►
From YouTube: CPC Meeting 2019-07-10
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
We're
live
for
the
July
10th
meeting
of
the
cross
project,
Council
for
the
open,
J's
foundation
I'm
here
with
several
representatives
of
open
J's
foundation,
projects,
regular
members
and
voting
members
welcome
everyone.
As
we
get
started.
Are
there
any
announcements
to
make
today
anything
going
on
in
your
projects
or
open
JSF
related
you
want
to
share
with
each
other
or
the
community.
A
C
So
I'll
give
a
brief
update
there.
The
nodejs
projects
we
had
two
people
step
up
for
the
representatives
on
the
open,
jazz,
Foundation
Board
of
Directors
note
gets
a
director
slot
and
James
Snell
and
Michael
Dawson
were
the
two
folks
in
the
election
and
over
the
weekend
it
was
announced
that
Michael
Dawson
had
won
the
election,
so
he
will
be
the
nodejs
rep
on
the
open,
j/s
board
of
directors.
Awesome.
A
I'll
just
share
that
we're
nearing
the
end
of
the
review
period
for
the
node
plus
Jas
interactive
proposals.
So
those
of
you
who
stepped
up
to
participate
in
the
proposal
review
process
just
a
quick
reminder
that
those
are
due
tomorrow,
so
we
can
get
started
announcing
in
the
next
in
the
coming
weeks.
Our
schedule
for
node.js
Center
after
the
mizzen
bridge,
so
that's
it
cool
I-
will
move
us
on
to
the
first
action
or
the
first
edge
and
item
then,
which
is
issue
number
234.
A
A
Cool,
so
just
a
quick
recap
of
this
issue:
we
wanted
to
clarify
what
the
role
of
observer
really
was
and
what
what
the
intent
was
there.
There
were
some
pieces
of
sample
language
provided
by
Michaels,
Dawson
and
Dolan,
and
we
incorporated
that
Jojo,
sepi
and
I
were
were
tasked
with
doing
a
PR,
and
we
did.
We
did
that,
like
maybe
30
minutes
ago,
I'm.
Sorry,
you
can
check
that
out
and
we'll
just
make
sure
that
it
that
it
captures
the
intent
there
wasn't
anything
else.
We
were
hoping
to
to
see
reflected
in
this
a.
E
A
E
C
E
Like
I,
don't
think
that
we
need
to
do
anything
inside
of
the
Charter,
where
we
could
put
it.
If
you
look
inside
of
the
readme
itself,
we
have
like
the
the
membership
voting
members
and
regular
members
if
we
want
to
make
it
like
as
discoverable
as
possible,
we
could
put
under
the
CPC
meetings.
Like
a
note,
like
change
a
note
there,
so
it
says
CPC
members,
we
could
say,
like
who's
invited
to
the
meetings
and
that
anyone's
able
to
join,
is
an
observer
and
then
just
kind
of
like
the
note
about
the
quorum.
C
A
E
Don't
think
we
need
to
change
the
Charter
at
all,
we'll
need
to
keep
in
the
Charter
the
descriptions
of
like
what
the
particular
membership
classes
are.
We
just
my
personal
opinion,
don't
need
anything
they're
about
like
decorum
or
like
how
one
gets
elected
like
we
technically
have
the
governance
around
how
regular
members
are
elected
and
the
readme
as
well.
A
Okay,
the
next
action
item-
if
we're
ready
to
move
on
is
the
proof
charter
changes
for
nodejs
charter-
and
forgive
me
I
thought
this
was
settled.
Oh
Joe,
if
you
could
correct
me
here,
this
is
one
that
Mike
said
was
Michael
Dawson
said,
was
ready
to
Timmer
land
because
it
had
been
14
days.
Yes,
yeah.
C
So
this
is
pull
request.
2:38,
let's
see
where
am
I,
so
we're
talking
about
issue
199,
which
is
approved
charter
changes
for
nodejs
charter.
If
you
scroll
down
to
the
bottom
Michael's,
you
know
reiterates
what
we
talked
about
in
the
previous
meeting
that
it's
worth
getting
poll
requests.
2:38
landed
that
I
will
drop
into
the
chat
here.
C
That
PR
is
pretty
much
ready
to
go.
