►
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
A
B
Just
a
couple
of
things
we
have
additionally
today
the
collab
summits
planning
meeting,
which
will
be
immediately
following
this
CPC
beating
it's
a
half
hour.
So
please
join
if
you're
interested
in
participating
in
that
either
today
or
just
in
an
ongoing
basis,
related
we're
collecting
feedback,
still,
obviously
from
from
past
versions
of
the
summit,
and
also
feedback
on
different
ideas
we
could
employ
for
for
the
next
summit,
for
example,
doing
individual
summits
or
by
project
or
having
project
tracks.
That
was
a
research
question
that
we
put
out
to
some
projects.
B
So
if
you
have
thoughts
or
ideas
that
you
want
to
share,
we
warmly
welcome
them
in
the
summit
slack
channel
or
you
can
email
me,
Rachel
or
Robin,
or
course
join
the
meeting
and
then
a
reminder
that
our
next
AMA
will
be
for
jQuery,
with
Timmy
and
Dave
on
on
the
5th
of
February.
So
please
help
us
spread
the
word
and
toy
friends
to
and
that
they
need
jQuery
and
that
they
need
to
attend
the
same.
A
cool.
A
B
Great
question,
and
so
unfortunately
that
was
set
up
originally
as
a
Google,
Calendar
hangout
event
and
which
I
think
we
will
try
and
get
that
addressed
that
today
and
instead
of
doing
it
that
way,
putting
putting
it
on
our
public
and
open
Jay
s
calendar
with
a
open,
jsm
link.
I'm
gonna
drop
in
our
zoom
chat,
really
quick,
a
link
to
that
hangout
for
those
who
would
like
to
join
today.
B
A
And
that's
immediately
following
this
meeting
for
a
half
hour,
it's
an
accurate,
that's
right.
Okay,
I
also
see
that
the
standards
team
meeting
is
today
two
hours.
Yeah
I
will
try
to
make
that
meeting
and
then
the
other
calendar
related
question
I
have
is.
It
looks
like
the
AMA
is
perhaps
not
on
the
public
calendar
either.
So
maybe
that's
something
we
can
update
as
well.
B
A
C
We
had
the
board
meeting
last
weekend.
Sorry
last
Friday
we
did
talk
about
the
travel
fund,
so
that's
one
of
the
issues
on
our
agenda
later
on
the
budget
was
approved
as
well
as
the
statement
was
made
in
terms
of
like.
If,
if
the
travel
fund
is
much
more
successful
and
the
funds
need
to
be
expanded,
you
know
there
was
a
statement
basically
saying
that
that
would
likely
happen.
C
A
Anything
else
before
we
get
into
the
agenda
here:
no
all
right,
I'm,
looking
here
at
I'm,
trying
to
see
if
I
can
identify
anything
that
is
you
know,
would
be
of
interest
to
Toby
since
he's
only
here
for
the
first
half
of
the
meeting.
The
first
thing
that
comes
to
mind
is
the
communication
channel
between
CPC
and
amp
infrastructure
working
group,
which
is
the
last
item
on
the
agenda.
Maybe
we
should
just
touch
on
that
first
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
that
we
get
to
it.
If
there
are
no
objections.
A
This
is
project
onboarding
issue
31,
which
I
will
drop
the
slack
and
thanks
Rachel
for
confirming
the
AMA
can
totally
go
on
the
public
calendar
so
yeah.
This
is
a
issue
31
communication
channel
between
cross
project
council
and
amp
infrastructure
working
group
I
think
that
we
had
had
like
some
things
spun
up.
You
know
perhaps
a
mailing
list,
but
the
slack
channel
was
another
one
Toby.
Do
you
think
that
this
is
something
that
we
need
to
stay
on
top
of
or
their
action
items?
We
should
be
aware.
D
I
think
we
can
close
this
I
think
we
made
sufficient
progress
at
the
collapse
submit
for
people
to
actually
meet
and
feel
comfortable.
They
were
going
in
the
right
direction
and
I
think
we
have
issues.
As
you
know,
points
to
structure,
conversation
so
I
think
we're
good
and
I
think
we're
we
have
those
set
up
by
Brian
and
I
I.
Don't
know
that
they're
actually
being
used
that
much
so
I
mean
I.
Think
regardless
we
can
close
this.
B
A
B
D
This
is
just
about
the
copyright
guidelines.
Brian
and
I
met
last
week
got
some
action.
