►
From YouTube: 2021-06-10-Node.js Technical Steering Committee meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
No
announcements
this
week,
I
guess
the
on
to
the
cpc
and
board
meeting
updates
in
terms
of
board
meeting
update.
I
don't
have
anything
in
particular.
There
is
a
board
meeting,
I
think
in
two
weeks,
but
I
don't
have
anything
necessarily
that's
on
the
agenda
to
bring
up
there.
A
So
if
there
is
something
let
me
know,
I
don't
know
on
the
cpc
front,
I
don't
think
there's
anything
you
know
of
note
to
to
call
out
other
than
you
know
the
regular
things
that
are
going
on,
and
you
know
anybody
here
if
you're
interested.
Definitely
it's
always
open
for
people
to
go
to
go
and
get
to
get
involved.
A
I
guess
maybe
the
one
thing
worth
mentioning
on
that
front
is
rich.
We
did
land
the
the
governance
change,
which
required
cpc
approval
right
so
that
took
place
and
got
landed.
A
I'm
just
opening
that
up
to
see
matteo
added
to
the
tsc
agenda.
He
says
I
think
the
key
questions
to
answer
is
what
we
have.
What
would
is
what
would
add
to
have?
What
would
it
would?
What
would
it
add
to
have
this
in
core
many
things?
Core
is
harder
than
maintaining
the
ecosystem.
It
adds
a
burden
to
a
limited
set
of
folks.
A
And
then
there's
some
continued
discussion
and
reference
to
the
mime
type.
Us
we
don't
have
mateo
today
for
context.
Does
anybody
else
have
any
sort
of
context,
thoughts
on
these
this
one.
B
C
So
I
guess
like
just
one
thing
I
would
say
looking
at
this
really
closely
really
quickly.
I
think
there's
maybe
two
different
things
to
to
look
at
here,
which
I
think
are
worth
poking
at.
One
is
like
the
higher
level
feature,
which
seems
to
be
like
html
form,
data
handling,
which
my
gut
is
maybe
a
little
bit
too
high
level,
there's
already
a
lot
of
great
form,
validating
options
like
multi-part
and
like
like.
C
C
So
I
think
that
you
know
this
does
re-raise
the
conversation
about
potentially
wanting
to
do
more
to
explore
that
my
module
that
I
know
brad
has
been
pushing
for
us
to
try
to
have
for
a
while
and
other
platforms,
such
as
python,
for
example,
do
have
you
know
like
mime
databases
that
they
ship
with
that
are
consistent.
B
So
that
you
don't
said
nobody
has
to
repeat
it
next
week
yeah
and
I'm
impressed
that
you
didn't
mention
fetch.
You
know
you
can
work
that
in
anywhere.
A
But
you
just
did
for
him
anyway,
okay,
so
so
should
any
more
any
other
comments.
Discussion
on
that
one
before
we
move
on.
B
A
B
B
A
B
Rudy,
in
particular,
wanted
wanted
a
positive
statement
that,
yes,
we
can
use
this
bot,
and
so
right
and-
and
I
you
know
so
so
I
suggested
in
the
that
we
just
mentioned
in
a
meeting-
ask
if
anyone
has
any
thoughts
or
objections
and
then
document
the
minutes
and
be
done
with
it.
C
C
C
So,
like
the
scenario
that
I
want
to
outline
here,
and
maybe
I'll
actually
make
a
proposal,
but
it's
like
when
we
update
depths
in
node
core
other
than
v8,
where
we
float
patches,
sometimes
or
open
ssl
like
for
the
most
part
like
we're
kind
of
taking
things
off
the
shelf
as
we're
getting
them
from
from
upstream
and
not
making
too
many
changes
for
it
and
with
the
case
of
npm
and
I'll
admit
my
bias
that
I'm
part
of
this
team.
C
But
it's
like
we're
now
in
a
point
where
we
have
a
bot
that
automates
the
pull
request
to
update
the
the
code.
That's
vendored
into
node
core,
based
on
like
an
artifact,
that's
published,
that's
not
going
to
change
and
we're
even
talking
about
using
an
action
to
automatically
add
the
fast
track
label
to
it.
C
We
have
more
than
two
collaborators
that
are
on
the
npn
team
that
are
immediately
going
to
go
in
and
thumbs
up
the
fast
track
and
then
approve
the
pr
so
that
we
can
actually
land
it
in
a
timely
fashion,
and
it
just
really
starts
to
feel
like
we're
kind
of
gaming
the
process.
So
we
can
actually
check
the
boxes
off
because,
like
I'm
not
going
to
do
this,
but
I
could
write
a
bot
that
looks
for
every
time
that
there's
an
npm
pr
and
automatically
thumb
up
the
the
fast
track
and
automatically
lgtm
it.
C
Because,
like
that's
about
the
level
of
like
approval
that
we
need
to
do
on
these
things-
and
it
really
just
feels
like
the
process-
that's
in
place-
is
introducing
unnecessary
friction
and
we're
kind
of
jumping
through
hoops
just
to
kind
of
check
the
boxes
and
I'd
like
to.
