►
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
Attention
everyone
welcome
to
another
openjs
foundation's
cross
project
council
meeting
today
is
the
first
day
of
the
month
of
september
in
the
year
2020.
thanks
for
joining
and
yeah,
like
I
said,
throw
your
name
in
that
list
in
the
minutes
and
of
course,
please
help
us
take
minutes.
Michael
dawson
sends
his
regards
he's
not
able
to
join
today.
I
think
he
sometimes
helps
with
meeting
notes
too.
So
people
can
help
fill
that
void
with
other
folks
who
are
taking
notes.
A
B
Yes,
we
do,
but
tomorrow
we
have
a
an
ama
with
the
eslint
team
and
we
just
are
super
super
stoked
to
have
kai
and
another
key
contributor
from
the
eslint
community
participating
in
that
ama.
So
please
tune
in
or
send
your
questions
in
advance
or
send
them
out
on
twitter.
But
tell
your
friends:
es1
is
a
super
cool
project,
we're
so
thrilled
they're
in
our
group
and
if
you
wanna
say
hey.
A
Yeah,
you
know
yeah
think
of
your
questions
now
abst,
abstract,
syntax
tree,
you
know,
get
all
your
questions
answered,
yeah
and
if
you
wouldn't
mind
or
someone
wouldn't
mind,
dropping
an
alert
into
the
slack
when
it's
going
on
that
might
actually,
you
know
alert
me
great.
B
Idea,
yeah
and
then
you
know
another
just
heads
up.
This
was
cool.
We
published
one
of
our
first
developer
profiles
on
message,
format
and
emily
earlier
today.
It's
awesome,
it's
awesome
read
so
if
you
don't
mind
giving
that
a
read
and
a
retweet
that'd
be
great,
let's
spread
some
message:
format,
love
meetings,
wise.
We
don't
have
any
other
open,
js
foundation
meetings
on
deck
for
this
week,
for
that
are
community
driven,
but
we
do
have
a
doodle
poll
out.
B
That's
our
chips
has
sent
round
to
our
group
on
the
supportive
program.
So
please
remember
to
fill
out
that
doodle
poll
and
let
us
know
if
you
can
attend
a
meeting
on
javascript
landia.
A
C
We
talked
about
it
briefly,
I
think
in
previous
meetings,
but
we
did
close
it
out
last
week
last
monday,
I
believe,
and
we
we
surpassed
the
response
goal
by,
I
think
over
500,
which
is
great,
and
so
we
have
downloaded
all
of
that
data
and
we
are
going
through
that
now
to
kind
of
come
to
some
conclusions,
I'm
going
to
pause
there
because
I
would
love
for
if,
if
mary
has
anything
to
say,
I
would
love
for
that.
A
Great
exciting,
if
there's
anything
more,
that
would
be
helpful
for
that
tsc
analysis.
Definitely
let
us
know.
I
know
we
have
that
slack
channel
going,
so
we
can
talk
about
it
more
there
yeah.
E
So
when
rachel
talked
about
surpassing
the
goals,
we
had
what
over
2
000
responses,
which
was
phenomenal.
So
it's
something
that
we're
looking
at
doing
for
other
projects
as
well.
So
if
you
know
of
a
project
that
may
be
interested
in
doing
a
poll,
it
looks
like
there's
yeah,
it
looks
like
we
can
provide
a
lot
of
value
to
the
projects
and
there's
quite
a
bit
of
interest
in
providing
that
feedback.
That
way,
so
it
was
good.
A
Yeah
yeah,
I'm
glad
that
you
know
I
think
it
went
pretty
smoothly.
I
think
the
plan
is
to
have
another
blog
post
wrap
up
once
you
know
some
votes
have
happened,
decisions
have
been
made
and
such
so
I
think
the
whole
thing
is
has
gone
really
well
and
yeah.
It's
good.
A
Cool
anything
else,
announcement
wise.
A
If
not,
I
will
dive
into
the
agenda
here.
Let
me
look
at
something
really
quickly
all
right.
That's
already
at
the
end
martian,
I
think
it's
going
to
try
to
join,
but
he
might
be
late
so
we'll
do
the
security
disclosures
at
the
end,
which
it
already
is
cool.
