►
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
Looks
like
we're
live
so
we'll
get
things
rolling.
Thank
you.
Everyone
for
joining
today's
episode
of
the
open,
j/s
foundation,
crafts
project
council,
meeting
today's
December
3rd
of
2019
and
we've
got
a
fairly
full
agenda.
I,
don't
know
if
we
have
any
any
things
we
want
to
discuss
in
the
private
session.
A
So
I
try
to
jump
in
here
and
sort
the
agenda
a
little
bit
before
the
meeting,
but
didn't
get
to
spend
as
much
time
as
I'd
liked
it's
ruptor
by
a
call
that
I
got
so
the
first
agenda
item
in
the
Google
Doc
working
from
there
is
add,
missing
links
for
buy
loss
and
vision,
mission
mission,
vision,
statements
that
was
merged.
So
they
can
move
along
past
that
one,
the
next
one
I
want
to
touch
on
real
quickly.
A
A
B
I
mean
really
I
think
it
just
needs
more
comments
and
approvals
to
get
it
landed.
You
know,
I
I,
think
it's
copying.
You
know
it's
it's
putting
in
what
was
approved
by
the
board,
I
believe
somewhere,
where
it's
more
visible,
so
I
think
it
should
mostly
be
about
like
if
there's
a
different
where
it
should
go
or
I,
don't
know.
Basically
it's
just
a
you
know:
it's
been
open
for
seven
days,
not
a
lot
of
comments
or
review,
so
we
should
get
more
people
looking
at
it
so
that
it
can
land
I.
A
C
Things
we
can
add
in
here
if
there,
if
there's
you
know
for
projects
like
how
they're
actually
expected
to
like
to
implement
this,
which
I
think
it's
fairly
straightforward,
but
still
you
know
it's
new
for
for
many
folks.
So
if
it
folks
have
questions
about
that,
please
pop
that
that
into
this
PR
as
well,
so
we
can
get
that
answered.
You.
A
A
This
is
kind
of
born
out
of
the
previous
COC
work
that
we're
still
working
through
it's
kind
of
held
up
for
this
one.
This
adds
the
contributor
covenant
directly
into
the
COC
document
in
our
a
CPC
repo
and
there's
some
conversation
here
about
whether
we
should
link
to
a
commit
sha
or
have
the
copy
directly
in
the
file
and
I
did
approve
this,
but
I
am
with
further
thought
thinking
that
it
makes
sense
to
link
through
the
Shah
but
I'll
open
it
up
for
discussion
here
through
I
was
bored,
I
mean.
D
B
B
F
B
E
Would
be
happy
to
amend
the
PR
effectively
to
do
that,
especially
if
it
is
the
instruction
that
we
were
also
given
to
our
projects
regarding
the
CLC
when
I
went
through
the
onboarding
I
recall
that
at
least
at
that
point
it
did
the
starting
instruction
was
technically
at
least
two
in
line
that
the
COC
in
the
project
reposed
themselves.
But
if
that's
been
amended,
then
that's
great
and
I've
just
missed
that
part
of
the
onboarding.
E
Another
question
then
arises:
what
is
the
proper
version
to
be
linking
to,
and
or
should
we
be
tracking
the
progress
of
the
of
the
of
the
COC
effectively
as
it's
now
gone
from
one
point,
four
to
two
point:
zero
and,
for
example,
the
translation
links
are
quite
likely
to
get
updated
to
point
to
that.
Instead,
yep.
E
B
A
F
You
quick
question
here:
sorry,
like
from
the
perspective
of
a
project,
the
project
will
point
to
sort
of
a
single
place
inside
of
the
of
the
CPC,
where
the
actual
siya
to
the
contributor
covenant
will
be.
Is
that
like
how
this
is
going
to
be
organized
if.
B
A
Time
great,
the
next
agenda
item
and
if
I
was
able
to
work
through
the
agenda,
a
little
further
I
probably
would
have
pushed
this
so
later.
But
do
we
want
to
discuss
the
open,
jeaious
foundation,
project,
landscape?
I
know
we
had
a
long
discussion
last
week
in
the
meeting.
I
would
say:
maybe
we
saved
this
for
last
and
come
back
to
it
or
encourage
folks
on
the
call
to
take
a
look
at
that
issue
and
add
your
comments.
Bear.
B
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
202
oppened
this
twenty
days
ago,
Matteo's
got
a
couple
of
comments,
I
think
Michael.
You
had
asked
for
some
alignment
with
the
Charter
Review
bit
of
it,
and
then
we
also
already
have
a
project
charter
submitted
sentence.
This
is
for
the
amp
project:
oh
they're,
there
they
have
an
issue
open
and
there
we.
A
C
Point
of
contact
for
onboarding,
so
we
discussed
on
this
one
Joe
that
verbally
that
there
was
an
awareness
that
the
the
champion
is
intended
to
stay
with
the
project
through
incubation,
but
that
this
is
not
clear
in
our
documentation.
So
we
need
to.
We
need
to
revise
that,
to
make
it
more
clear
that
the
the
champion
remains
with
with
the
project
as
their
point
of
contact.
A
A
So
yeah
there
are
two
questions
here.
Should
all
issues
relates
all
morning
the
mood
to
the
onboarding
repo,
which
I
think
decided
that
that
should
be
the
case.
It
should
be
the
canonical
spot
question
you
are
looking
at
required
files
such
as
Code
of
Conduct.
Do
you
require
uniformity
in
naming
I
think
we
agreed
that
we
should
do
the
github
preference
and
naming
and
require
that?
Does
anybody
have
any
more
context
hearing.
C
Discussed
a
little
bit
more
where
certain
issues
should
should
live.
The
preference
here
was
that
onboarding
questions
really
go
solely
to
the
onboarding
repository,
but
the
the
point
was
raised
that
the
onboarding
checklist
canonically
lives
in
this
repository.
So
there's
a
bit
of
a
kind
of
problem
there,
where
we've
kind
of
separated
thing
ideally
be
kept
together
and
I'm,
not
sure
what
the
results
of
that
decision
was.
I.
Think.
B
B
So
I,
you
know
specifics.
We
may
come
across
specific
ones
that
are
harder
or
easier,
but
it
seemed
like
that
was
the
agreement
and
so
like
unless
there's
a
problem
moving
that
stuff
over.
Maybe
we
should
look
at
how
what
it
would
take
to
move
it
over
mm-hmm
just
take
somebody
to
actually
look
at
it
and
figure
out
what
does
or
doesn't
make
sense.
A
So
do
we
I'm
capturing
this
in
a
comment
and
the
issue
that
question
one
on
putting
repos
place
for
all
onboarding
issues
and
augmentation
exceptions
may
arise
but
should
be
dealt
with
us.
They
come
question
to
you,
which
is
follow.
Github
mini
convection
conventions.
I.
Think
one
question
born
out
of
that
is:
should
we
document
that
somewhere
and
if
so,
where.
B
Yeah
I
guess
that's
like
is
it
do
we?
Are
we
saying
that,
like
in
general,
we'll
just
follow
github
naming
conventions
in
what
case
that
can
be
documented
somewhere
in
the
CPC
governance
or
if
it's
like
specifically,
the
code
of
conduct
should
be
called
this,
because
that's
what
github
uses
or
supports,
then
we
should
update
I,
think
the
code
of
conduct
governance
to
say
that
somewhere,
yeah.
A
A
B
A
A
C
A
So
the
first
one
is
and
the
project
onboarding
Rico
is
issue,
thirty-one
communication
channel
between
CPC
and
the
camp
infrastructure
working
group.
This
was
opened
up
three
weeks
ago.
There's
been
a
few
comments,
but
largely
right
out
of
right
out
of
the
gates,
but
it
looks
like
brian
is
going
to
spin
up
a
mailing
list,
so.
A
I
think
Toby
was
looking
for
some
guidance
on
where
they
would
need
to
land
coming
out
of
incubation.
Is
that
running?
One
of
the
graduation
requirements
for
amp
from
the
CPC
was
to
draft
a
clear
plan
to
disentangle
the
CDN
from
the
amp
runtime
from
Google
app
cache,
they're
tracking,
not
in
a
working
group
working
and
working
with
infrastructure
issue.
