From d0f4737f67017b25274161d0d41f92d9f5a151fe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kai Cataldo <kaicataldo@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 17:15:26 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Meeting notes for September 29, 2016

fixes #14
---
 notes/2016/2016-09-29.md | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 notes/2016/2016-09-29.md

diff --git a/notes/2016/2016-09-29.md b/notes/2016/2016-09-29.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fb2cc04
--- /dev/null
+++ b/notes/2016/2016-09-29.md
@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+# 29-Sep-2016 ESLint TSC Meeting Notes
+
+## Transcript
+
+https://gitter.im/eslint/tsc-meetings/archives/2016/09/29
+
+## Attending
+
+* Nicholas Zakas (@nzakas) - TSC
+* Toru Nagashima (@mysticatea) - TSC
+* Brandon Mills (@btmills) - TSC
+* Ilya Volodin (@ilyavolodin) - TSC
+* alberto (@alberto) - TSC
+* Kai Cataldo (@kaicataldo) - TSC
+
+## Topics
+
+### Nomination of @not-an-aardvark as a committer
+
+* @not-an-aardvark nominated as a committer.
+
+**Resolution**: @not-an-aardvark will be added as a committer following the meeting!
+
+### https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/6525
+
+* This is a proposal to add additional API methods to core
+
+**Resolution**: Issue is accepted and should be added to the Core Roadmap
+
+### https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/6592, https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/6874, https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/6740
+
+* These are accepted issues for core
+* Seems to be a point of confusion - accepted core issues should end up on the roadmap
+* `Help wanted` issues should not be added to the core roadmap because we're not committed to doing them ourselves
+
+**Resolution**: https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/6740 should have the `help wanted` label removed and all three issues should be added to the Core Roadmap
+
+### https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/7038 Postmortem
+
+* There was confusion surrounding the subsequent patch releases to the minor release on Sep 23, 2016
+* Patch was released on Monday that fixed one of three regressions, leaving two unfixed regressions
+* A semver-minor PR was merged the next day, making the next release a minor version bump instead of a patch
+* Release team
+* A `regression` label could make finding and fixing regression issues easier
+* We need some guidance around patch releases, both the initial one on the following Monday and any necessary subsequent patches
+
+**Resolution**: Create a `regression` label as well as open an issue to discuss the following:
+* Come up with guidance around when on Monday patch releases should be made.
+* Come up with guidance around when a Tuesday patch release should be made.
+* How to notify the team when we are in "possible patch release" mode to avoid merging things.
+* What is the proper course of action if a semver-minor PR has been mistakenly merged - should we do a minor release?
+
+### https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/5900
+
+* Issue is accepted and in the Core Roadmap, but has the `help wanted` label
+
+**Resolution**: Remove `help wanted` label to match our guidelines for what issues should be in the Core Roadmap.
+
+### Release on September 30, 2016
+
+**Resolution**: @nzakas and @kaicataldo will handle this release
+
+### Release on October 14, 2016
+
+**Resolution**: @mysticatea and @btmills will handle this release
+
+### Review pull requests without issues are going
+
+* Pros: Lots more PRs! Cons: Open PRs are stagnating, difficult to tell the status of open PRs
+* External contributing factors: team members are currently less active, larger volume of incoming PRs
+* Other concerns: current PR template is complex, currently can't filter/search by review status
+
+**Resolution**: Label PRs the same way we do issues, continue discussion next meeting