C
If
people
are
not
like
immediately
gonna
minus
one,
it
right
now
revisit
the
process
and
policy
that
we
have
around
prs
that
are
related
to
dependencies,
because
it
does
feel
a
little
bit
unnecessary
to
have
all
of
these
steps,
if,
like
everything,
is
in
place
to
kind
of
more
or
less
automate
it.
If
we
wanted
to.
B
A
C
B
D
Anyway,
I
think
that
sounds
good.
I
I
find
that
when
I'm,
when
I
am
making
releases,
there's
always
like
hey,
can
we
get
this
last
npm
changing?
Can
we
get
this
next
one
in,
and
so
I
think
anything
to
help
them
automate.
That
process
is
this
is
danielle
speaking
by
the
way
I
didn't
turn
my
camera
on
anything
to
help
them
automate
that
process
just
to
create
a
little
less
friction,
I'm
plus
one
on
yeah.
I
think
that's
my
thoughts
on
it.
A
Okay,
so
maybe
we
should
move
back
to
the
the
this
particular
one.
Just
you
know
want
to
note
in
the
minutes
that
people
have
taken
a
look
at
that
and
nobody
has
any
objections
to
automating
the
npm
updates
with
a
bot.
C
A
Okay,
good
so
moving
on
to
the
next
one.
The
next
one
is
the
future
of
the
node
http
client
38533.
A
A
One
because
I
think
you
know
robert
had
had
you
know,
given
the
overview
that
they
were
hoping
for.
You
know
some
some
references
in
the
docs
I
think
to
start
with
to
indici
in
terms
of
like
hey
here's,
what
people
are
working
on.
It's
it's.
You
know
what
we're
that
group
is
looking
to
is
the
future,
and
so
it's
you
know
if
you
can
try
that
out,
help
help
refine
it
so
that
it
can
become
sort
of
the
next
gen.
A
That
would
be
good,
and
I
think
we
had
agreement
on
that.
So
I
don't
know
that
there's
anything
more
on
this,
so
I
don't
see
anything
recent
in
the
issue.
Unless
anybody
has
any
insight
there.
A
A
E
A
F
I
don't
think
I
added
it
to
the
agenda,
but
I
probably
have
contacts
on
it.
I
guess
we
need
to
open.
A
I'm
sorry,
you
opened
the
issue
so
maybe.
F
So
the
issues
just
a
running
issue
too
for
folks
to
share
feedback
or
issues
related
to
the
document
wheel
for
context.
The
committee
crew
has
not
been
working
for
a
few
months
because
there
is
a
token
problem.
Github
talking
problem
and.
F
A
F
F
A
So
I
think
you
know
the
you
know
the
couple
the
for
the
specific
reason
it
was
added
to
the
agenda,
it's
kind
of
like
as
a
group
here.
What
do
we
think
you
know?
I
I'm
I
I'd
agree
with
mary.
We
can
give
it
more
time
in
terms
of
saying
well,
let's,
let's
leave
it,
let's
not
do
it
until
some
more
time
goes
by
what
other
people
think.
F
F
F
B
Hey
I'm
fine
with
leaving
it
and
I'm
fine
with
removing
it
I've.
No,
no,
no
objection
other
approach.
I
totally
trust
you
and
enjoy
other
people
to
figure
this
out
and
I
will
happily
get
involved
if
my
if
needed,
but
I
don't
think
I
have
any
any
insight
or
knowledge
to
add
here.
So
I'm
just
like
trust.
You
folks.
A
A
A
A
Okay,
well,
then,
we'll
just
move
on
to
the
next
issue,
which
is
rename
default
branch
from
master
domain
or
something
similar
that
one
I've
just
been
sort
of
poking
along
on
a
number
of
them,
a
number
of
the
easier
ones.
Just
posting
issues,
basically
saying
hey.
Do
you
mind
if
we
rename
don't
think
there's
going
to
be
too
much
of
an
issue,
so
we'll
pretty
soon
be
down
to
the
ones
that
are
more
going
to
require
more
work?
A
A
E
Yeah,
so
I
posted
something
that
we
did
not
really
find
an
actual
use
case
so
far.
Why
we
do
this
while
it
has
a
couple
of
downsides
that
are
obvious,
such
as
performance
penalties
and
that
are
non-obvious
and
much
more
complicated
code
that
is
more
difficult
to
read.
That
might
also
prevent
other
people
from
partially
contributing
and
before
we
do
have
a
clear
reason
to
do
this.
Besides
making
the
rappel
work
with
any
code,
I
personally
would
like
to
stop
porting
more
code
to
primordials
and
I'm.
E
I
would
suggest
to
continue
the
discussion
in
the
issue
as
long
as
at
least
for
like
let's
say
one
or
two
weeks
more,
and
then
we
could
put
it
back
on
the
agenda
to
see
how
far
it
went.
B
That
sounds
good
to
me.
I
I
think
this
is
probably
something
that
eventually
tsc
is
gonna
have
to
engage
with.
You
know,
but
yeah
there's,
there's
no
rush.
E
Yeah
pretty
much,
I
personally
would
suggest
that
I,
in
fact
I
did
block
one
pr
today.
B
B
D
A
A
A
A
Okay,
any
more
discussion
that
we
should
have
this
week
on
that
one
then.
A
A
F
No,
I
don't
have
any
updates
on
that.
One.