From 5c9c1f38594f98b5c7c14ead5cdb3b5c6ed0d6ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Bethany Nicolle Griggs Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 13:19:35 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] doc: add minutes for 2020-03-12 (#551) Fixes: https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/546 --- doc/meetings/2020-03-12.md | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 69 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/meetings/2020-03-12.md diff --git a/doc/meetings/2020-03-12.md b/doc/meetings/2020-03-12.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7069bcc --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/meetings/2020-03-12.md @@ -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. + +