►
Description
To learn more about critical open source JavaScript projects like Appium, Dojo, jQuery, Node.js, and webpack, and 27 more checkout The OpenJS Foundation: https://openjsf.org/
A
That's
great
all
right,
I
believe
that
we
are
live
says
it's
setting
up
our
webinar
thanks
everyone
for
joining
another
episode.
Great
there.
We
go
of
the
open,
JS
foundations
cross
project
council
meeting
today
is
the
8th
of
November
and
I'll
drop
the
recording
link
into
the
notes,
Here,
and
we
can
get
started
any
announcements.
B
Well,
just
the
team,
the
openjs
team
Luke
sitting
next
to
me,
Kylie's
across
the
table.
We
are
in
Tahoe
California
for
the
Linux
Foundation
member
Summit.
So
it's
essentially
anyone
who's.
A
Linux
Foundation
member
sends
Representatives
as
well
as
board
members,
so
a
good
opportunity
for
us
to
learn
what's
happening
across
the
LF
organization.
A
That's
great
cool
yep,
so
if
we
anything
from
the
board
or
anything
else,
we
want
to
share
before
we
get
into
the
agenda
anything
else
to
talk
about.
B
We
yeah,
we
had
our
board
meeting
yesterday
we
and
an
audit
and
finance
committee
meeting.
We
still
have
a
little
bit
of
noodling
to
do
before.
We
approve
our
2023
budget,
but
everything
seems
to
be
going
on
track.
It's
a
lot
of
work,
kind
of
pulling
those
things
together
and
just
sort
of
doing
a
true
up
from
how
much
we
you
know
track
from
last
year.
So
we'll
probably
vote
on
that
in
our
December
2nd
board
meeting
I'm
just
making
a
few
kind
of
adjustments
here
and
there.
C
A
Cool
Toby,
you
added
this
at
the
top
of
the
list,
so
you
wanna,
should
we
start
with
talking
about
issue
labels
and
creating
a
dedicated
project.
D
Yeah
sure
so
this
is
just
a
proposal
and
they
sort
of
like
built
a
bit
of
it
to
so
we
could
have
a
better
feel
of
what
it
looked
like,
essentially
I'm,
struggling
to
figure
out
like
what
we
have
to
what's
on
our
plate.
That's
like
the
number
one
problem
and
the
number
two
problem
is
that
we're
like
we
have
sort
of
like
these
issues
that
keep
showing
up
and
that
we
keep
discussing
on
a
regular
basis.
D
Although
we
sort
of
have
an
agreement
on
what
the
conclusion
is,
the
conclusion
just
needs
to
be
done,
but
we
sort
of
like
have
the
whole
conversation
over
and
over
every.
You
know,
sort
of
like
six
weeks
or
something,
and
you
know,
and
sometimes
every
other
week
yeah.
So
essentially
the
idea
was
well
twofold:
one
was:
can
we
create
a
CPC
meeting
label
for
all
of
the
open
meetings
that
we
have
that
haven't
been
closed
yet
so
we
can
filter
them
out
really
easily.
D
So
I
did
that
which
is
really
nice,
because
you
can
literally
like
just
see
all
of
the
other
issues
right
that
we
actually
have
to
work
on
and
then
once
I
got
to
see
the
other
issues.
D
It's
like
the
batch
is
a
lot
smaller
right
and
there's
like
a
number
of
them,
which
essentially,
as
I,
was
saying,
have
a
decision
to
have
been
made
or
like
waiting
on
either
the
board
or
or
the
staff,
or
to
do
something
right
and
once
we
have
those
listed,
it
gets
much
clearer
to
understand
exactly
what
we
need
to
be
working
on,
and
so
the
idea
was,
let's
clean
things
up
a
bit
and
have
a
better
sense
of
that
and
following
that
sort
of
like,
if
folks
have
a
look
at
this,
and
it
makes
sense-
and
they
were
happy
with
it-
and
you
know-
I
mean
this-
is
a
proposal
right
following
that,
the
idea
would
be.
D
Can
we
create
a
project?
I
haven't
used
a
new
GitHub
project
sort
of
whiteboards.
