Node.js Technical Steering Committee, 25 Aug 2016

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: 2016-08-25 Node.js Foundation Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting

Description

https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/134

* Rod Vagg - https://github.com/rvagg (TSC)
* Alexis Campailla - https://github.com/orangemocha (TSC)
* Jeremiah Senkpiel - https://github.com/Fishrock123 (TSC)
* Michael Dawson - https://github.com/mhdawson (TSC)
* James Snell - https://github.com/jasnell (TSC)
* Bryan Hughes - https://github.com/nebrius (TSC)
* Josh Gavant - https://github.com/joshgav (Observer/Microsoft)
* William Kapke - https://github.com/williamkapke (Observer)
* Fedor Indutny - https://github.com/indutny (TSC)
* Julien Gilli - https://github.com/misterdjules (TSC)
* Jenn Turner - https://github.com/renrutnnej (Observer/Node Foundation)

A

First 2016 and we've got a bigger than usual group here, which is great, so we're going to do a quick review of last painting which I wasn't here for but I look over the meeting. The minutes. I haven't got this doc ready yet whoops. Okay, the last meeting there was a looking at some collaborative oops, some collaborative repositories to contribute to that would came out of the post board and working group.

A

Looking at covering the moderation of IRC mail and select channels and same with either see on the tsc supervision did, that is eat then go anywhere. I didn't see. Them minutes really had anything substantially.

A

I mean that anyone report.

A

Remember there.

B

Being a discussion there, yeah.

C

What I remember was we briefly chatted and just kind of decided to kick it down the road about because it wasn't any progress so to speak.

A

Sorry I'm getting a minutes doc it ready at the same time.

A

Okay and defining note chord no progress on that regular roll-ups of actually directed reporting an active working groups. No progress on that I wasn't here at the time, and it's going to be roughly the same for this week. So what we're going to do for stand up is if there's anyone in here that has it has had relevant, tsc activity that they would like to report on. Then please do so.

A

Otherwise we can move on. But anyone would like to report on tsc activity, I.

D

Added the required documents to the github bot that we discussed in the last meeting sitting there as a PR, and hopefully they accept it and TSE can just kind of screws it afterwards.

A

Great and have you pinged the tsc group on there so that we link to it no.

D

Now I just did it last night and I wanted the the build group and the bot people to review it. First.

C

So we'll discuss it more in the agenda later. What I spent a fair amount of time and discussion about various things related to the inclusivity working group with various individuals who have input that we want on that?

C

C

A

Okay, so we'll consider that the stand up so we're going to move on to an issue that the Brian filed, which is issued number 133, which is a request to migrate inclusively working group, responds release for the no foundation at tsc. This is a request for any investigation Brian. Would you like to give us a quick summary of that.

C

So there's been uh excuse me a lot of discussion in a recent weeks about you know what is the best way for the note foundation to work on improving both inclusivity and diversity and the project- and you know the inclusivity working group was started somewhat informal.

C

Eight, you know by people who cared or he liked it about these specific topics, but you know: was it really a part of like any sort of project wide initiative, and so now that we've been going for about half a year or so it's you know, we kind of realized that a working group isn't the right place for a lot of this work to be done. Yeah.

C

We think it probably is for some things, but the question of you know what really is the proper venue to get this stuff done, and how can we do it in a way in which you know, people are confident and can trust and the work that we're doing that people feel that you know we're treating that. We're approaching this in a way that really takes everyone's concerns. Excuse me in mind- and so this is, you know, we won't work with the foundation to really figure out where the right places for these different efforts to live.

C

You know where they can be the most effective and I suspect that is probably going to end up being a combination of things like some things will be best done by the foundation. Some things will be best done by us. You know the TSE and then something would be less than maybe by the inclusive, be working group as well, and so we really kind of want to have a broader conversation, bringing a lot of different stakeholders into like figuring out. What's the best way to do this, and so that's what this request is about.

C

But since this is through the foundation, you know we need to have the TSE make a formal request to the foundation board to really kind of get this moving.

A

C

So that's the purpose of this specific issue and.

A

What are the deliverables they were expecting from this so.

