Node.js Foundation Modules Team Meeting 2018-03-14 about modules

[MylesBorins]

I'd like to push us to avoid discussing general technical PRs in the meeting this week.

A rough agenda that I can update above if people are onboard (if yes please use emoji repsonse, if no please explain why)

1. Quick review of outstanding PRs against this repo
2. Reach consensus on how we should handle current PRs against core

• #42

3. Discuss use cases and try and put together a base list that we reach consensus on in the meeting to avoid another 2 weeks before we can land anything

Thoughts?

[MylesBorins]

The agenda was automated, we can definitely scope it a bit better. TBH using this meeting to focus on user stories / use cases seems like a really solid use of time.

…

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 1:35 PM James M Snell ***@***.***> wrote: I will also be traveling and unable to make the call this week. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#47 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecV1OxEVqmC3flqcflJ0i7aqLLK5jkks5tdrHOgaJpZM4SnBrv> .

[benjamingr]

@jdalton or @devsnek would either of you be willing to present the console.log extra stack frame issue in the meeting so we can solicit more eyes on it and land?

I'm opening another issue to discuss in the meantime

[devsnek]

I can talk about it I guess, it was a concern originally brought up by @TimothyGu

[WebReflection]

Apologies I'm unable to attend and, ultimately, unable to contribute much too ... thanks gosh I agree with whatever @jdalton says so I feel well represented 😅

If I cannot fix my useless presence in here I'd be happy to be moved to observer state ... just please give me some more time to figure out if I have those 5 hours of duty per week I've said I would.

Regards

[jkrems]

Should we identify a single focus topic / deep dive for this meeting? E.g. getting a good, exhaustive list of use cases we can agree on? Or are we punting on that until April 3rd (or whenever the module summit will be)? It felt like the last meeting got dragged down by the back-and-forth between "answer minor question X" and "we need a general agreement on what we're trying to build here".

[mcollina]

I'm traveling and I probably won't be able to join. I'm ok with whatever decision the team is going to make. Feel free to not count me towards quorum.

The agenda seems too big for one single meeting, should we prioritize a bit?

[jasnell]

I will also be traveling and unable to make the call this week.

[inidaname]

I may not be able to attend due to a recent attack, I have limited access to PC and Internet. On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 6:56 PM, Myles Borins <[email protected]> wrote:

…

The agenda was automated, we can definitely scope it a bit better. TBH using this meeting to focus on user stories / use cases seems like a really solid use of time. On Mon, Mar 12, 2018, 1:35 PM James M Snell ***@***.***> wrote: > I will also be traveling and unable to make the call this week. > > — > You are receiving this because you authored the thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#47 (comment)>, or mute > the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AAecV1OxEVqmC3flqcflJ0i7aqLLK5jkks5tdrHOgaJpZM4SnBrv> > . > — You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#47 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AE2tHpfE5Fbc_eR243Obx3oEMsX3n0Ccks5tdra6gaJpZM4SnBrv> .

[benjamingr]

Maybe weird request?

I'd prefer it if we started with technical discussion of the nodejs/node technical issues and I ask that people who would like to participate in that discussion enter the actual issues (I try to ping @nodejs/modules on issues when I see them).

Namely,

• I'd love to hear an update about wasm from @linclark in "loader: allow importing wasm modules"
• I'd love us to vote about the _ issue in "esm: provide named exports for all builtin libraries"

[weswigham]

By "the underscore issue" do you mean filtering _ prefixed members from the exposed exports?

[guybedford]

We can remove the mode: "esm" flag item from the agenda, as we already discussed this briefly last week.

[benjamingr]

@weswigham yes

@guybedford how do we proceed with the esm flag item? Don't we need to make a decision about it?

[guybedford]

@benjamingr I'm ok with putting this on the back-burner while we focus on other technical decisions and use cases.

[jdalton]

@benjamingr

I'd love us to vote about the _ issue in "esm: provide named exports for all builtin libraries"

The PR isn't blocked on filtering of _ at the moment. That was worked through a bit ago.

[benjamingr]

@jdalton thanks for the update, reading it: I don't really understand why it's stalled. How can core move forward with named exports for ESM? What needs to be decided before the PR lands?

[jdalton]

@benjamingr

I don't really understand why it's stalled.

It's stuck on a console.log stack count nit at the moment.

What needs to be decided before the PR lands?

Minor things are left, for example now that live bindings of named exports works should setters still be filtered. That said, with the push to remove getter/setters from builtin module exports started before live bindings were thought possible and with things still being experimental, it may not be a super concern esp. for initial support.

[benjamingr]

@jdalton thanks, is this something you think we need to discuss in the meeting, spin off into an issue here or discuss in the main nodejs/node repo? I really want to see named exports for native modules land :)

[jdalton]

@benjamingr

thanks, is this something you think we need to discuss in the meeting, spin off into an issue here or discuss in the main nodejs/node repo?

I think it just needs someone to pop-in and fix the console.log stack issue or better yet find the root cause of the console.log reference issue and fix that.

I really want to see named exports land :)

Same.

[manekinekko]

@MylesBorins sorry I can't make it to today's meeting. Will catch up tomorrow.

[jkrems]

I'll only be able to join but need to drop off after the first 30min.

[MylesBorins]

Hey All, I've updated the agenda based on #47 (comment) which significantly simplifies the agenda and puts it into subcategories and time boxes for each discussion.

[MylesBorins]

Here is the link to join y'all https://zoom.us/j/656987750