Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docs: TSC meeting minutes for 2017-01-26 #199

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 1, 2017
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
203 changes: 203 additions & 0 deletions meetings/2017-01-26.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,203 @@
# Node.js Foundation TSC Meeting 2017-01-26

## Links

* **Audio Recording**: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF72qa2qodo>
* **GitHub Issue**: [TSC#196](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/196)
* **Minutes Google Doc**:
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QWScwMz5JRhxgmmgcsk0b1pdCzSevf0jehhC94TgwZ8>
* _Previous Minutes Google Doc_:
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eLeeL-7Mz9nze9g-EmVEPAP5CASr-Hn1IMlKghinrk4>

## Present

* Jeremiah Senkpiel @Fishrock123 (TSC)
* William Kapke @williamkapke (observer)
* Josh Gavant @joshgav (observer/Microsoft)
* Mikeal Rogers @mikeal (observer/NF)
* Michael Dawson @mhdawson (observer/CTC)
* Jenn Turner @jennwrites (observer/NF)


## Agenda

### Today

* Security WG
* Formation of a Security Working Group
[TSC#175](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/175)
* version-management & nvm
* Investigate moving `nvm` into the foundation
[TSC#96](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/96)
* Copyright
* Updating the Copyright
[TSC#174](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/174)
* Copyright Date
[TSC#195](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/195)
* Governance & TSC
* charter: revised membership rules
[TSC#142](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/pull/142)
* General update to the Member travel fund doc
[TSC#181](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/pull/181)
* Rotating meeting times
[TSC#198](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/198)
* Community Committee
* ...migrate Inclusivity Working Group...
[TSC#179](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/179)
* https://github.com/nodejs/community-committee

### Review of last meeting

* Add info about YouTube access
[TSC#183](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/pull/183)
* General update to the Member Travel Fund doc
[TSC#181](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/pull/181)
* Formation of a Security Working Group
[TSC#175](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/175)
* Updating the Copyright
[TSC#174](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/174)
* Add scope of responsibility for TSC ("Define Node Core" cont.)
[TSC#144](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/pull/144)
* Community Committee
* nvm and version-management
* node-inspect

---

## Minutes

### Security WG

* Formation of a Security Working Group
[TSC#175](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/175)

Waiting on transfer of data from nsp. Bill of sale is on board agenda for
Jan-30. Hopefully will be able to transfer some time next week.

---

### version-management & nvm

* Investigate moving `nvm` into the foundation
[TSC#96](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/96)

Discussion Group advised\* not accepting `nvm` till further decisions regarding
standards and specs such runtime managers should adhere to.

\*See https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/96#issuecomment-264965326 and bottom
of
https://github.com/nodejs/version-management/blob/master/meetings/2016-12-01.md.

We should make sure this conclusion is clear in the thread and perhaps close it.
`nvm` could re-apply later.

There are benefits of having a version or runtime manager so we should leave the
repo and Discussion Group active.

**Next steps**

* Update #96 and remove from tsc-agenda, but leave repo active.

---

### Copyright

* Updating the Copyright
[TSC#174](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/174)
* Copyright Date
[TSC#195](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/195)

We would benefit from more feedback from the Foundation Legal Committee. Can we
set up a process to request a review? Could be partly in private.

Once we solve pending issues we can ask for more review of our processes like
CLAs. More process can be an impediment to contributors, though.

Need to also ensure compliance for adjacent projects like node-inspect and
node-report in addition to core.

@mikeal: Board made a list of requirements for bringing in new projects, for
example acceptable licenses and DCO.

Should add this list of requirements to TSC repo for future reference,
@williamkapke to prepare PR.

Some reliable sources have told us that a date isn’t required. But if a date was
previously included it can’t be removed.

**Next steps**

* PR to add list of requirements for new projects to TSC repo.

---

### Governance & TSC

* charter: revised membership rules
[TSC#142](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/pull/142)

Ping @jasnell for update.

---

* General update to the Member travel fund doc
[TSC#181](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/pull/181)

@mikeal recommended mentioning that traveler should update sheet with actual
costs after trip. @addaleax replied that it might not be known to the traveler.
@mikeal replied today that NF member (e.g. Mikeal) can provide final numbers.

Point is we need to track how much we’ve spent so we can request budget
adjustments if needed.

Should also add to document how much money has been allocated and spent.

@williamkapke suggested merging as is and addressing concerns in later PRs.

**Next steps**

@Fishrock123 will continue discussion and help merge.

---

* Rotating meeting times
[TSC#198](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/198)

Is the solution to change the time rather than to rotate them?

Are we preventing interested parties from joining?

We need to clarify if some interested parties are unable to attend; we should
only adjust to accommodate actual participants.

Goal is always to reach consensus in GitHub if possible, meetings are a
fallback.

Can we find a time which works for Ben, Rod, and American folks?
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice to see this was discussed. 0500 or 1600 UTC would work better for me but probably isn't very nice to people from the USA (and @rvagg? I don't know what timezone he's in after moving.)


**Next steps**

* Continue discussion in GitHub.

---
### Community Committee

* ...migrate Inclusivity Working Group...
[TSC#179](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/179)
* https://github.com/nodejs/community-committee

No updates.

---

## Q/A

None.

---
## Next Meeting

Node.js Foundation calendar:
<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=kap.co_i17i575te0aes6kaanfjr2e4hs%40group.calendar.google.com>

2017-02-09 2000 UTC (Thursday 12pm Pacific).