►
Description
B
Should
probably
announce
the
need
for
team
proposal,
PR
has
been
opened,
it
will
be
updated
every
week
with
new
commits
that
land
on
master
and
I.
Think
24th
of
March,
so
just
under
two
weeks
today
will
be
the
SEM
for
major
cutoff
and
after
that
point
some
majors
require
no
objections
from
the
TSE
to
land.
Sorry,.
C
Do
so
there
is,
we
are
progressing
with
the
organization
of
the
collaborator
summit
and
we
invite
people
to
collaborate.
No
collaborator
to
submit
sessions
session
proposal
to
the
URL
I
will
put
it
in
the
notes
and
so
that
it
there
is
open.
It
have
to
come
slash
open,
jazz
foundations.
Let's
sum
it.
C
A
C
So
there
has
been
some
discussion
back
and
forth
on
shipping
their
own
types
to
have
a
little
bit
more
formal
support
for
typescript,
and
this
is
the
issue-
is
swinging
between
different
options.
Some
extent
there
is
some
people
that
appreciate
the
fact
that
they
can
install
them
separately.
However,
there
are
people
that
complains
that
the
types
that
are
being
shipped
are
not
a
far
from
complete
and.
C
Reflective
of
reality
to
some
extent,
so
there
is
I-
think
the
type
scape
how
we
serve
the
typescript
community
is
something
that
we
might
be
can
possibly
do
something
better
than
this.
So
I
I
put
there
it
there
to
gather
some
attention
because
you
know
there
is
we
I,
don't
think
we
can
ignore
typescript
in
any
form.
So-
and
this
is
the
types
for
node
are
a
critical
part
on
ow.
The
nodes
is,
is
perceived
and
used
by
users
of
target,
so.
C
A
C
So
there
is
a
lot
of.
There
is
a
lot
of
thinking
over
there.
So
one
is
what
are
the
rules
for
you
know
if
you
have
the
new
API,
should
you
have?
The
type
should
not
add
the
types
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
and
then
there
is
also
the
fact
that
you
know
if
we
ship
them.
Thai
script
should
pick
those
up
essentially
in
their
search
path.
So
right-
and
that
is
also
I
to
some
extent
problematic.
So
they
need
to
be
on
board
with
whatever
we
decide.
C
E
A
C
C
A
C
C
F
C
F
H
J
A
G
It
does
especially,
we
will
eventually
introduce
bugs
into
other
type
definitions,
and
then
people
will
be
forced
to
update
to
a
new
node
version
just
to
have
the
types
fixed
and
as
far
as
I
know,
right
now,
there's
no
way
to
include
our
type
definitions
in
node
releases
and
typescript
tab.
Script
won't
pick
it
up
before
we'd
have
to
add
a
modified,
typescript
or
HECO
way
around
that.
J
To
be
like
something,
on
top
of
the
types
that
we
provide
as
a
fix
right
and
for
a
specific
version
that
would
be
required
in
that
case.
On
the
other
hand,
our
documentation
is
also
outdated
at
times,
so
everything
has
to
be
maintained
manually,
but
their
current
typing
system,
if
we
move
it
inside,
of
course,
still
has
to
be
maintained
manually.
If
we
do
not
have
the
parser
that
it
generates,
it
I.
G
Just
don't
really
see
a
benefit
of
moving
it
into
core,
even
if
even
if
we
decide
to
take
the
electron
approach
and
generate
type
definitions
automatically
from
our
documentation,
we
could
still
do
that
as
a
PR
to
the
arm
at
type.
Slash
note
repository,
so
we
don't
really
have
to
put
it
into
node
releases.
G
D
C
No,
it's
totally.
Realistically,
it's
totally
possible.
There
is
Allah.
There
has
been
a
significant
amount
of
work
that
was
put
on
into
the
festivai
types
by
internal
road
to
get
to
resolve
most
of
those
problems.
So
a
lot
of
that
stuff
has
been
some
in
order
to
support
it.
Wait
there's
some
shine
against
that
it
did
to
make
it
all
work.
