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

Open Community Working Meeting 2022-11-07 - 14:00 PT #263

Open
1 of 3 tasks
Relequestual opened this issue Nov 3, 2022 · 0 comments
Open
1 of 3 tasks

Open Community Working Meeting 2022-11-07 - 14:00 PT #263

Relequestual opened this issue Nov 3, 2022 · 0 comments
Labels
Working Meeting Identify working meetings

Comments

@Relequestual
Copy link
Member

Relequestual commented Nov 3, 2022

📺 See Recording

Go To Previous Meeting

Agenda

Topic Owner Decision/NextSteps
Review last call's action items @Relequestual All items were reviewed
3 "current work" items of focus #250 @Relequestual The content of current work file should highlight organization's priorities that currently require attention
A note on governance and vision work, re last call
- Booking a call with OpenJS Foundation
- Research on current governance structures of other projects with assistance from Postman's OTPO (Open Technologies Programs Office!)
- Propose using Sheriff and that all org members can see the repo
@Relequestual OpenJS foundation call is in the works
Both OpenJS and Postman to provide guidance.
Sheriff, process to be worked out before a tool is settled on.
Update on Referencing spec? repo
Should we ask OpenJS Foundation to promote asking for feedback?
Should we invite everyone to go review the proposals?
@jdesrosiers/ @handrews Promotion required to bring more people to provide feedback on the spec.
SDLC Discussion from last call
Should deprecated features be included directly in the spec or someplace else?
Should we deprecate keywords at all if we don't plan to ever remove them?
Should we use semantic names rather than numbered stages?
@jdesrosiers To handle exceptional cases deprecation is a possibility
Numbered stages make for a quick start and can be modified with semantic names

Highlights

  • All items on the agenda were reviewed.
  • Before call to order, @gregsdennis shared updates on implementation of dropped annotion in his library. In that context, performance of proposed changes was discussed as well.
  • Governance, Spec and SDLC updates were shared and discussed.

Actions

  • Create a file and process, to help hightlight and get attention to org's priorities
  • Promote to get feedback on the spec
  • Take a look at Sheriff, the permission and general org management tool

Attendees

Account
@Relequestual
@jdesrosiers
@Julian
@gregsdennis
@jviotti
@handrews

Details

PR 250

There was some confusion over the original intent of the "current concerns" list. Ben forgot or got confused over if it was a "currently working on this" list vs the original intent. The original intent was to allow individuals in the core team to bring attention to specific GitHub Issues, PRs, Discussions, because they require specific actions such as requiring review.

PR 250 was updated to reflect the original intent as opposed to the confused message.

Governance

  • OpenJS foundaction call is in the works.
  • Postman OTPO has been requested to provide research on governance structures. Both OpenJS and Postman's reply is expected to provide selective options to pick from and act as a guide.
  • The above has already helped in clarifying distinction between an advisory committee and community champion and heroes program.
  • Regarding Sheriff it is agreed that governance process needs working out before a tool is settled upon. Consideration of tool is deferred for later.

Spec

  • Currently awaiting more people to provide feedback on the spec proposals and further discussion to be had.
  • Discussion on, keeping the references $ref as they are and/or to add a new keyword. The two approaches were discussed and feedback is seeked.

SDLC

  • With regards to deprecation of keywords it was decided that it should be available as an option to handle exceptional cases.
  • Place of deprecated features is a presentational issue to be decided later.
  • Regarding stages, categorizing behavior of implementers and users at certain stages can be used as semantic naming. Although, numbered stages would be faster to begin working under and can be modified when need be, by pre/post fixing of semantic names.

Reference links

@Relequestual Relequestual added the Working Meeting Identify working meetings label Nov 3, 2022
@Relequestual Relequestual pinned this issue Nov 7, 2022
@Relequestual Relequestual unpinned this issue Nov 15, 2022
@benjagm benjagm closed this as completed Apr 5, 2023
@benjagm benjagm reopened this Apr 5, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Working Meeting Identify working meetings
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants