Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
doc: add minutes for 2020-03-12 (#551)
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
Fixes: #546
  • Loading branch information
BethGriggs authored Mar 14, 2020
1 parent fe52572 commit 5c9c1f3
Showing 1 changed file with 69 additions and 0 deletions.
69 changes: 69 additions & 0 deletions doc/meetings/2020-03-12.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
# Node.js Release WorkGroup Meeting 2020-03-12

## Links

* **Recording**: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTMv2pQIKfU
* **GitHub Issue**: https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/546
* **Minutes Google Doc**: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AuGvlqPg_XVihWPFOaOJKYeXD8wDZN3DKyQeYQFtY9w/edit

## Present

* Beth Griggs (@BethGriggs)
* Darcy Clarke (@darcyclarke)
* Michael Zasso (@targos)
* Myles Borins (@mylesborins)
* Richard Lau (@richardlau)
* Shelley Vohr (@codebytere)

## Agenda

## Announcements

* Nominating Richard Lau (@richardlau) for the LTS and backporters team [#550](https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/550)

### nodejs/Release

* Working out a policy around reverts for LTS branches [#535](https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/535)
* Discussed last meeting - no specific actions.
* Should it be reverted on master first, and then bubble down to LTS?
* Consensus was that we should decide on a case-by-case basis.
* Documentation on what we should do if a release has a confirmed bug.
* Potentially including raising an issue on Release repository when something goes wrong.
* We should aim to revert PRs in master as soon as possible.

* Dropping the backporters team - [#547](https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/547)
* Myles suggestion in [#547](https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/547#issuecomment-596644900)
* We’re currently mixing the model of IAM and working streams.
* We want to encourage more people backporting.
* Should more than just releasers/backporters land on staging branches?
* At the moment it’s a small group so we don’t conflict with each other when landing PRs on staging branches and backports.
* Bottleneck is the time it takes for backport PRs.
* Do we want the LTS team to be able to have an opinion on what should land without having access to land PRs on staging branches?
* The questions we’re trying to answer are:
* Who has permission to land things on the branches?
* And who can participate in the discussions?

## Q&A, Other

* The definition of done is currently when a commit lands on master - maybe we should change this?
* (Shelley) Checks API to show if a PR will land cleanly on LTS branches.
* (Richard) Is there a risk of alienating drive-by contributors?
* (Shelley) Doesn’t need to block merge.
* (Myles) We could show through labels - we already use `backport-requested` labels.
* (Myles) We want to avoid premature backports.
* (Beth) Does this mean backports could be raised before the LTS team has audited eligibility?
* (Richard) We should work on the flow.
* **Action**: Raise an issue to discuss flow and/or prototype.

* Create an offboarding document [#542](https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/542)
* `node-core-utils` now has an option for landing backports `git node land --backport`
* Shelley is working on automating the steps involved with creating release commits in `node-core-utils`
* Call for releasers to try it out and review.

## Upcoming Meetings

* **Node.js Foundation Calendar**: https://nodejs.org/calendar

Click `+GoogleCalendar` at the bottom right to add to your own Google calendar.


0 comments on commit 5c9c1f3

Please sign in to comment.