C
H
H
D
D
D
H
Tying
into
that
is,
has
anything
changed
on
the
typescript
side,
or
definitely
typed
side,
as
far
as
like
versioning
goes
because
last
I
looked
at
it.
Versioning
was
not
basically
in
any
way
consistent
with
the
actual
releases
or
really.
There
was
no
good
way
to
like
track
multiple
branches.
Basically,
it's.
H
So,
like
that's
the
that's
the
other
issue
right,
we
have
LTS
and
mom
LTS
releases
and
we
have
to
support
both
somehow
and
I.
Don't
see
how
that's
possible
right
now,
we've
definitely
type
like
it's.
Just
the
versioning
is
a
mess.
You
basically
have
the
latest
version,
which
is
for
the
latest
version
of
the
package.
G
H
Know
that
that's
not
been
the
traditional
practice
and
I
know,
there's
I
mean
when
I
last
looked
at
it,
which
I
haven't
worked
with
typescript
for
a
bit
like
I,
haven't,
contributed
in
like
a
year,
but
I
mean
last
time.
I
contribute
it.
It
was
just
a
mess
in
terms
of
versioning
and
there
was
an
open
issue
about
actually
standardizing
around
that.
So
one.
G
C
G
We,
what
are
we
most
concerned
about
I,
will
concern
about
people
using
outdated
types
or
are
we
concerned
more
people
using
types
that
are
newer
than
what
you
know
it
actually
suppose
we
could.
We
could
take
the
Android
approach
and
always
target
the
newest,
the
latest
type
definitions
and
then
just
use
tests
to
see
what
passes.
C
The
my
main
concern
is
as
module
library,
author
I,
have
no
way
to
know
if
my
module
will
compile
on
different
version
of
with
different
types
versions.
So
let's
say
that
I
use
it
using
node
12
and
it's
it
has
the
ties
for
no
12
installed
and
when
I
build
the
module.
I
need
to
support
the
ties
for
no
12
the
ties
for
no
10.
The
ties
would
not
13,
possibly
in
the
future.
C
D
A
There's
a
couple
different
things:
I
guess
the
first
one
would
be
like
if
there's
an
agreement,
whether
or
not
this
is
something
we
we
want
to
try
and
push
to
improve,
because
even
if
there
isn't
a
good
versioning
approach,
the
time
it's
gonna
take
us
to
like
say,
for
example,
structure
our
Docs,
so
we
could
generate
types
from.
It
is
probably
means
that
you
know
it's
not
an
immediate
problem.
A
C
A
The
next
one
that's
tagged
is
we
nominate
to
reach
pune
tell
but
I
think
that's
basically
waiting
on
on
additional
members
joining
the
TSC
so
that
we're
at
appropriate
numbers.
So
that's
like
the
FIR
I,
don't
not
for
discussion
this
week,
but
if
defer-
and
so
we
have
members
the
next
one
tagged
is
nominating
room.
Bridgewater
Reubens
been
nominated
a
while
back
he's
attended
now,
I
think
at
least
two
calls
and
just
want
to
confirm
that
we
should
move
forward.
I
guess
at
this
point
is
like:
are
there
any
objections.
L
A
Right
like
I,
see
I
can
I
can
go
back
and
count
so
I
guess
what
I
was
gonna
say
as
long
as
we
have
that
count
and
if
we
count
the
people
who
are
in
this
meeting
as
plus
ones,
I'm
thinking
we're
probably
over
the
majore
I
can
double-check
that,
but
I
just
wanted
to
see.
If
there's
any,
if
there's
no
objections-
and
we
agree
that
you
know
I
can
use
those
counts,
I
would
move
it
forward.
A
So
I'll
take
the
action
like
Oh,
we'll
check,
counts
and
I'll
chase
people.
If
we
don't
quite
have
it,
but
otherwise
no
objections
to
moving
forward,
and
so
next
time
hopefully
rune
will
make
an
official
will
make
it
official
before
them
all
so.