So
first
up
on
the
agenda
is
approving.
Project
charters
is
clunky
in
issues
I
created
this
a
week
ago
out
of
our
discussion
in
the
meeting
you
know
emily
and
and
tierney
kind
of
had
a
couple
of
ideas.
A
I
think
the
thought
is
to
either
revive
the
projects.md
file
or
to
add
it
to
add,
like
a
link
to
the
charter
in
the
readme
for
context,
the
the
we've
been
approving
charters
in
issues,
and
it's
just
not
really
clear
approval
be
better
if
it
was
in
some
sort
of
pull
request
and
we
can
see
actual
approvals
in
the
in
the
ui
and
such
excuse
me,
I'm
wondering,
and-
and
you
know
we
can
discuss
this
more
here
or
discuss
it
more
in
the
issue,
but
I
like
the
idea
of
just
having
it
in
the
readme.
A
A
I
wondered
about
even
you
know-
and
maybe
this
is
going
too
far,
but
taking
that
list,
maybe
making
it
into
a
table
and
add
a
link
to
the
charter,
maybe
a
link
to
anything
else
that
might
be
helpful
and
some
things
that
come
to
mind
is
like
code
of
conduct,
maybe
contributing
a
couple
of
links
there
and
maybe
even
a
small
version
of
the
logo
right
do
we
have
I,
I
remember
brian,
going
through
the
process
of
gathering
logos.
A
Maybe
that
would
be
a
thing
that
would
that
would
be
good.
I
don't
know
yeah
they're
on
this
page
here.
B
You
know
prevent
people
from
feeling
like
they
have
to
go
down
rabbit
holes
to
chase
certain
information
here
here
or
here.
I
think
a
table
in
of
this
information
would
be
really
useful.
A
A
Maybe
comment
on
that
issue,
and
you
know
maybe
we
can
start
to
flesh
that
out
and
and
then
it
would
make
sense
to
when
you
are
and-
and
I
don't
know
if
we
need
to
look
at
the
documentation,
because
I
mean
I
guess
the
pr
it
could
be
just
one
pr
that
gets
charter
approval
and
promotes
the
project
from
incubating
to
whatever
stage
they're
going
to
do
it
all
in
one
swoop,
and
you
know
just
have
it
timed.
A
B
B
A
Yeah,
even
the
code
of
conduct,
yeah
that'll,
be
good,
all
right,
cool,
so
I'll
I'll,
try
to
double
back
and
comment
that
in
the
issue
or
if
someone
wants
to
do
it
feel
free
to
I'd,
be
happy
to
have
that
done,
and
then
we
can
start
a
pr
that
would
convert
that
list
into
a
table
and
everybody
knows
everybody
loves
a
table
and
mark
down.
A
But
you
know
whatever
we'll
figure
it
out
cool
party
great
moving
on
the
next
item
on
the
agenda
is,
should
we
share
voting,
result
details
and
if
so,
how
this
is
issue
629?
I
created
the
issue,
but
it
was
basically
something
that
was
brought
up
by
emily
in
the
call
I
see.
Let
me
promo
march
in
here.
While
I
noticed
it,
there's
a
there's.
Some
there's
some
comments
here.
Does
anybody
want
to
update?
So
I
don't
have
to
read
this
in
front
of
everyone.
D
F
Observing
that
there
can
potentially
be
some
unintended
consequences
of
certain
levels
of
transparency,
I
mean
in
general,
we
tend
to
lead,
laying
towards
being
more
transparent
versus
less
transparent.
But
the
the
main
concern
that
I
heard
from
talking
with
some
folks-
and
that
I
tried
to
articulate
here,
is
that
we
we
wouldn't
want
to
inadvertently
discourage
people
from
continuing
to
run
for
future
elections
if
they
weren't
the
winning
candidate.
And
so
you
know,
attempting
to
strike
a
balance
here
is
is
really
the
goal.
F
Toby
toby
had
a
good
comment
on
there
as
well.
If
we're
using
ranked
choice
voting,
which
we
are,
there's
not
really
a
whole
lot
that
can
be
gained
necessarily
from
posting
this
other
than
seeing
what
the
process
was
like
for
the
ranking
and
if
there
were
something
that
would
happen
like,
for
example,
if
somebody
were
to
bow
out
right
at
the
end
of
the
election
or
if,
for
some
reason
they
were
to
be
ineligible,
then
it
it's
a
much
more
complicated
calculation
than
just
going
to
the
second
place
person.
F
So
if,
in
the
event
that
we
do
really
need
to
go
back
in
and
see
how
things
work,
though
foundation
staff
which
cannot
vote,
would
be
able
to
go
in
and
take
a
look
as
well.
So
that's
that's.
I
think,
maybe
summarizes
up
the
stream
of
comments
up
to
that
point,
cool
anything
else.
Anybody
would
like
to.
G
I
would
just
add
really
quickly
that
I
think
well,
it
does
make
sense
in
this
context
to
to
not
share
the
results
by
default.
G
I
do
think
that,
like
for
a
sake
of
transparency,
perhaps
we
do
need
to
think
about
a
way
to
make
the
results
available.
In
the
case
of
a
request,
or
in
the
case
of
you
know
like,
I
guess,
we're
using
tools
and
those
tools
give
us.
You
know
like
a
pretty
clear
insight,
but,
like
some
information
may
be
useful,
rather
than
like
how
many
people
voted
for
each
people,
it
might
be
useful
to
know
like
what
percentage
of
the
cpc
actually
voted
so
well.
G
I
think,
for
the
context
and
the
scope
of
this,
like
we
don't
need
to
dig
too
much
more.
I
do
want
to
kind
of
leave
the
door
open
for
us
to
explore
some
of
these
statistics
that
that
aren't
about
the
results
that
might
still
be
useful
information.
A
A
Excuse
me
all
right.
Well,
we
can
keep
that
in
mind
on
future
in
future
elections
and-
and
maybe
even
you
know
clearly
state
upfront
what
what
the
expectations
are
in
terms
of
information
sharing.
B
Participation
seems
easy
enough
to
share
like
you
know,
there
were
15
eligible
voters,
and
so
many
of
them
x
many
of
them
voted
and
they
all
voted
within
the
first
three
days.
You
know
something
of
that
sort
like
that
seems
generically
useful.
B
One
of
the
questions
I
had
was
whether
you
know
we,
because
to
to
miles's
point
about
requests
requesting
information
being
available
on
request.
Does
that
extend
to
a
candidate
who
would
like
to
know
what
their
results
were?
Privately
do
we
want
to?
You
know,
say
yes
to
that
request
if
that
person
asks
it
of
a
foundation
staff
or
no.
H
I
I
just
have
one
thing:
if,
if
by
showing
the
results
like
what
I'm
I'm,
I
don't
want
us
to
be
discouraging
folks
from
applying
again
like
you
know.
If
people
see
that,
oh
I
just
got,
you
know,
ex-person
got
so
many
votes,
while
the
others
barely
got
any
votes.
Well,
I
don't
want
to
discourage
anyone
from
retrying
or
reapplying.
So
that's
the
only
concern
I
have.
I
think
that
if,
if
need
be,
someone
asks
us
personally
to
share
the
results.
H
A
And
maybe
sharing
privately
is
okay.
If
someone
individually
requests
it,
I'm
still
a
little
hesitant
about
that,
but
I
think
maybe
it's
I'm
not
sure
how
much
harm
there
is.
There.
I
G
The
thing
I
was
going
to
say
really
quickly.
There
was
like.
I
think,
that
being
kind
to
people
is
definitely
a
really
great
goal
to
have
up
until
the
point
that
it
becomes
paternalistic
like
if
folks
genuinely
want
to
know
these
things
so
that
they
can
improve
or
understand
what
happened.
G
I
don't
think
it's
like
our
place
to
like
withhold
that
information
to
make
them
feel
better,
so
I
personally
do
feel
it
would
be
appropriate,
and
maybe
this
is
worth
documenting,
that
if
a
candidate
wants
to
know
what
percentage
of
the
votes
they
received
without
disclosing
more
information
than
that,
I
think
that
is
a
very
fair
thing
to
give
to
a
candidate
who's
interested.
A
I
Yeah,
no,
I
think
that
miles
covered
what
I
wanted
to
say
and
I
don't
want
to
go
any
further.
So
that's.
