►
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
B
B
B
Bouncing
around
here
today
we
were
going
to
talk
about
the
board
seats,
the
community
board
seats
and
then
work
on
the
code
of
conduct
process
blockers
for
onboarding
projects.
Again
sorry,
I'm
kind
of
just
jumping
around
here,
Oh
somebody's
already
got
the
issue
great.
Thank
you.
Let
me
drop
the
agenda
into
the
Google
Doc
to
the
note
before
hand
votes
so
much
going
on.
Let's
see.
D
As
usual,
I
have
a
whole
boatload
of
announcements
about
upcoming
meetings
and
so
immediately
following
today's
CPC
meeting,
we
have
the
summit
planning
meeting
and
and
we're
really
keen
to
have
anybody
interested
attend
where
we're
coming
down
to
sort
of
the
final
couple
of
weeks
before
I
think
we've
got
five
weeks
before
open
j/s,
world
and
and
collab
summit.
We
really
encourage
all
of
the
projects
to
get
their
sessions
in
ASAP,
make
sure
that
you're
registered
for
both
events
so
that
you're
getting
updates
and
stuff
like
that.
D
We
really
hope
to
see
everyone.
There,
then
at
6:00
yeah,
no
wait
5
7
p.m.
UTC.
We
have
the
standards
working
group
meeting
and
then
the
marketing
committee
is
meeting
after
that.
So
quite
a
few
different
groups
meeting
today
and
you're
welcome
to
all
of
them.
I
believe
we
also
have
office
hours
this
week.
Is
that
right,
Joe
or
is
that
next
week
that.
D
And
then
on
Friday
we're
hoping
to
have
a
public
session
of
the
board
meeting,
so
lots
of
different
events
this
week
and
a
lot
of
it
is
again
focused
on
kind
of
getting
communities
ready
for
the
event.
We
also
have
a
new
shared
channel
and
our
black
work
space
with
the
electron
work
space
so
pop
in
and
say
hello
to
our
friends
over
in
watching
and
that's
all
I
got
for
you
cool.
B
Yeah,
just
to
kind
of
add
on
to
that,
you
know
we
have.
The
Monday
of
the
open
joyous
world
week
is
going
to
be
a
collab
summit
today,
focused
on
contributors,
so
I
encourage
anyone
from
our
community
of
projects
to
consider
a
new
contributors
session
on
that
day
and
if
you
want
to
trial
out
any
contents,
or
you
know
footage
to
that
in
the
open
office
hours.
Just
let
me
know
happy
to
facilitate
any
other
announcements.
B
E
B
B
F
B
Excellent,
just
one
other
reminder:
I
think
I've
forgotten
the
last
couple
of
meetings.
If
anyone
can
have
big
notes,
that's
always
helpful.
I
think
are
one
of
our
code
of
conduct
sessions.
There
was
very
little
notes,
so
if
anyone
can
open
that
up
and
chime
in
whenever
they
are
able
to
that's
awesome,
anything
else,
I
think
Emily.
You
you
touched
on
something
you
want
to
raise.
A
Yeah
related
to
the
collab
network
of
getting
people
outside
of
the
project
themselves.
Active
I
really
think
we
should
do
something
about
the
individual
membership
program
that
we
were
supposed
to
have
launched
the
first
phase
of
in
q4
of
last
year
and
well
didn't.
It
would
be
great
to
get
that
off
the
ground.
While
looking
at
the
specifics
of
that,
it's
some
of
the
things
in
phase
along
the
dimensions,
namely
the
town
hall,
are
currently
only
a
stage
zero
proposal
in
in
our
systems.
So
I
was
wondering.
G
So
my
understanding,
you
know,
as
we
came
up
with
this
proposal
at
a
high
level
of
what
the
program
could
look
that
look
like,
but
we
just
haven't
had
an
active
champion.
I
do
not
believe
that
the
town
halls
have
been
blocking
it
in
any
way
and
if
anything,
I
actually
think
the
town
halls
should
probably
be
teased
out.
It's
something
that
we
should
maybe
consider
doing
independent
of
the
program.