It's
been
around
for
court
some
days
right.
Is
this
the
one
I'm
talking
about
here
yeah
14
days
ago?
It's
got
a
number
of
approvals,
so
I
think
that
there's
no
objections
and
that
we
can
probably
move
forward
on
this
and
then
move
forward
on
the
issue.
That
reference
is
at
199
issue.
A
A
A
C
C
A
C
Yeah
that
makes
sense
to
me,
so
240
is
six
rules
for
landing.
Sorry,
six
rules
for
landing
rules
with
CPC
charter
changes.
Basically,
it's
a
one-line
addition.
The
text
of
the
change
must
be
approved
by
a
simple
majority
of
the
voting
members.
This
is
in
the
governance,
doc
I'm
trying
to
open
it
up
to
see
and
get
more
context,
but,
of
course,
my
internet
lives
not
so
this
is
this.
C
Great,
so
something
back
to
the
review.
I
think
we
have
a
number
of
approvals.
It's
been
open
for
two
weeks,
so
I
think
we
can
merge
this
one
in
as
well
just.
E
E
C
A
A
C
It's
been
brought
up
a
couple
of
times
that
a
person
on
the
node
side
has
a
tool
that
better
analyzes
the
choices
rather
than
just
finding,
which
one
is
the
row
column
for
most
numbers.
I
was
hoping
to
find
some
time
to
break
out.
You
know
voting
members,
regular
members,
observers
I'm,
not
even
sure
you
know
how
valuable
other
than
you
know,
just
making
sure
we
have
quorum
of
birding
members
I've
been
thinking
about
this
and
it's
really
difficult
to
find
a
good
time
that
meets
everyone's
needs.
C
I'm
wondering
you
know
my
my
thinking
was
to
try
and
find
a
better
time,
for
you
know,
folks
that
are
further
East,
Asia
and
whatnot
I'm,
not
sure
it
would
be
great
to
get
some
input
from
folks
that
are
too
far
east
for
these
meeting
times
and
we
can
try
and
see
what
would
work
for
them.
I
I
hesitate
to
just
pick
something
that
arbitrarily
I
think
might
be
good
for
some
folks.
If
I
don't
know,
if
that's
you
know,
I'm
solving
a
problem
that
you
know,
I
don't
have
much
input
on.
A
And
I
think
it
makes
sense,
but
what
I
guess?
What
I'm
noticing
is
that
we
have
this
just
like
a
little
bit
of
a
chicken
and
an
egg
problem
right
where
we
need
and
put
from
these
populations
in
order
to
make
an
informed
decision.
But
we're
also
don't
seem
to
be
getting
that
input
and
so
that
then,
then
the
question
is
is
not
really
a
problem,
because
that's
just
that's
not
coming
our
way,
despite
I.
A
Think
sharing
that
this
is
something
we
want
to
accommodate
and
so
I
I
think
the
of
the
secondary
problem
is
providing
us
an
alternating
time
so
that
we
don't
conflict
as
often
with
other,
maybe
recurring
meetings
that
people
have.
You
know
like
the
TSC
meeting
or
people's
work
meetings.
That
kind
of
thing
so
I
mean
I.
A
Think
I
would
propose
that
that
we
work
with
the
data
that
we
have
to
find
a
second
time
and
and
just
across
the
bridge
of
accommodating
somebody
and
say
like
Japan,
when
we,
when
we
meet
that
person
in
that
person,
you
know
comes
you
know,
I,
don't
know,
that's
I,
guess
my
two
cents
yeah.
C
A
Mean
that
seems
reasonable,
like
I
mean,
if,
if
somebody
decides
to
take
a
look
and
say
okay
well,
these
two
or
three
options
seem
like
next
best
options
based
on
the
data
and
folks
can
can
weigh
in
and
hope,
and
maybe
maybe
through
that
process.
Somebody
will
come
forward
and
say
well,
you
know
actually
there's
a
bunch
of
people
in
Australia
that
want
to
participate
great.
You
know,
let's,
let's
do
it,
but
this
this
particular
open
issue.
A
C
Okay,
maybe
I
will
take
a
stab
at
that
right
after
this
meeting
throw
a
couple
of
comments
into
this
issue.