C

The delivery, what we want with this is for what, in this case, you rob so you go ahead and take basically the proposal that we wrote up and present it to the foundation board on behalf of the tsc sort of asking the foundation to take the initial steps in doing this, investigation.

C

So this is an ass for, like a formal, you know, motion on the part of the tsc.

D

Brian one thing I was wondering is, if you envision the future, to continue collaboration in under the github repo that you have set up.

C

Continued collaboration on inclusive, even as indie inclusivity, repo specifically ye yeah. I think some would be there. I think communication may not be as centralized as it currently is. You know, I think some discussions, probably a better hat under the tsc repos, some might be better head under the moderation repo. Some might be better had on email, mailing lists yeah as appropriate.

C

One thing we definitely did run it is, you know, sometimes having you know. We were limited to essentially two communication mechanisms. One was either the inclusivity specific slack, which had very low visibility and to it or the inclusivity repo, which was completely public, and that wasn't always necessarily, but in neither of those are necessarily the best venues for a lot of these discussions.

B

It's Tracy here, I think just from the foundation sigh, but what I think what we'll see moving forward is the inclusivity repose so really important, and it is a mechanism for communicating and getting community to collaborate on on those on the efforts that are at a point where they can be discussed publicly.

B

I mean I think ultimately, I do want to say: I, don't want anyone to be worried about things disappearing behind closed doors, because it's still the responsibility of everyone in the community or everyone who feel who wants to participate in node to take some responsibility, for you know what this means, but that also means like trying to I guess. I would envision that the responsibility of the foundation would be things like ensuring that we are getting the outreach. We need to make sure that all of the perspectives are being taken into consideration.

B

Moving forward and I mean all of the perspectives being like a very global view, so I mean that's all. This is very like there's a lot to be explored with this and we're also considering doing things like bringing in a consultant to help. But the sum of the blind fox that we might have as a group and help us with the strategy moving forward from.

D

The inception of the inclusivity working group become an official thing. I thought it was. It was better placed into the under a different arm of the foundation, so I'm I think it's a great idea, and so I don't want to take too much away from this actual task, which is just requesting to do investigation which a lot of the week we could. You know people can dive into more of these details in the investigation right.

D

B

I just wanted to make sure people yeah cuz I, know that bit like the investigation itself, probably I just wanna make sure people understood like what that even would be gearing towards.

A

Okay, is there any other questions or feedback than anyone has before we do? A vote will do a vote here simply because it's a formal action that we're taking.

A

From what I understand Tracy this, this investigation is its mother request, for an investigation is simply a request for investigating the interaction that we need to have with the executive of the foundation, and it's not actually a request to do to begin the work because you're already beginning it. This is just about the interaction. Is that right? What.

E

A

E

It's also to get direction from the board right, because.

F

E

Like Tracy and I work for the foundation like we need the board to tell us to do something it as abortion. He'd need to you to ask the board to do that. Ok, I.

B

Really I like that, this is just this is absolutely something that should be coordinated across the different leadership. You know the various parts of leadership in the note project, so yeah I.

A

Like that too, I, like it, the holistic approach here, rather than just focusing on out the technical bit, but actually taking a a very broad view of how two of the things that we as an organization need to change the things that we need to focus on what are our blind spots? What r l weak areas like that holistic approach, I think, is really positive. Yeah.

C

And I also really like trying to get. You know everyone involved at all different levels as well within the project and not trying to have just one group leave this or do it all by themselves.

A

And getting some of those foundation resources into it too, exactly.

C

Yeah most at Baia resources, I think our lack of resources was one of the big issues we have as a working group. Just the nature of associate that kind of working group is. It was just a bunch of volunteers, as we were just kind of by definition, limited and a lot of the stuff. We could do.

A

Now Brian it's the I'm just looking at your text, is there part of it or all of it that I can take and then pass on to the board or we need to form. We need to form some wording around that if.

C

You think that I kind of worded that such that it could be taken wholesale. We could certainly edit that you know there's anything. You think that would be better phrased differently, but you know kind of the idea I had going in was that we could just take that issue. A wholesale would present that straight to the board. You know, but the wording changes necessary to say the TSE is asking us a be inclusive. Be working group is asking ok.

A

So the motion, then, is given that, given that basic text with possibly some minor editing, the motion is to for the tsc to pass that on to the board. It's a request for an investigation. It's not you know we're not actually committing to anything here. So we don't. It's really just a fairly easy lightweight steps. A needs really concerned about what we're getting ourselves into I. Think it son controversial. But if, if anyone else has any concerns before we go ahead with, let's have a vote.

A

Okay, so let's have a vote of TFC members, so everyone in favor of this of this motion, please say: aye aye, aye,.

G

A

Aye aye anyone against there's really one abstaining.

A

Ok, we're going to you know, move ahead without them. So great next item on the agenda is TC elections. Now this has been a really broad discussion, I'm late to the game on this discussion, I'm. Sorry, the reason that the timing is interesting is because the foundation is up for its renewal of everything and, while I believe we don't we're not actually tied into particular terms or like we don't have the strict renewal date.

A

It would be appropriate for us to be putting forth an individual at the same time as companies are renewing and the chair. The positions are being um elected at the board level and just to get a little done now.

E

See William William uncovered that the bylaws actually do say that it's a one-year term. This isn't a new election, so we have really yeah.

A

But so we need to get time, but.

E

Yeah, it would be good to get it done very quickly because, as you said, we're we're doing the board chairperson vice chair and secretary elections, so it would be good to be on the cadence where you know every year were we're lighting it before that I agree.

A

Yep now that's that's like this week, isn't that that every date is so.

E

Monday is when we're going to kind of solicit people who want to put their name it, and then there will be some were solicitations over email and voting. So you know we have you know if you want to take a few extra days after Monday to complete the tsc election. That's actually all right. Yeah.

A

And to clarify for anyone that doesn't know the league, the positions on the board are only open to platinum members. So it's not. The tsc position doesn't isn't eligible anyway for any of those positions so which is just about having a bility to participate in those elections. I think would be valuable, actually.

E

So the chair and vice-chair are restricted the platinum right now in the bylaws, but the secretary position is not anybody could do it for the secretary spoke, you.

H

I definitely like to make sure we have a representative there for that. Let's do that. I.

E

Think the most important thing is that the TSE get to vote in that election.

A

E

A

A

Okay, so it's been a bit a little discussion about. um Actually the original issue is not even listed here, but there's some good discussion in between particularly Michael and William was like 126. I think it was about the bylaws so that the question here is whether to actually go ahead with two positions, so TSE chair versus TSD director and then the other question of who wants to stand.

A

My suggestion is to keep them as one but have this concept of a rotating meeting chair for both the tsc and the CTC, so that we share actually share the responsibility of the meeting facilitation. I wrote a big screen about that in you should be 128.

A

So I, I think that the step right now is that we need to see if there's anyone else other than myself. That is the interested in standing for the position of TSE director. So we can get the board bit done. um I I haven't.

F

A

F

I

I think that, just to clarify one thing, I think that one way or the other they have to stay as two positions, and I think that we all agree on that. Even if you do both, but they still have to be two positions, and you guys william point out.

A

Yeah, that's fine I'm just understand just suggesting that we keep them. As you know, a single individual just for the at least from now, anyway, wouldn't.

I

That I mean that the boat itself will.

E

Yeah, like reveal.

I

E

William kind of uncovered is that the way that it's written is that we need to have an election for both positions. Even if you know it's the same person running in both, and even if there's only one person's linking book, we still need to have two elections virtually.

A

That's that's fine, I, don't know drama with it. The mechanics of them I'm just making a suggestion that that's worth noting yeah the best outcome here.

A

Okay, so given the timing, what we might do is we'll announce today and make it no this somewhere else. So they'll actually do it announce today that we need to hear of any other nominations and then we'll try and conduct a vote between ideally between now and Monday, we'll try and do it on github. So we've got a synchronous time to do that, a rather than waiting for our next meeting, which is two weeks. Let's do it on github and then we can actually we'll do it on github and I.

A

Guess it's going to be ratified of the board.

A

Anyway, so I'll write up an issue. I write a pic I note about that in a probably issue, 129 about about the flow there so we'll get that done as soon as possible, so we can participate in that election on the board. Any other comments about that before we move on.