The
old
one
was
good
enough
to
actually
like
have
a
better
sense
of
what
what
work
was
getting
done.
So
I
haven't
tried
the
new
one,
but
would
folks
be
okay,
creating
a
new
one,
so
we
can
have
a
better
sense
of
like
whether
projects
and
pull
requests
like
what
kind
of
stuff
we
have
and
have
a
better
view
of
like
our
work.
Essentially,
that's
the
idea.
A
Yeah
I,
don't
I,
don't
have
any
objections.
Other
than
is
it
will
managing
the
board,
be
creating
more
work.
A
D
E
E
D
D
Yeah,
it's
just
like
the
fourth
or
fifth,
this
project.
A
D
It's
essentially
a
kanban
board
that
combines
all
of
your
issues
and
all
the
requests
of
the
pull
requests,
either
across
a
project
to
a
whole
organization
and-
and
it's
just
very
practical,
to
have
just
a
better
view
of
like
work.
That
actually
needs
to
be
done
and
if
people
hate
it
like,
if
people
are
cool
with
me
trying
that
out-
and
we
could
have
a
look
at
it
in
two
weeks
and
if
everyone
hates
it,
we
can
just
delete
it.
I'm.
A
A
Yeah
on
that
note,
too
I
I
started
to
clean
up
some
of
the
meeting
issues,
but
I
still
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do
there.
So
I'm
gonna
try
to
get
those
done
soon,
that'll
at
least
clear
out
a
bunch
of
the
noise.
That's
in
the
repo,
so
yeah.
So.
B
A
All
right
cool
well,
keep
us
posted
and
let
me
know
how
I
can
help
awesome
great.
So
that's
all
good
stuff.
Moving
on
to
the
agenda
items
here,
the
first
issue
is
953.
This
is
funding
for
project
driven
initiatives,
I'm,
not
sure
where
we
are
with
this
and
what's
been
determined
I
know,
we've
had
some
good
conversations,
but
does
anybody
have
anything.
B
Yeah
Mateo
and
Sarah
brought
this
to
the
board
meeting
yesterday.
Mateo
could
make
the
board
meeting
because
it
was
late
in
the
afternoon,
so
time
zone
didn't
work,
but
we
had
a
prep
call
with
him.
B
I
we
took
a
bunch
of
notes.
I
think
the
bottom
line
is
the
board
is
open
and
again
we're
still
working
out
the
budget,
but
I'm
going
to
sort
of
summarize
some
of
that
feedback
share
some
of
that
feedback
with
Mateo
again
and
then
we'll
update
the
issue.
B
Right
cool
great
I
took
the
action
to
yeah
to
summarize
update
and
then
to
concisely,
write
that
up
and
the
issue
for
y'all.
Oh.
A
Cool
and
thanks
to
whoever's,
helping
take
notes,
I
appreciate
that
one
one
thing
I
might
add.
G
Just
as
a
not
not
directly
related
but
semi-related
as
I
I
did
submit,
LFX
crowdfunding
account
for
node.js
for
collecting
the
bug
bounties,
which
was
another
thing
we
kind
of
discussed
in
this
context,
so
I'm
just
waiting
for
that
to
be
approved
just
as
a
related
item.
Okay,.
A
Great
is
that
something
that
allows
someone,
LF
staff
approves
Robin
I'm
guessing.
B
G
I'd
opened
a
ticket
now
I
actually
did
the
application,
and
my
ticket
I
was
asking
about
like.
Can
we
actually
have
an
organization
versus
just
an
individuals,
and
the
answer
is
you
can
only
have
individual
Linux
Foundation
accounts,
so
I
created
one
for
the
TSC
named
like
LFX
I
forget
what
I
called
it,
but
like
a
specific
one
for
this
crowdfunding
accounts
and
if
we
moved
if
we
use
the
same
kind
of
model
for
this
project,
driven
funding,
which
I
think
is
what
we
talked
about.
G
B
Yeah,
my
understanding
with
LFX
funding
accounts.
You
need
to
have
an
a
known
person
who
is
not
an
LF
employee,
be
the
approver
on
things.
