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

TSC meeting 13-August-2020 #198

Closed
eslint-deprecated bot opened this issue Jul 30, 2020 · 6 comments
Closed

TSC meeting 13-August-2020 #198

eslint-deprecated bot opened this issue Jul 30, 2020 · 6 comments

Comments

@eslint-deprecated
Copy link

Time

UTC Thu 13-Aug-2020 20:00:

  • Los Angeles: Thu 13-Aug-2020 13:00
  • Chicago: Thu 13-Aug-2020 15:00
  • New York: Thu 13-Aug-2020 16:00
  • Madrid: Thu 13-Aug-2020 22:00
  • Moscow: Thu 13-Aug-2020 23:00
  • Tokyo: Fri 14-Aug-2020 05:00
  • Sydney: Fri 14-Aug-2020 06:00

Location

https://eslint.org/chat/tsc-meetings

Agenda

Extracted from:

  • Issues and pull requests from the ESLint organization with the "tsc agenda" label
  • Comments on this issue

Invited

Public participation

Anyone is welcome to attend the meeting as observers. We ask that you refrain from interrupting the meeting once it begins and only participate if invited to do so.

@mdjermanovic
Copy link
Member

mdjermanovic commented Aug 2, 2020

It would be nice to define semver policy for bug fixes in rule schemas, specifically for those fixes that can cause schema validation errors in existing configs (if the rule was misconfigured in user's config, but the schema was incorrect/incomplete and didn't catch that).

ref eslint/eslint#13166

Additionally, and if the decision is to treat these as semver-major changes, should we revert eslint/eslint#13166.

@ljharb
Copy link
Sponsor

ljharb commented Aug 2, 2020

To be clear - anything that causes correct linting warnings in code to appear imo is not semver-major, however, anything that causes a schema failure crashes the entire eslint run.

My preferred outcome would be that "string, override object" became valid for comma-dangle, as the pattern is valid for many other rules.

@nzakas
Copy link
Member

nzakas commented Aug 3, 2020

@mdjermanovic can you clarify if your intent here is to add an agenda item to the meeting?

@mdjermanovic
Copy link
Member

@mdjermanovic can you clarify if your intent here is to add an agenda item to the meeting?

Yes, I thought it would be good to discuss this since it's about semver policy (if it isn't already covered by the policy).

@nzakas
Copy link
Member

nzakas commented Aug 3, 2020

Yup, that's fine. In the future, if you can just prefix with "Agenda item:" or "I'd like to discuss", it will make things a bit clearer. Thanks!

@nzakas
Copy link
Member

nzakas commented Aug 5, 2020

Agenda item: Let's discuss what types of companies and organizations we want to accept donations from. For example, we probably don't want to accept donations from any of the following:

  1. Online gambling sites
  2. Political groups
  3. Groups related to sex work
  4. Hate groups

It would be good to get this documented, as it might help us avoid needing to refund and block groups on Open Collective.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants