►
From YouTube: CPC Meeting - November 26, 2019
Description
The OpenJS Foundation is a member-supported non-profit organization that provides a neutral home for some of the most important project in the JavaScript ecosystem.
Learn more and join us at https://openjsf.org
A
Great
all
right
looks
like
we're
live
on
resume
side
here.
So
so,
let's
get
started.
Thank
you.
Everyone
for
joining
another
episode
of
the
open,
Jo
foundation
is
cross-project
council
meeting
today
is
November
26th
holy
cow
yeah,
the
end
of
November
welcome.
So,
let's
see
before
we
dive
into
things.
B
I
just
have
really
important
one,
which
is
you
know:
interactive
is
just
around
the
corner
and
along
with
that
is
of
course,
collab
summit
and
we've
got
a
really
nice
program,
that's
coming
together,
so
we
really
would
love
for
you
to
register,
so
we
can
get
a
head
count
in
or
for
meals
and
such
for
collapse
of
it.
So
please,
please,
register
at
your
earliest
convenience
for
collab
summit
and
I'll.
Try
and
rustle
up
the
link
to
that
in
a
minute
and
get
that
in
the
chat
and
slack
and
stuff.
It's.
A
Great
all
right!
Well,
thank
you,
joy,
any
anything
else.
Folks,
it's
not
I
will
jump
in
to
the
agenda
items.
The
first
one
is
issue
number
411,
and
this
was
kicking
off
an
open,
jf
foundation,
project
landscape,
Brian,
you
open
this
up
core.
They
used
to
go
you
want
to.
You
want
to
give
us
some
context.
Yeah.
D
And
this
is
just
do
it.
It's
a
we've,
found
it
to
be
a
pretty
good
way
to
be
able
to
visualize
that
which
you
know
for
us
who
are
involved
in
it
every
day
on
the
day-to-day.
Maybe
we
don't
need
it
as
much.
Therefore,
somebody
who's
coming
to
it
on
the
first
time
it
can
be,
it
can
be
helpful,
can
make
it
a
little
easier
to
understand
the
contours.
This
community
and
generally.
E
D
That
this
works
just
just
to
give
a
description
on
the
software
was
developed
by
CN,
CF
and
essentially
there's
a
git
repository
that
holds
all
the
config
files
and
Dan
was
offering
to
set
to
do
the
initial
configuration
on
it
and
then,
at
that
point,
editing
it
or
adding
it
adding
to
it
or
changing.
It
is
all
just
basically
done
by
for
request
so
organization
X
comes
up
and
says:
hey
I'm
involved
in
these
particular
projects
or
I'm
consuming
this
particular
project.
F
So
just
for
context,
I
I
did
raise
some
things
on
this.
One
thing
specifically
was
the
accessibility
issues
there
is
like
784
at
the
maximum
cap,
and
similar
issues
are
five
by
two
other
tools.
So
this
is
accessibility,
insights
by
pinch
and
then
lighthouse
as
well.
Taxol
are
things
that
does
seem
to
have
had
issue
created
for
it.
Additionally,
though,
III
do
think
that
it's
definitely
worth
you
know
each
the
project's
themselves,
assessing
the
I
guess,
necessity
for
this
or
the
utility
of
this
to
their
to
their
success
and
I
I.
F
Do
also
think
that
you
know
I'm
thinking
about
this.
A
little
bit
more.
It
is
the
JavaScript
ecosystem
is
fundamentally
different
than
CN
CF
or
like
the
cloud
native
ecosystem
and
the
DevOps
ecosystems,
primarily
because
we
do
have
some
level
of
centralization,
which
you
know
in
CN,
CF
and
the
native
ecosystems.
There's
a
accessibility
of
finding
or
discoverability
I
guess
is
a
better
word
of
finding
projects
is
not
very
high,
whereas
in
JavaScript
it
there
is
definitely
a
lot
of
tooling
that
has
already
been
built
on
this
and
I
do
think
it's
worth
considering
the.
F
A
D
I
believe
we
dan
has
already
I
believe
Dan
either
has
already
pushed
the
fixes
for
the
accessibility
issues
or
they're
in
the
pipeline
fairly
shortly.
So
that's
that's
also
in
the
issue
in
his
reply.
It
seems
like
I
guess
from
from
the
description
it
seems
like
they
should
be
reasonably
addressable.
I
can't
hear
Nate.
Remember
correctly,
with
your
all
the
images
weren't
there
and
the
contrast,
ultimately,
arrests
and.
B
D
F
B
D
D
E
D
B
So
I
am
generally
a
super
fan
of
data
visualization
and
for
a
long
list
of
reasons.
My
only
concern
with
stuff
like
this
is
the
maintainability
of
a
tool
like
this
over
time.
So
it's
wonderful
that
dan
is
like
hey.
We
can.
We
can
spend
this
up
for
you,
but
my
question
is
in
you
know
a
year
or
two
from
now.
Is
it
something
we're
still
going
to
be
like
maintaining
and
updating
and
or
we
is
this,
like
sort
of
an
extra
thing
that
we
need
to
be
mindful
of
taking
care
of
in
the
future?
B
D
One
of
these
things
that
I
really
like
about
this
is
that
it
is
managed
entirely
with
through
a
repo
and
essentially,
if
it
gets
out
of
date,
anybody
can
submit
a
pull
request.
So
it
is
something
you
know.
These
things
are
always
a
trailing
measure
of
what's
going
on
in
the
community,
but
at
the
same
time,
there's.
E
E
Robin
no
go
ahead:
Lomond
Thanks,
yeah,
someone
mentioned
marketing
I.
Think
Dan
unveiled
this
early
on
at
some
tech
conferences
that
were
just
more
broad
on
the
tech
front.
So
I
think
it
was
a
really
good
marketing
tool
for
him
to
show
and
demonstrate
and
hardly
create
some
shape
and
structure
around
his
community
to
folks
who
are
just
living
in
it
know
it
intuitively.
So
it
has
been
a
very
good
I
think
marketing
tool
for
their
organization,
I.
C
Would
think
that,
like
it'd,
be
interesting
to
see
what
our
categories
are
and
even
like,
if
there's
gaps,
that
might
help
say,
okay
well
like
say,
if
there's
a
security
provider,
but
we
have
nobody
in
the
foundation
related
to
security.
It
might
you
know,
give
us
some
ideas
of
where
to
go,
look
and
add
projects.
D
That
I've
noticed,
particularly
with
the
graph
QL
one,
is
that
organizations
who
you
don't
maybe,
who
aren't
already
members
in
the
foundation
or
you
know
who
aren't
maybe
speaking
up
in
the
meetings,
will
submit
pull,
requests
and
add
themselves
and
as
end
users,
and
that
can
also
be
useful
as
well,
because
it
gives
some
idea
of
how
broad
the
constituency
goes
and
Robin
I
think
I
might
have
talked
over.
You
no.
E
D
C
So
on
this
front,
I
guess
in
terms
of
concerns,
is
there
any
locking
concern
that
you
know
we
think
we
couldn't
overcome?
Like
you
know,
in
terms
of
the
accessibility
ones,
it
sounds
like
there's
some
path
forward
is
I
mean
I.
Guess
my
question
is:
is
there
something
that
says?
No,
we
just
don't
want
to
do
this
I.
F
C
F
F
If
you
look
at
either
of
the
Netscape
dashboards
in
the
first
two
or
at
the
top
there
there's,
it
says:
you're
viewing
I'm
looking
at
the
graphical
one,
so
it
says
you're
viewing
122
cards
with
the
total
of.
However
many
entries
and
a
market
cap
of
3.8,
two
trillion
and
funding
seven
point:
seven
billion
and
the
CNC
f1
is
similar,
specifically
I'm,
not
sure
how
comfortable
I
am
with
that
and
again
I'm.
Not
a
voting
member,
so
y'all
can
totally
ignore
this,
but
I'm
not
sure
how
comfortable
I
am
with
that.
F
B
Journeys
point
here
and
I
think
it
would
be
great
to
have
more
of
a
story
for
our
communities
about
you
know
like
supporting
them
with
other
kinds
of
open
source.
