►
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
All
right:
well
thanks
everyone
for
joining
another
episode
of
the
openjs
foundation's
cross
projects.
Council
meeting
today
is
tuesday
august
2nd,
there's
the
recording
and
the
notes.
A
Yeah
thanks
everybody
for
joining,
don't
forget
to
add
yourself
to
the
meeting
minutes
and,
of
course,
as
usual,
if
anyone
or
multiple
people
can
help
take
notes,
that's
always
greatly
appreciated
takes
a
village
cool,
so
getting
the
ball
rolling.
Do
we
have
any
announcements
this
morning.
B
B
It's
a
hackathon,
so
the
node
folks
are
working
on
that
and
then
we
will
have
a
booth
under
the
linux
foundation
umbrella
that
we're
leading
on
in
orlando
sarah,
and
I
will
be
there
on
booth
duty,
we'd
love
to
meet
you
all
and
we're
also
participating
in
career
day.
So
hopefully
we'll
have
some
cool
leads
on
some
jobs
and
if
you
have
cool
leads
on
jobs,
send
them
our
way.
So
we
can
make
sure
we
link
to
those.
A
Great
well
speaking
of
jobs,
I
just
merged
the
node.js
tweets
this
morning,
the
monthly
hiring
tweet.
So
if
anybody
has
any
jobs,
they
wanna
to
add
to
that
reply
to
that
thread.
When
is
the
grace
hopper
event
since
september.
B
B
A
Great
excellent:
let's
see
anything
else
in
terms
of
announcements
or
board
updates
or
anything
of
that
sort.
B
Well,
I
think
we're
kind
of
off
sync.
I
think
we're
gonna
try
to
do
better
about
sort
of
promoting
when
our
meetings
are
coming
up.
You
know
we
do
have
that
public
calendar
it's
on
the
collaboration
link.
So
if
you
go
to
that,
you
can
actually
click
on
the
calendar
and
just
populate
whatever
calendar
technology
you
use.
A
Yeah
good
points,
excellent
anything
else
was
there
a
board
meeting
recently.
Is
that
what
I
understood
or
is
that.
C
C
Another
record
this
time
we're
going
to
reschedule
the
actual
finance
meeting
to
when
we
have
quarantined,
so
we
can
actually
go
through
it,
but
we
did
clean
up
our
finance,
slides
and
hopefully,
the
next
time
we
scheduled
a
meeting.
We
will
have
all
of
our
costs
in
from
open
js
world,
because
right
now,
they're,
not
all
in
so
our
budget
doesn't
give
us
our
yeah.
Our
reports
give
us
a
full
glimpse
and
everything,
because
we
need
those
open,
js
world
numbers
in,
because
we
know
those
are
going
to
be
a
fair
chunk
of
change.
A
Okay,
great
with
that,
we
can
jump
into
the
agenda.
The
meeting
issue
is
921
in
the
cpc
repo.
The
first
item
on
the
agenda
is
the
link
fixer.
A
D
Believe
I
fixed
that
didn't
I
there's.
E
D
There
was
a
pr
up,
it
seems
like
it
seems,
like
it
got
merged
yeah
and
it
just
passed
on
that
pr
made.
So
that
should
be
fixed.
A
Okay,
great
so
do
you
have
the
pr
I
can
drop
it
in
there.
I'm
looking
at
closed
stuff
here.
A
A
Excellent,
so
I'll
just
make
a
note
there
fixed
and
closed.
We
like
those
cool,
so
moving
on.
The
next
item
is
openjs
world
retrospective.
We
talked
about
stuff
last
week.
I
don't
know
if
we
have
any
sort
of
notes
or
an
update
or
how
we
want
to
move
forward
on
this
particular
issue.
B
A
couple
of
things
one:
we
are
going
to
carry
the
conversation
through
to
the
programming
committee,
but
I
think
at
a
high
level
and
everyone
sort
of
pitch
in
the
idea
next
year,
given
that
covet
is
still
pretty
much
impacting
our
lives
that
we
will
co-locate
with
some
other
events
like
the
linux
foundation,
events
and
then
we'll
look
at
investing
more
of
our
event
budget
into
third-party
events
and
having
a
booth
and
community
prisons.
That
way.
