►
From YouTube: Node.js Technical Steering Committee meeting
Description
A
Okay,
sorry
first
meeting
of
the
year
and
which
sorry
I'm
the
issue
outlined
in
796.
So
we'll
start
it
with
anybody.
Does
anybody
have
any
announcements
that
they'd
like
to
share.
B
The
work
of
the
new
day
collaborator
summit
for
the
next
for
the
next
event,
which
will
be
held
in
Austin
at
the
end
of
June
and
the
details
if
you
want
to
get
involved,
are
in
these
issues
that
I'm
going
to
past.
Just
give
me
a
second:
it's
in
the
open
taste
foundation
summit
repository
issues,
trees,
two
three,
six
and
I'm
going
to
add
it
into
the
speaker
into
the
notes.
A
The
in
terms
of
the
last
board
meeting
there
was
one
it
was
a
while
back
though
just
before
node
plus
G
is
interactive.
I,
don't
think
I
have
anything
new
to
report
on
that
front,
except
that
you
know
in
respect
to
our
request
for
some
additional
build
resources
and
that
the
board
members
try
and
encourage
their
people
from
their
organizations
to
get
involved.
There
have
been
you
know:
I've
been
forwarded,
some
names
from
microsoft,
so
I'm
gonna
be
connecting
with
them
and
then
connecting
them
with
the
build
working
group.
A
B
There
is
still
some
ongoing
discussion
on
the
DCO
type
of
things
that
is
still
happening.
There
is
thereĆs
been
some
points
on
the
director
seat,
the
second
director
seat
for
the
CPC,
that's
currently
being
held
by
Michael
and
I've,
sent
all
of
you
an
email
to
collect
feedbacks
and
so
on
on
what
we
would
like
to
propose
to
the
CPC
of
the
topic
and
work
continued
on
what
continue
on
the.
B
A
I
think
the
only
other
thing
is
still
lots
of
discussion
around
the
code
of
conduct.
The
one
thing
that
there
had
been
a
lot
of
discussion
about
that
was
agreed
was
that
there
be
an
inline
copy
of
the
code
of
Covenant
instead
of
a
link,
and
then
we
didn't
get
to
it.
But
there's
still
the
discussion
of
like
is:
do
we
need
to
move
the
current
proposal
back
to
stage
one
or
can?
Is
it
that
the
content
there
is
okay,
but
that
we've
got
extensions
that
we
would
handle
separately?
A
A
And
I
think
you
know
the
the
other
thing
was
a
request
for
regular
updates
on
on
things
like
new
foundation,
members,
no
new
members
to
my
knowledge,
but
we
did
have
some
announcements
like
electron
and
so
forth.
It's
like
new
projects
joining
through
the
CPC,
okay,
so
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
else
there
to
cover.
So,
let's
move
on
to
the
issues
tagged
for
the
agenda.
The
first
one
is
no
js',
slash
node,
which
is,
and
it's
three
zero.
A
B
A
B
A
C
D
B
B
B
A
B
B
B
Don't
know
so
I'm
just
like
it
was
completely
unaware
of
all
of
this
and
it
was
only
ended
by
the
kumkum.
So
that's
my
only
my
only
general
concern.
If
most
people
are
okay
with
it,
please
add
GTM
it,
I'm
not
going
to
block
I'm.
Just
hey
this
is
happening.
You
might
not
know
this
is
happening.
So
if
anybody
objects
it's
here,
a
session
I.
D
Think
there's
a
valid
point
here
about
the
fact
that
it's,
the
first
external
javascript
dependency,
everything
else
we
can
load.
It
hasn't
been
straight
from
the
repo
I
mean
this
is
actually
falling
out
to
you
and
that
drunk
kid
that
pom.
D
A
D
D
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
raise
the
issues
that
we've
discussed
here
on
the
on
the
tracker
and
then
take
it
from
there.
I
don't
know
if
I'm
personally,
the
guy
I
was
in
the
original
discussions
for
whatever
it's
worth
back
in
like
I,
don't
know
this
was
luck
in
Berlin
last
year,
anything
or
so
years
ago.
Sorry
in
2018
and
yeah
I
just
am
not
sure
that
I'm
comfortable
at
this
point
blending
it
give
him
some
of
the
concerns
raised.
E
A
E
I
believe
there
are
three
main
points
well
why
we
could
be
concerned
actually,
for
one
of
them
is
koja
running
details
inside
our
region
from
third-party
solutions
that
they
can
track
all
users.
The
third
is
that
they
can
go
down.
This
will
break,
and
the
fourth
is
that
they're,
targeting
very
Direction
users
to
them.
I
think
that
third
and
fourth
are
not
significant,
like
looking
fixed
or
easier,
but
for
the
second
one
I'm,
not
sure,
and
about
the
first
one.
I
think
that
it
should
be
possible
to
prevent
this
from
happening.
E
And
say
here
they
might
be
raised
doing
that
if
they
are
worried
doing
that,
then
it
would
be
as
simple
as
just
taking
a
snapshot
of
the
integration
code
and
started
local
inside
a
folder
it
from
data
instead
of
holding
from
that
diamond.
But
if
they
don't
do
that,
then
you
will
need
somewhere
to
do
house
house.
E
E
A
A
A
A
B
A
C
B
B
Don't
know
if
we
can
delay
this,
but
in
fairness,
let
me
change
this
I
just.
B
D
A
F
A
D
F
D
I'll
see
if
I
can
get
him
to
go
through
it
yeah
you
know
there
was.