J

Just to clarify its to TFC members that will hold on that versus the CPC member for.

A

Now it's just the tsc name is yes.

I

It's not the whole community know.

A

This is amongst the tsa.

A

We can have that discussion about how you would define the whole community and how would you, how did you get their votes, but that's probably not constructive.

A

Ok, any other kinds: I.

C

Just offhand we're not a discussion for now, but it could be interesting to look into including the CTC in this and the next election next year. Yeah that might like.

A

I absolutely agree and I wish they were included at this time, and that's one of the things I said was trying to make sure that there's accountability between the two groups and the one supporting the other and I think that part of that this, this process of electing somebody should be, should absolutely include the success. Think because it's it's so it's fixed really relevant to their work. Yeah.

J

It kind of did the last time because that's all there was at the time exactly.

A

And now we've got a whole group of people that are excluded from this process because of the way we've got things set up, which is kind of on.

A

Okay, moving on we've got two issues which I think we can probably skip through so issue number 113, which is recurring issue defining node core. We do need to make it progressing like this, but I don't think this meeting is the place to make progress since we haven't done anything a github since, since a few meetings so is, is there anything that anyone here would like to say with regard to progress on that issue?.

A

Okay and the same thing for regular roll up reporting for active working groups, I did post a proposal there, which has received thumbs ups, but I haven't done any work on that since the last meeting. So the only thing here that I think could impact. It is the crossover with the work that the foundation is now doing with Jen and I'm wondering if either Jen, Michael or Tracy would like to give us a rundown on what what the activities are there just. So we are additive rather than you know, overlapping too much.

A

Who would like to do that.

E

Okay, sorry, I was like responding to an email. What woman's request we.

A

Just wanted to just some information about the the new reporting or newsletter work, the gens going to be doing for the foundation just a description about that. Just just so we don't make.

E

Sure you're lacking too.

A

F

E

Yeah Jen's putting together this awesome community newsletter, I'm just like interesting stuff that no developers should know about particularly like each other, some stuff, as well as kind of course stuff and hopefully.

B

E

Can get like a more higher level view of what's what's going.

D

E

Around here so um yeah, if you have stuff that you you know, you really want to get people's attention to that's another resource and the way to do that similar to like even Twitter, and things like that that we have so that's the gist.

A

Okay, so we're just going to remove forward without roll up reporting in a way that doesn't open up too much with that, and it can actually contribute to it. Well,.

E

Like so, the roll-ups would probably be like pointed to essentially like did this. You know this is covering the stairs letters coming a lot of stuff, so I doubt that it would get into like the details of what it in the hole, but it may be like hey, there's some roll-ups like here's, something I could.

D

So his Jen's new role is Jenna. Now an additional member of the Linux Foundation with Tracy and Michael. No.

E

We're not we're contracting Jen specifically to do this.

B

Also um I don't know if it helps the lead. Also, I created an issue if you saw in the evangelism repo that was proposing an idea moving forward for. If people wanted to highlight information for Jen to consider for the newsletter each week, there would be a place to do that. I thought I had bc the TSB on it. I may have just cc'd the TTC's dirty.

A

If you can drop a link in the chat door somewhere else, yeah.

B

A

I'll put that in minutes.

C

Yeah I kind of have a bit of a gut feeling on this that this could be a really good opportunity to trying like combined efforts, like you know, really kind of make these more part of the same effort. I mean you're still doing all the same structure were talking about doing it, but you know, as far as like you know, there was some discussion we had on the role of purported like how we publish this and where and I feel like.

C

This is something that would you know we might want to look into doing both of them together or something like that and I'm just kind of thinking out loud right now.

A

Yeah well at least using the newsletter as a way to get some visibility into what we publish, rather than it, going into black hole.

J

B

The opportunity.

J

If somebody is driving, the newsletters also maybe drive some of that. You know asking the workgroup server for the reports.

A

That's true, given us a contracted position, it probably is not going to work just now, but that is probably something we can explore. Once we get the ball rolling because I imagine the.

B

A

Workload to be distributed or handed to someone yeah.

