►
Description
A
A
B
B
A
Okay,
so,
basically
is:
do
you
think
it's
just
like
a
request
for
people
to
look
at
it
and
I
guess
maybe
coordinate
with
miles
it
is.
His
request
was
that
we
do
discuss
his.
You
know
he's
planning
to
do
a
foundation,
medium
blog
post
on
module
he'd
sent
out
that
through
email
for
discussion,
I
think
he
just
wanted.
A
A
D
So
I
do
want
to
bring
up
a
separate
issue.
Besides
that
one
comment
in
that
thread
in
that
thread
there
there's
a
thought
that
we
don't
need
to
be
able
to
import
non
ESM
modules
and
whatever
we
do
with
response
that
we
should
include
any
response.
We
have
to
importing
non
ESM
in
the
blog
post
or
wherever
it
ends
up
right.
A
I
think
the
blog
posts
you
know
he
was
just
trying
to
clarify
where
we
were
on
that
one.
If
I
remember
correctly,
you
know
he
was
going
to
say:
we've
haven't
come
to
consensus.
Yet
right,
don't
sounds
like
some
people
think
it
would
be
good
to
have
import
support.
You
know
both
all
the
new
modules.
Other
people
will
think
well.
Well,
you
could
just
have
it
just
do
ESL
modules
right,
so
we
still
need
more
discussion
to.
D
D
D
A
A
A
C
A
And
Ana
had
commented
back
that
her
answer
was
no,
because
the
overload
of
buffer
constructor
cannot
be
relied
upon.
Sorry,
the
opener.
The
overload
of
the
rough
constructor
that
cannot
be
really
relied
upon
is
buffer
string
is
when
people
intend
to
use
the
latter
that
latter,
one
that
an
information
leak
was
possible.
Previous
no
version
and
a
possible
deal
inspector
was
do
spectra
was
present.
The
buffer
number
range
is
consistent
with
type
two
race
back
and
since
buffers
type
terrain,
we
should
make
it
available.
F
A
A
C
In
future,
can
we
ask
that
if
things
get
labeled
TSE
agenda,
they
also
come
with
a
description
of
why
it's
on
the
agenda,
because
this
this
is
a
repeating
discussion,
I
died,
I
can't
see,
there's
anything
particularly
new
here
and
perhaps
is
a
good
reason
for
labeling
it.
But
without
that
reason
it's
just
gonna
lead
to
a
waste
of
time
here,
because
we've
been
over
this
a
hundred
times,
and
so
maybe
we
need
to
have
a
rule
if
there's
no
there's
no
summary
or
nobody
to
champion
at
the
meeting
just
doesn't
get
on.
A
A
A
B
This
so
this
is
I
took
this
right,
so
this
is
an
issue.
That's
been
open
for
a
while.
I
really
know
what
to
do
with
it
so
might
as
well
bring
up
to
the
TSC,
because
I
don't
really
know
what
the
correct
behavior
is
yeah,
so
currently
set
intervals
in
particular.
So
if
you
have
a
set
interval-
and
it
has
a
callback
that
takes
a
significant
amount
of
time,
the
next
interval
will
be
scheduled
at
the
end
of
your
callback.
B
So
if
you
have
something
that
takes
a
lot
of
time,
delay
the
next
one
by
quite
a
bit,
so
the
the
what
this
poll
request
does.
Is
it
changes
essentially
where
at
the
start
time
would
theoretically
be
to
the
beginning
of
when
the
callback
is
called
and
from
what
I
can
tell
browsers
already
have
this
behavior?
They
seem
to
skid
schedule
the
next
one
when
at
the
beginning
of
your
callback,
I
can't
tell
100%
for
sure,
but
the
the
test.
That's
included
with
this.
What
this
poll
request
seems
to
pass
in
browsers.
A
B
Yes,
with
this
patch,
you
wouldn't
so
there's
some
concerns
have
been
raised
in
this
thread.
If,
if
that
is
really
like
the
intended
behavior
that
we
we
want,
because
it
kind
of
changes
like
timing,
expert
expectations
around
intervals,
I
know
some
people
have
brought
up,
it
might
be
good
to
do
it
browsers
do
in
this
case,
and
that
seems
to
be
with
this
pull
request.
Does,
although
it
wasn't
intended
for
browser
compatibility,
it
was
intended
to.
You
know,
essentially
fix
something
else,
but
it's
hard
to
tell
if
it.