There
was
a
test
that
was
failing,
that
he
changed
that
I
missed
and
that's
that's
yeah
I
thought
we
didn't
have
a
test
case.
I
was
trying
to
write
a
test
case,
but
we
actually
had
a
test
case
that
he
just
thought
it
just
changed
it
because
it
was
failing.
Oh
yeah,
so
I
fixed
that
for
him
and
I
think
we're
good.
Now.
A
A
The
next
one
is
one
I
should
probably
just
have
unmarked
from
the
agenda,
but
it's
their
strategic
move
see
make
for
building
nodejs.
I
think
we've
mentioned
a
few
times
I
haven't
heard
any
objections
been
is
gonna,
be
starting
on
that,
so
next
step
is
well
actually
PR
it
into
the
strategic
initiative
list
and
I'm
just
gonna,
so
I
don't
forget
again,
take
it
off
the
agenda.
F
C
D
F
I
mean
this
is
specifically
a
thing
about
suppressing
experimental
warnings.
My
objection
is
that
you
really
shouldn't
we
have
these.
We
already
have
the
the
no
warnings
command
line
flag.
So
if
somebody
can
suppose
press
all
warnings,
if
they
really
wanted
to
make
it
basically
make
you
know
if
like
say
specifically,
we're
not
gonna,
show
two
terminal
warnings
and
me
I
think
that
that's
a
bit
of
a
bad
precedent.
So
we
have
these
things
in
there.
F
G
Because
you
precisely
don't
know
at
what
control
flow
the
warnings
can
appear,
whereas
for
experimental
features,
the
warnings
are
printed
right
in
the
beginning
in
a
conclusive
manner.
Every
time
you
run
the
application,
the
experiment
funniest
form,
so
the
idea
is
I
mean.
The
question
is
once
we
know
that
we
are
making
use
of
the
experimental
features.
G
Should
we
need
to
be
printing
it
every
time
which
seems
to
be
kind
of
a
disturbance
or,
and
we
provided
an
option
to
the
user
to
suppress
that
once
he
knows
that
he
is
using
on
a
calculated
decision,
but
as
he
still
want
to
run
with
the
warnings
enabled,
because
in
different
control
flow
based
on
the
work
workload
situations,
he
may
still
get
warnings
and
he
doesn't
know
what
all
areas
can
throw
up
mornings.
That's
my
my
take.
A
G
A
F
Well,
one
thing
that
I
have
considered
it
at
some
point:
yeah
we
have
the
ability
on
all
of
these
warnings
that
are
that
are
admitted
to
to
attach
an
identifier.
We
use
it
for
the
warnings,
for
instance
right
the
DEP,
whatever
I
would
not
be
opposed
if
we
had
a
mechanism
command
line
only
not
for
the
environment
burger.
F
If
we
wanted
to
disable
a
specific
warning
right,
not
not
a
category
but
a
specific
warning,
so
we
could
say
you
know
no
warning
equal
and
then
a
specific
identifier
or
list
of
identifiers
that
way
they
basically
have
to
be
switched
off.
You
know,
as
specifically
or
individually
not
by
category
I,
would
not
be
opposed
to
that,
and
as
long
as
all
of
these
you
know,
as
long
as
we've
had
a
identifier
on
every
morning
that
we
admit
right,
which
is
just
a
good
raucous.
Anyone,
then
then
I
would
not
be
opposed
to
that.
A
D
A
A
G
F
B
A
So
right,
but
I
guess
like
I,
could
understand
the
case
where
you
want
to
say
you
want
to
monitor
your
output
and
if
there's
a
warning
like,
if
you
see
a
warning,
do
something
like
you
know,
send
off
a
message
track
that
and
we
don't
want
to
prevent
people
from
you
know
being
proactive
in
that
way.
Simply
to
make
sure
they
see
these
other
ones
would
be
my
sort
of
counter.
A
A
So
I
think
we've
had
that
discussion.
The
next
one
is
no
js'
admin,
which
is
number
four
or
five
for
social
media
accounts.
Let
me
just
see
who
added
this
to
the
agenda?
Oh
I
guess
so
this
one
has
been
on
there
right,
so
I,
Tierney
added
it
there's
some
discussion
about
the
project
being
more
involved
in
managing
the
social
media
accounts.
There's
some
discussion
and
suggestions
there,
I
don't
know
if
people
have
had
time
to
review
and
and
have
comments,
discussions
that
we
want
to
have
live
here.
A
D
A
F
We
definitely
need
to
make
sure
it's
being
watched
that
there's
some
active
monitoring
of.
What's
going,
you
know
what
sweets
are
going
out,
not
just
for
content.
Just
you
know
not
just
for
moderation,
type
content
issues,
but
just
in
terms
of
just
overall
messaging
right
make
sure
making
sure
that
the
the
the
overall
tone
and
message
of
the
of
the
account
is
and
reflects
the
product,
but
really
but
I
think
a
basic
idea
of
having
a
team
that
follows
the
same
basic
guidelines
is
the
moderation
team,
where
it's
an
annual
and
an
annual
renewal.
F
I
just
think
that
maybe
the
the
nomination
right,
Iria
I,
need
to
be
a
bit
more
stringent
right,
I
like
what
the
moderation
team
we
someone
can
stop
to
nominate
right
and
as
long
as
there's
no
objections,
I've
been
celibate
they're
in
I.
Think
with
this,
we'll
probably
want
more
of
a
explicit
approval
process
right.
So
no
implicit
approval.