E

You know I want to stress is like this is a very small part of that newsletter. There's a lot of other stuff going on so I, wouldn't want to like block and also like these roll-ups are useful for the other working groups to end the CPC and the tsc and the board. So I really I'd like to keep them. You know somewhat separate Olympic.

I

That same person could be a technical liaison for Jen, possibly yep. Let's.

A

Sounds good Jim.

D

Well, it's Jens newsletter cover more foundation stuff that likes a robot. Roll-Ups are certainly going to be within the technical side of the foundation, will Jen be including other things like, but I'm still looking for a great resource to find like one board, meetings are coming up and things like that.

E

um That's a good idea to keep in there I wish that there was a way that we could more easily already know the streaming location that would be nice, um yeah, okay, I'll! Think about that. A little more.

F

E

Think also I mean, like the newsletters contain stuff. Like you know, this is just like cool stuff that people don't know J as in the in the community. It includes, like you know that the foundation is, you know, doing an event or something like that. Like there's.

B

E

Sort of higher-level done not as like deeply technical stuff that the newsletter covers. It's mainly for users to come, but yeah yeah getting gang stuff in there like that. These really cool I'll think about the definitive.

A

Okay, we'll look less of this. Try make progress by next week on that issue, that's mainly in my court, but happy to get help from others that are interested in this activity after rollit reporting. Anyway, my interest is in mainly getting the ball started and then figuring out how we can resource the doing of the work right.

I

I'd like to help with that, if you need help, okay,.

A

Hola I'll hit you up and IRC. Probably then I'm.

H

A

Now the next one is enough to ask someone else to take the lead on this one and tell us all about it, but it's issue number 96, which was investigating moving in vm into the foundation and I'm from what I understand the questions here, largely a matter of process and what's involved, and I don't think we've been that helpful, given that we're in such a limbo state. But would somebody like to start this by providing a summary, I'm sure I had me why?

A

Okay and I'm just gonna for the recording say that we've got Jordan hub and here, whose current maintainer of nvm so take it away. Jordan. So.

K

Yeah, basically, uh the original projects creator handed the reins over to me a few years ago. I've been maintaining it ever since, and I continue to put a lot of effort into it, and I think that the project would benefit from the governance and testing infrastructure and be more explicit coupling with the node build process that had already kind of we already kind of coordinate a lot in implicitly but I that it could benefit from being in the node foundation.

K

It seems the right place for it, so I opened up that issue to try and investigate what yeah. Certainly the process questions, but also just the feasibility of it, because, as I understand it, the there isn't a lot of precedent for bringing projects in and I wanted to just start. The dialogue.

K

Well, I've uh I spoke to a few people and have opened up a PR into the repo that adds the like various files. I could governance file on a code of conduct and things like that I've put up a road map which includes you know. Various forms of Windows support as well, because I am I would assume that inside the foundation, I would want nvm to support the same platforms. Note itself does in a first-class fashion and yeah.

D

In one of the comments that you had an issue 996 you, additionally, you outline the differences between some of the competing version managers in and what they bring to the table and I really. That was really compelling to see that listed out like that, and I think the node users have all of those use cases, and so you know bringing it to windows is very cool, but also those other use cases are relevant. Do you envision it? You know taking on those other use cases, I think.

K

It's certainly worth exploring, but I think that in general, there's no need for a project joining a foundation to be the sole and entire pocket of you skate of relevant use cases within the foundation, so I don't like if the end or the nave project or any other version managers were interested in joining I, wouldn't see any conflict in doing that. I and I and I also do not see. I would not see nvm joining the foundation, as this is now nodes official version manager. That's not the statement.

K

I want it to make or I expect it to make it's more simply that the priorities are shared and an aligned, and it's more of a public statement that everyone's interests are intended to be served on both sides. So as far as expanding to cover some of the use cases of N or nave I, it's certainly feasible. I have I, don't have any current plans to do it, but if there would be interested doing it, that would be fine it.

K

You know I I, think that's worth exploring whether it's better to expand nvm scope versus simply have multiple projects that address those use cases versus incubating them in the foundation. In the meantime, while a quote official note version manager, solution is planned out and those are all valid approaches.

D

Yep and also we priestly just had an exchange like within the last hour about you know what group this would kind of fall under to oversee it. Moving forward and I. Don't think there is an answer for that right now, but it's something for TSE and CTC to kind of consider like what would be the governing body for something like this and.