Issue
129
it's
been
around
for
a
little
while,
but
it
seems
like
it
makes
more
sense
to
drop
it
in
there
and
then
maybe
if
we
could
surface
this
to
the
project
list,
I
guess
we're
looking
at
a
couple
options
for
an
alternate
time
for
this.
For
this
meeting,
yeah.
A
C
A
A
A
C
Yeah
I
think
if
I
may
jump
in
Georgia
I
think
that
we
landed
where
I
was
going
to
drop,
something
in
I
think
the
node
admin
repo,
as
as
more
of
an
FYI,
then
then
kind
of
getting
input
on
the
fact
that
we're
you
know
moving
forward
on
figuring
out
from
the
CPC
level.
What
travel
fund
would
look
like
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
there
miles
or
Jory
or
anyone
else
on
the
call
I
seem.
A
To
recall
something
like
that,
I
also
did
send
out
in
the
in
the
newsletter
last
week
just
a
line.
That
said
this
was
something
that
we
were
going
to
be
tackling
in
a
direction
that
we
were
heading
in
and
you
know
let
us
know
if
there
was
any
additional
comments
or
thoughts
or
ideas
that
people
had
and
so
far
I
haven't.
Nobody
responded
to
the
to
the
newsletter
with
that.
But
hey
it's
a
newsletter.
So
you
know
we
read
those
like
maybe
every
other
week,
so
I.
D
A
G
No
worries
so
last
meeting
we
had
the
discussion
regarding
the
travel
plans
and
then
I
think
appropriate
for
now,
because
she
discussed
this
elite
like
to
move
this
forward,
because
last
time
we
were
blocked
by
this
issue.
But
now
we
have
a
momentum
to
go
forward
with
actually
deciding
that's.
Why
I
was.
E
Go
ahead,
mom
I
was
gonna
say
that
the
best
next
step.
If
we
want
to
move
this
forward
as
a
CPC
initiative,
my
guess
would
be.
We
have
the
proposal
process.
I
think
we
need
to
make
a
stage
one
proposal
for
the
travel
fund.
If
someone
wants
to
take
that
on
that'd
be
great.
So
if
you
go
into
I'll
drop
at
the
proposals
folder
inside
of
there,
there
is
a
template.
You
just
need
to
fill
out.
The
template.
E
I
just
drop
the
the
thing
in
there
and
you
can
look
at
the
staging
process
as
a
way
to
quickly
see
how
to
do
that
within
a
pull
request
because
proposal
on
it,
but
if
we
wanna
I
think
the
best
course
of
action,
because
this
is
a
larger
proposal
that
requires
funds
from
the
board.
A
budget
and
consensus
across
the
projects
I
think
going
through
the
proposal
process
would
be
the
best
way
forward.
C
Yeah
I
agree
and
miles
since
this
kind
of
was
born
out
of
the
node
project.
Can
you
give
a
quick
overview
on
how
this
has
functioned
in
the
past.
E
E
Cool,
no,
that
budget
is
approved
by
the
board,
and
previously
the
node
project
was
chartered
to.
Let
me
see
this
budget
we
administered
in
a
repo.
We
called
admitting
that
repo,
we
maintained
a
spreadsheet
with
all
the
information
of
O'brien
enjoyment,
a
new
process
that
he's
been
suggesting
using
Expensify
people
put
in
a
request
to
the
admin.
E
What
likely
is
you
know,
create
a
proposal
for
a
travel
fund
or
the
foundation
proper,
and
you
know
in
that
proposal
would
include
probably
some
of
the
information
around
how
we
would
manage
it,
how
people
would
apply
for
it.
You
could
probably
just
lift
majority
of
the
governance
text
from
what
we
have
over
in
the
new
project,
as
well
as
what
Bryan
has
proposed
a
new
process.
I
stayed
one
proposal
for
that
could
come
in.
E
C
H
Just
joined
late
but
I,
what
I
really
was
trying
to
say
was
just
you
should
before
we
make
a
decision.
We
should,
you
know,
basically
inform
and
as
an
FYI
saying,
here's
the
plans
right.
Just
you
know
an
existing
project,
so
I
think
the
the
suggestion
to
make
like
a
stage
one
proposal
which
could
outline
what
we're
thinking
and
then
sending
that
as
an
FYI
to
the
TSC
and
the
calm.