I'll
I'll
mention
it
to
the
team
here
this
week
at
our
LF
event,
just
to
see
if
we
can
have
just
a
TSC
I,
just
don't
want
to
get
it
bounced
back
and
then
have
it.
G
G
The
perk
that
confused
me
is
like
it
only
seemed
like
you
know.
Basically,
there
it
didn't
sound
like
there
was
any
going
to
be
any
org
associated
with
any
accounts
like
it
seemed
like
there
was
one
LFX
account
to
Saudi
associated
with
the
crowdfunding
account,
and
they
might
have
to
do
everything.
I
I,
don't
know
but
like
which,
which
sounds
a
little
bit
different
from
what
you're
saying.
If
it's
like
somebody
could
create
the
account,
but
then
somebody
else
is
approving
them.
I,
don't
know.
Maybe
once.
B
G
C
A
Great
I
will
move
on
if
there's
something
more
on
this
one.
The
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
issue
923.
This
is
clarified
voting
process.
A
This
is
a
placeholder
issue
to
drop
things
in,
for
you
know
our
voting
and
election
areas
of
improvement,
I
guess
I'll,
say
I
don't
know.
Do
we
want
to
keep
this
on
the
agenda?
Do
we
want
to
just
try
to
have
a
working
session
where
we
kind
of
work
through
some
of
these
things?
What
what?
What
were
people's
thoughts
about
this
issue.
C
B
D
Yeah
I
mean,
if
I
remember
well
now
it
might
be
confusing.
This
issue
was
another
one,
but
I
think
part
of
it
was
clarifying
the
process,
but
another
part
of
it
was
also
making
sure
that
we
had
a
better
sense
of
a
better
time.
D
B
B
Because
if
you
look,
we
actually
we
don't
vote
very
often,
but
when
we
do,
we
have
only
we
have
very
few
voting
reps.
So.
D
Oh
yeah,
no
sure
absolutely
no
I
mean
I
was
talking
about
elections,
not
like
Plus
winning
people.
Yeah
I
feel
like
we
have
lots
of
Elections
compared
to
the
importance
of
the
roles.
H
Was
going
to
say
the
same
thing
that
officially
we
vote
very
rarely
we
do
have
votes
like
sort
of.
We
do
have
I
think
quite
a
few
processes
where
we
do
see
consensus
in
various
ways,
but
I
would
I'd
be
happy
for
us
to
to
effectively
enlarge
in
the
the
representation
pool
effectively,
possibly
get
rid
of
the
elections
that
we've
been
running.
A
H
And
then
sorry
I
was
thinking
of
the
at
large
project,
representative
elections
and
the
regular
member
representative
elections.
D
And
probably
the
board
seats
too
I
assume.
C
D
A
D
I
just
want
to
clarify
one
thing,
which
is
that
when
I
titled
that
issue
clarified
a
voting
process,
I
should
have
written
clarified
the
election
process,
not
the
voting
process,
because
yeah
everything
else
is
consensus,
driven
and
so,
like.
There's
no
point
in
clarifying
that,
like
we
have
agreement
about
this
and
clarify,
was
also
probably
not
a
very
well
chosen
word
right,
and
so
the
idea
really
was
that
I
mean
when
I
opened
this
issue.
The
idea
was
two
things
one
was
it
felt
like.
D
C
D
Yes,
so
do
I
right.
So
anyway,
there
were
yeah.
D
There
were
two
things:
one
was
we
were
spending
lots
of
time,
actually
talking
about
setting
up
elections
and
then
voting
and
then
like
having
issues
with
how
the
votes
have
been
done
and
redoing
them
and
choosing
what
kind
of
voting
process
we
were
supposed
to
use
and
it
felt
like
for
most
of
these
roles
either
there
were
not
enough
candidates
for
it
to
make
sense
or-
and
that
wasn't
my
point
for
the
board-
and
this
is
what
I
do
for
the
advisory
committee
at
amp.
D
By
the
way,
it
would
make
more
sense
to
make
decisions
about
who
to
elect
on
a
consensus
basis
with
at
this
a
defined
purpose
in
doing
so
in
my
opinion
than
electing
people,
so
that
was
that
was
the
position
and
I
know
that's
a
strong
position
and
not
everyone's
going
to
agree
with
this
right,
but
that
was
that
was
my
position
on
this
topic.