I
A
Okay,
fair
enough-
I
I
think
maybe
a
breakdown
by
suburban
and
urban
kind
of
you
know
that
might
be
informative,
but
other
than
that
never
mind.
Sorry,
that's
bad
u.s
politics,
anyway,
all
right
cool,
so.
A
Joe
sure,
I
guess
the
consensus
is
that
we
will
not
share
specific
details
on
results
but
are
happy
to
share
other
data
points
that
might
be
informative
to.
You
know
the
work
that
we're
doing,
such
as
you
know,
percentage
of
cpc
members
voted
and
perhaps
how
quickly
or
what
not,
but
you
know
I
guess
some
of
that
is
still
you
know
we
can
continue
to
think
about,
but
I
think
in
general,
leaving
the
specific
details
as
private
makes
sense
unless
specifically
requested
individually.
A
It's
probably
a
good
idea
right
I
mean,
I
think
there
is
a
whole
section
on
voting
in
our
governance
or
something
right.
A
You
know
we
like
to
document
things
just
looking
real.
A
A
B
Preference
would
be
you
know,
to
the
extent
that
we
can
avoid
a
protracted.
You
know
thing:
let's
avoid
that
yeah
and
put
it
in
the
governance
document
if
we
can
find
a
good
spot
for
it,.
A
A
All
right
cool,
if
somebody
wouldn't
mind
kind
of
you,
know
either
copy
and
pasting
from
the
notes
into
that
issue
or
something
some
comment
on
that
issue
would
probably
be
helpful.
I
do
believe-
and
I
see
someone
highlighting
the
whole
section
so
great.
Thank
you.
Anonymous!
Mink
moving
on
the
next
item
is
pull
request.
618,
this
is
add
ip
policy
guidance
and,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
getting
to
the
bottom
toby
you
you
have
a
a
new
pull
request
open.
Is
that
right?
J
Yeah
good
question:
no,
I
think
this
is
the
right
one.
6
6
18
is
the
last
one.
I
Oh
and
as
far
as
I'm
concerned
that
is
ready
to
land.
I
I
would
like
to
get
notably
chris
mills
to
have
a
look
at
it
before,
because
he
had
a
change
request
that
brian
him
and
I
discussed,
and
we
were
disagreeing
with
chris's
request
and
so
would
like
him
to
either
rescind
it
or
I
mean
we
have
to
like.
We
can't.
We
can't
merge
this
without
chris,
having
made
a
decision
about
whether
he's
fine
with
not
making
the
change
he
requested,
or
this.
A
Is
is
this
chris
hiller
is
that
is
that
miller
chris
piller
torchers.
I
A
No
worries
no
worries
cool
chris,
I
don't
know
if
you
have
any
comment
or
if
you
just
want
to
look
at
the
pull
request
and
and
go
from
there.
I
A
Yeah,
jordan
and
chris
borchers
are
on
there
chris.
I
will
paste
this
into
the
chat.
This
is
pull
request.
618
chris
hiller
asks
about
yeah,
jordan.
Chris
butchers
anton
is
on
here
as
well,
so
yeah.
If
we
get
some
some
more
folks
wrapping
that
up.
That
would
be
great.
A
This
is
added
20
days
ago.
It's
a
good
conversation.
F
Chris,
I
think
this
is
the
one
where
you'd
asked
it
was
about
updating,
formerly
accurate
copyright
lines
to
current
information,
whether
that
was
something
you
could
do
or
something
that
you
must
do
is
that
yeah?
Does
that
sound
familiar
to
you.
F
F
Was
to
make
it
a
little
easier
to
to
interpret.
I
L
Toby,
the
the
the
thing
is
you're
waiting
on
me
for
is
that
you're
suggesting
to
move
the
dco
guidance
into
a
separate
pull
request.
No.
I
It's
not
let
me
it's
a
very
a
very
specific
line
that
brian
just
mentioned,
and
then
I
my
last
comment
actually
references.
It.
A
There's
I
just
pasted
a
link
to
the
comments.
The
comment
thread
in
the
file
view.
I
think
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
if
that's
not
the
right
spot,.
A
It
so
cool
all
right.
Well,
you
know
we
can
take
this
offline.
If
folks
can
take
a
look
at
it
and
we
can
move
it
forward,
assuming
it's
good
to
go.
