►
From YouTube: Node.js Technical Steering Committee meeting May 9 2018
Description
A
B
A
So
you're,
hoping
we'll
see
some
more
involvement
on
that
side.
Is
that
the
oh
yeah,
okay,
okay,
the
other
announcements,
I
will
say,
is
I
think
this
was
since
last
time
no
mouse
was
reelected
as
the
director,
maybe
since
I
didn't
make.
The
last
meeting
you
already
announced
that
TC
chair
votes
are
ongoing,
closes
next
Monday.
So
please
whoever
hasn't
voted.
Yet
if
you
can
vote
that
would
be
great.
A
B
There
were
some
kind
of
duplicated
functions
between
the
final
object
and
me
FS
promises
and
they
just
are
necessary
to
have
them
duplicated
the
API,
still
experimental,
so
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
real
controversial,
we'll
just
you
just
pull
this
off
so
I'm,
not
I,
don't
I!
Don't
have
the
issue
up
in
front
of
I'm,
not
sure
so
many
have
been
deported
on
the
agenda.
I'd.
A
Read
through
it
earlier
I
my
take
was:
it
was
mostly
put
on
the
agenda
just
as
an
FYI,
since
it
was
moving
a
fairly
good
portion
of
the
dapi
but
I.
You
know
my
take
is
if
you're
in
agreement
and
there's
no
disagreement,
then
yeah
it
should
just
move
forward.
But
if
I
guess
other
people
want
to
chime
in
there,
that's
really
the
sort
of
the
fyy
FYI.
So
people
can
do
that.
A
A
A
Okay,
if
there's
nothing
on
that,
we'll
wait
for
the
offline
update
so
moving
on
to
the
next
issues.
So
the
tracking
issue
for
the
updating
the
board
on
board
meetings
miles
had
mentioned
that
he
likely
wasn't
gonna,
make
it
and
I
unless
he's
joined
recently.
I,
don't
think
he's
here
so
we'll
skip
the
next.
One
is
an
update
on
strategic
initiatives,
so
I
can
start
with
napi.
A
A
B
Nothing
specific
just
still
making
progress.
You
know,
we've
had
some
some
bug,
fixes
and
doc
updates
here
recently
for
the
most
part
just
trying
to
let
it
just
stabilize
and
ensure
that
you
know
things
are
good
with
it
and
there
may
be
some
some
Abids
to
some
of
the
error
handling.
It's
some
point
here
soon,
but
we're
still
kind
of
getting
some
validation.
B
A
D
Slowly,
moving
onward
I
think
at
this
point,
like
we're
waiting
for
the
QB
opted
to
lanten
master,
where
I
got
a
couple,
PRS
open
that,
like
have
better
multi-threading
support
part,
just
like
forum
betters
and
hopefully
later,
for
workers
like
adding
new
Texas
stuff
and
those
kind
of
things.
So
yeah
I
hope
that
things
will
be
going
a
lot
more
smoothly
in
the
next
weeks.
Okay,.
C
B
B
B
D
B
A
B
E
E
B
Weird,
you
know
making
progress
specifically
limiting
it
to
the
FS
right
now,
just
as
we
kind
of
work
through
the
process
and
an
API
pattern
and
how
we're
gonna
expose
these
things
so
just
kind
of
using
that
as
the
as
a
testbed.
So
I'm
purposely
not
looking
at
other
API.
Yet
until
that
settles
down,
the
biggest
questionnaire
is
going
to
be.
B
B
C
A
It
was
again
a
problem
related
to
an
old
clan
with
version.
So
there's
an
open
issue
to
suggest
opening
upgrading
the
client
version
sounds
good.
I'm
I
know
we're
also
working
on
some
issues
on
and
even
later
or
even
even
newer
version
of
e8
it
with
respect
to
the
compiler
on
ax
or
working
through
some
of
those
okay.
So
async
hooks
is
le
here.
I,
don't
thinks
so
we'll
skip
that
one.
Okay,.
B
B
B
B
The
trace
fence
front
we
actually
might
want
to
make
trace
events,
an
actual
strategic
initiative
at
some
point,
but
the
their
husbands
in
progress
there
awliyas
been
working
on
aliens
being
have
been
working
on
enabling
trace
event,
support
for
the
inspector
protocol,
there's
a
PR
that
they
opened
yesterday
a
trace
domain
and
would
allow
a
change
about
clients
to
connect
and
receive
the
that
slow
crazy
event.
So
that
needs
to
be
look
good.
B
A
A
A
E
B
A
You
know
the
does.
Somebody
have
a
you
know,
a
short
summary
of
what
the
options
are
and
like
is
it?
Is
it
I've
read
it
a
bit
through
it,
but
it's
it's
not
100%
clear.
Is
it
just
that
we
have
a
couple
of
different
options?
We
just
need
to
choose,
or
is
there
still
like?
We
just
don't
know
what
the
right
way
to
go
is
I.
B
B
There's
you
know,
there's
a
variance.
You
know
there's
a
way.
We
need
you
to
with
comment.
Just
maybe
do
it
with
the
SM.
So
as
the
assim
stuff
is
figuring
out
and
getting
figured
out,
we
you
know
we
have
to
make
sure
we're
thinking
through
that,
but
for
the
common
geus
approach
it
would
just
be
something
like
a
you
know
require
at
node.js
/fs
right
or
right.
B
A
B
Not
that
I'm,
aware
of
other
than
just
the
you
know,
we
have
to
decide
whether
we
want
to
do
it
for
the
existing
core
modules.
So
would
we
run?
We
have
a
node
FS
right
and
an
FS
right
and
in
the
backwards
compatibility
issues.
If
someone
starts
using
like
the
at
node
FS
right,
you
know
that
wouldn't
work
in
six,
eight,
ten,
so
yeah.
E
There
is
also
the
issue
like
esteemed
but
GG
URL
yeah,
because
it
is
out
of
experimental
now
and
it
is
Melanie
that
way
and
no
like
in
the
future.
We
introduce
another
kind
of
namespace
like
in
addition
to
the
existing
API
we
introduced
and
another
namespace
for,
like
a
very
variants
of
api's,
you
don't
have
like
we
don't
have
to
choose.
We
can
add
another
one
like
an
alias
for
like
a
tommix.