It's
just
kind
of
a
useful
thing
that
we
can
be
doing
with
regards
to
the
program
itself.
G
I
do
think
that,
especially
since
it
has
kind
of
gone
stale,
the
lack
of
better
way
of
putting
in
which
to
Emily
I
think
you
are
pointing
out
I
think
we
really
should
revisit
first
principles
about
what
we
want
to
host,
how
we
want
to
host
it
and
how
we
want
to
do
it.
So
a
couple
you
know
like
high-level
bits
and
questions
that
need
to
be
answered.
One
would
be
you
know
like.
Is
it
a
membership
program?
I
know
that
the
foundation
staff
do
have.
G
You
know
like
some
insight
into
how
other
organizations
have
done
it,
but
calling
it
a
membership
actually
creates
like
legal
responsibilities
and
the
way
in
which
it's
handled,
which
is
maybe
higher
than
you
know
what
we
want
to
do
with
this
kind
of
problem,
this
kind
of
program
and
what
we
wanted
to
accomplish.
I
think
there's
also
a
question
about
administration,
so
my
gut
is
that
it's
not
something
that
should
be
administered
by
the
volunteer
side
of
the
house.
G
You
know
the
conference
we're
running
free.
Now.
People
may
still
want
to
support
the
organization
we
don't
have
swag
with
the
conference
as
far
as
I
know,
Robyn
and
the
staff
can
chime
in
there's
all
sorts
of
like
things
that
we
could
do
or
like
value
that
we
could
offer
for
a
program
like
this,
but
I
do
anyways
with
all
those
kind
of
haphazard
notes.
I
really
do
think
it
makes
sense
to
identify
a
new
champion.
Who
wants
to
leave
this
initiative
and
likely
kind
of
rethinking
from
first
principles
what
we
want
it
to
look.
C
H
I
think,
if
you're
looking
for
to
maybe
start
over
so
I
see,
I
can
clearly
see
the
suggestions
that
are
there,
I,
don't
know
being
new
I,
don't
know
why
they're
there.
So
if
the
idea
is
to
start
over
happy
to
help,
if
people
want
to
provide
me
with
a
list
of
stakeholders
or
whatever
is
most
helpful,
this
seems
like
something
that
would
be
helpful,
I'm
getting
to
know
the
foundation
structure
better
and
possibly
being
a
set
of
new
eyes.
That
could
be
helpful.
B
Thank
you,
Sara
yeah,
I,
wonder
how
we
should
proceed
on
this
I
mean
I.
Think
maybe,
which
said
we
can.
We
could
take
the
conversation
to
the
issue
that
I
think
Emily
opened
up,
but
I
wonder
if
we
should
start
some
sort
of
you
know
team
or
something
to
start
fleshing
it
out,
I
think
or
moving
it
forward,
because
there
has
been
a
lot
of
work
already
on
it.
B
F
I
B
Let's
we
have
a
couple
other
things
we
want
to
get
going
folks
who
are
interested.
You
know,
pay
attention
to
that
issue.
We
can
chime
in
on
that
issue
and
then
spend
something
out
of
that.
You
know
ad
hoc
meeting
or
what
have
you
and
try
to
move
that
forward.
Thank
you.
Excuse
me
anything
else.
Before
we
get
into
the
agenda
cool,
we
have
two
things
that
we
want
to
work
on
split
evenly.
B
The
first
one
is
the
community
steeped
and
then
the
other
one
is
the
unblocking
code
of
conduct
process
issues
for
onboarding
folks,
let's
dive
into
the
first
one
being
the
community
board
seats
for
folks
who
are
unaware.
I'll
give
some
quick
context
when
the
Foundation's
were
merged.
We
set
aside
some
community
seats
for
the
board.
One
is
elected
from
the
voting
members
of
the
cross-project
Council
one
for
the
first
year.
B
B
J
J
F
D
I
I
would
love
to
share
and
I
think
I
shared
this
with
Joe
once
and
he
was
like.
Oh
really,
that's
what
you
were
thinking.
I
didn't
think
that
at
all
and
I
had
the
impression
and
I
could
be
totally
wrong
right,
but
because
it
feels
like
a
lifetime
ago
that
we
were
going
through
all
this
initially
but
I
had
the
impression
that
one
of
these
seats
and
the
one
that's
currently
being
held
by
node
would
be
a
seat
that
would
be
held
for
impact
projects
and
that
we
would
kind
of
cycle
through
different.
D
You
know
impact
projects
taking
turns
holding
that
seat,
so
I,
don't
I
honestly,
don't
know
where
I
got
that
impressed
anymore,
but
that
was
that
was
the
understanding
that
I
had,
and
so
my
expectation
was
that
at
the
end
of
Michael's
term
we
would
either
say:
oh
nope
yep
note
should
keep
it
this
year,
because
there's
more
node
specific
impact
things
I,
don't
know
that
they
have
to
do.
Or
you
know
it
would
go
to
another
impact
project,
because
there
was
something
that
they
needed
to
do.
I
don't
know
I
I,.
F
Think
it
was
discussed
that
that
kind
of
thing
was
an
option,
but
the
governance
was
written
to
make
it
up
to
the
CPC.
You
know
it
could
be
another
CPC
seat.
We
could
say
yeah
this
other
impact
project
needs
a
board
member
or
you
know
we
left
ourselves
the
flexibility
to
do
what
we,
what
we
think
is
best
at
this
point.
G
So
perhaps
kind
of
building
on
that
Michael
if
the
intent
is
a
representation
of
any
project,
if
I
recall
correctly
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
the
existing
board
seat,
that
we
have
is
more
of
kind
of
like
a
CPC
rep.
So
it's
like
representing
one
of
the
cross
project
council
members,
perhaps
something
that
we
could
do,
that
could
be
like
flexible
and
fair
is
to
do.
G
You
know
an
open
call
to
anyone
from
any
of
the
projects
to
represent
their
projects
on
the
board
and
then
Note
can
send
a
rep
if
no
one
else
submits
anyone
to
apply.
Then
kind
of
the
status
quo
follows,
but
that
seems
to
be
kind
of
in
spirit
with
what
the
original
purpose
was.
I
guess.
The
only
thing
that
we
would
need
to
figure
out
would
be
voting
I
personally,
like
the
idea
of
like
the
CPC
voting
on
it.
G
But
having
really
opened
nominations
I
think
that
like
keeps
it
kind
of
simple
as
far
as
executing
the
vote,
as
opposed
to
like
if
we
had
like,
if
we
had
closed
nominations,
but
everyone
could
vote
or
open
both
and
like
how
we
know
who's
eligible
to
vote
starts
getting
really
complicated,
but
I
do
think
that
you
know
a
broader,
broader
asks
to
kind
of
any
foundation
project
like
would
you
like
board
representation?
Would
you
like
to
participate
in
this
capacity?
Do
you
have
the
capacity
to
do
it?
K
I
would
add
to
what
Miles
said,
which
was
kind
of
the
thing
I
said
last
week,
which
is
we
need
to
outline
pretty
clearly
for
the
projects,
what
it
means
to
be
on
the
board,
see
to
see
if
there's
any
interest,
I
think
so,
like
Myles,
you
said
that
in
several
different
ways,
but
I
think
we
just
need
to
sort
of
ant
fundamentally
answer
that
question
first
to
decide.
Yeah.
G
K
G
The
only
the
only
question
would
be,
and
we're
probably
fine,
I
think
going
about
this
is
fine
via
the
current
bylaws,
but
we
should
just
review
that
and
make
sure
it's
fine
I
believe
that
the
bylaws
were
written.
That
note
gets
it
the
first
year,
then
the
CPC
can
it
like,
basically
assign
it
the
second
year
so
I
think
all
we
need
to
to
do
something
like
this
is
reach
consensus,
but
we
would
be
good
to
review
and
ensure
that
we're
you
know
following
the
bylaws
bylaws
appropriately
and
then
separately
from
that
doing.
G
What
are
the
needs
of
a
board
member
and
what
they
do
is
kind
of
like
up
in
the
air,
depending
on
who
the
board
member
is
I.
Think
some
of
the
most
important
bits
here
are
like
what
is
the
risk
of
being
a
board?