People
work
through
it,
cool.
A
Cool
cool
all
right,
great,
just
making
sure.
Let
me
check
my
list
here.
Oh
there's
sarah's,
not
here,
that's
too
bad!
I
get
excited
about
the
next
one.
This
is
607
issue,
607
next
steps
for
supporter
program.
As
jory
mentioned
earlier,
there
is
an
email
out
for.
B
There's
a
new
doodle
poll
that
was
sent
to
the
cpc
email
list,
which
is
probably
the
a
better
way
to
capture
responses
to
doodle
polls.
So.
B
Y'all
should
respond
to
that.
If
you
are,
I
think
you
might
be
available
for
that
call
sometime
in
the
next
couple
of
weeks
to
to
move
move
things
forward
on
next
steps.
There
yeah.
A
And
then
there
is
a
related
pr
for
the
supporter
program
that
sarah
opened
up
12
days
ago.
I
pasted
it
into
the
chat
625.
A
This
is
you
know,
documenting
the
progress
that
we've
been
making.
This
is
still
in
stage
one
of
the
supporter
program,
but
further
kind
of
fleshing
out
some
of
the
things
that
we
discussed
in
the
last
meeting
and
you
know
be
great
to
have
this
landed
before
our
upcoming
meeting.
A
So
I
encourage
folks
to
take
a
look
comments.
You
know,
add
your
inputs,
your
thoughts,
your
support
for
the
supporter
program.
What
have
you
great
all
right?
A
Well,
we'll
move
on
from
there
unless
anybody
has
anything
else,
they
want
to
add
I'm
going
to
talk
about
talk
about
javascript
landia
for
a
while,
which
should
be
cool
next
up
on
the
agenda
is
issue
to
talk
about
an
earlier
cpc
time
which
we
tried
a
bit
ago,
and
I
actually
created
an
issue
just
to
kind
of
surface
this
to
the
top
the
we
decided
in
our
last
meeting.
A
I
believe
it
was
that
we
would
alternate
for
two
meeting
slots
of
an
earlier
time,
so
we've
been
doing
sixteen
hundred
and
eighteen
hundred
and
we're
going
to
try
fourteen
hundred
and
1800
for
the
next
two
earlier
meetings
and
what
I
mean
by
that
is
we're
doing
the
1800
now
next
week,
we'll
do
1400
the
week
after
we'll
go
back
to
1800
like
we
normally
would
like
the
1800
slot
is
not
interrupted,
and
then,
after
that
we
would
do
another
1400
and
I
believe
from
there
evaluate
how
that
earlier
time
slot
is
doing-
and
you
know,
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
if
folks
could
spread
the
word
and
and
make
sure
people
are
aware,
particularly
folks
who
this
time
zone
would
be
helpful
to
you
and
we
can
just
evaluate
if
it's
you
know
which,
which
is
better
and
how
things
are
working.
A
A
A
This
was
opened
up
a
couple
of
months
ago,
and
I
know
that
toby
and
chris
hiller
have
put
a
little
bit
of
work
into
this.
Some
some
associated
issues,
growth,
project
goal,
setting
plan,
formalized
project,
champion
mentor
role
or
a
couple
of
them
does.
Does
anyone
want
to
give
us
an
update
or
anything
more
on
this.
I
Yes,
I
actually
sent
a
doodle
literally
35
minutes
ago.
M
M
I
B
I
would
say:
send
it
around
to
cpc
private
to
make
sure
that
you
know
anybody
who
may
have
missed
it
on
a
meeting
or
something
can
do
that
and.
A
Cool
all
right,
great
yeah.
I
look
forward
to
that.
I
think
it'll
be
the.
I
think
it's
a
healthy,
productive
thing
to
go
through
this
process.
So
thank
you
for
driving
that
toby
and
chris
and
everyone
else
cool.
Moving
on
issue.
583
is
updating
the
cla
to
the
apache
style,
icdla
and
ccla.
It's
been
around
for
a
little
bit.
I
think
this
is
where
are
we
at
with
this?
A
A
It's
the
the
cla
icla
ccla
issue
that
one.
F
Yes,
thank
you.
I'm
sorry,
I
was
pulled
away
on
an
email,
no
worries
yeah.