Items
listed
and
I
won't
be
continuing
to
work
on
that
and
won't
have
something
to
share,
not
next
meeting
but
the
one
after
that,
because
there's
fosston
over
the
weekend
and
so
I
don't
expect
to
get
much
time
to
do
anything.
A
A
A
The
doc
and
chat
for
ease
of
use,
cool
all
right.
Well,
then,
we'll
well
now
just
kind
of
jump
into
the
agenda
items
here
and
work
our
way
through
the
first
one.
Here
is
a
cross
budget
council
issue,
four
four
five:
this
is:
where
shall
certain
resources
live?
You
know
we
kind
of
bike,
shed
it
on
this
a
little
bit
and
I'm,
not
sure
we
really
left
with
anything
other
than
like,
let's
think
of
perhaps
a
repo,
that's
we
should
have
that.
B
My
recollection
after
the
last
meeting
was
that
we
should
continue
the
conversation
on
the
github
issue,
because
we
were
just
sort
of,
as
he
say
like
bike
on
it
a
bit.
There
hasn't
been
any
further
bike
shedding
on
the
if
you,
since
we
biked
shedded
in
person,
and
so
that
sort
of
leads
me
to
believe
that
nobody
at
this
point
is
experiencing
this
problem
strongly
enough.
You
know
that
they're,
like
oh,
my
gosh
I,
have
the
ideal
solution
and
it
is
X.
B
What
I
would
like
to
do
just
to
move
forward
is
to
simply
create
a
resources
directory
in
one
of
our
existing
repos
with
an
index
for
what
some
of
these
files
are,
and
just
call
that
good
enough
for
now
and
move
on.
Does
that
sound
reasonable
to
everyone?
So
we're
not
introducing
other
like
places
to
lose
track.
B
Okay,
great
I'll
I'll,
take
that
action
item
and
to
do
that
then
great
excellent.
A
Thank
you
and
then
we
can
close
that
one
out
and
revisit
it
later.
If
we
decide
that
we
need
something
more
cool.
So
the
next
item
on
the
agenda
here
is
the
pull
request
for
for
one.
This
is
finalized
travel
fund
process,
and
this
is
something
we
need
to
get
over
the
finish
line
as
we,
you
know,
already
have
travel
requests
coming
in
and
moving
forward.
A
F
Here
the
basically
the
questions
I
had
in
377
are
effectively
answered
by
by
us
merging
this
and
the
the
comments
I
left
are
just
basically
are
just
comments.
They're
not
they
may
lead
to
something
being
clarified.
If
the
answer
is
that
something
should
be
clarified,
but
they
should
not
be
blockers
or
for
what
I
thing
I
approve
this
message,
great.
A
C
Yes,
I
mean
one
previous
objection
was
was
removed,
based
on
the
suggestions,
discussion
and
I,
followed
up
with
James
in
the
issue.
He
seems,
okay,
with
landing.
It
I
took
the
action
that
once
we
land
it
will
we'll
submit
a
new
PR
which
would
further
update
it
to
open
the
possibility
for
projects
to
request
the
budget
they
can
manage
themselves
but
I.
C
C
I
believe
this
actually
brings
everything
to
the
like.
The
member
travel
fund
actually
lands
in
the
repo,
so
I
think
it's
not
just
in
the
proposal
but
taking
what
was
in
the
proposal
and
puts
it
into
our
repo
okay,
so
I
am
yeah.
So
basically,
yes,
so
I
think
we
land
this
and
we
now
have
a
working
travel
fund.
This,
it's
my
understanding,
so
I
basically
say
unless
there's
any
objections,
I
don't
know,
don't
think
we
need
a
board
approval
like
this,
isn't
changing
the
governance
or
anything
like
that.
It's
I
know
already.
G
Approved
by
the
board,
and
not
not
this
meeting
the
previous
meeting,
if
I
recall
correctly,
and
then
there
is
these,
the
Faddis
PR
changed
the
operation
of
the
funds
so
that
we
are
doing
so
when
these
lands,
it
will
be
on
us
to
approve
the
travel
fund
requests.
So
we
need
to
land
an
equivalent
PR
that
actually
remove
things
from
admin
from
nausea,
sodomy.
C
G
G
C
C
G
G
G
I
G
F
A
Great
okay,
excellent!
That's
that's
great
progress,
thanks
everyone
for
pushing
forward
on
that
cool,
so
moving
on
to
the
next
issue.
Another
big
one
here
is
the
starting
a
Code
of
Conduct
team.
Now
I
know
we
touched
on
this
the
last
couple
meetings.
