►
Description
A
So
let's
just
get
straight
into
it
with
a
quick
review
of
last
meeting.
If
my
browser
would
whisper
us
respond
and
let
me
change
tabs,
no,
it's
not
gonna.
Let
me
change
tabs
there.
We
go
okay
review
of
last
meeting,
we
talked
about
travel
fund,
we
talked
about
the
working
group
and
the
copyright
thing
is
still
going:
we're
talking
about
leather
gear,
more
travel
fund,
node
caught
defining
scope
of
no
core
which
is
preparing
back
this
week.
A
Hopefully
we
can
close
it
out
and
we
had
quick
update
on
the
nvm
stuff,
so
actually
not
a
whole
lot
of
substance
to
the
last
one.
This
was
some
middle
of
December
anyway,
so
the
while
ago.
So
let's,
let's
get
straight
into
it,
but
and
jump
through
some
of
these
items
that
we
have
on
the
list.
First,
one
is
adding
info
about
YouTube
access
was
this:
was
this
Jeremiah?
B
Was
me
so
I
edit
the
agenda
item
labeled
to
this,
just
as
a
is
update,
a
few
meetings
back
maybe
month
or
more
back,
we
had
talked
about
access
to
youtube
and
I'd
said
that
I
would
add
some
text
for
basically
what
Michael
Rogers
head
kind
of
just
verbally
dumped
out
on
the
call,
and
so
that
text
just
reflects
that.
So
it's
documented
I.
E
D
D
C
F
C
A
F
You
guys
have
a
quick
chance,
I'm
sharing
my
screen
and
I
just
want
to
check
with
you
Michael
you'll,
see
now,
when
you
go
into
the
events
section.
What
you
see,
if
you
don't
do
anything,
is
just
this
and
that's
confusing.
But
then,
if
you
change
it
to
like
up
coming
here,
I
can
see
mine
and,
like
start
hanging
out,
I
see
yours.
It
says
it
never
happened.
Actually
so
I'm
wondering
if
so.
D
A
A
A
A
A
A
G
A
Okay,
so
the
next
one
is
this
copyright
thing.
So
we
have
a
request
from
James
to
the
foundation
to
get
in
front
of
the
legal
committee
the
to
pull
requests
that
have
been
prepared.
The
alternative
pull
requests.
The
first
one
restores
copyright,
aperture
attribution,
heaven
all
files
still
remaining
from
original,
commit
that
remove
them.
The
second
one
reverts
that
restoration
and
proposes
the
new
copyright
attribution
header
block
in
the
new
jsh
and
CC
files
located
in
lemon
sauce.
A
So
that's
putting
this
in
node
repo
pull
request,
10,
15,
5
and
10
599
I
believe
there's
some
additional
context
here.
Some
people
not
even
wanting
to
put
the
restoration
comedian
because
it
it
adds
a
lot
of
kid
knows
that
is
becomes
frustrating
but
I,
don't
know
if
that's
something
we
even
have
the
ability
to
negotiate
on
so
I
will
take
that
to
the
next
board
meeting
and
get
the
board
to
pass
that
on
to
the
legal
committee.
Apparently
that's
the
way
you
have
to
do.
A
We
have
to
give
something
in
front
of
the
board
to
go
to
the
legal
with
me
and
then
we'll
send
it
off
into
the
void
and
hope
for
something
to
come
back.
Oh
I-I
they're
the
ones
I'm
pressing
for
this,
so
I
think
that
the
you
know
their
dell
if
they
want
action
in
the
balls
in
their
court,
so
hopefully
it
won't
take
too
long.
I
have.
G
A
E
E
A
E
A
E
Yeah,
that's
what
I
was
thinking
was
like
I'm.
I
get
the
process
behind
the
board
meeting,
see
it
first
to
ask
the
subcommittee
but
yeah.
I
think
there
isn't
a
lot
of
clarity
on
what
resolutions
we
can
introduce
and
passes
email
versus
the
meeting,
so
I
just
want
clarity
on
that
heaven.
It
helps
my
work.
You
know
yeah.
I
I
think
it
might
be
worth
it
while
run
for
you
just
go
ahead
and
send
an
email
on
this
age.
Nothing
I'll
see
what
happens
yeah,
you
know.
Maybe
this
is
one
of
those
things
where
we
just
haven't
chartered
what
that
course
looks
like
to
you
know:
email
the
board.
Instead
of
like
waiting
for
a
meeting,
you
know,
may
I
guess
or
sick
happen
as
they
say.
No,
but
you
know
something
with
the
shock.
Is
we
could
do
this
over
email?
I
think
that
would
make
everyone's
lives
easier
to
yeah.
E
G
We
need
to
one
thing
we
do
need
to
decide
is
what
is
our
course
of
actually
going
to
be?
Should
we
not
get
the
timely
response
in
the
legal
committee?
What
is
our
follow
up
going
to
be?