Member
is
one
thing
that
I
think
is
really
important
for
people
to
have
a
heads
up
to
I,
think
kind
of
like
what
are
the
expectations
of
involvement
is
another
one
yeah.
J
Oh
yeah,
just
a
quick
question,
because
this
is
something
that
I
thought
was
brought
up
too
was
the
CPC
elections,
as
is
the
person
going
to
be
elected
to
go
to
the
boy
going
to
represent
their
project?
There
will
be
a
representative
of
the
community
because
that's
sort
of
different,
even
if
the
person
comes
from
a
project
right,
so
I
think
like
clarifying
that
and
the
expectations
around.
That
would
be
important.
So
that's
just
like
the
two
cents.
I
wanted
to
add
to
the
conversation.
A
B
G
Two
different
things:
one
to
Toby's
comment:
I
think
it
could
be
wrong
that
this
would
likely
be
a
project
representation
position,
although
I'm
not
sure
if
I
love
that
I
just
like
I,
think
that
is
the
framing.
That
makes
the
most
sense
based
on
what
this
seat
has
already
been
used
for.
I.
Think
that
if
we
wanted
a
broader
community
representation
that
is
kind
of
what
the
the
like
non-activated
individual
membership
program
see,
it
is,
and
so
I
think,
there's
room
to
explore
that.
G
G
You
were
saying
is
like
a
lot
of
these
bylaws
around
community
representation
in
these
seats,
where
it
was
totally
written
in
a
vacuum
trying
to
think
about
what
the
future
would
be,
but
not
really
knowing
it
and
I
think
I
think
in
general
it's
probably
beneficial
for
us
too.
So
yes,
stay
in
the
spirit
of
the
law,
but
like
the
word
of
the
law,
is
something
that
we
can
change
to
reflect
reality
and
I.
E
And
just
note
that
this
is
defined
actually
in
the
CPC
Charter
instead
of
in
the
bylaws,
so
it's
much
easier
chance,
one
that
the
CPC
can
make
themselves.
It's
it's
here
under
Section,
eight
and
basically
just
says
that
CPC
will
determine
its
own
methods
and
then
review
it
once
a
year.
So,
whether
it's
a
project
seat
or
whether
it's
general
seat,
then
that's
that's
fine
one
way
or
another
doesn't
doesn't
particularly
matter
and
the
CPC
is
fully
empowered
to
choose
it
other
than
that
really
there's.
There's
there
shouldn't
be
any
other
constraints.
E
C
C
That
that's
that's
totally
like
that's
totally
fine,
okay,
what
I
mean
is,
if
somebody
just
go
to
the
board
and
does
never
pass
through
the
CTC
or
has
never
passed
through
the
CPC
or
does
not
really
participate
on
the
CPC.
It's
probably
not
good
overall
for
this
community.
So
at
least
that's
my
only
that's
my
only
concern
when
I.
K
G
K
B
Me
just
say
really
quick
miles.
I
would
just
say
that
if
we
I
would
perhaps
encourage
folks
to
be
involved
in
the
CPC
if
they
had
an
interest
in
the
board,
not
like
well
we're
gonna
start
this,
you
haven't
been
a
part
of
the
CPC
work,
so
you
are
blocked.
You
know
what
I
mean
I
think
we
should
try
to
keep
that
broad
net
and
encourage
folks
to
be
involved
party
miles,
gone
I,
absolutely.
G
Agree
with
you
and
I
pasted
the
bylaws
into
the
chat
and
one
thing
I
wanted
to
just
say-
and
this
is
just
a
name
and
from
a
Shakespearean
perspective,
what
is
in
a
name
would
a
director
by
any
other
name
attend
as
many
meetings,
probably
but
the
the
second
board
member
is
called
the
at-large
community.
Director
is
the
actual
name
that
we
assigned
it
in
the
bylaws.
G
We
have
the
CPC
director,
the
at-large
community
director
and
then
potentially
a
third
director
of
the
individual
membership
program,
and
so
the
CBC
shall
have
the
right
to
designate
a
third
representative
to
the
Board
of
Directors,
in
accordance
with
so
in
spirit
with
the
bylaws.
