diff --git a/meetings/2025-06-18.md b/meetings/2025-06-18.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..77e2b8f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/meetings/2025-06-18.md @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@ +# Node.js Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting 2025-06-18 + +## Links + +* **Recording**: +* **GitHub Issue**: + +## Present + +* Antoine du Hamel @aduh95 (voting member) +* Ruben Bridgewater @BridgeAR (voting member) +* Gireesh Punathil @gireeshpunathil (voting member) +* Joyee Cheung @joyeecheung (voting member) +* Matteo Collina @mcollina (voting member) +* Michael Dawson @mhdawson (voting member) +* Rafael Gonzaga @RafaelGSS (voting member) +* Darshan Sen @RaisinTen (voting member) +* Richard Lau @richardlau (voting member) +* Robert Nagy @ronag (voting member) +* Ruy Adorno @ruyadorno (voting member) + +## Agenda + +### Announcements + +### Reminders + +* Remember to nominate people for the [contributor spotlight](https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/main/doc/contributing/recognizing-contributors.md#bi-monthly-contributor-spotlight) + +### CPC and Board Meeting Updates + +*Extracted from **tsc-agenda** labeled issues and pull requests from the **nodejs org** prior to the meeting. + +* Matteo - nothing for the public section + +### nodejs/node + +* Remove `Symbol.dispose` integration in `setTimeout` and `setInterval` [#58689](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/58689) + * Matteo, came from discussion I had with Lucas after presentation + which talked about leveraging the using feature. + * Michael, main issue is with compatibility Web. + * But it is different anyway in terms of the return, but actual code usage is the same because + the return type does not end up mattering when writing the code + * Matteo: So before the code would work on both despite the two different return types + * Richard, will point out it has already been shipped, so more complicated to change + * Matteo, in terms of back portable not possible because using syntax + * Joyee: symbol dispose in timers has shipped since 18.x, will need a full deprecation cycle + * Darshan: likely not very practical to change the return types, maybe have a WebTimers API + which would allow us to support both. + * Ruben, challenge is that existing code likely still expects compatible API + * Joyee, not sure how widespread the use of the non- + * Darshan, possibility of feature flag where it would return different type + * Matteo, 2 concerns, first generic compatibility, unlikely we can every shift it back as ref and + unref are super popular. Don’t think we should embark on that journey unless other runtimes + willing to invest the significant time/effort that would be needed. + * Matteo, maybe we should invite Luca to to explain further. Biggest difference from the web + * Ruben, since it's already incompatible, maybe it would be better with new API + * Matteo, problem is that in the Web its used from the global + * Matteo how about we invite Luca? Ruben, not sure if that will add additional info. + * Joyee, how about we think about how to avoid it in the future. + * Michael agree that documenting that we won’t add changes that will take us away to from + web compatibility in general - Michael will volunteer. + * Joyee, bot that flags updates to globals, + * Matteo also good to have bot add comments on the issues + * Please jump into the issue to discuss + +* Update npm to v11 in Node.js v22 [#58423](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/58423) + * on agenda as it is technically SemVer major so would need TSC approval to land + * npm does not have an LTS policy, v11 has some changes we probably want + * Matteo: I believe we should land it. + * Michael: major breaking change?, Matteo -> warnings + * Joyee: could users just update their version of npm on their own. Comes down to the risk + balance between updating, versus not updating + * Richard: there is also an unknown breaking change as one of the life-cycle scripts is no + longer run + * Matteo: its also about Node.js 22 still having a long time to run, will make the life of the + project to move now versus possibly being forced to later. + * Ruben: We also have the concern related to security fixes. If we had to update later that + That would be worse. We can also run CITGM + * Joyee: what is the opinion of the npm team? Cannot tell from the issue + * Rafael: in terms of security, I believe we could wait until there is a CVE, at that point we + could do a security release with the update to 11. It is our standard practice to include + breaking changes as SemVer minor when needed in security releases. Better to wait to give + more time to see how the changes affect people in 24.x + +* Revert [#58282](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/58282) + * Nothing to discuss this week. + +### nodejs/nodejs.org + +* Add blog post publishing guidelines [#7860](https://github.com/nodejs/nodejs.org/pull/7860) + * change is to align with Marketing discussion. + * On agenda as FYI to TSC members. + +### nodejs/TSC + +* Let's talk about the CI situation [#1614](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/1614) + * Skipped for this week. + +## Strategic Initiatives + +* Skipped for this week. + +## Upcoming Meetings + +* **Node.js Project Calendar**: + +Click `+GoogleCalendar` at the bottom right to add to your own Google calendar.