A
Great,
when
do
we
expect
the
program
committee
to
start
meeting
again?
B
A
B
A
Yeah
and
I
actually
I'm
looking
at
the
agenda
and
just
swapped
it
around,
I
figured
we
could
just
jump
to
that
one
next
on
the
agenda
here.
A
B
Yeah
that
it
was
just
they
were
just
making
some
final
tweaks
because
it's
you
know
all
the
graphs
and
everything
go
to
graphic
designer,
and
so
that
should
be
ready
to
go
this
week.
A
Cool
we'll
check
on
it
next
meeting
and
then
yeah.
A
Yeah
we're
all
good
great
so
jumping
to
the
next
one
I'll
make
a
note
here,
real
quickly,
we'll
close
next
meeting
after
a
report
is
published.
A
We'll
continue
the
discussion
and
program,
maybe
meetings
great,
so
the
next
one
is
the
2023
planning.
Does
anybody
want
to
comment
on
this,
or
is
this
kind
of
the
same
sort
of
thing.
B
B
You
know
tierney
sent
me,
I
think
one
already,
maybe
one
or
two,
and
that
way
that
actually
helps
shape
our
budget
planning
for
2023
as
well.
So
everything
will
start
to
really
come
together
in
the
fall.
A
And
I'll
just
also
say
that
we'll
continue
talking
about
this
in
the
program
community
meetings.
Great
so
should
we
leave
this
issue
open
for
folks
to
drop
items
into,
should
we
take
off
the
agenda
label?
What
do
we
want
to
do
with
this
issue?.
B
It
depends,
I
wouldn't
mind,
having
an
open
issue
on
everyone,
dropping
their
favorite
event,
and
that
would
be
a
cool
way
to
curate
some
ideas.
Okay,.
A
Great,
if
someone
can
either
add
a
comment
or
update
the
description
that
that's
what
we'll
use
this
for.
That
would
be
great.
A
Cool,
so
I'm
I'm
just
kind
of
working
with
the
agenda
here,
a
little
bit,
I'm
going
to
move
this
one
down
here
to
related
issues.
So
if
I
make
that
sort
of
change,
then
we
get
into
some
of
the
election
related
stuff,
which
I
don't
know
if
we
really
have
anything
on
any
of
these.
We
have
the
cpc
at
large
voting
member
election,
which
is
issued
906.
A
We
have
the
cpc
impact
voting
member
selection,
which
is
905
and
then
the
cpc
secondary
seat,
which
is
903.
I
am
under
the
impression
that
the
elections
are
still
happening
and
today
is
the
last
day
to
vote.
So
if
anyone
is
able
to
vote
and
hasn't
yet,
please
do
so.
It
was
yesterday.
B
And
it
actually
closed
at
midnight
last
night,
so
we
are
now
starting
to
communicate
with
the
candidates
and
then
we
will
give
an
update
to
all
on
email.
I
think.
B
F
B
F
B
F
A
Toby,
did
you
receive
an
email
about
voting
because
I
think
you
two
are
similar
positions
right.
I.
E
Did
yeah
I'm
trying
to
I
have
I
have
this
as
a
title.
E
C
E
When
you
have
the
data
of
who
was
supposed
to
get
an
email
and
who
was
able
and
who
voted
so,
are
we
actually
cool?
Was
that
outcome
I
mean
like
did?
Did
other
people
miss
receiving
an
email?
Is
my
question?
Do
we
I
mean
we're
gonna
have
to
answer
this
now.
B
But
I
think
it
would,
it
would
count.
I
thought
it
went
out,
but
let
me
circle
back
with
your
heel
and
just.
C
E
Sure
but
but
I
think
it
would
be
nice
to
make
sure
that
everyone
that
was
supposed
to
get
a
chance
to
vote
actually
was
able
to
vote.
Definitely.
A
E
My
understanding
was
that
we're
gonna
leave
the
voting
open
up
to
the
end
of
today,
so
that
we
could
remind
folks
that
they
have
to
vote
in
the
school
and
so.
B
E
Okay,
so
in
that
case,
and
if
they
were
able
to
vote
that,
that
is
totally
fine,
but
I
mean
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
mean.