You
know
funding
and
sustainability,
but
before
we
use
especially
given
I
think
there's
a
sensitivity
in
our
community
toward
overly
capitalist
themes,
and
we
can't
obviously
ignore
the
the
there
there's
business
here
and
that
we
need
to
engage
with
and
open
source
is
really
good
for
business
and
that's
the
story
we
should.
B
G
Look
how
valuable
is
market
cap
really
I
mean,
like
a
company
of
large
market
cap,
might
completely
drop
a
project
in
a
given
month
or
completely
adopt
a
new
one
and
separately
market
caps
can
fluctuate
wildly
like
if
you
look
at
the
top
five
market
caps
in
the
world.
They
reshuffle
constantly
like
I,
just
I,
don't
know
if
that's
valuable,
they're.
D
Nothing
I
mean
given
this
is
all
open
source.
We
can
certainly
ask
for
it
to
be
changed
or
misstep
or
Crescent
changed
ourselves.
I
mean
these.
Are
these
are
interface
questions
which
I
think
are
maybe
separate
from
the
principal
question
interface.
Questions
can
be
addressed
with
an
open
source
project.
F
Right,
but
it's
so
I
guess
the
issue
there
is
that,
like
in
terms
of
interface,
questions
can
be
addressed
at
that
open
source
project.
That's
this
is
something
that's
being
brought
to
the
CPC
as
like
a
proposal,
and
it's
then
on
us
to
go
address
then
on,
like
on
the
folks
bringing
it
to
the
CPC,
which
is
more
of
like
that's,
adding
work
to
the
workload
that
this
crew
party
has,
which
is
a
slightly
concerning
precedent
to
set
to
me.
H
H
C
F
H
Yeah
as
a
bird's-eye
view
of
the
projects
in
the
foundation,
that
seems
like
a
neat
thing.
You
know,
but
certainly
we
can't
we
can't.
If
we're
gonna
leave
stuff
out,
that's
not
in
the
in
the
Lord.
So
then
no,
we
can't.
We
can't
say
that
it's
you
know
the
commute,
the
JavaScript
landscape,
because
it's
not
right,
I,
don't.
D
D
No
so
Graciela
scoped
entirely
to
people
who
are
using
graph,
QL,
CNCs
s,
scope
to
CN
CF
projects.
Other
organizations
which
used
you
know
the
landscape
tool
hit
scope
specifically,
is
that
it's
not
meant
to
be
a
survey
of
the
entire
ecosystem,
and
it's
not
it
may.
If
it
presents
itself
that
way,
then
it's
presenting
itself
incorrectly
because
that's
well
beyond
the
scope
of
what
anybody
would
volunteer
and
do,
and
these
are
things
that
do
take
quite
a
bit
of
time
and
effort
to
set
up.
D
And
you
know
the
fact
that
operative
set
up
for
us
was,
is
not
a
trivial
amount
of
time
either.
But
the
same
goes
for
attempting
to
maintain
something
that
goes
beyond
the
boundaries
of
the
scope
of
the
foundation.
That
would
just
be
a
tremendous
lift
which
I
don't
know
that
anybody
would
would
either
have
the
ability.
You
know
the
overall
top-down
view
to
be
able
to
see
that
or
the
time
to
take
it.
On-Site
I
think
that
that
necessarily
limits
this
to
Foundation
activities
versus
being
a
landscape
of
the
JavaScript
ecosystem.
D
B
H
C
G
D
Think
it
would
depend
whether
somebody
wanted
to
contribute
a
poor
request.
You
know
to
include
that
yeah
I'm,
not
I,
guess
I,
wouldn't
say,
let's
close
down
the
idea
of
including
information
about
dependency,
trees
or
anything
else.
You
know
the
dependency
tree
is
obviously
quite
deep,
but
at
the
same
time,
if
a
volunteer
shows
up
and
says,
I
would
like
to
document
this
and
make
sure
that
that
this
is,
you
know
well
represented
this
particular
dependency.
Trees
and
I
would
be
very
hard-pressed
to
say.
We
should
turn
that
down.
G
F
Think
that
would
also
be
a
good
way
to
get
some
feedback
from
the
system
on
it
of
like
hey.
What
would
you
want
to
see
this,
as
are
you
okay
with
it?