I
guess
you
know.
This
is
probably
a
good
time.
Just
I
probably
should
have
done
that
in
the
announcements,
but
to
welcome
Mateus
and
Shelly
as
people
who
have
been
nominated
or
here's
observer
observers
and
so
welcome,
and
thanks
for
participating.
A
Okay,
then,
moving
on
to
the
next
issue,
which
is
tagged
for
the
agenda,
nodejs,
future
directions
and
interest
in
an
online
or
in-person
summit
I
had
the
action
last
time
to
put
together
sort
of
a
draft
of
what
the
agenda
might
look
like.
I
see
that
jerusha's
has
chimed
in
with
some
other
suggestions
now.
A
I
would
be
good
if
some
of
the
other
TCC
members
could
kind
of
chime
in
and
help
to
shape
that
that
agenda
into
something
we
think
makes
sense,
or
you
know,
because
I'm
not
sure
if
all
the
suggestions
I've
got
there,
it
includes
things
like
talking
about.
You
know
tight
or
I'm,
pretty
sure
I
included,
yeah
types,
type
definitions,
packet,
managers,
HTP
evolution.
A
How
do
you
know
how
does
cloud
deployments
kubernetes
function
as
a
service
all
affect
node,
so
sort
of
from
technical
things
and
I
also
thought
we
should
also
talk
about.
You
know,
potentially
the
technical
management
side
of
things.
What
are
our
key
values
that
have
helped
us
be
successful?
What
should
they
be
going
forward
standards?
Should
we
be
defining
standards
in
some
way?
A
C
C
C
A
Yeah
I
was
I
was,
like
you
know
some
thoughts
I'd
had
on.
That
is,
you
know.
Maybe
it's
shorter
over
a
number
of
days,
yeah
like
I,
think
an
hour
might
be
too
short
but
like
for
the
time
zones.
If
it
was
like
four
hours
in
the
that
overlapped,
the
most
time
zones
that
might
help
on
that
front,
but
yeah
I,
don't
know
what
the
would
the
sweet
spot
in
terms
of
time
is
rated.
A
Think,
like
from
past
experience
like
if
we
tried
to
make
this
like
a
an
hourly
call
or
something
I
think
it
would
be
tougher
because
I
think
from
the
value
we've
seen
in
the
summit's
is
that
people
come
together.
They
they
block
off
the
time
and
they
actually
have
that
time
to
think
about
and
be
active
participants.
A
So
I'm
thinking
it's
like
you
know,
say
if
it's
four
hours
you
know,
maybe
we
try
and
do
it
for
a
week
four
hours
in
the
middle
of
each
day
or
three
hours
or
whatever
I,
don't
know
the
right
number,
but
I
think
it
needs
to
be
more
of
a
focused
thing
versus
you
know.
We
have
a
group
that
gets
together
and
just
talks
about
it
once
a
week
or
something
like
that,
because
it's
hard
to
sustain
once
a
week
every
week
right.
D
A
A
A
D
Mm,
if
you
could
split
each
topic
into
multiple
rounds
and
move
the
tennis
court
between
those
rounds
even
inside
the
same
large
number
of
time,
slots
could
then
be
real.
Viable
I
could
be
take
several
days
or
several
days
on
several
weeks.
I,
don't
know
and
discuss
each
star
took
multiple
times,
but
on
different
time
slots
in
saying
those
yeah.
A
Things
thought
I'm.
My
first
thought
is:
we've
got
a
lot
of
topics
going
covering
them
twice,
maybe
a
challenge,
but
it's
certainly
an
interesting
like
an
interesting
idea
of
like.
Can
we
have
I
mean
it's
it's
the
I
guess
my
you
know.
Are
you
thinking
that
people
won't
be
able
to
make
a
time
slot
just
because
it's
strictly
the
time
zone
thing
or
because
they'll
have
other
commitments
during
the
week.
A
That
I
mean
if
we
have
an
in-person
conference.