D
So
yeah
I
do
think
that
unless
there's
like
a
legal
obligation
to
like
elect
for
the
CPC
to
elect
the
board
seat,
that
the
CPC
should
do
that
from
a
was
a
strategy
in
mind
like
what
are
we
trying
to
achieve?
Why
do
we
want
folks
on
the
board?
D
A
Well,
I
think
I
think
both
can
happen
right.
We
can
figure
out
a
strategy
and
goals
and
whatnot,
but
still
have
an
election.
So
I
think
that
that's
valid
I
would
ask,
maybe
because
I
think
the
issue
as
it
stands
is
not
bad
for
dropping
things
like.
Oh,
we
should
fix
this
for
the
election
or
this
process
or
whatever
so
I.
A
Think
that
that
issue
maybe
can
stand
as
it
is,
but
I
wonder
if
you
want
to
create
an
issue
or
two
for
the
two
other
things
that
you're
talking
about
I
mean
I,
think
you
know
it's
a
good
question.
Should
we
have
a
regular
member
voting
members
and
at
large
voting
members?
Should
they
be
the
same?
You
know
person
or
two
people
or
whatever
you
know,
I'm
open
to
kind
of
simplifying
some
of
that
structure.
A
You
know
we
sort
of
over
complicate
a
little
bit
at
the
outset
to
to
cover
our
bases
so
and
and
I'll
also
say
Luke
if
you
want
to
get
together
and
like
look
at
election
process
and
how
things
are
set
up.
I
think
there
are
some
things
in
this
issue
and
I
think
there
are
other
improvements
that
we
could
make.
We
we
made
some
decisions
based
on
some
things
that
now
don't
really
make
as
much
sense.
A
So
we
can
kind
of
make
things
better.
I
think
sounds
good,
I'll
book
some
time
that
we
can
do
that
cool
that'd,
be
great,
all
right
and
Toby.
If
you,
if
you,
if
you're
into
it,
drop
a
couple
other
issues
of
there
I
think
that's
at
least
worth
discussing
and
seeing
what
we
figure
out.
A
A
A
Cool,
oh
this
one,
my
favorite
next
on
the
agenda
is
issue
910.
This
is
the
patching
script
for
the
code
of
conduct.
Updates
I
see
some
recent
comments.
Does
anybody
want
to
update
me
or
the
group
on
these
recent
things
here.
D
So
Ben
asked
about
what
the
status
of
this
stuff
was,
because
he's
essentially
blocked
by
like
this
thing
and
I
think
and
suggested,
which
I
think
you
know
is,
is
a
is
a
good
suggestion
which
is
on
the
code
of
conduct,
like
the
Upstream
version,
doesn't
get
updated
that
often
and
doesn't
make
sense
to
set
up
a
whole
infrastructure
to
deal
with
this.
D
If
you
know
it's
to
update
that,
this
could
have
conduct
a
really
like
a
regular
basis
and
that
we're
blocking
everything
on
the
fact
that
no
one's
actually
doing
the
engineering
work
to
make
that
work.
So
I
think
that's
a
valid
point.
A
C
Samuel
I
think
last
working
session
I
was
in
with
Tierney
I
think
we
did
a
little
bit
of
engineering
work.
That
doesn't
mean
that
you
know
it's
infrequency
means
that
we
need
to
finish
that
engineering
work
but
I
think
some
progress.
A
Yeah,
it's
true
and
that's
on
my
plate
to
finish
that
up
attorney
handed
it
off
to
me
to
finish
putting
it
in
place
with
the
actions
and
stuff
Sarah.
E
Just
even
listening
to
this
just
throwing
it
out
there
I
wonder
if
Engineering
Group
working
sessions
would
be
nice
to
everyone
to
get
that
work.
Done
too,
though,
I
recognize
that
I
didn't
come
to
the
last
working
group
session,
where
we
were
all
getting
things
done
so
I'm.
Just
learning
about
that.
D
A
C
A
Yes,
build
stronger
ties
between
at
large
maintainers
and
their
CPC
rep
is
what's
listed
currently.
