You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Open Community (TDC) Meeting, Thursday 01 February 2024 #3519
In order to give visibility into the topics we cover in the TDC meetings, here is the planned agenda for the next meeting.
Sharing agenda items allows people to plan to attend meetings for topics that they have an interest in.
Everyone can comment on this issue prior to the meeting, to suggest topics or add comments on planned topics, whether attending or not.
Feel free to suggest other potential agenda topics.
Please submit comments below for topics or proposals that you wish to present in the TDC meeting
I have several things I'd like to bring up, and will start a list here and update it:
Do we want to keep any requests regarding JSON Schema keywords in-scope for 3.x? Or do we want to declare them all to belong with JSON Schema (either the standard or extension vocabularies)? If we want any in-scope, are we entertaining all requests or is there a criteria for what we'll consider vs not?
Can we agree to use milestones to group issues for releases, putting each issue into the oldest relevant release line (e.g. 3.0.4 if it applies to both 3.0.4 and 3.1.1) and actively forward-porting fixes as we make them? That will get rid of our confusing milestone/label overlap
Does anyone object to me removing GitHub labels that are either unused, duplicate what we can do with milestones, or had to do with ways past teams managed releases years ago?
[EDIT post-meeting: "Apollo" turns out to be associated with GraphQL, so @baywet proposed "Gemini" as the previous incremental space program that laid the groundwork for Apollo and the moon landing. After the meeting, there were also valid concerns raised about it being better to just ship a release than create too much confusing jargon. We'll be holding off on deciding this until there's been plenty of time to consider the impacts.]
I'd like to propose naming the 3.2+ minor releases the Apollo Series, in reference to the Apollo Program that took incremental steps leading up to the first humans walking on the Moon.
I also think that we should publish a blog post about how the Apollo Series will bring near-term incremental improvements that is as exuberant and widely promoted as the Moonwalk 2024 post.
In this weeks' Moonwalk call, I proposed a way to split up the Moonwalk functionality, specifically around deployments vs shapes, to make a more incremental transition possible - I can explain more on the TDC call.
Reacted by Miguel Quintero, Ralf Handl and Lorna Jane Mitchell
Activity
baywet commentedon Jan 25, 2024
lornajane commentedon Jan 28, 2024
(I won't be at the meeting, here are some things that might be worth your time though)
handrews commentedon Jan 29, 2024
I have several things I'd like to bring up, and will start a list here and update it:
handrews commentedon Jan 29, 2024
Easy PR review/merges, could all be done async!
uri-referenceformat for template URLs #3455 (I've approved, simple schema fix)baywet commentedon Jan 31, 2024
handrews commentedon Feb 1, 2024
[EDIT post-meeting: "Apollo" turns out to be associated with GraphQL, so @baywet proposed "Gemini" as the previous incremental space program that laid the groundwork for Apollo and the moon landing. After the meeting, there were also valid concerns raised about it being better to just ship a release than create too much confusing jargon. We'll be holding off on deciding this until there's been plenty of time to consider the impacts.]
I'd like to propose naming the 3.2+ minor releases the Apollo Series, in reference to the Apollo Program that took incremental steps leading up to the first humans walking on the Moon.
I also think that we should publish a blog post about how the Apollo Series will bring near-term incremental improvements that is as exuberant and widely promoted as the Moonwalk 2024 post.
In this weeks' Moonwalk call, I proposed a way to split up the Moonwalk functionality, specifically around deployments vs shapes, to make a more incremental transition possible - I can explain more on the TDC call.
miqui commentedon Feb 1, 2024
Adding #3523
handrews commentedon Feb 1, 2024
@miqui we can't properly address #3523 until the new TSC is in place.
earth2marsh commentedon Feb 1, 2024
Recording and an experimental summary written by Zoom's AI assistant.