We
have
the
hack
and
B
file
that
lays
out
you
know
our
purpose,
our
scope
of
work,
people
who
have
raised
their
hands
if
anybody's
interested
check
that
file.
What
what
do
we?
What?
What?
What
are
the
next
steps
here
for
moving
forward?
I.
C
D
B
He
wanted
to
approve
that,
and
we
had
wanted
to
get
a
group
together
to
work
from
from
the
CPC
to
work
on
them
and
then
go
to
the
prom
to
the
projects
with
that
or
to
call
for
their
participation
and
that's
my
understanding
of
what
we
wanted
to
do
is
in
so
that
we
did
not
confuse
issues
for
for
projects.
Eoc
groups
burn
probably
already
very.
A
Busy
yeah,
my
understanding
too,
is
that
this
is
kind
of
just
to
get
the
ball
rolling
and
what
the
whoever
raised
raised
their
hands.
You
know
that's
not
a
limited
group
like
as
we
move
forward
and
talk
to
more
people
if
they
want
to
get
involved
in
the
by
all
means.
You
know,
I
expect
we'll
start
to
reach
out
to
more
and
more
people
as
we
get
the
ball
rolling,
yeah.
D
F
G
G
C
C
G
D
A
Be
great
I
would
appreciate
that
cool
I
am
one
thing
I'm
thinking
about
is
that
I
have
a
task
to
PR
in
admin
policy
Docs
and
one
of
them
is
around
teams
and
working
groups,
and
such
do.
We
feel
like,
before
we
kind
of
start
to
spin
this
up
as
a
quote-unquote
team.
We
need
to
land
those
documents
first,
and
you
know
formalize
this.
They
wouldn't
really
want.
C
C
There's
something
that's
typed
in
there,
so
I
guess
it's
like
do
we
think
that's.
Does
this
group
think
that's
good
enough?
If,
yes,
then,
maybe
we're
good
on
the
scope
right?
If
not,
then
maybe
we
need
to
get
together
to
figure
out
how
to
move
it
forward,
since
it
hasn't
moved
forward
in
the
the
dock
itself,.
F
C
C
F
My
my
understanding
earlier
of
the
status
was
that
the
MVP
version,
the
current
one,
did
not
have
parts
to
it
that
people
actually
objected
to.
It
was
more
about
what
else
ought
to
be
in
it,
which
would
indicate
that
I
am
not
sure
that
we
have
a
disagreement
on
the
the
current
stage,
2
or
stage
3.
Sorry,
I,
don't
remember
what
stage
it's
at
proposal.
C
F
C
C
C
A
A
A
All
right,
I'm
gonna,
move
on
to
the
next
issue,
which
is
411
I,
think
Bryan
suggested
we
take
this
off
of
the
agenda,
but
you
know
I
I
feel
like
there's
been
some
conversation
here,
that
we
should
discuss.
I
mean
I,
guess
Bryan's,
not
on
the
call,
and
he
commented
an
hour
ago.
Tierney
has
some.
You
know,
I
think
valid
questions
on
the
call
yeah.
Turning
do
you
want
to.
You
want
to
give
us
a
summary
of
your
thoughts
here.
A
A
There's
been
comments
about
accessibility
and
doesn't
work
with
JavaScript
turned
off,
and
you
know
it's
not
clear
to
me
how
we
maintain
this
because
I
know
when
fast.
If
I
wasn't
on
there,
you
know
somebody
said
Dan
said
he
would
update
that,
but
I'm,
not
it's
not
clear
to
me
how
these
are
maintained
and
the
other
foundations,
if
it's
just
like
pull
requests
more.
E
E
I've
not
seen
this
is
something
that
is
like
going
to
inherently
add
value
to
the
project
or
to
the
foundation
or
to
its
projects
in
a
way
that
doesn't
already
exist,
and
then,
on
top
of
that,
in
that
way
that
doesn't
exist.
If
that
the
thing
that
doesn't
exist,
that
does
exist
already.
If
that
isn't
solving
the
problem
needs
to
solve,
we
should
probably
enhance
that
rather
than
d2
or
duplicating
the
work
and
making
it
more
complex.
E
My
concern
is
that
if
this
is
being
put
into
the
open
days,
foundation
goetaborg
that
the
CPC
will
then
have
to
maintain
it
and
I,
don't
know
if
that's
something
that
we
have
time
to
do
and
like
that's
an
adding
a
burden
to
the
CPC
that
was
not
like,
requested
or
asked
for,
and
especially
if
it's
like.