Is
it
just?
We
do
nothing
and
sit
and
wait
until
we
eventually
get
a
response
or
do
we
escalate
or
what
so
we
will
that's
something
we
need
to
think
about
going
necessarily
need
to
decide
right
now.
G
E
Recommendation
is
setting
deadlines,
I,
don't
think
like
I
would
say
like
if
you
just
manage
expectations
when
you're
sending
this
communication
for
requesting
the
legal
committee
look
at
it
just
say.
Like
we've
been,
you
know
you
guys
brought
up
this
stuff
in
december
or
even
november.
I
mean
on
top
of
all
the
other
month.
I
would
just
set
a
deadline
and
say
like
we
are
going.
We
need
to
move
on
them.
E
A
Urgency,
as
you
know,
as
we
haven't,
had
action
and
now
the
balls
back
in
their
court,
and
so
I
think,
I'm
not
sure
that
we're
want
the
ones
that,
once
at
the
deadline
on
this
particular
thing,
this
is
this
is
something
that
mostly
this
CTC
doesn't
even
want.
So,
let's
just
put
in
their
court
and
say:
look
you
want
actual
miss
you.
You
know
you
make
it
happen.
Otherwise
these
things
go
sit
but
I
don't
think
they
will
let
it
sit
because
in
a
joint
has
been
putting
legal
pressure
on
so.
E
B
Somewhat
yeah
tsc
issue
1
39,
which
is
it's
only
vaguely
related
in
that
it's
the
one
asking
about
switching
the
default
license
from
MIT
Joe
Pesci.
To
that
has
the
TSE
agenda
label
on
it,
but
I,
don't
know
well,
I
mean
you
removed
it
from
you.
Didn't
add
it
to
this
agenda.
I,
don't
know!
If
we're
going
to
have
much
movement
on
that,
should
we
remove
that
label
for
now.
D
A
G
I
Yep
agree
and
I,
especially
with
the
the
apache
license
thing,
that's
going
to
know.
If
we
do
decide
to
take
that
route,
that's
going
to
be
a
really
big
undertaking
to
begin
with
and
yeah
so
I
think.
That's
something
that
you
know
they
will
need
to
understand.
You
know
how
complex
that
is
as
well
and
see
it.
Definitely
one
thing
at
a
time.
A
A
A
G
A
G
A
A
I
Forward
about
this,
we
have
this
list
of
teams
and
stuff,
and
we
put
any
thought
into.
How
are
you
make
sure
that
that
stays
up
to
date?
Is
that
something
that
would
be
the
responsibility
of
like
working
groups
and
teams
to
do
like
you
know
if
a
team
changes
that
part
of
that
process
of
changing
is
maybe
they
eat,
submit
a
PR
to
the
TSU,
repo
or.
B
A
J
B
B
D
A
E
But
it's
really
a
group
that
we
work
with
a
lot
we'd
love
to
hear
them
represented
in
the
community
committee
and
we
love
your
participation.
So
something
that's
really
important
to
the
health
of
this
group
is
making
sure
that
we're
working
alongside
the
tsc
as
much
as
possible
because
you
all
have
paved
the
way
in
so
much
of
what
we're
trying
to
build
and
there's
a
lot
of
work
to
be
done
even
just
in
the
Charter.
That's
up
for
PR
right
now.
So
if
I
can
get
kind
eyes
on
that,
that
would
be
much
appreciated.
A
E
I
know
mines.
The
instruction
I
was
given
was
that
the
Community
Charter
is
what
needs
final
sign-off
and
that's
where
that's
where
I'm
at
just
sort
of
like
just
weep.
They
need
to
be
able
to
see
some
things
and
need
to
be
shown
that
it
has
things
to
do
and
governance
and
is
going
to
be
able
to
stand
up.
Ok,.
B
E
A
A
What
about
gee
Geographic
concern
so
if
you've
got
groups
that
are
spread
across
like
a
diverse
across
geographies,
is
it
worth
getting
the
different
geographical
parts
of
those
groups
involved?
I'm
thinking
here
of,
like
we've,
got
this.
No
girl,
Sydnee
and
they're
related
to
know
girls,
Melbourne
I,
don't
know
if
they've
got
any
real
relationships
with
any
of
the
other
node
girls
groups.
Is
it
worth
reaching
out
to
those
specifically
and
saying
hey?
Do
you
want
to
think
consider
getting
involved
here,
or
is
it?
E
For
right
now,
I
from
Brno
girls,
for
example,
they
don't
have
like
one
person,
they
don't
have
a
leader,
and
so
they
have
a
few
between
London
and
I
mean
at
this
point,
Tonya
own,
pretty
much
everything
in
Australia,
but
then
also
my
friend
Alfred
in
China
was
also
trying
to
get
something
started
there
so
like
he
would
also
be
he's
a
good,
separate
representation
cuz.