D
D
A
And
I'll
just
add
before
I
pass
it
to
Emily
that
if
we
were
to
do
that
sort
of
a
working
session,
I
would
try
to
do
that
that
patching
script
stuff.
While
we
were
kind
of
talking
about
stuff
and
get
stuff
done,
Emily.
H
That
sounds
like
a
better
idea
than
what's
currently
on
board
booked,
but
but
I
mean
on
that
topic.
I
would
be
very
happy
about
effectively
talking.
H
Have
you
discussed
about
listen
to
mediating
me
from
my
role
that
I've
had
I
think
currently
do
as
a
at
large
project
representative
by
effectively
doing
kind
of
like
what
Toby
suggested
and
and
getting
rid
of
this
role
by
making
all
at
large
projects
have
a
voting
representative,
because
I
think
we
can
trust
on
the
sort
of
interest
level
in
actual
participation
here
being
sufficiently
low,
that
this
would
not
actually
block
anything.
A
H
Yeah
I
have
a
conversation
about,
does
that
make
sense
and,
and
what
are
the
risks
rewards
and
other
concerns
around
that
that
you
know
I,
don't
think
we've
ever
talked
about,
because
I'm
not
sure
if
this
has
been
raised,
at
least
while
the
foundation
has
been
beyond
its
bootstrapping,
because
in
the
bootstrapping
I
presume,
it
was
figured
out
that
the
current
structure
made
sense,
but
I
think
it
would
be
a
good
time
to
to
have
a
conversation
about.
D
So
we
we
just
decided
not
to
have
this
conversation
next
week,
because
it's
not
worth
it
and
now
we're
not
going
to
have
it
today.
I
mean
that
doesn't
make
sense.
Does
it
it's
an
important
conversation
but
like
no.
D
It
I
mean
this
is
half.
This
is
an
issue,
but
governance
in
general,
I
mean
I
mean
like
the
two
issues,
I'm
actually
in
Pratt
and
and
about
to
open
now
touch
on
this
topic
too.
Essentially,
so,
let's
like
widen
this
a
little
bit
and
have
a
conversation
about
reorganizing,
like
the
the
governance
of
the
small
projects
in
the
CPC
and
in
the
board,
and
seeing
how
that
goes.
C
C
D
To
clarify,
like
the
write,
the
issue
title
before
I
actually
do.
G
Michael
I
I,
just
I
I,
guess
I,
don't
want
to
get
into
the
details
of
this,
but
the
you
know
the
question
of
like
having
additional
voting
members.
It's
like
do.
We
don't
have
an
anybody
from
any
of
those
projects
could
already
show
up
and
be
very
active
in
the
CPC,
so
I'm
just
wondering.
If,
like
is
it
going
to
make
any
difference
to
say
you
can
have
a
voting
member
versus
you
can
just
show
up
and
participate
and
has
been
mentioned.
We
don't
vote
on
that
many
things.
A
Okay,
so
in
terms
of
next
week's
working
session,
should
we
have
sort
of
a
general
working
session
or
should
we,
you
know,
review
governance?
What
are
people's
thoughts.
H
I
would
say
that
if
there's
a
hope
of
getting
the
COC
or
other
stuff
unblocked,
then
that
would
be
really
good
because
that's
been
on
us
for
ages
and
doing
something
else
kind
of
feels
like.
Let's
do
this
other
thing
because
that's
new
and
sexy,
rather
than
this
thing,
we
really
ought
to
get
done
all.
B
A
A
Is
so
director
one
is
February
28th
the
primary
director
and
then
the
CPC
chair
is
April
30th
director
two
is
July
31st,
see
I
told
you
all
the
time.
D
A
Me
be
clear:
we
have
three
elections
three
election
times,
we
have
the
CPC
chair,
we
have
the
primary
board
director
and
then
we
have
a
few
at
one
time.
It's
all
in
this
dating
dates
and
reminders.
Doc.
A
But
that
happens
at
the
same
time
as
the
other
things
now,
I
lost
my
page.
Where
does
it
go
here?
It
is
so
the
secondary
director,
as
long
as
well
as
the
CPC
impact
voting
member
selection
and
the
CPC
non-impact
voting
member
election.