As
you
know,
we
this
initial
envisioning,
or
would
you
like
to
see
something
different
beyond
the
like,
relatively
small
scope
of
12
people
in
this
meeting,
just.
I
F
Mean
I
I
think
it's
you
know,
I
think
your
suggestion
around
like
not
calling
it
the
landscape,
because
I
think
that
word
is
very
tied
up
in
a
lot
of
things
in
JavaScript
that
it
could
not
popular
possibly
represent
if
it
was
like,
be
anything
landscape
referring
to
JavaScript,
but
tying
it
to
something
like
you
know,
the
project
map
I
think
that
would
relatively
address
some
of
this
of
like
these
are
just
our
projects.
I
mean
not
just
our
projects,
but
these
are.
This.
F
I
B
Is
there
anything
can
we
can
we
talk
to,
or
just
maybe
for
Brian's
sake
and
for
Danny's
sake,
I
think
we
should.
We
should
say
like
that.
This
is
something
that
we're
interested
in
and
we'd
love
to
move
forward
and
talk
about
how
we
can
tailor
it
for
our
sort
of
ultimate
vision
and
that's
something
we
can
do
like.
You
know,
together
over
the
course
of
maybe
hey
summit.
Oh.
D
Yeah
I
mean
the
the
place
to
ask
questions
like:
can
we
rename
it
is
in
that
issue,
dance
on
that
issue,
so
they'll
be
able
to
answer
this
I
mean
probably
within
a
few
seconds,
given
how
quickly
responds
on
things.
So
that
would
definitely
be
a
good
place
to
ask
these
questions
particularly
related
to
how
do
we
present
the
interface.
A
I
Okay
with
the
regular
members
being
owners
as
well,
I
guess
the
only
gotcha
there
would
be
like
what
kind
of
like
like
would
that
affect
the
process
of
us
approving,
regular
members
and
the
flute-like.
Additionally
to
that,
is
that
a
bad
thing?
You
know
not
to
not
to
call
anyone
out
on
anything
but
attorney.
You
made
a
comment
earlier
about
how
you
are
just
a
regular
member
and
not
a
voting
member
about
making
a
discussion.
C
I
A
B
Think
it
would
be
I
mean
really
wise
of
us
and
prudent
of
us
to
say
you
know
we're
gonna
enable
two-factor,
often
in
a
couple
of
weeks-
and
you
know
you
need
to
have
that
enabled
I'm-
also
really
keen
for
us
to
be
on
the
same
page,
about
like
strategy
for
adding
collaborators
or
team
members
and
so
in
in
the
interim
of
having
just
a
real
plan
here.
I
think
I
or
maybe
Joe
I.
Don't
know
one
of
us
made
teams
for
voting
members
and
teams
for
regular
members
and
then
there's
a
there's.
C
Total
sense
to
me
I'm
pretty
sure
in
the
node
project.
That's
exactly
the
way
you
know
when
you're
added
to
the
you
know,
collaborator
list
that
gives
you
access
to
the
things
collaborators
have
access
to
them
so
because
otherwise
you've
got
multiple
thing.
You
know,
when
you
add
somebody,
it's
like
go.
Do
this
this
this
and
this
and
when
you
remove
somebody
go
do
this
and
things
get
missed
or.
I
For
what
it's
worth,
I
just
took
a
quick
peek
at
2fa
for
the
whole
org,
and
it
looks
like
there
are
I'm,
just
double
checking
only
two
people
in
New
York
of
sixty
something
people
who
do
not
have
two
FA
now.
I
cannot
say
that
that
that
stays
true
for
the
people
who
have
not
yet
accepted
invitations,
but
I
think
we
could
potentially
even
just
enable
it
and
give
those
two
people
a
heads
up,
that
they've
been
removed
for
not
having
two
FA
but
will
riad
them
as
soon
as
they
enable.
B
I
A
A
C
C
Don't
know
if
we
could
detach
that
comment,
you
know
get
this
piece
landed
and
then
handle
the
discussion
of
whether
or
not
we
want
to
have
a
copy
and
that
it
other
PR
or
if
that
makes
sense
or
or
what
this
one
is.
It
would
be
nice
because
it's
blocking
for
us
not
for
a
seventh
blocking
moving
the
COC
guidance
to
stage
three.