Basically
you've
got
to
make
the
commitment
to
make
the
time
during
that
time
right
and
one
of
the
I
guess
one
of
the
advantages
of
the
in-person
one
is
that
it
kind
of
forces
that,
because
you're
there
and
for
for
a
virtual
one
I'm
almost
thinking,
you
need
the
same
kind
of
commitment
to
say
well,
I'm
gonna,
block
off
I'm,
not
gonna,
do
other
things
during
that
that
time
right
to
make
it
actually
work.
A
So
if
it's
strictly
that
the
time
zone
is
like
no
that's
the
time
that
you
just
can't
come
because
you're
asleep,
that's
fair
enough
right.
If
it's
well,
I'm
gonna
have
to
juggle
all
the
rest
of
my
stuff.
At
the
same
time,
then
it's
then
I
think
we're
we're
already.
Gonna
have
a
hard
time
cuz.
You
know
everybody's
always
got
something
going.
The.
H
Virtual
one
is
harder
in
that
way,
though,
because
you
get
both
those
problems
at
the
same
time,
right
like
with
with
the
in-person
one,
you
negate
both
and
agreed
yeah
like
people
come
out
to
the
same
timezone,
and
they
also
take
time
off
work,
or
hopefully,
they
work
response
or
whatever,
but
with
the
online
one
a
it's
really
hard
to
justify
at
work
in
general.
So
a
lot
of
people
are
gonna.
Have
that
trouble
and
be
obviously
the
time
zone
thing
is
just
not
feasible,
really
like.
L
C
The
discussion
related
the
collaborator
summit
and
open
the
S
word
one
related
to
an
inference
and
doing
the
summation.
So
did
you
see
some?
It
seems
kind
of
impossible.
The
or
I
would
not
go
ahead.
However,
there
is
still
the
openness
were
still
plan
to
go
ahead.
So
far,
and
in
the
last
meeting
for
the
club
summit,
we
made
the
decision
to
pack.
The
club
summit
to
Penzias
were
essential.
I.
A
Think
for
now,
like
let's
the
the
first
step
is
if
we
could
get
a
good
agenda
that
we
would
do
whether
in
person
or
virtual
I,
think
that's
the
thing.
Let's
get
to
that,
and
once
we've
got
that
then
we'll
see
where
we're
at
like
we
had
miles
had
said
that
hey,
if,
if
we're
all
at
the
open
jeaious
world,
maybe
we
make
this
the
focus
of
the
collaborate
or
summit
for
this
year
or
something
right
like
this.
A
L
And
just
to
update
folks
who
weren't
listening
to
the
board
meeting
yesterday,
the
current
plan
is
that
open,
Jeff's
world
will
still
run.
It
is
in
late
June.
My
understanding,
at
least
from
like
event,
spaces
that
I've
seen
like
a
lot
of
things
that
are
getting
kind
of
preemptively,
cancelled
or
delayed
are
things
that
are
kind
of
between
now
and
May.
So
you
know
the
the
intent
isto
is
still
run
the
event.
L
This
staff
will
keep
us
kind
of
up
to
date
and
in
the
know,
about
what's
going
on,
the
event
is
running
in
case
you
weren't
aware
it's
running
in
conjunction
with
open
source
summit,
which
is
a
multiple
thousand
person
event
run
by
the
Linux
Foundation,
we're
actually
going
to
be
in
the
same
physical
space,
and
so
actually
one
of
the
things
that's
you
know
really
great
for
us.
Is
that,
because
we're
sharing
all
of
this,
the
you
know,
the
the
cost
and
risk
is
not
ours
alone.
A
So
I
think
I
think
with
that
we
should
probably
move
on
so
I
had
totally.
We
will
open
a
new
issue.
I,
don't
know
if
you
want
to
go
ahead
and
open
that
issue
and
to
start
to
discuss
the
logistics.
Otherwise,
if
people
can
chime
in
and
help
to
craft,
the
agenda
I
think
that
would
be
great
because
regardless
it's
something
that
we
should
do
and
then
we'll
figure
out
how
I'm
moving
on
to
the
next
issue,
the
election
for
voting
represented
for
the
open,
Jas
cross
project
council,
GSC
rep.