I
know
this
is
not
a
high
stake
election
at
all,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
do
it
in
a
way
that,
like
no
one
feels
kind
of
like
right,
weirded
out
about
the
whole
thing.
B
C
B
B
D
B
Bylaws
actually
say
it
doesn't
specify
how
long
the
vote
should
be.
We
had
sort
of
just
set
the
two
weeks,
particularly
with
summer,
to
make
sure
everybody
had
voted
and
we've
sort
of
done
that
in
the
past
yeah
the.
F
D
Yeah
also,
the
links
are
all
individualized
so
like
they'd
have
to
add
that
right
now
and
like
since
there
wasn't
already
an
entry
for
you
and
then
they'd
also
have
to
extend
the
thing.
I
I
I
I
prefer
that
we
just
because
we
weren't
gonna
announce
it
here
that
we
we
delay
it
like
just
push
it
back
to
like
let
them
the
foundation
step
finish
that
after
this
meeting
just
so,
we
don't
mess
it
up
at
all.
So
there's
no.
D
Right
so
I
I
think
that
might
have
been
our
plan
previously.
The
foundation
staff
seemed
to
have
like
shifted
that,
or
that
seems
to
be
different
than
the
what's
documented
there,
so
that
that's
fine
like
we
can
that's
a
separate
issue
that
we
can
we
can
address
later,
but
I
think
we
should
go
with
the
plan
to
the
foundation
right
now,
rather
than
the
one
that
was
documented,
then,
because
that's
what
they've
been
operating
on
in
the
past
few
days.
A
Okay,
yeah,
that's
my
confusion,
but
I
see
in
the
issue
that
it
did
says
otherwise,
but
I
agree:
let's
just
go
with
what
the
foundation
was
planning.
I
don't
think
there's
any
rush
to
to
to
figure
this
out
asap,
so
we'll
we'll
know
soon.
E
F
E
A
A
Yeah
yeah
agreed
agreed.
Okay,
so
that's
the
plan,
then
emily
would
get
the
the
the
link
take
care
of
it
work
through
it
today
announce
tomorrow.
I'm
curious
about
this.
You
know
at
large
voting
election.
B
We
had
nominations
and
we
had
just
the
right
number
of
nominations
to
fill
those
seats,
so
yeah.
A
It
really
is,
I
would
be
only
to
kind
of
working
on
that
and
fixing
some
things
yeah,
because
I
was
just
looking
at
the
documentation
thinking
I'm
not
even
actually
sure
how
this
is
supposed
to
happen.
I
hope
someone's
doing
something,
but
luckily
we
don't
have
to
do
anything.
B
And
I
yeah
I
analyze
every
word
carefully:
I'd
gut
check
with
andy
and
legal,
sometimes
to
make
sure
I'm
interpreting
things
well
and
sort
of
looking
at
precedent
as
well.
A
Well,
maybe
we
should
have
a
an
issue
open
to
kind
of
review.
These
things
make
them
clear.
A
B
Well,
the
impact
impact
representatives
essentially
says
that
the
cpc
must
ratify
those,
and
what
does
you
know
our
interpretation
of
ratify?
You
know
in
the
past?
It's
it's.
It's
been
essentially
a
notification
from
the
project,
but
there
hasn't
really
been
a
an
official
voting
motion
by
the
cpc
to
ratify
those.
So.
F
B
F
D
Given
that
ratify
is
like
vague,
we
can
also
just
say
like
we
can.
We
can
lend
that
we
can
lend
like
us
ratifying
it
being
that,
like
we're
just
passively
agreeing
to
what
the
the
projects
say
like
I,
I
would
like
to
document
what
we
do
with
that,
but
I
also
like
I.
I
don't
want
to
go
down
the
path
of
a
vote
for
that
one.
I
think
that
can
cause
like
problems
with
the
projects
into.
I
think
I
think
it's
just
excess
overhead,
that's
useless.
D
I
don't
think
it's
useful
to
do
like
a
vote
for
that
and
so
documenting
that
I
think,
would
probably
be
good.
A
Toby,
if
you
create
that
issue,
if
folks,
if
you
can,
let
us
know
what
I
mean,
we
can
find
it
too,
but
if
folks
can
drop
in
any
of
the
things
that
come
to
mind
that
we
need
to
fix
on
on
this
process.
What.