K

I don't think I am informed enough as to how the foundation is organized to make that call, but whatever that everyone feels is appropriate, I'm pretty content with does.

I

This relate to myles's electron installer. Should we are they in the same bucket, I think.

K

Conceptually they're very similar, yet mm-hmm.

E

I wouldn't want to structure it. That way, though, because I mean this would be like a dependency of the Installer. Essentially so I would want, to you know, put their development necessarily under like the same work, either.

H

Wasn't the discussion somewhere at some points of shipping, a version manager with Newt installs like the installers 40 secs, some windows- this would I mean I think if we always start with something, that's pretty stant. You know semi standard in the community and is known to like work pretty well. That would probably be a good option for that.

F

Yeah I think eventually, maybe definitely to look at shipping a booking manager with the distribution, but ain't getting started, I mean one person I have it. We actually need a working group for this I, don't know if we really need to have any kind of real formal governments over it's just one. We go.

E

Yeah I mean it's; basically, it was that repo would be the working group right. I mean it's one project. It.

A

Seems to me that the biggest thing we can bring to the party here would be a framework around which many people could get involved in the development and progress of the project. Right.

F

The records brought in it, nothing that manages just like we do at the core repo that really didn't have to be much more part and I'm processing on it than that.

G

And also resources to run tests, so I've been I've wanted for a while to have nvm stats running on smell, oh s, so that will be a good way to you know, for instance, asked giant contribute resources to that point. Stance.

K

That would be great. The only architectures I really contest on our Travis and my mac, and everything else relies on user reports. So having more automated verification would be amazing. Yeah.

J

The same would apply to power in Z Linux as well.

D

So for the governance at some level, it's going to fall to the TSE then, which is what I suggested in the PR that Jordan had put out there for the documentation, I kind of see it similar to like nan and streams, for example, where you know they're working groups, but they also have a product too. So I'm not saying maybe they shouldn't have a working group, I'm not sure, but it's similar, and so consistency is what I guess. I look for.

C

And it just to confirm kind of along those lines. I think probably already agree on this, though, that the CTC would also oversee nvm. Ultimately, as far as like you know, the group that sort of owns them is that correct.

A

I guess we could to find that range.

C

Of my man, all right, I think if we decide that that's not the case and there directly under the tsc that yeah I'd be interested, see what the board has to say on that topic.

C

I feel like bring it under the seat. City might be and ease yourself, I.

D

Feel like that also falls into that category of defined node core, which is it tied to the CTC and how things like that I.

A

Think the process here is probably going to be. If we move forward move move closer to progress on this, because I don't. I don't believe this I'm- that much progress in the issue. But if we as we move forward, we would we will at least notify the board that we're having this discussion and get feedback from them and I, don't think I, don't think we should have high expectations of getting.

A

You know some notice back from the board that they want to do x, y&z with it it's more about getting the feel of the board, because I really don't think the board is going to come up with a collective opinion on this. It's more about the individuals on the board and how they respond to it. And that's what we'd be looking for to move forward. I.

I

Know I think Microsoft is is wants to keep us focused. That's probably that's been one of the main motivations, so that might be the feedback here. So we would want to explain how this is part of the core focus. That will be the question. I guess from our board members that.

A

Was a very strong theme from your previous board member but um yeah I'm, not I, irate, I haven't really and I, don't really know where Colleen's coming from or even if she's has very strong opinions here. But do you do you know if she's of the same mind I had.

I

A

I

That oh she's, not gonna, be as strong as Gina go. Maybe but yeah.

A

That and that will be interesting to get that feel from the board and then and and that we may get us a fairly strong signal that the board is uncomfortable with that, and that may be enough for us to say: okay, well we're not going to proceed here or we may get in difference from the board and they've met their might actually but see. This is that as being a a core part of what we do, and that would be interesting signal of itself. Yeah.

I

I've been pitching that internally I kind of do think this fits into core so trying to remove some of those barriers. I.

H

Think it'd be very interesting at the very least to get the board's opinion on this, where the sounds of it.