A
This
is
on
the
agenda
as
an
FYI.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
what
that
representative
does
the
role
the
level
of
work,
you
know
you
can
ask
Matteo
who's,
rep
or
any
of
the
rest
of
us
like
myself,
were
active
in
the
CPC
or
and
but
really
just
wanted
to
make
sure
everybody
was
aware,
and
if
you
want
to
self
nominate,
that's
the
place
to
do
it.
It's
open
until
you
just
get
that
right.
It's
open
for
nominations
until
March
16th.
A
Okay,
the
next
issue
is
additional
org
owned
by
an
odious
project
for
package
maintenance
team
number
470.
So
this
is
being
open
for
a
few
weeks.
I
tagged
it
for
the
agenda
to
get
more
input
sort
of
live
discussion
from
from
the
technical
steering
committee.
Members
also
tagged
for
the
community
community
agenda.
A
A
Just
like
the
nor
know,
Jess
Oregon
terms
of
you
know,
moderation
and
so
forth.
There
is
kind
of
the
ask
as
well
that
there
might
be
you
know,
additional
flexibility
delegated
to
the
package
maintenance
team
in
terms
of
creating
repos
in
that
organization.
So
you
know
possibly
some
some
delegation
of
authority
from
the
TSE
and
Kham
Kham
in
terms
of
the
creation
process
and
there's
discussion
in
there
back
and
forth.
A
In
terms
of
you
know,
some
I
think
there
are
some
comments
in
terms
of
like
well,
why
not
just
create
the
repos
in
the
node
nor
organization
or
organization
versus
having
a
separate
organization,
I.
Think
some
of
the
concern
about
just
creating
repos
in
the
node
repo
is
to
avoid
making
these
things
look
more
or
more.
You
know
more
more
official
than
anything
which
is
you
know
outside
of
the
the
node
repo
and
just
potentially
disadvantaging
those
so
looking
for
one
way
or
the
other
on
that
I.
A
I
L
Personally,
never
saw
our
scope
limited
to
a
single
organization.
The
project
is
not
the
organization
on
github
that
just
happens
to
be
how
things
conveniently
have
run
I'm,
absolutely
fine
with
there
being
multiple
orgs,
although
you
know
we
do
want
to
limit
how
much
we
have
to
oversee
I
think
in
this
case
it
makes
a
ton
of
sense,
and
you
know
the
documentation
that
we
need
to
update
I,
see,
as
you
know,
just
not
having
been
written
with
this
in
mind.
Not
that,
like
we
explicitly
didn't,
want
to
see
it
happen.
K
I'm
fine
with
another
or
gift
that
s'what
people
want,
but
if
the
concern
is
that
putting
it
in
the
node.js
sword
makes
it
gives
it
more
official
weight
than
it
should
have
I'm,
not
sure
if
there's
another
org,
but
it's
a
nodejs
org
like
if
it's
associated
with
the
primary
nodejs
are
very
you
know
the
node.js
project.
It
might
not
achieve
that
goal,
making
it
look
unofficial
or.
A
Yeah
I
mean
Sam
I
I
brought
that
exact
point
up
in
the
discussion
in
the
package
maintenance
meeting.
Yesterday
I,
you
know
we
we
we
discussed
even
like
naming
the
new
org,
something
like
no
just
experimental,
but
then
that
led
into
well.
There
might
be
things
that
we
that
they,
you
know
the
team
wanted
to
put
in
there,
which
were
experimental.
So
it
wasn't
a
good
name.
A
Yep,
so
it's
yeah,
that's
a
good
point,
but
so
yeah
they're,
just
gonna
point
out
that,
if
naming
in
some
way
helps
in
helps
improve
the
chances
of
achieving
that,
then
that
we
should
consider
that
you
so
I,
don't
I,
don't
hear
any
objection
so
far.
Is
that
still
just
give
people
more
time
to
chime
up
you?