All
three
of
those
happened
on
July
31st,
their
terms,
end
July,
31st,.
D
A
That
seems
fair,
but
I'm
happy
to
have
that
conversation
sooner
than
later
too
so
so
I'm
go
I
I,
let's
push
off
I
mean
the
building's
stronger
ties
between
at
large
maintainers
and
the
CPC
rep.
That
might
even
be
moot
if
we're
kind
of
you
know,
moving
away
from
that,
but
I'm
I'm
getting
the
impression
that
next
week
we'll
do
a
working
session
and
then
the
week
after
that,
we'll
you
know
potentially
look
at
governance
and
you
know
or
or
bump
it.
If
we
find
something
else
more
important.
A
All
right,
I'm
gonna,
get
rid
of
this
one.
Sorry
I'm
going
to
do
this
real
quickly,
so
it's
so
it's
done
so
next
week
is
working
session
and
then
review
governance.
A
All
right,
great,
so
I'm
updating
that
cool
anything
else
before
I
move
on
Michael.
You
still
get
your
hand
up.
A
I'm
gonna
move
on
next
up
is
open,
JS,
World,
2023
planning.
This
is
issue
908..
Anything
we
want
to
talk
about
here.
B
A
Are
convening
our
openjs
program
committee,
this
Thursday
to
finalize
the
proposal
for
openjs
World
2023
at
the
Linux
Foundation
open
source,
Summit,
North
America.
E
C
B
C
B
Concepts
now
there's
a
micro
conference
which
is
under
the
same
the
same
day
as
the
open
source
Summit
or
there's
co-located
Summits,
which
are
the
day
before
the
day
after
we're
not
going
to
do
the
Colo
we're
going
to
do
the
micro
conference.
A
Okay,
great
I
closed
the
issue.
With
that
comments,
excellent
moving
on
update
contributor.
C
H
B
B
G
I
think
what
was
mentioned
is
we
can
do
both
of
them.
Yes,.
B
We
can
do
both,
yes,
so
yeah,
so
we
should
update
that
is
in
the
fall.
I
think
I
had
mentioned
offline
or
off
camera
off
YouTube
last
week,
where
it
was
going
to
be
held.
If
you
can
remember,
but
it's
not
been
publicly
bless,
you
not
been
publicly
listed
yet.
E
C
B
C
A
All
right,
great
so
moving
on
pull
request,
851
the
contributor
Covenant
code
of
conduct.
We
kind
of
talked
about
this
earlier
we're
going
to
try
to
move
forward
on
this
next
week
or
or
even
before
then
try
to
get
progress
on
this.
So
it's
unblocked
last
couple
of
issues
here
license
check,
support,
tooling.
This
is
issue
815
I
think
we've
got
a
waiting
on
staff,
update
label,
Thank,
You,
Toby
and
then
I
don't
know
if
this
is
I.
B
A
Thank
you.
Moving
along
next
up
is
clarify
requirements
around
COC
code
of
conduct
violation.
A
This
has
been
around
for
over
a
year.
Where
are
we
at
on?
This?
Is
this
Toby?
Is
this
on
your
plate?
Looking
for
what.
D
The
last
thing
it
is
I
do
have
a
question,
though.
Okay,
we
had
a
session
on
COC
about
a
week
ago,
I
think
and
I'm
not
sure
if
we
still
want
to
make
the
changes
that
were
planned
now
or
do
we
wait
on
whatever
conversations
we're
having
now
to
batch
all
those
changes
together.
D
So
I'll
follow
up
on
that
and
then
we
can
take
whatever
we
did
last
time.
Yes,
okay
makes
sense.
Good
yeah.
B
A
A
Okay,
great,
thank
you
great
last.
One
on
the
agenda
here
is
issue.
664
code
of
conduct
missing
for
a
number
of
projects
in
the
projects
table
in
the
readme.
Oh
wow,
so
did
somebody
add
this
Toby
out
of
this
a
week
ago
and
I
agree
I'm
glad
that
you
did
so.
We
should
be
updating
that
table.
That's
in
the
readme
pulling
this
up
here.
A
Yeah
a
lot
of
them
have
it,
but
not
all
of
them,
so
we
should
we
should.
