nodejs · Trott · Mar 11, 2022 · Mar 10, 2022 · Mar 10, 2022 · Mar 10, 2022
diff --git a/meetings/2022-03-10.md b/meetings/2022-03-10.md
@@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
+# Node.js Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting 2022-03-10
+
+## Links
+
+* **Recording**:  <https://youtu.be/sgDT2ZcRSiQ>
+* **GitHub Issue**: <https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/1184>
+
+## Present
+
+* Antoine du Hamel @aduh95 (TSC)
+* Сковорода Никита Андреевич @ChALkeR (TSC)
+* Colin Ihrig @cjihrig (TSC)
+* Gireesh Punathil @gireeshpunathil (TSC)
+* Michael Dawson @mhdawson (TSC)
+* Myles Borins @MylesBorins (TSC)
+* Richard Lau @richardlau (TSC)
+* Robert Nagy @ronag (TSC)
+* Tobias Nießen @tniessen (TSC)
+* Rich Trott @Trott (TSC)
+
+## Agenda
+
+### Announcements
+
+* No announcements this week
+
+### CPC and Board Meeting Updates
+
+*Extracted from **tsc-agenda** labeled issues and pull requests from the **nodejs org** prior to the meeting.
+
+* Last CPC session was a working session on community fund
+  * <https://github.com/openjs-foundation/community-fund/pull/11>
+
+### nodejs/node
+
+* Grant triagers the ability to re-run a failed CI [#42125](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/42125)
+  * Gireesh added, there ended up being a number of issues in the discussion
+  * Gireesh, first question should triaggers be able to run the CI
+    * Robert, what are the security implications of that
+    * Triagers only have access to labels.
+    * Myles, limited to only test infrastructure
+    * Michael, we nominate,approve triagers so we know them, which should limit risk
+    * Nobody arguing that we don’t give access
+  * Second question is about re-run CI
+    * Michael, what about expectation to check for open issues before re-running
+    * Robert, could backfire by creating spam type issues
+    * Nobody voice concerns with allowing triagers to re-run CIs
+  * Robert
+    * Block based on security audit
+    * Myles, we should not block
+  * No objections if somebody wants to add label to resume CI
+* Proposal: Adding a built-in test runner [#40954](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/40954)
+  * Colin
+    * Should we ship a built in test runner, Deno does, believe it makes sense
+    * Even if you try to avoid npm dependencies you still have to install a test runner
+    * Wanted to get more TSC feedback before spending more time on it
+  * Michael what kind of size would it add to the shipped binaries
+    * Colin, tap is 30MB, expect what we would provide would be far, far less and 1MB
+  * Myles what about reporters, there are so many of those, what would we do, pick one
+    or support many
+    * Colin consensus seems to be just generate tap
+  * Myles what about code coverage
+    * Colin has been discussed, would likely want to incorporate C8.
+    * Michael there is/was an open issue by Issac
+  * Michael, possible to make stripped down version of tap
+    * Colin, maybe but not volunteering to do that
+  * Tobias
+    * Would the test runner have a tap-like assertion interface (t.equal etc) or reuse node's assert?
+  * If no other comments, will work on assumption brought to TSC, will work on PR.
+
+* Add a `resume-ci` label to issues? [#40817](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/40817)
+  * Already discussed in issue related to triagers
+  * Richard it will be a lot more complicated to implement.
+
+* Rename default branch from "master" to "main" [#33864](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/33864)
+  * These are the remaining repos
+    * build:master - <https://github.com/nodejs/build/issues/2761>
+    * i18n:master - <https://github.com/nodejs/i18n/issues/502>
+    * node:master
+    * node-gyp:master - <https://github.com/nodejs/node-gyp/issues/2495>
+    * snap:master - <https://github.com/nodejs/snap/pull/17>
+    * unofficial-builds:master - <https://github.com/nodejs/unofficial-builds/issues/35>
+
+### nodejs/email
+
+* Email cleanup tracking [#182](https://github.com/nodejs/email/issues/182)
+  * Bunch of things that need to happen
+  * On TSC agenda as FYI, removing lable
+
+### nodejs/TSC
+
+* nominating aduh95 as a Moderation Team member [#1182](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/1182)
+  * 72 hours nobody objected, approved. Thank you very much.
+
+* Publishing specs for `Buffer` and `EventEmitter` [#1176](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/1176)
+  * Not time sensitive will wait for a time James can make it
+
+* \[meta\] settle on a voting solution [#1165](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/1165)
+  * discussed before, agreed we should go for it.
+
+### nodejs/admin
+
+* Bot user for nodejs/corepack [#660](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/issues/660)
+  * Removed, from TSC agenda, no objections to bot user.
+
+* blocklist import/export [#659](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/issues/659)
+  * discussed last time, no concern about mirroring, taking off of TSC agenda.
+
+## Strategic Initiatives
+
+* V8 - V8 9.9 and later are blocked on windows compiler issue, issue open in the V8 issue tracker. Would be great if anybody with Windows knowledge could help out
+* Next-10
+
+* Core promises - no update this week
+  * Suitable types - next step PR in changes to doc style/api guides
+  * Single binary exe's discussed in mini-summit but no champion to push forward, should probably still land something so we capture what we agreed would be best way forward
+  * Modern http
+    * undici landed/being tweaked
+  * Documentation
+    * PR goal to have inline example for all methods/functions - <https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/42274>
+    * Planning to work on documenting metadata
+  * Planning for next virtual summit on WASM and Security, 7th of April
+  * Planning for sessions at OpenJS World (common, review modern http progress, baseline review, ESM and Observability as technical deep dives)
+
+## Upcoming Meetings
+
+* **Node.js Project Calendar**: <https://nodejs.org/calendar>
+
+Click `+GoogleCalendar` at the bottom right to add to your own Google calendar.