So
at
this
point
it's
it's
just
really
a
matter
of
getting
this
getting
it
scheduled
with
the
legal
committee.
I
they
keep
saying
that
I
was
going
to
do
that
and
I
keep
it
keeps
dropping
off
my
list,
but
I
will
definitely
get
this
done
other
than
that.
F
The
other
piece
of
this,
which
was
briefly
mentioned
earlier,
is
putting
together
the
guidance
for
how
to
actually
implement
this
in
the
in
the
context
of
choosing
between
using
vco
or
having
tooling
for
the
for
using
a
cla.
I
It's
632.
A
I'm
gonna
keep
your
attention,
mr
brian
warner.
The
next
item
on
the
list
is
pull
request.
547
governance
changes
for
the
collaboration
network
michael,
is
not
able
to
make
it
today,
but
he
messaged
me
and
said
that
I
think
he's
waiting
for
text
from
you.
If
I'm
not
mistaken
brian.
J
A
F
No,
that's
fine!
I
I
can
get
that
written
this
afternoon.
I'll
just
do
that
right
after
this
call,
yeah.
A
Fantastic
reminder:
yup.
Thank
you,
brian
appreciate
all
that
you
do
great,
so
we
will
look
at
that
more
next
week
and
I
will
jump
to
the
next
agenda
item.
The
final
agenda
item
martian.
This
is
the
responsible
security
disclosures
issue
and
related
pull
requests
and
stuff.
Do
you
want
to
give
us
an
update
sure.
K
So,
in
the
course
of
moving
this
to
stage
three,
I
actually
went
through
all
the
cpc
documents
in
order
to
identify
places
where
this
new
policy
should
be
plugged
in.
I
let
me
actually
take
a
look
at
the
pr
and
list
the
places
that
I
touched
very
very
briefly,
so
I
added
a
security
policy
element
to
the
new
project
application
documents.
K
I
think
the
document
that
I
extended,
the
most,
which
is
the
changing
like
literally
three
lines,
was
the
project
progression
document,
and
apart
from
that,
I
it
was
really
just
minor
moving
documents
here
and
there
and
there's
actually
a
second
pr
that
I
put
out
to
the
issue
templates
in
the
project.
Onboarding
repo,
so
those
two
pr's
are
kind
of
related,
and
I
would
be
very
grateful
for
feedback
like
the
there's.
Nothing,
that's
changed
in
the
actual
content
of
the
proposal.
A
Cool
yeah,
yeah,
there's,
there's,
there's
not
a
lot
to
review
here,
so
paul
can
take
a
look,
we're
kind
of
at
the
the
final
stage
here
of
of
moving
this
forward.
I
threw
the
pull
requests
both
of
them
into
the
chat
for
folks
to
take
a
look
and
yeah.
It
would
be
great
to
move
this
forward.
Thanks
for
all
your
work
on
this
martian.
K
Yeah
my
my
pleasure,
I
think
I
think,
when
this
lands,
what
I'm
gonna
do
is
before
I
started
on
this.
I
did
a
little
assessment
on
the
security
reporting
mechanisms,
for
I
think
growth
and
more
mature
projects.
So
I'll
probably
do
it
once
again
to
see
where
we
are
great.
Thank.
A
Thank
you
miles
cool,
I'm
looking
at
issues,
nothing
jumps
out
at
me.
A
I'm
looking
at
pull
requests
and
nothing
jumps
out
at
me,
except
that
mary
taking
over
for
mateo,
has
been
open
for
seven
days,
which
I
think
the
changing
of
an
impact
voting
member.
Is
it
only
seven
days.
I
think
it
needs
to
be
opened
and
fully
approved.
M
A
Excellent
cool
I
will
we
can
lay
on
that.
I
just
kind
of
want
to
double
check
the
documentation,
even
though
I
agree
with
jory,
but
I
think
we
switched
some
other
a
different
member
at
one
point
and
we
did
document
it.
So
I
will
take
a
look
at
that,
but
if
I
remember
correctly,
it
was
a
week
and
but
beyond
that,
is
there
anything
else
anyone
wants
to
discuss?
Do
we
have
anything
we
should
take
into
a
private
session
or
anything
like
that?