Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
91 lines (76 loc) · 5.17 KB

2019-03-19.md

File metadata and controls

91 lines (76 loc) · 5.17 KB
Raw

Upgrades WG weekly meeting 2019-03-19

Attendees

Members

  • @alexeykuzmin
  • @codebytere
  • @jkleinsc
  • @nornagon
  • @robo

Visitors

  • @nitsakh
  • @ryzokuken

Agenda

  • The new Japanese Era support in Electron 3.1 and 4

    • Context: http://blog.unicode.org/2018/09/new-japanese-era.html
    • Important dates:
      • April 1st – the new Era name is revealed
      • May 1st – the new Era starts
    • There's a PR to update ICU 62.1 (M69) unicode-org/icu#514 We need to update ICU we ship with Electron 4.
    • What about ICU 60.1 (M66) and Electron 3.1?
      • there's no backport upstream for us to copy
      • Microsoft wants this though
    • What about Electron 5 (M73)?
      • M74 is going to be released on April 23rd, so there's a chance that M73 will get a patch.
      • TODO: look for a corresponding Chromium issue
    • How does this break? Is it just � character?
      • Possibly also some issues related to date calculations

  • WG Membership of @jdalton and @zcbenz

    • I think all these people have been listed as initial members somewhere? But @jdalton and @zcbenz aren't part of the @wg-upgrades team on github.
    • JDD: I observed the first meeting before the summit but decided not to commit to being a member.
    • Let's ask @zcbenz if he wants to be a member & come along to a meeting.
    • [DECIDED] if @zcbenz wants to be a member he can :)

  • Process for adding new members

    • @nornagon suggests: prospective new members should reach out to an existing member to ask to be invited to the regular meeting, & to be added as a Slack guest to #wg-upgrades. After actively contributing to the project and attending 3 of 6 consecutive WG meetings (accounting for time zones), that person may be added to the working group by a 2/3rds vote of WG members at a WG meeting. The prospective member should leave the meeting while the deliberation & vote is underway, and be informed only of the outcome of the vote (approved/not approved).
      • (@codebytere) what does 'actively contributing' mean?
      • (@alexeykuzmin) is that an implicit thing in becoming a member?
      • (@jkleinsc) if someone wants to become a member, they should be known by us. we need to have enough data to go on. there's a variety of things that can be considered 'contributions'. also a variety of possible time commitments.
      • (@nornagon) perhaps 'actively' is the wrong word? maybe 'materially'?
      • (@robo) chromium works this way, more or less. if you don't get it at first, just keep working and reapply.
      • (@ryzokuken) metrics are hard for this. also, how does one stay in the WG? what if someone wants to be a temporary member?
      • (@alexeykuzmin) someone can decide to quit. or we can vote if they just vanish, after asking them to join a meeting.
      • (@nitsakh) no need to explicitly define what 'actively contributing' means; it should be up to the members to vote. if the person isn't accepted then some kind of feedback would be helpful. also "3 consecutive meetings" should take into account time zones.
      • let's also expand when we document this what some examples of 'actively contributing' could be. & clarify that full-time isn't required.
      • no objections
      • [ACTION] @nornagon to write this up and PR to governance repo.

  • Alternating meetings at 1600 / 0000 UTC

    • To allow people in diverse timezones to attend
    • start with 0000 utc and adjust
    • if nobody in other time zones is interested in attending (prospective or current members), keep just the 1600 UTC meeting.
    • [DECIDED] keep just the one time until an alternate time is needed

  • Electron 5.x, node 12 with v8 7.3 or node 11 with v8 7.3?

    • the worst option would be to stay where we are
    • v12 will hit stable Apr 23, rc = when?
    • node v12 lts is Oct
    • (deepak) v12 sounds better. there's already a v8 7.3 PR in node
    • (@ryzokuken) people might expect that node 12 comes with certain v8 features. in particular internationalization builtins. we're better off using an older version of node with a newer version of v8 rather than the other way around. people might assume that a particular version of node comes with certain v8 features.
    • (@robo) downgrading might be a safer option.
    • (@ryzokuken) node 11 EOLs in June. which is before Electron 5 EOLs
    • people should feature-test for v8 features rather than relying on node version
    • (@ryzokuken) what about polyfilling?
    • (@jkleinsc) make sure we note this in our release notes, incl. what the implications are of using a different version of v8. we probably shouldn't add it to core.
    • [DECIDED] we're going to roll to v12.

Followup

  • Look into how Canary version numbers work (@nornagon)
    • still dunno
  • try out tracking canary in a separate branch once M74 is merged
    • @robo to write a design doc
      • haven't done this
  • figure out what we should do re: internal / builtin bindings for embedders (@codebytere)
    • embedders use a "linked" binding
    • ... which isn't tested and might not work???
    • anna will join the #wg-upgrades channel
    • done yay
  • @nornagon to fix linux failures on M74
    • done yay