You
know
like
this
is
meant
as
like
it
kind
of
like
an
at-large
community
thing.
We
already
have
one
that's
specific
to
the
CPC,
so
I
think
a
huge
+1
Joe
to
what
you're
saying
in
that,
like
I,
think
that
this
should
be
open
to
all
the
projects.
G
I
think
that
perhaps
it
would
be
a
reasonable
expectation
that
those
folks
are
active
in
the
project
and
have
the
buy-in
of
their
project
to
be
in
this
position,
and
that's
something
that
we
can
kind
of
figure
out
during
the
nomination
process
in
period
but
separately
from
that
I.
Don't
think
that
it
should
be
a
requirement
that
they're
active
in
the
CPC
today,
but
I
do
think
that
part
of
the
expectations
would
be
that
they
would
become
active
in
the
CPC
as
part
of
taking
on
this
role.
G
B
A
If
we
only
have
a
one
possible
candidate
for
it,
then
you
know
this
discussion
is
kind
of
moot
and
the
way
that
it's
phrased
in
the
Charter.
It
means
that
we
can
revisit
the
whole
foundation
of
how
we
make
decisions
in
every
single
year.
So
making
a
decision
now
is
just
for
this
year.
It
doesn't,
you
know,
carry
on
for
the
future.
B
Yeah
Dylan:
do
you
want
to
comment
on
your
your
chat.
K
Up
your
muted
doublemeat
it
yes
I'm
just
gonna,
say
given
I
think
the
thing
that's
blocking
us
is
exactly
what
Emily
miles
and
others
have
said,
which
is
like.
Let's
get
the
short
like
a
very
concise
version
of
what
the
expectations
are
and
what
the
role
is,
and
let's
get
that
agreed
upon
as
soon
as
we
can
and
then
socialize
that
among
the
projects
and
what
I
think
we'll
see.
K
K
So
if
we
could
get
like
a
one-pager
that
just
says
hey,
this
is
what
the
role
is.
This
is
what
you'd
be
doing.
This
is
what
we
expect
from
you.
This
is
what
would
be
beneficial.
This
is
what
you
actually
do,
then
I
think
we
could
distribute
to
all
the
projects
real
fast
and
see
if
there's
any
interest
at
all
roll
with
it
from
there.
B
A
J
B
K
And
yeah
I
think
the
suggestion
of
a
Google
Doc
is
good
because
I
don't
think
this
is
like
a
formal
like
PR
vetted
thing,
it's
just
more
of
like
an
informal
like
this.
Is
you
know
what
I
mean
like
I?
Don't
think
this
has
to
be
part
of
the
formal
process
per
se,
because
it's
more
just
a
summary
of
the
information
that's
already
out
there,
so
I
think
a
Google
Doc
is
probably
perfectly
fine
for
that.
Yeah.
F
I
think
we
like
Brian,
did
we
have
some
existing
write-up
like
this
in
the
past
I'm
just
thinking.
If
we
found
that
posted
that
and
then
we
can
kind
of
tweak
it
in
the
Google
Doc
based
on
you
know,
require
you
know
what
would
that'll
probably
be
me
more
bored
generic
and
then
we
can
add
in
the
expectations
that
the
CPC
has
and
on
sort
of
on
top
of
that
yeah.
E
B
K
B
K
B
B
B
D
D
D
Looking
for.
So
we
have
right
now,
basically,
two
options
that
we've
and
and
there
could
have
been
three
or
four-
that
we're
discussed-
that
I
didn't
get
captured.
But
that's
why
this
is
a
draft.
You
know
one
is
linked
to
it.
You
know
create
a
code
of
conduct
file
for
your
project
repositories.
That
includes
a
very
short
piece
of
text
that
says
something
like
this
project
adheres
to
the
Oakland
A's
foundation
of
code
of
conduct
that
links
to
the
canonical
URL.
D
Please
email
projects,
reporting
email
address
with
questions
or
to
report
a
violation,
very
short
and
sweet
action
option
one
option:
two:
we
we
present
them
the
fold
that
the
consumption
of
the
full
document,
which
is
to
create
that
code
of
conduct,
file,
copying
our
code
of
conduct
in
its
entirety
and
then
update
specific
pros
in
the
reporting
projects,
patient
spaces,
section
I,
don't
know
if
there
were
other
things.
Other
variations,
other
suggestions
as
Mateo
and
had
had
commented
that
he
prefers
it.
When
projects
put
this
sort
of
information
in
a
dot,
github
folder.
C
Like
from
my
point
of
view
having
it
into
the
Mae
dot,
get
up
folder,
it's
would
be
recommended
for
organizations,
so
it's
automatically
applied
to
all
repos
in
the
art
and
it
shows
up
everywhere
whenever
they
send.
There
is
a
contribution
and
so
on.
It
shows
up,
and
it's
correctly
linked
and
it's
the
side-effect
for
that.
It
is
not
in
the
repo
itself,
so
it
shows
up
in
the
github
UI,
but
not
in
the
repo
itself.
So
that
is
that
and.
D
C
F
L
E
However,
there
could
be
situations
where
a
collaborator
has
cloned
the
repo
and
says
hey
where's
the
code
of
conduct
file,
and
in
that
case,
then,
we
just
added
essentially
a
blank
code
of
conduct
file.
That
includes
a
link
off
to
this
particular
repo
directly
to
the
Dakota
condo
file
in
the
doc
github
repo,
so
you're,
essentially
covering
all
of
your
bases
and
then
at
that
point
and
should.
F
M
C
M
L
C
G
That
is
mean
personally
is
really
not
functional,
like
discoverability
is
like
I'm
in
the
repo
and
I
see
a
Code
of
Conduct
file
and
I
click
on
it.
Now
that
leading
to
somewhere
else
where
it
lives
is,
is
fine,
I'm,
still
not
thrilled
about
like
the
source
of
truth
being
a
dot
github
repo,
because
that's
not
really
like,
where
I
think
to
look
for
stuff
like
this,
but
if
it's
something
that
people
are
using
across
github
I
guess
over
time
become
more
of
a
like
expectation.
G
Perhaps
this
is
even
just
a
feature
that
we
could
give
to
github
themselves
about
like
improving
discoverability
and
making
a
like
a
clear
button
in
the
repo
or
something
like
that
of
what
the
code
of
conduct
is,
because
for
me,
if
I
go
to
contribute
somewhere,
I,
look
at
the
repo
and
I'll
go
look
for
the
code
of
conduct.
I
don't
want
it
in
a
subfolder
I,
don't
want
it
in
the
just
a
repo
and
at
least
in
the
no
project.
Up
until
now,
we've
had
those
kind
of
like
stub
files.
G
The
point
and
I
think
that
they're
absolutely
fine
Emily
how's
their
habit.
Why.
A
B
D
K
B
Okay,
cool
so
we'll
move
the
discussion
to
the
github
issue
and
I
encourage
folks
to
put
their
two
cents
in
there
or
thumbs
up.
You
know
someone
else,
someone
else's
comment
or
what
have
you
we
can
move
this
forward
in
the
interest
of
moving
things
forward.
I'll
ask
about
next
week's
meeting.
Should
we
start
on
this
start
on.
B
D
B
Ready
to
land,
yeah,
I
think
so
too.
I
think
we
just
need
to
leave
it
open
for
a
little
bit
longer
to
make
sure.
But
so
folks
could
just
take
a
look
at
those
two
that'll
be
great
next
week,
we'll
plan
on
doing
the
agenda,
which
I
think
is
good,
because
we
do
have
a
few
things
that
we
want
to
wrap
up
on
and
a
couple
that
we
want
to
get
progress
on.
So
that's
sounds
like
a
good
plan.
B
We
have
seven
minutes
left,
so
maybe
we'll
stop
here
and
drop
into
a
private
session
for
a
few
minutes
and
then
call
it
a
wrap,
sound,
good
cool.
Thank
you.
Everyone
I'll
ask
folks
who
are
not
voting
members
or
regular
members
or
foundation
staff
to
drop
we'll,
have
a
quick
short
private
session
and
thanks
everybody
appreciate
it
hold
tight
while
I
kill.