Calm
makes
a
lot
of
sense
because
they're
basically
says
we're
just
thinking
about
it,
because
at
stage
one
so
give
us
your
input.
A
A
E
A
D
C
That
was
Myles
sharing
before
all
the
details,
I've
been
trying
to
drop
a
link
into
zoom
but
I'm
having
internet
trouble.
Basically,
if
you
go
to
the
github
comm,
slash,
nodejs,
slash
admin
you'll
see
one
of
the
files
is
member
travelin
and
there's
a
lot
of
information
there
that
you
could
get.
You
know.
Pollock
phone
Yona.
E
B
B
Yeah
and
that's
actually
I'd
put
together
a
full
request
to
the
against
the
travel
process
and
the
node
admin
repo
and
it
was
accepted
last
week
so
that
final
text
since
they're,
just
basically
has
you,
know
the
new
process.
Well,
it's
not
it's
a
new
process,
but
it's
an
additional
process.
So,
as
miles
had
said,
the
old
way
of
doing
was
people
thought
out
the
spreadsheet
or
felt
out
of
spreadsheet.
They
had
to
put
together
a
zip
file
of
expenses.
You
know
photos
of
receipts
and
that
sort
of
thing
it's
cumbersome
and
time-consuming
and
I.
B
C
A
Go
team
all
right
moving
then
to
issue
number
161,
also
in
the
in
progress
progress.
Column
of
our
of
our
board.
Here
is
draft
initial
process
for
electing
voting
members
from
the
non
impact
projects.
This
was
opened
by
miles
I.
Think
we've
had
some
progress
made,
or
some
at
least
discussions
on
this,
mostly
between
I,
think
Nick,
O'leary
and
Michael,
Dawson
and
Chris
Hillier
do
y'all
have
any
updates
or
comments
to
share
on
where
this
sort
of
bucket
of
oh
I
guess
we
do
have.
H
H
A
A
H
A
A
A
A
E
Guess
one
update
that's
good
to
give
people
I,
don't
know
if
everyone's
reviewed
the
pull
request
that
accompanies
the
proposal.
There's
a
slight
change
to
the
project
progression
proposal,
the
biggest
one
being
the
introduction
of
a
new
projects,
email
address
for
new
projects
to
send
their
application
to
and
apply
it
period.
E
Brian
has
known
ahead
and
created
that
email
address
and
the
initial
membership
are
all
of
the
voting
and
regular
members.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
no
one
has
any
concerns
with
that.
One
of
the
biggest
things
is
that
we'll
need
to
be
able
to
like
keep
those
discussions
private
and
make
sure
that
you
know
when
people
are
applying
to
become
a
part
of
the
foundation
until
they've
opted
into
the
Incubus
incubation
period,
I
think
there's
an
expectation
of
anonymity
or,
like
a
certain
degree
of
embargo.
On
that
information.
E
You
know
a
large
project
may
want
to
plan
some
sort
of
press
release
around
it
or,
alternatively,
if
it
doesn't
work
out,
they
don't
want
to
be
surprised
or
like
make
a
whole
stink
in
the
ecosystem.
If
it
doesn't
work
out,
so
just
want
to
make
sure,
because
that's
the
biggest
bit
but
I
think
we
need
to
have
consensus
on
to
move
forward.
H
E
H
C
A
I
think
we
Myles
and
I
were
discussing
and,
as
we
were,
offering
in
the
one
of
the
last
drafts
that
it
really
a
violation
of
that
you
know,
would
be
considered
a
code
of
conduct
violation
because
we
we
do
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
we're
respecting
the
process
here
and
so
I
just
want
to
maybe
double-click
a
little
bit
on
what
what
Myles
was
saying.
That
I
think
this
is
something
we
really
need
to
take
seriously
and
because
it's
it's
very,
it's
very
important.
You
think.
E
H
We
already
landed
a
a
the
equivalent
of
that
member
expectations
document,
but
I'm
not
I,
think
strengthening
in
it.
To
specifically
call
out
this
could
make
sense,
like
I'm
almost
wondering,
even
if,
like
on
that
mailing
list,
is
it
possible
to
add
a
header
that
basically
says
you
know
hey
reminder.
This
is
all
very
confidential.