He
also
works
on
CN
p.m.
so
I'm
thinking
along
those
lines.
So
yeah
like
right
now.
E
E
I
Alright
I'll
make
it
a
point
to
reach
out
to
some
of
the
node
bucks
folks
about
this,
because
I
think
with
no
buses,
they
have
a
pretty
good
traction
going
in
south
america
as
well,
so
that
so
you're
thinking
geographic
diversity
that
maybe
it
could
be
a
good
way
to
start
reaching
out
to
the
south
american
contention.
Yeah.
B
A
I,
so
let's
let
it
stink,
the
label
is
appropriate
still,
so
let's
leave
a
label
and
then
next
meeting,
let's
actually
discuss
it.
If
there's
been
no
movement
from
that
group,
let's
form
a
proper,
a
request
to
that
group
to
come
back
to
us
with
a
some
sort
of
proposal
regarding
nvm
specifically,
but
ideally
regarding
a
more
strategic
position.
I
think.
F
We
already
we
already
have
nvm
like
they
told
us.
We
can't
bring
in
nvm
without
a
more
standard
without
agreeing
on
standards
and
what
they
should
support
and
requirements
universe.
But
the
question
is:
do
we
do
we
want
yeah
at
the
end
of
they
something
with
those
standards
in
the
foundation,
and
should
you
know
it
could
be
nvm
with
some
changes
at
that
point
or
something
else,
and
that's
that's
still
kind
of
pending
for
them.
A
F
A
G
This
is
one
that
I
don't
think
we
have
those
much
disagreements
on
it.
I
think
you
were
so
kind
of
like
not
sure
what
to
do
about
the
whole
debug
thing,
but
the
old
debug
protocol
is
going
away
knows
you
know
we're
gonna
have
a
command-line
debugger.
We
need
to
have
something
there.
I
think
I
think
there's
general
consensus
on
doing
this.
This
is.
C
G
C
A
A
C
I'm
not
sure
if
we
formally
agreed
or
not,
I
think
it
was
discussed
in
one
of
the
meetings,
but
I
don't
remember
Burt
asks
is
under
active
development.
Yes,
very
much
so
as
far
as
I
know
I
posed
in
the
act,
we
go
I'd
very
least.
It's
I
believe
the
code
base
is
actually
better
than
the
current
node
debugger
and
they
serve.
They
act
like
very,
very
similar.
C
G
A
G
A
D
C
A
Okay
and
so
a
pen
also
according
to
our
scope,
stuff,
that
we
were
agreeing
on
already.
This
is
something
that,
if
we
do
agree
here
to
bring
it
in
then
we're
just
passed
by
the
board
to
make
sure
that
they
cool
with
it,
because
it
does
just
adjust
our
scripts
slightly,
but
I
don't
see
that
it's
it
in
any
way.
Controversial
does.
G
G
A
A
H
A
D
A
A
A
A
A
Okay,
let's
close
up
the
meeting,
then
thanks
everyone
for
Oh.
Actually
we
do
have
q
AQ
&
A.
Let's
quickly
do
that,
then.
If
there's
anyone
listening
on
the
live
stream
and
you
have
questions
or
comments,
please
drop
them
in
the
chat
or
the
YouTube
live
stream
and
we'll
see
if
we
can
answer
them.
So
let's
have
a
minute
or
two.
F
A
F
G
Help
them
on
the
repo,
so
yeah
there's
still
some
things
that
need
to
be
figured
out
there.
So
it
isn't
everyone
to
take
a
read
on
it.
It's
just
about
a
week
ago
that
I
updated
it
and
I
know
everyone's
been
busy.
So
if,
if
you
would
take
a
review
and
then
let's
look
at
trying
to
close
on
it
next,
we
got
the
next.
G
The
main
questions
are
the
activity
requirement,
and
that's
for
most
of
the
comments
are
are
going
to
focusing
on
is
what
is
a
reasonable
time
frame
for
non
activity
for
us
to
consider
removing
hesc
number
keeping
in
mind
that
this
part
of
the
whole
idea
for
this
is
to
set
appt
opposite
of
basic
policy
at
TFC
level
and
have
that
trickle
down
into
ctc
and
work
groups
as
well.
At
some
point,
we
just
want
the
CSC
to
establish
the
policy
for
itself.
G
B
I
Ya,
see
that
being
the
most
common
use
case
and
I
think
it's
an
important
one
where
someone,
whatever
reason
said:
they're
not
involved
in
the
project
anymore,
and
they
pretty
much
this
ghost
and
but
you
know,
of
course
we
don't
want
to
just
like,
without
a
band
room,
to
make
sure
there's
a
process
for
that.
But
yeah
I
mean
if
they're
like
I
respond
at
all
its.
But
that's
still,
you
know
the
presence
and
the
list
could
still
affect
boats
and
stuff
like
that.
So
I
think
it's
important
that
we
do
handle
that
case.