A
B
B
A
A
B
B
A
A
B
A
A
And
you
know
it
I
guess
it
would
land
unless
there's
objections
right.
So
it's
it's!
No.
Does
anybody
object
to
that?
It
kind
of
makes
sense
to
me
that
you
would
queue
on
the
interval
and,
if
it's
compatible
with
the
browser,
that
seems
like
another
good
reason,
the
course
Donald's
father
the
risk
of
you
know
actually
breaking
people.
Yes,.
B
A
B
B
A
A
So
I
guess
what
we'll
say
is
you
know,
based
on
discussion
and
the
TSC,
we'll
post
a
comment,
and
that
says
you
know.
We
believed
that
just
we
believe
that
the
new
behavior
sounds
like
the
right
thing
to
do,
and
you
know,
given
that
it's
provided
its
number
major.
It
will
give
the
okay
to
move
forward.
B
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
G
G
Hp
to
just
ongoing
effort
right
now,
I'm
working
on
refining,
refactoring,
the
lifecycle
of
the
session
and
a
stream.
It's
just
you
know
ongoing
effort
to
improve
it.
G
Error
messages
are
progressing.
We
landed
quite
a
few
updates.
Before
nine
went
out.
There
are
still
several
hundred
errors
left
to
convert.
Mostly
on
the
sea
side.
We
have
ongoing
efforts
to
get
those
done.
It's
gonna
be
kind
of
a
solid
sure
process
and
hopefully
we'll
get
them
all
done
before
then
yeah.
A
A
G
A
B
E
A
E
D
Iesg
bus
after
we
tried
to
register
a
mime
type
and
they
wanted
it
to
be
moved
to
standards
track,
and
that
means
recognizing
a
standards
organization
as
the
controller
when
we
were
registering
outside
of
standards
track,
that
was
going
to
be
the
TSC
and
I
would
feel
more
comfortable.
We
put
the
note
foundation
itself
as
the
controller.
G
D
G
Wait,
you
know
you
know,
for
example,
I
mean
we've
went
when
I
Sumi
activitystreams
specifications
right.
We
had
a
Lisa
of
of
companies
that
were
involved
where
the
you
know.
Basically,
some
of
the
this
up.
There
was
a
big
it
was
pushed
through
as
just
wasn't
even
a
legal
entity.
It
was
just
this
group
accompanies
was
the
change
control
over
stuff?
D
D
G
E
G
A
D
G
B
A
D
D
There's
some
part
of
the
node
foundation
that
is
recognized
as
the
standards
body
controlling
something
so
we've
started
to
take
projects
under
the
node
foundation
that
aren't
entirely
overseen
by
the
TSE.
To
my
knowledge,
like
node
report,
everything
bubbles
through
the
TSA
but
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
if
we
go
through
any
standardization
or
our
C's
that
are
for
those
we
necessarily
want
them
to
be
controlled
by
the
TSE
when
that's
not
in
their
organization.
Normally.
A
C
Tse
sits
in
the
same
hierarchy
is
for
all
these
projects,
as
the
board
does
so
it's
it.
If
you're
gonna
say
the
board,
you
it's
use
the
same
thing
unless
the,
unless
the
board
chooses
to
spin
out
some
other
technical
organization,
but
for
now
this
is
the
technical
organization,
and
this
is
the
the
peak
of
the
technical
organization,
so
just
make
sense
limit
the
scope
of
this
thing.
C
A
B
C
A
D
E
A
Other
was
found
Foundation
medium
blog
post
on
module.
We
already
discussed
that
I.
Think
the
clicky
thing
miles
was
one
to
make
sure
there
were
no
objections
to
using
the
foundation,
medium
blog
and
he's
going
to
publish
it.
So
I
would
also
say,
if
you
have.
You
know
for
the
last
chance
to
look
at
the
draft
he
sent
out
because
it's
going
to
go
out.
You
know
imminently.
A
A
Okay,
so
upcoming
meetings
include
the
diagnostic
working
group
meeting
later
today
at
3:00
p.m.
Eastern,
there's
a
community
committee
meeting
tomorrow
at
12:00
eastern
sorry
for
the
eastern,
because
that's
what
shows
up
when
I'm
looking
at
the
calendar,
the
napi
team
gets
together
and
it's
weekly
time,
1:30
Eastern
tomorrow
as
well.
There
is
also
a
security
working
group
meeting
at
3:00
p.m.
Eastern
on
Thursday,
and
there
is
a
discussion
on
the
nodejs
end
user
feedback
on
Friday.