A

Okay, well, it's not going to happen. This next board meeting is probably going to be there's too much distraction going on right now, but maybe we can plan to have something in front of the board by the next board meeting after this one just ajust a you know the heads up quest for quick discussion and that- and that would be good actually at the same time, to make progress on the defining, though core things.

A

So we can perhaps present that at the same time and say this is what we think we're doing, and- and this thing here we think fits in in whatever way we think if it's in and get feedback on, that initial feedback anyway sounds.

H

Like a good plan to me,.

C

It sounds good to me too.

A

um Jordan you ate I mean I know it's not satisfactory that we're um we're inside such a nun, decisive, stay at the moment, but I you satisfied that we are making enough progress here. Is there something you would like to request from I specifically here yeah.

K

I mean I I, understand that foundations and boards and structure has a lot of complexity. So I'm I I'm not expecting rapid action. It's there's convened continued forward. Progress and I appreciate that and I appreciate everyone's time in consideration. So I think that the the thing that I would love to see is some actionable steps, like some signal that, yes, it will happen or some list of things that say this is the order of things that will need it. You know we're like the last step.

K

Is it's in the foundation or whatever and then the first few steps are. You know. Maybe one of them is wait on a board meeting at this date and all that's fine, but so yeah, so I guess I'm. What I'm saying is I would hope for some more concreteness if possible, but I'm patient yeah.

A

I the way I see at this two big hurdles we need to get over one is that the one we're talking about here, which is that does this even belong within the scope of responsibilities that we're accepting for ourselves and the board wants to define for us as well, and that's such a big unknown that it's really difficult to get beyond that that the step beyond the immediate step beyond that is the question of in around whether this even is something we want to take on, so it beyond responsibility.

A

Do we want to take on something that is part of a a competitive ecosystem that doesn't necessarily contribute directly to call, although all those sort of things? So that's the step after that. So, given that we have those two big unknowns than the whole question of process, I think is something we're not really very focused on it's very difficult for us to get our heads around process. So I think that's, you know be patient with the question of process while we get a hit throughout the other two things. Yeah.

K

That's totally fine. I certainly don't want to waste anyone's time if either of those first two questions are gonna work out so well, but.

A

For my part, I think that even having this in front of us is helpful for us to define some of the other things that we're doing in the same way that we had other requests and they were helpful for prodding us in different ways. I think this one's pretty pretty important for us to make other progress, adjacent progress. Thank.

D

A

Are there any other comments or questions on that issue or Jordan? While we've got him here.

I

J

I

Guess well, I got one so I, just I'm gonna throw in I wrote it on the thread, but just to give a little justification for why we might want it in court. Is there are potential synergies which would be more difficult to achieve I? Think if it's not in the foundation like I mentioned in the thread like making it sync with what some package.json or using it to put in different VMS and things I, think that will be harder if it's. If it's an outside product.

K

Yeah I think in general, sharing sharing the build infrastructure was something that's a much easier sell. When it's inside the the foundation, then, when it's out that's.

A

Very true when we have the discussion around some of the post-mortem tools or the debugging tools as well.

C

A

C

Interesting implications for like tying together the vm neutrality work as well. You know using possibly MDM as the distribution mechanism for that so yeah. That could be another great synergy and greasing the rihanna.

K

Yeah I'd be totally doable to add support for alternative engines.

A

Okay, let's take it back to github for that and we'll try and have something to it. Air next meeting we might discuss what we might put in front of the board. Let's try the plane for that.

A

I'm making a note so I will forget that okay, so let's move on to public Q&A, do we have people on the livestream Jeremiah.

H

Yeah, we are six people right now: okay,.

A

So, let's open forum for Q&A, you can leave a question if you're listening a question or a comment on the YouTube comments, page for this or the nerdiest / tsc issue, number 134 or even someone in IRC and the no dash dev channel is where most of us are.

A

A

Okay, I, don't believe there any questions, here's anyone else see any questions.

A

Nope, okay, let's close it up next meeting, is going to be in two weeks from now. There's a bunch of action items here that will follow up with on github made some notes and I'll try and get to them today, but thanks everyone possess, but for participating thanks for joining us Jordan and everyone else.

A

Great light on you thanks.

A

C

Call recording off.