H
So
doing
that
kind
of
thing
and
I
think
also
like
it
wouldn't
be
bad
to
the
governance
on
the
members
whatever
somewhere.
That
basically
says
like
what
Miles
said
that
you
know
this
would
be
considered,
possibly
a
COC,
II,
violation
or
grounds
for
removal.
As
a
member,
if
you
know,
if
you,
if
it's
you
know,.
H
B
So
that
I'm
clear
on
the
message,
footer
I,
the
voting
board
and
regular
members-
should
have
all
gotten
my
intro
email.
Is
everybody?
Okay
with
me?
Basically
just
modifying
that
text
down
to
maybe
a
sentence
or
two
to
drop
into
the
footer
of
all
messages
about
to
the
list?
Mm-Hmm,
we
have
money.
You.
E
B
A
I
mean
I,
think
I.
Think
yes
and
no.
This
was
this
is
also
a
big
kind
of
step
toward
that,
because
there's
assurances
we
want
to
be
able
to
provide
some
of
these
projects
that
we
will
be
discreet
during
this
period
of
diligence
and
that
this
goes
I
think
a
good
step
forward,
but
you
know
think
I'm
eager
to
help
these
projects
start
to
get
to
know
us
and
to
come
into
the
to
the
organization.
I
would
hope
that
everybody
shares
my
enthusiasm,
but
that's
that's.
That's
very
y'all
to
say
not
me,
I
sure.
H
A
A
I
think
you
know,
we've
got
a
we've
got
a
couple
projects
who
we
would
obviously
one
internal
project
already
architect,
who's
happy
to
dog
food.
It
and
we've
got
a
couple
of
potential
projects
who
are
more
comfortable
with
it
being
and
they're
understanding
that
this
is
a
new
process
that
we're
figuring
out
so
they're
they're
they're,
more
comfortable
with
it
being
something
we
learn
as
we
go,
but
you
know
I,
just
I
I
don't
want
to
move
forward
on
my
own
confidence,
I'd
like
to
move
forward
on
the
confidence
of
the
entire
CPC
I.
Think.
E
E
It
sent
an
email
to
the
board
with
an
overview
I
guess
earlier
this
week,
I
think
on
Monday
I'm
still
waiting
for
some
responses.
The
next
board
meeting
is
scheduled
for
about
like
two
weeks
from
now
and
I'm
sure
that
will
be
on
the
agenda
Brian
and
Mike.
How
long
would
you
say
it
would
be
reasonable
to
wait
for
the
board
to
have
reviewed
it.
I.
F
I
would
say
you
could
start
proceeding
with
this
and
you
know
if
the
board
has
any
adjustments
or
changes
they're
gonna
require.
Then
we
can
take
that
accommodation
into
account,
but
I
I
wouldn't
necessarily
hold
up
for
board
approval.
To
be
honest,
I
think
the
Board
expects
the
CPC
to
be
sort
of
self
running
and
operating
so
I.
Don't
think,
there's
any
intention
to
hold
things
back
until
approval
on
everything.
H
F
H
E
E
That
being
said,
because
we
have
Brian
and
Mike
on
the
call
from
the
LF
who
have
more
experience,
you
know
than
I
do
in
you
know
dealing
with
boards
dealing
with
various
foundations.
If
they
don't
see
anything
that
in
that
proposal,
that's
standing
up
to
them.
I
think
that's
a
pretty
reasonable
signal.
F
A
Is
this
that
that
initial
email
and
that
initial
initial
submission
of
the
application
starts
the
dialog
and
starts
the
conversation
about
like
what
the
project
needs
to
adjust
change.
You
know
information.
We
need
that
kind
of
thing.
It's
it's.
So
one
of
these
questions
are
going
to
be
answered
in
full
in
a
week
for
sure.
A
Okay,
so
we
will
then
maybe
on
this
particular
issue,
look
to
hopefully
get
more
feedback
from
the
board
on
the
project
progression
proposal
in
the
next
couple
of
CPC
meetings
and,
in
the
meantime,
I
think
I
will
encourage
these
projects
to
start
looking
at
the
application
form
and
and
potentially
emailing
that
that
list
with
with
an
intent.
If
that's
that
sounds
good
to
everybody,.