A
A
C
Not
sure
that
he
has
but
I
did
want
to
take
a
second
and
thank
Chris
and
and
tear
me
a
new
where
we're
interested
in
doing
this,
but
also
ask
them
if
anybody
else
is
interested
in
being
part
of
that
conversation,
and
we
could
certainly
use-
and
you
know,
lots
of
support
and
input
here.
This
is
really
really
important,
and
so,
let's
you
know,
and.
A
C
I
I
feel
that
they
ask
is
to
be
you
know,
a
participant
in
shaping
this,
this
plan
document
and
so
I,
don't
believe.
The
intention
is
to
do
any
technical
work
at
this
time,
but
rather
to
help
the
amp
team
kind
of
create
a
road
map
and
that's
going
to
be
acceptable.
You
know
for
the
foundation
for
for
this
for
this
work,
and
you
know
that
that's
something
we
made
in
our
mission,
so
we
should
be.
We
should
be
really
active
participants,
yeah.
A
C
Think
that
would
be
great.
We
just
paused.
You
know
the
plan
for,
like
you
know,
creating
any
of
these,
these
communication
channels
just
to
wait
to
see
who
would
want
to
participate
in
how
so,
if
it's
black
is
something
that
that
folks
are
gonna
be
using
and
into
then
we
should.
We
can
very
easily
do
that.
Yeah.
A
Cool
next
is
the
checklist
deadline
for
collab
summit.
Graduation
tobe
created
this
three
weeks
ago.
The
goal
was
for
amp
to
graduate
by
the
open,
J's
collaborator
summit.
The
CPC
will
need
to
have
time
to
look
at
the
work
done
and
actually
votes
on
allowing
amp
to
do
so.
We
need
to
clarify
when
that
will
be
that's
a
good
question,
especially
as
the
collab
summit
is
more
like
ten
days
away
as.
C
Yeah
I
think
and
I
think
we
communicated
that
that's
probably
unlikely
to
currently
stand
so
I've
been
collaborating
with
some
folks
on
the
amp
working
group
on
incubation,
working
group
and
I.
Think
the
group
is
in
agreement
that
it's
would
be
nice
if
we
could
have
done
it,
but
it's
at
this
point
unlikely.
Given
the
kinds
of
things
we
were
waiting
on
me.
C
C
C
These
checklist
items
cleared
for
this
project
and
you
know
we've
been
pretty
pretty
clear
with
our
incubating
projects
that
this
is
something
we're
here
to
help
them
accomplish,
and
so
you
know
this
is
sort
of
a
I
think
an
important
thing
to
be
keeping
track,
track
up
and
keeping
visible,
because
you
know
everybody
can
help
the
project
on
board
and
everybody
should
be
so
it's
it's
here's
the
project's
goal
to
be
on
budget
we're
on
board
by
such
and
such
date
and
time.
You
know,
help
us
achieve
that.
A
C
A
A
Cool
well
we'll
leave
this
agenda
label
here
and
check
back
in
on
this
in
two
weeks
and
see
where
things
are
I
I'm
wondering
if
there's
any
way
to
surface
either
the
conversation
or
the
needs
that
a
project
may
have,
if
there's
any
better
way
to
kind
of
surface
those
things
and
I'm
thinking
about
slack.
Because
that's
why
I
spend
a
lot
of
my
time
but
I
know
that's
not
always
the
best
way.
But
if
anybody
has
any
ideas
to
you
know
make
sure
that
the
CPC
is
actively
engaged
in
moving
projects
forward.
A
B
A
B
It
it
really
comes
down
to
like.
Is
it
something
that
people
can
do
as
a
drive
by
or
is
it
something
where
you
know,
they're
gonna
have
to
commit
multiple
hours
ongoing
for
several
weeks,
because
those
are
two
different,
two
different
kinds
of
things.
If
it's
one
than
just
having
a
list
of
saying,
hey,
here's,
if
you
got
time,
here's
how
you
can
help,
otherwise
it's
more
of
like
hey.
We
want
you
to
get
involved
in
this
one
specifically
ramp
up.
What's
going
on
and
that's
sort
of
a
bigger
ass
right.
A
A
I'm
just
checking
should
we
move
on
to
the
open
gates,
foundation,
project,
landscape
issue
or
jump
into
the
project
board
for
post
bootstrap
work.