You
know,
I
personally,
not
seen
a
lot
of
value
being
provided
to
the
CPC
or
the
foundation.
E
C
E
C
Don't
know
why
the
line
has
to
be
that
hard
in
terms
of
who's,
maintaining
it
or
not,
but
I
think
the
idea
is
that
mostly
it
maintains
itself
other
than
you
know
when
we
have
new
projects.
Joining
somebody's
gonna
have
to
see
our
in
that
new
project,
but
I
don't
think
like.
If
you
look
at
the
example
there,
a
lot
of
that
stuff
isn't
gonna
change
all
that
often.
E
Fair
and
that's
totally
fine,
but
it
does
add
additional
burden
to
the
work
that
we're
gonna
do,
and
one
of
the
things
that
resonated
with
me,
early
on
in
in
the
CPC's
tradition,
is
being
very
cautious
about
adding
burden
to
the
group
we
have
and
making
sure
we're
protecting
our
time
to
ensure
we
can
get
the
work.
We
need
to
do
done
right
so.
C
J
J
E
F
E
E
This
loads,
like
three
point
six
megabytes
of
JavaScript
before
it
paints,
so
less
of
it
doesn't
work
at
all
with
JavaScript,
but
it's
enhanced
by
JavaScript
is
more
of
what
I'm
kind
of
poking
out
there
is
that
it
literally
does
not
load
them
if
until
the
javascript
is
loaded
which,
like
as
the
people,
you
know
as
the
open
J's
funding,
perhaps
not
the
best
look
is
kind
of
what
I'm
getting
out
there
like.
Is
that
a
best
practice?
Probably
not?
And
it's
probably
not
something
any
of
us
would
ever
advocate
for.
F
E
J
E
A
E
J
A
A
Great
so
I'll
just
keep
on
truckin
poll
request.
386
is
ad
post-graduation
checklist
I
think
there
were
some
questions
about
yeah
and
scrolling
down.
There's
conflicts
in
the
PR
just
because
some
of
the
things
have
actually
moved,
but
does
anybody
how
many
I
guess
I
should
have
maybe
pulled
this
up
one
until
he
was
on
it?
I
forgot
that
this
I.
C
Think
that
one
like
when
I
last
looked
at
it,
it
needs
that
update,
but
it
also
needs
more
approvals,
and
then
we
can
take
it
to
the
board,
but
it
really
needed
them
last
time,
I
looked
at
it.
The
main
thing
in
my
mind,
was
like
people
saying
like
we
need,
as
per
governance,
I
think
we
need
50
percent
of
our
voting
members.
Is
it
let's
see
what
did
I
say
in
the
last
one
is.
C
A
A
Great
responsible
security
disclosures-
this
is
issue
3
to
6,
Marcin
or
Marcin
am
not
sure
how
you
say
that
from
the
node
security
working
group
spun
something
up
and
now
we're
looking
at
how
to
apply
this
to
the
wider,
open,
JSF
landscape
of
projects.
He's
done
some
preliminary
work
to
see
what
other
folks
have
in
terms
of
security
procedures
and
he
and
Michael
and
I
are
gonna
connect.
A
F
F
E
C
So
changing
the
governments
need
to
be
open,
they
need
to
have
to
attend
to
approvals
by
CPC
members
and
no
objections
and
be
open
for
14
days.
So
as
that
one
been
open,
it's
been
more
than
say
so
yeah,
yet
I
would
say
that
if
we
agree
that
it's
it's
a
governance
and
not
charter,
then
we
can
land
it
at
this
point,
yeah.
A
Cool
all
right.
So
the
next
item
is
the
post.
Bootstrap
work
called
drop,
the
link
to
the
actual
project
board
and
the
chat
probably
touch
on
this.
Briefly.
The
admin
policy
Doc's
as
I've
mentioned,
there's
a
PR,
that's
open,
I.
Think
one
of
the
three
remaining
docs
is
ready,
but
the
other
two
I
am
still
needing
to
convert
from
nodejs
to
open,
Jas
and
and
then
can
open
that
PR
up
before
you
know
comments
and
move
that
along
Chris
was
not
able
to
make
the
meeting
today.
A
Chris
Borchers,
but
he
did
say
and
I'll
read
the
comment
here.
He
set
up
the
repo
to
test
the
easy
CLA
process.
Ab.
It's
confirmed
that
one
signature
will
work
for
all
open
JSF
projects
that
use
the
EC
CLA.
