stable
and
there's
still
a
bit
of
work,
that's
being
done
on
loaders
to
make
the
implementation
a
little
bit
more
expressive.
B
But
overall,
this
is
the
closest
that
I've
felt
to
maybe
being
able
to
say,
hey
modules
are
there
and
I'm
hopeful
that
you
know,
maybe
by
the
end
of
this
calendar
year
or
the
beginning
of
next
year,
we'll
be
able
to
like
really
say:
hey
es
modules
in
node,
we're
going
to
call
them
stable,
and
you
should
feel
comfortable
to
use
them
in
production.
B
I
think
we
just
want
some
of
the
new
features
that
we've
introduced
to
bake
a
little
bit
first,
just
to
make
sure
that
there's
no
surprises,
but
it
feels
it
feels
like
you
know
if
it
was
the
lord
of
the
rings.
Well,
we've
already
thrown
the
ring
into
mordor
and
we're
all
like
in
the
room
in
slo-mo
all
like
hugging
each
other
and
it's
going
on
a
little
longer
than
you'd
like
to,
but
this
scene
should
be
done.
You
know
relatively
soon.
B
Sorry,
I
got
a
little
bit
too
into
that
in
there
you
enjoyed
it,
though,
right
mostly,
although
you
know
the
the
part
with
like
all
the
orcs
could
have
been
better
right.
A
Okay,
okay,
well,
that's
a
great
update
sounds
like
things
are
moving
well
on
the
modules
front
and
that
that's
that's!
That's
great!
I'm
looking
through
the
the
next
list
build
resources.
I
don't
have
anything
to
report
on
that
future
bill
of
build
tool
chain,
mary,
any
updates
on
that
one.
A
A
I
think
that
is
all
the
ones
that
we
have
in
terms
of
people
who
are
here.
I
might
mention
the
next
10,
which
isn't
listed
as
a
strategic
initiative,
but
we
we've
met
a
few
times.
The
values
document
that
we
worked
on
did
land
in
in
node
core.
There
is
some
discussion
going
on
around
extending
that
so,
but
that
that
we
expect
to
be
an
ongoing
thing
currently
working
on
the
requirements
of
the
constituencies.
A
So
we've
got
a
list
of
you
know
who
who
are
the
constituents
for
node.js,
and
you
know
in
terms
of
again
being
able
to
have
that
sort
of
step-by-step
path
from
you
know
our
values,
who
are
the
constituencies
that
that
are
used
by
node,
who
use
node
and
what
do
they
need
we're
working
on?
You
know
what
do
they
need?
We
had
a
great
session
last
time
in
using
fund
retro
to
start
start
that
process
and
the
next
meeting.
We
are
going
to
continue
on
with
that
as
well.
A
B
I
guess
one
question
this:
this
could
be,
I
think,
reasonable
for
the
for
the
public
discussion,
because
it
wasn't
on
the
agenda
core
pack,
so
there's
been
active
work
in
the
core
pack,
pr
to
try
to
get
it
together,
and
my
gut
is
that
the
intention
is
that
to
get
it
into
15
mary.
If
I
recall
your
review
on
it,
which
was
blocking,
was
asking
for
a
couple
things
which
it
seems
has
most
mostly
been
accomplished
at
this
point,
one
was
that
core
pack
became
opt-in
instead
of
available
by
default.
B
Another
was
that
the
repo
was
transferred
into
our
org,
which
I
know
there's
kind
of
like
an
ongoing
discussion
in
admin
around,
and
then
I
think
there
was
a
question
also
about
like
starting
to
bring
on
some
other
maintainers,
but
in
in
general.
B
I
think,
like
a
big
question,
that
I
wanted
to
just
pose
to
everyone:
it's
not
clear
if,
if
core
pack
landing
and
the
way
that
it's
landing
is
something
that
we
would
consider
december
major
or
not,
and
I
wanted
to
get
a
pulse
of-
you
know
like
how
bullish
people
are
feeling
about
trying
to
get
this
in
for
15
and
similar
to
some
of
these
other
changes
that
we're
talking
about
trying
to
get
into
15
of
just
kind
of
like
reminding
folks
if
they,
if
they
want
to
see
this
happen,
we
probably
need
to
put
in
some
extra
effort
to
get
it
over
the
line
because
landing
a
change
that
big
like
a
week
before
the
release,
makes
me
a
little
bit
nervous.
B
I
want
to
also
just
make
it
really.
You
know
like
abundantly
clear.
I
recognize
that
there
is
a
tiny
bit
of
conflict
of
interest
right
now
with
my
association
with
npm,
but,
like
you
know,
the
team-
and
I
were
talking
about
it
today-
we're
very
interested
in
the
work.
That's
being
done
here.
B
I
think
there's
some
high
level
questions
about
like
if
it's
the
best
solution
to
the
problem,
space
of
leveling,
the
playing
field
between
all
the
different
package
managers,
but
we're
definitely
very
interested
in
finding
a
way
to
like
improve
access
to
different
package
managers
by
different
people
and
figuring
out
a
way
for
like
npm
to
generally
be
part
of
the
story.
But
kind
of
you
know
like
outside
of
that
with
my
node
hat
firmly
on.
B
A
A
A
You
know
it
deserves
the
the
time
to
have
the
discussion
play
out
and
because
it's
significant
enough,
as
you
said
and
and
if
especially
if
it's
you
know,
can
go
in
a
later
version
of
15,
I
don't
see
the
rush
personally.
B
Okay,
so
I
I
guess
I
guess,
like
the
one
thing
that
we
may
want
to
do,
then
just
to
make
sure
we're
all
on
the
same
page
is
maybe
a
comment
in
there
and
just
maybe
make
it
explicit
that
we,
like
you
know,
add
december
minor
label
and
do
a
quick
call
to
folks
of
saying
okay.
If,
for
whatever
reason,
you
think
this
could
be
considered.
Simver
major,
please
chime
in
now,
because
if
we
can
all
agree
that
it's
sember
minor,
then
it's
not
something
that
we
have
to
rush
for
the
15.0.0
release.
B
But
I
do
want
to.
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that,
like
you
know,
miles,
put
a
lot
of
hard
work
into
this,
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
give
it
a
like
a
fair
shot
of
making
it
into
the
release,
and
the
15
release
seems
like
the
best
release
for
it
like
it
doesn't
have
to
be
15.0.0
but
like
if
we're
going
to
try
to
do
an
experiment
like
this
15
is
the
right
time
to
do
it.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
setting
ourselves
up
for
failure.
A
A
A
A
If
not
thanks
to
for
everybody's
time-
and
we
will
all
talk
to
you
in
github
and
next
week,.