My
inclination
is
to
go
to
the
project
board,
just
to
make
sure
that
that
doesn't
languish,
I'm
open
to
other
suggestions,
and
actually
this
board
is
I
think-
would
be
pretty
quick
to
go
through
so
I'll
move
in
that
direction.
Unless
anybody
objects,
the
project
board
is
project
three
in
the
cross
project.
Council
I'll
drop
a
link
to
it.
Folks
can
go
directly
if
they'd
like
to
you.
A
This
has
been
around
since
the
bootstrap
days.
There's
a
in
progress.
The
first
one
is
add:
admin
policy
Doc's
actually
have
a
PR
about
to
be
opened,
but
since
I
had
computer
trouble,
I'm
not
sure
which
computer
it's
on
so
I'm
to
figure
that
out
and
submit
that
PRS,
and
that
is
basically
adding.
You
know.
Github
admin
policy
Docs,
which
maybe
I,
can
even
update
to
include
more
information
on
github
or
management
policy
and
such
based
on
discussions
about
member
owners
and
such.
A
A
C
What
did
we
call
that
the
services
dresser
just
as
ven
you
and
had
some
input
from
folks
on
that
and
and
I
think
really
in
terms
of
next
needs,
it's
gonna
kind
of
boil
down
to
what
what
the
projects
wouldn't
unique
challenges
that
projects
are
having
as
they
sort
of
upgrade
their
own
infrastructure
and
identify.
You
know
those
those
needs
and
things
so
I
mean
I'm,
not
really
sure
without
anything
more
concrete
than
that
what
we
meet.
What
else
we
need
to
do
here?
What
further
action
needs
to
happen?
C
B
Yeah
I
mean
we've
documented
what
the
current
sort
of
services
you
can
get.
It's
is
that
is
that
enough
or
or
like
like
I,
you
know,
like
you
said,
each
of
the
projects
has
their
own
challenges.
It
may
be
that,
like
once
a
few
more
or
bigger
projects
come
come
on
those
projects.
You
know
once
an
amps
join,
maybe
oden
amp
can
look
together
to
see
what
their
infrastructures
is.
Is
there
any
commonality
or
whatever,
but
like
right
now?
A
Yeah
I
agree:
I,
guess
the
question
is:
do
we
need
to
document
this
somewhere
either
in
a
repo
or
on
the
website,
and
then
call
this
done
and
until
we
you
know
something
is
born
out
of
the
work
that
other
projects
are
doing,
that
we
can
further
this
or
what's
what?
How
do
we
really
feel
like?
This
is
closed?
A
B
Almost
like
we
could
use
an
aspirational
like
here's,
a
bunch
of
things
we
still
think
could
use
some
some
future.
They
have
some
more
work
or
improvement
in
the
foundry
foundations
CPC,
but
we're
not
really
actively
working
right
now,
so
we
don't
forget
them,
but
having
an
issue
where
we
don't
do
anything
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense
in
my
mind,
right
right.
A
B
C
B
C
A
A
So
there
is
a
column
here
in
the
post
bootstrap
housekeeping
that
is
waiting
on
board
slash
foundation.
Do
we
have
any
updates
on
any
of
these?
It's
project
directed
funding,
update,
move
to
SF
CLA
box
for
new
Foundation
and
define
and
document
a
style
guide
for
foundations.
Name
like
that
last
one
Brian
made
some
progress
on
ok,.
A
A
B
A
H
H
F
D
H
D
H
A
E
A
H
H
H
Soon
as
possible,
but
with
the
understanding
there
are
it's
not
one
person
or
two
people
to
drive
it
forward.
It's
there
are
a
number
of
things
that
need
to
be
considered,
but
it's
I
mean
the
hour
prior
to
this
one.
We're
actually
meeting
on
this
it'll
be
a
topic
of
discussion
next
week
when
the
Board
meets.
A
A
So
we
haven't
touched
on
the
open,
J's
foundation,
project
landscape,
but
again
I
encourage
folks
to
drop
comments
into
issue
for
one
one,
and
we
can
look
at
discussing
that
further
I
believe
that
we
decided
or
well
really,
you
decided
to
create
an
issue
to
discuss
the
CPC
meetings
for
December.
The
expectation
is
that
next
week
will
be
canceled
and
potentially
meeting
on
the
24th
and
31st
will
also
be
canceled.