E
Do
you
want
to
call
it
something
like
like
clean
up
or
clarifying
on
the
the
overall
rolling
process
or
something.
F
Sorry
nitpicky,
but
we
are
kind
of
screwed
on
the
ratified
if
we
go
by
the
actual
language,
because
because
the
terms
ended
already
right
technically,
yes,
I
think
this
means
we
have
no
voting
members
technically.
This
means
that
we
have
no
voting
management
that
can
ratify
other
voting
members,
and
that
must
be
done
in
order
for
those
voting
members
to
become
voting
members.
E
A
F
D
That
was
the
board
seat.
I
could.
C
C
A
All
right
great,
so,
let's
see
where
am
I
so
that's
the
two
election
related
things.
We
also
have
the
selection,
which
I
noticed
this
morning.
There
is
some
progress
on
as
well.
Electron
has
selected
there
too
folks,
thanks
for
working
on
that
tyranny
and
node.js
we
sent
trot
and
myself
rich
trots
to
represent
node.
I
don't
know
about
any
of
the
other
projects.
B
F
F
Sorry
yeah,
the
third
category
of
voting
member.
Have
we
done
anything
about
this
or
have
we
just
forgotten.
B
No,
we
had
people
opted
in
for
regular
member
voting
and
at
large
voting.
Those
are
the
two
different
categories
that
we
had
nominations
for
excellent.
B
A
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
what
you're
asking
emily
and
I'm
trying
to
pull
up
the
the
dates
here.
Dates
and
reminders.
B
That
was
missing
on
the
dates
and
reminders,
but
if
you
see
our
governance
page
on
their
website,
we
have
two
different
categories
of
voting
members.
We
have
regular
and
we
have
at
large.
We
still
need
to
fix
the
title
on
one
because
it
says
because
it
used
to
be
growth
in
that
large
voting
member.
Now
we
don't
have
growth,
so
it's
just
an
at-large.
A
A
But
yeah.
A
F
Know
the
term
ends
text
is
two
paragraphs
down
voting
members
serve
for
a
term
of
one
year
and
must
be
re-nominated
and
ratified
by
the
voting
cpc
members
each
year.
B
It
was
in
sync
with
all
of
the
others,
so
we
essentially
have
those
currently
those
three
seats.
We
have
nominations
for
those
current
three
seats
that
we
have.
B
A
E
Yeah
yeah,
what
bothers
me
a
little
about
this
is
like
there's
so
much
process
around
it
and
like
they're,
all
sort
of
like
so
much.
You
know
close
positions
but
they're
all
slightly
different
that
we're
kind
of
losing
out
on
what
you
know.
Elections
should
be
about
which
is
about
figuring
out.
You
know
what
people
actually
want
to
stand
for
and
do
and
have
discussions
around
this,
and
I
find
that
a
little
I
don't
know
I'd.
Rather
we
did
it
a
different
way.
E
So
if
we
can
sort
of
like
think
about
this,
you
know
if
we
sort
of
clarify
things
and
and
use
that
as
a
way
to
simplify
the
process
and
spend
more
time
talking
about
what
folks
are
going
to
do
and
less
time
about,
like
you
know,
open
links
that
would
be
good.
A
A
All
right,
what
are
we
doing
so
yeah?
We
we,
we
went
back
to
election
related
stuff,
but
we
did
talk
briefly
about
selection
related
stuff.
So
I
assume
that
foundation
staff
are
looking
at
who
is
being
selected
and
who
hasn't
stepped
up
to
make
sure
that's
clear.
I
guess
that
would
be
great.
B
I
think
we're
good.
We
have
a
open
agenda
on
august
9
for
a
working
session.
A
Okay,
do
we
want
to
decide
that
now.
A
I'm
open
to
going
through
this
rat's
nest
and
trying
to
fix
some
things
up.
B
It'd
be
good
to
have
somebody
who
was
maybe
there
during
the
development
of
the
charter
and
all
of
the
the
rules
around
this.
Maybe
for
some
context
or
any
of
you
all
on
that
part
of
that.
D
I
was,
I
think
I
think
joe
was,
and
I
think
emily
was
am
I
forgetting
anyone.
I
was
toby.
Were
you
there
for
that?
No
okay,
you
must
have
come
in
not
long
after
okay,
yeah
yeah,
we're.
B
A
B
A
Great
all
right
so
moving
along.
That's
all
the
election
and
selection
related
stuff.
The
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
the
grace
hopper
stuff.
Do
we
do
we
need
to
talk
about
that
or
did
the
kind
of
stuff
at
the
beginning
cover
this.
C
A
Great,
does
it
make
sense
to
put
an
update
into
this
issue
and
then
maybe
close
it
and
just
know
that
when
we
ask
for
announcements
in
the
beginning
that
it
will
probably
be
something
that
we'll
touch
on
or
how
do
we
want
to
move
forward
with
this
particular
issue?.
A
So
moving
on
the
next
two
items
are
the
the
the
open
pr
851
for
updating,
contributor
covenant,
code
of
conduct
and
the
patching
script
that
we
would
like
to
you
know
use
once
we
get
this
landed
as
is,
and
then
can
make
our
changes
on
top
of
looking
in
the
issue
here,
the
pull
request.
That
is,
which
pr
was
this
again
851.
A
I
you
know
I
feel
like
we
talk
about
this
one
often,
but
I
think
the
plan
is
to
just
land
it
matching
what
is
upstream
and
then
apply
our
changes.
On
top
of
that.
E
A
All
right,
I
I
feel
like
ben
reached
out
via
a
relic
equestrial
ben,
reached
out
slack
sorry.
A
Yeah,
I
think
it
was
made
clear
what
we're
hoping
to
get
done
on
this,
so
I
will
ping
ben
and
see
if
that's
something
that
he
wants
to
move
forward
or
if
we
can.
You
know
how
we
move
this
one
forward,
because
this
has
been
ongoing
for
a
while.
F
F
As
it
stands
now,
we'll
change
the
the
change,
the
text
to
be
the
current
upstream
2.1
text,
which
is
dropping
specifically
what
the
long
discussion
was
about
was
the
specifier
project
on
project
community,
which
was
kind
of
mistakenly
in
the
version
of
2.0
that
we
had,
and
that
was
patched
upstream
from
2.0
to
2.0
without
any
sort
of
announcement
after
we
did
effectively
an
extraction,
and
the
idea
now
is
that,
as
we
tend
to
have
an
idea
that
we
don't
want
to
have
the
exact
text
of
the
2.1
that
we
first
go
to
2.1,
and
then
we
fix
separately
from
that
as
an
identifiable
change.
E
F
A
Yeah
I
just
scrolled
through
it
and
you're
you're
right
emily.
It
looks
like
it's
just
matching
2.1.
We
can
merge
it
and
then
apply
any
of
the
changes
we
want.
On
top
of
it.
A
Perfect,
let's
see,
then,
is
this.
D
One
thing
I
will
say
is:
we
should
maybe
try
to
get
that
patching
mechanism
out
by
next
meeting
or
like
have
a
pr
ready
for
it
that
implements
it
just
because
technically
we're
changing
the
my
understanding
is
that
we're
technically
changing
the
we're
changing
the
code
of
conduct
for
every
project
that
relies
on
the
upstream
code
of
conduct
right
now,
and
so,
if
we
have
something
that
projects
want,
I
I
I'm
fine
with
the
less
permissive
language
which
I
think
is
what
this
merges
or
sorry
the
the
more
broad
language,
which
is
what
I
think
this
merges.
D
But
there
are
things
that
subprojects
want.
We
should
make
sure
we're
trying
to
get
it
so
they're
not
having
to
push
or
live
against
the
code
of
conduct
that
they're
not
happy
with,
and
that,
like
we
collectively
agree,
should
be
different.
I'm
unopinionated
I
either
language
is
fine,
but
given
that
this
is
something
people
want,
we
should
probably
try
to
get
this
out
fast,
rather
than
you
know,
take
from
may
to
now
again
to
get
that
system
out.
A
I
wonder
about
using
the
working
session
of
next
week,
at
least
the
first
part
of
it
to
just
get
that
clear
and
our
process
and
something,
like
you
said,
tierney
ready
for
next
meeting,
which
maybe
won't
take
an
hour.
And
then
we
can
start
on
the
election
sort
of
related
stuff,
which
you
know,
I'm
not
sure
how
long
that
will
take.
But
this
does
seem
pretty
important.
E
It
seems
like
it's
essentially
implementation
work,
and
so
I
don't
think
it
really
needs
like
a
session.
It
needs
someone
to
actually
do
the
implementation
work.
Yeah.
E
E
And
I
am
not
going
to
be
doing
that
work
right
now,
because
I
already
have
like
stuff
on
my
plate
that
I've
been
promising
for
way
too
long.
It
takes
anything
else
on
and
it
doesn't
look
super
difficult
if
you
actually
know
what
the
problem
is
and
no
are
like
really
familiar
with
github
actions,
I'm
literally
too
old
to
be
really
familiar
with
github
actions.
E
Yes,
that's
true,
and
so
someone
else
who's
younger
shouldn't.
Take
it.
E
A
B
E
A
All
right:
well,
I
hesitate
to
volunteer
but
I'll
I'll,
try
to
figure
it
out
and
maybe
reach
out
to
jordan
and
see
if
we
can
tag
team
it
or
something-
and
that
has
nothing
me.
Volunteering
has
nothing
to
do
with
age,
because
I
don't
know
our
relationship.
A
All
right,
so
I
will
I
will
reach
out
to
jordan
and
and
see
if
the
two
of
us
can
throw
something
together.
A
Okay,
great
so,
let's
move
on
and
I'm
trying
to
get
back
to
where
I
am
so
that
that's
those
two
issues
there
you
know
relatedly
is
the
clarify
requirements
around
coc
violation,
I'm
kind
of
jumping
around
a
little
bit
here
on
the
agenda.
I'll
put
this
one
up
here,
so
it's
clear.
A
I
don't
know
if
we
have
anything
on
that
one,
it's
another
one!
That's
just
been
hanging
around.
A
Okay
got
it
regarding
the
javascript
security
collab
space,
my
that's
on
my
plate,
which
has
been
overflowing
lately,
but
my
my
plan
was
to
get
something
on
the
calendar,
opposite
the
standards
working
group
meeting,
and
so
I'm
going
to
put
that
on
the
calendar
today
and
have
a
plan
for
the
first
meeting,
which
would
be
a
week
which
will
be
in
two
weeks.
I
think
so
I'll
get
that
ball
rolling.
B
Okay,
we
did
an
update
last
month
on
the
open,
ssf
alpha
omega
funding
for
node.
We
have
another
draft
blog
for
this
last
month,
I'll
be
going
out
in
the
next
couple
of
days.
If
you're
interested
in
tracking
that
there's
also
a
new
channel
on
openjs,
it
is,
let
me
pull
it
up.
Node
node.js,
hyphen
security,
hyphen,
wg,
node
security
working
group
channel
on
openjs
you're,
also
welcome
to
join
openssf,
has
a
slack
workspace
with
all
kinds
of
channels.
Best
practices
alpha
omega,
all
kinds
of
goodies.
A
Great
yeah,
I
need
to
join
that
open
ssf
one
yeah
and
there
are
a
couple
of
things
from
the
working
the
node.js
working
group
that
I
think
was
suggested
that
we
take
it
up
a
level
to
the
openjs
collapse
space,
so
I'm
gonna
kind
of
collect
some
of
those
things
for
us
to
start
considering
in
the
first
meeting.
A
So
thank
you,
kahil
slac.openssf.org
for
folks
who
want
to
join
the
open,
ssf
slack.
I
will
do
that
after
this
meeting.
A
So
that's
that
then
we
have
the
last
two
I'm
trying
to
hurry
up,
so
we
can
talk
in
the
private
session.
The
last
two
is
license
check,
support
and
tooling.
I
assume
no
updates
there
any
no.
A
Yep
understood
and
then
last
one
is
build
stronger
tide
screen
at
large
maintainers
and
their
cpc
rep
anything
new
there.
Let's.
E
Talk
about
this
in
two
weeks:
it's
it's
fine.
A
Okay
sounds
good,
so
that
concludes
our
agenda.
Unless
anybody
has
anything
else,
we'll
call
it
a
wrap,
we
will
go
to
a
private
session
for
members
only
and
go
from
there.
A
So
thanks
everybody.
I
will
end
the
stream
see
you
in
two
weeks.