You
can
see
that
on
the
test
test,
ez
CLA
project
and
I
will
drop
a
link
to
this
comments
into
the
chat
for
folks
who
want
to
see
where
I'm,
leading
from
just
keep
in
mind
that
this
is
the
live
CLA,
so
only
complete
the
sign
process.
A
A
I
A
All
right,
so
that's
it
from
that
board
which
hopefully
will
actually
have
that
board
closed
out
soon,
maybe
even
just
pull
those
issues
out
of
the
board
and
just
throw
them
on
the
agenda,
but
we
have
eight
minutes.
The
last
item
here
is
chartering
the
standards
team,
which
is
issue
58,
and
the
standards
group
here,
I.
A
I
I
can
I
can
chime
in
here
really
quickly,
like
the
group
itself
still
needs
to
discuss
these
things,
as
we
will
do
in
the
next
hour.
I
guess,
like
the
high
level
question
to
the
CPC,
would
be
like
how
does
CPC
folks
feel
about
the
idea
of
chartering
the
standards
group
specifically
kind
of
making
the
standards
group
the
official
owners
of
the
open,
giasses
engagement
and
standards
organizations
where
I
think
this
is
particularly
important
for
that
organization?
For
that
group?
I
Is
that
if
we
want
to
be
engaging
in
standards
organizations
if
we
want
to
be
working
with
them,
we
need
to
be
able
to
say
like
so-and-so.
That's
attending
is
a
delegate
and
representative
and
I
think
that
it
would
be
really
inefficient
if
every
time
we
want
to
do
that,
the
standards
group
has
to
kind
of
come
to
the
CPC
and
ask
for
permission
now,
I
think
there's
certain
things
that
will
still
involve.
I
You
know
working
with
the
CPC
like
the
OSI
membership,
for
example,
was
one
of
those
things
that
you
know,
I,
don't
think
the
standards
are,
can
independently
make
a
decision
like
that.
But
if
we,
if
the
CPC
approve
approves
which
it
did
and
the
board
approves-
and
we
move
forward
with
that,
then
making
the
decision
of
like
who
would
be
the
OSI
rep
would
be
something
that
I
think
would
be
reasonable
for
the
standards
organization
to
be
able
to
make
independently.
I
I
So
I
think,
with
with
that
in
mind,
then,
like
the
other,
really
high
level
bit
that
to
just
kind
of
put
in
people's
heads,
and
we
don't
need
to
make
any
decisions
right
now
is
like
this
kind
of
concept
of
having
working
groups
that
are
chartered
by
leadership
to
oversee
and
own
particular
parts
of
the
operations
of
the
foundation.
You
know
it's
something
that
the
nodejs
project
has
traditionally
done.
We
have
kind
of
done
this
with
how
we
charter
projects,
but
it's
a
very
different
thing.
I
So
you
know
the
high
level
thing
for
people
to
think
on
is
like.
Are
we
good
with
the
idea
of
spinning
up
these
kind
of
projects,
agnostic
projects
or
software
project?
Agnostic
initiatives
is
maybe
a
better
way
of
women
within
the
foundation
that
have
autonomy.
I
personally,
think
that
it's
good
and
it's
healthy
and
it
will
help
our
foundation
and
continue
to
build,
be
more
productive,
maybe
be
more
meaningful
to
different
folks.
Not
everyone,
for
example,
is
into
did
in
the
governance
work
that
we
do
in
the
CPC,
but
may
be
interested
in
the
standards.
I
Work
or
moderation
will
be
another
example
of
something
that
I
think
may
require
similar
a
similar
level
of
chartering.
So
you
know
no
decisions
to
make
right
now,
but
would
very
much
like
folks
to
think
about
it.
Be
aware
of
it
and
I
think
over
at
the
standards
group
will
we'll
kind
of
discuss
next
steps
of
putting
together
a
charter
likely
based
on
how
the
the
nodejs
project
does
it
and
hopefully
for
a
future
meeting
we'll
be
able
to
make
a
more
formal
presentation
for
approval
of
the
CPC.
A
A
Some
admin
policy
Doc's
from
node
over
to
the
open,
J
org
note
that
some
of
them
have
not
been
updated
yet
and
that's
why
it's
do
not
merge.
But
if
you
wanted
to
read
more
about
how
we've
worked
on
this
and
the
note
project
in
the
past
and
continue
to,
there
are
some
documents
that
you
can
take
a
peek
at
great
any
more
on
that
issue
or
any
other
issues.
As
we
near
the
top
of
the
hour.