It
would
be
good
to
have
those
in
there.
I
agree.
C
D
That
we
already
have
a
list
in
the
COC
itself,
of
which
project
has
their
own
process.
D
And
so
I'm
not
exactly
sure
what
we
want
to
do
with
this
I
mean
the
the
whole
idea
is
that
we
have
one
coc
for
the
whole
organization
anyway.
So
what
are
we
TR
I
mean?
Are
we
tracking
that
the
projects
have
or
like
pointing
to
the
COC,
using
that,
like
I'm
I'm
confused
as
to
why
we
have
sort
of
like
two
sources
of
Truth?
D
A
A
Is
it?
Is
it
required.
H
The
CLC
often
includes
details,
right,
reporting,
Pathways
and
so
on,
and
those
are
possibly
maybe
projects
first
and
then
only
later
escalated
to
the
CPC
level
or
Foundation
level.
D
Well,
I
know
because
the
main
COC
that
we
have
actually
lists
for
every
project,
whether
they
have
to
call
you
know,
like
the
specific
you
know,
email
for
that
project
or
if
it's
a
foundation,
one
I.
D
Minute
so
so
I
mean
like
what
I
think
is
bad
is
if
we
start
to
have
like
a
whole
bunch
of
different
ways
to
report
an
issue
and
that
they're
not
synchronized
and
they're
inconsistent,
because
that's
like
the
worth
possible
outcome
right.
It's
like
you,
email
focuses
the
wrong
email
like
nothing
happens
like
three
days.
A
I
I
I
would
welcome
being
forced
to
do
the
right
thing.
You
know
not
I
mean
you
know.
We've
had
a
lot
of
discussions
and
node,
particularly
but
I'm
sure
other
projects
as
well
about
what
should
you
know?
What
should
the
reporting
mechanism
be?
What's
the
code
of
Economics,
you
know,
and,
and
you
know
those
are
important
discussions
to
have,
but
it
would
be
wonderful
if
the
foundation
had
requirements
that
just
made
it
easy
to
do
the
right
thing,
because
you
just
do
what
the
foundation
instructs.
H
A
D
Yeah
no
I
think
simplifying
is
good.
D
I
think
that
what
we
had
in
place
and
and
projects
was
a
redirect
so
like
at
some
point
to
have
a
code
of
conduct
in
the
right
place,
but
just
it
just
it
just
points
to
the
main
one
and
my
understanding
is
like
we
have
like
agreement.
That's
that
that's
how
it's
supposed
to
be
like
I
mean
when
I
moved
the
the
the
when
I
helped
did
the
work
to
move
the
amp
project
to
the
foundation
like
a
number
of
years
ago.
D
At
this
point
like
there
was
a
whole
bunch
of
requirements
around
this,
like
that
was
discussed
in
the
CPC
meetings
and
like
those
conversations
where
I
mean
people
that
something
that
people
were
quite
serious
about
us
doing
the
right
way.
So,
like
you
know,
we
did
a
whole
bunch
of
work
to
make
that
like
the
right
way
and
so
I'm
very
surprised
that
suddenly
like
this
is
actually
not
something
that
like
is
a
like
a
an
applied
policy
and
like
yeah.
B
So
I
did
I
think
I
mentioned
last
year.
I
did
an
inventory
of
everybody's
code
of
conduct,
but
then
I
found
all
kinds
of
other
things
from
missing
privacy
notices
and
even
though
we
have
Footers
and
things
like
that,
I
think
during
the
the
merger
there
were
still
some
projects
that
didn't
finish
their
onboarding
during
the
merger
to
bring
themselves
up
to
that
requirement.
So
I
know
that
the
team
I
think
was
whittling
through
that,
but
there's
still
quite
a
few
projects
who
need
updates.
B
Sometimes
those
updates
are
harder
to
make
because
their
websites
might
be
fragile
and
adding
new
things
are
a
little
more
difficult,
but
but
at
least
on
their
GitHub
page
it
should
be
quite
clear
and
easy
to
find
I
even
found,
even
if
they
had
one
and
it's
the
right
one.
Sometimes
it's
really
hard
for
somebody
to
find.
A
I
think
specifically
about
this
issue
and
I
think
what
Toby
talked
about
at
the
beginning
of
discussing
this
issue.
You
know
we
do
have
the
table
which
links
to
everybody's
code
of
conduct,
which
should
you
know
in
theory,
have
reporting
directions
so
having
this
other
list
of
you
know,
email.
A
This
person
for
this
project
I
think
doesn't
make
sense,
and
we
should
perhaps
update
that
part
of
our
code
of
conduct
so
reference
the
table
of
projects
on
the
readme
or
something
because
that
is
going
to
get
out
of
sync
for
sure
and
then
that'll
be
a
problem.
Michael.
G
Yeah
I
was
just
going
to
clarify
that
Toby's
comment
like
I
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
less
requirement,
or
you
know
our
governance
is
you're
required
to
have
a
code
of
conduct
and
we
have
requirements
around
it.
The
the
separate
part
of
enforcement
is
requires
people
to
go
around
and
do
checks,
and
so
that
part
I
might
agree
we
haven't
been
on
top
of,
but
the
it
doesn't
change.
The
fact
that
we
have
the
requirements.
D
Oh
I
did
not
mean
that
at
all
I
think
this
is
important.
I,
like
my
point
was.
This
is
something
that
we
had
clear
agreement
about
when
I
was
in
the
position
to
have
to
follow
whatever
the
process
was,
and
so
the
point
is
my
point
wasn't
to
say
that
other
folks
are
not
following
the
process.
D
It
was
to
answer
the
question
of
like
how
was
it
supposed
to
handle
this
like.
There
is
a
process
like
that.
That's
that
was
my
point
like
we
have
agreement
around
this.
The
fact
that,
like
it
hasn't
been
applied
across
the
the
you
know
the
room
for
a
whole
bunch
of
historical
reasons
that
are
completely
sound.
That
is
absolutely
understandable
and
okay,
but
it
doesn't
mean
that
we
don't
have
agreements
as
to
what
it
is
that
we're
supposed
to
do.
D
Correct,
okay
and
and
I
do
want
to
point
out
that
we
have
we've.
This
is
a
conversation
that
we've
already
had
about
like
what
is
the
source
of
Truth
and
that,
whether
it
should
be
the
foundation
CRC,
whether
every
project
can
have
their
own
COC
and
then
move
Etc
et
cetera,
so,
which
you
have
a
point.
But
anyway,
I'll
I'll
just
shut
up.
H
A
All
right,
well,
there's
there's
a
little
bit
of
work
to
do.
There
I
mean
the
review
process.
There's
a
lot
of
work
to
do,
but
in
terms
of
this
specific
issue,
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
update
that
table
and
then
maybe
point
the
code
of
conducts
appropriately
to
the
table
in
terms
of
who
you
reach
out
to
and
the
process,
which
raises
a
good
point.
We've
only
got
a
few
minutes
left.
A
A
Sounds
like
a
good
idea:
okay,
cool,
maybe
I'll,
amend
that
line
item
in
the
dates
for
next
week.
I'll
add
a
couple
of
issues
this
one
and
and
a
couple
other
things
so
getting
back
to
the
previous
conversation,
Toby.
D
A
Lots
to
do
all
right,
great
good
meeting.
Everybody
I
appreciate
you
all
coming.
Does
anybody
have
anything
else
we
want
to
talk
about
in
the
last
two
to
three
minutes?
Oh
I,
I
see
you
says
your
hand
up.
F
Yeah,
all
right
so
I'm,
quite
new
just
before
we
close
I
just
wanted
to
like
introduce
myself
and
so
I
wanted
to
call
the
new
collaborators
on
node.js
I'm
working
on
the
performance
stuff,
mostly,
but
I
want
to
take
more
responsibility
on
them,
opengs
foundation.
So
if
you
have
any
thing
that,
if
you
need
any
help
where
I
can
contribute
and
give
back
to,
the
community,
I'm
always
happy
to
do
it
and
just
give
you
a
heads
up
great.
A
A
All
right,
well,
we'll
call
it
a
day
thanks,
everybody
great
session
talk
to
you
all
soon,
thanks.