doc: add minutes for meeting 17 Jan 2024

meetings/2024-01-17.md

@@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
+# Node.js Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting 2024-01-17
+
+## Links
+
+* **Recording**: <https://youtube.com/live/00oahsrkFTU>
+* **GitHub Issue**: <https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/1492>
+
+## Present
+
+* Antoine du Hamel @aduh95 (voting member)
+* Yagiz Nizipli @anonrig (voting member)
+* Benjamin Gruenbaum @benjamingr (voting member)
+* Ruben Bridgewater @BridgeAR (voting member)
+* Geoffrey Booth @GeoffreyBooth (voting member)
+* Gireesh Punathil @gireeshpunathil (voting member)
+* Chengzhong Wu @legendecas (voting member)
+* Matteo Collina @mcollina (voting member)
+* Michael Dawson @mhdawson (voting member)
+* Richard Lau @richardlau (voting member)
+* Ruy Adorno @ruyadorno (voting member)
+* Michaël Zasso @targos (voting member)
+* Claudio Wunder (Guest)
+* Steven @styfle (Guest)
+* Darcy Clarke @darcyclarke (Guest)
+* Maël Nison @arcanis (Guest)
+
+## 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.
+
+* From Claudio
+  * We're closing in on finishing the Travel Fund Rework
+  * Same for the CoC rework
+  * We're applying the Foundation (OpenJS) to Google Season of Docs -- to have Node.js as a participating project.
+
+### nodejs/node
+
+* enable corepack by default [#50963](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/50963)
+  * Antoine - issue opened last month, asking if we can enable by default. Quite a few
+    discussions that have come from that, one being the integration of npm.
+  * Darcy - <https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/35398#issuecomment-700314358> included a
+    number of questions that would be answered before we would unflag. Would consider that a
+    blocker to unflagging.
+  * Mael - as package manager for yarn, has definitely solved the problem they had before in
+    terms of using the package manager that they.
+  * Michael, one option not discussed too much, mark stable but still require corepack enable,
+    * Mael might be ok, but what is the point of forcing the extra command
+    * Michael to try to make sure they know they are enable auto install of software for them
+  * Darcy - link that shows registry traffic
+    * Sharing some data sourced from the public npm team statements: <https://github-production-user-asset-6210df.s3.amazonaws.com/459713/297423226-1d18f2dc-1deb-457b-8a14-5f512921f8cc.png>
+    * there was almost a 50/50 split at one point, which shows that blockers of consumption might
+      not have been there original
+  * Steven - data shows us that people are using different package managers, the problem was
+    not that. The problem that corepack is solving is helping a new user get up and running
+    Faster.
+* Steven to answer the question about corepack by default. Seems like it should be easy.
+  Because it’s not enable by default Vercel does not have it enabled by default
+  * the official [@action/setup-node](https://github.com/actions/setup-node) where it will not be enabled because it is not enabled by default. There have been [multiple PRs](https://github.com/actions/setup-node/pulls?q=is%3Apr+corepack) to add support for corepack but still waiting on stable.
+  * value is that people who don’t even know they are using it, will use it when contributing to a new project.
+  * avoids the issue with multiple ways to install causing broken `PATH` - see  [example](https://twitter.com/galstar/status/1745172635674169663)
+* Claudio may be bad example but in terms of how many people use IE simply because its the
+  Default. More inclined if adopted by default.  Data might be different if others were enabled by
+  Default.
+* Darcy, only going to be aware of package managers that is aware of. Don’t think
+  its going to help with creating opportunities for package managers, more see
+  it as locking in the existing ones.  The 50/50 at one point supports this
+* Yagiz, disagree with the lock-in, not enabling the same level of competitive advantage is a
+  main concern for me. If all of them were shipped at the same time, then numbers might be
+  Different.  Alternative to enabling corepack would be to install all of them.
+* Mael, disagree that it would be locking in the package manager list. Any other package
+  manager could advocate to being added to the list.  Not being shipped as part of Node.js has
+  caused lots of issues over time.
+* Geoffrey, concern is that we ship both npm and corepack, npm taking firm stand on not
+  including npm, if its enabled by default, then people will ask why it’s not included.  Could we
+  add to npm, check of package manager, and spit out error saying using the wrong one.
+* Matteo, want to state the obvious, npm is the default, and it’s the golden
+  standard since all other package managers are npm registry clients. It is,
+  maintained by the people who maintain the registry so corepack is not going to change that.
+* Antoine, another advantage, because npm client is default we get problem reports
+* Darcy, to add on to Matteo’s comment about npm being the “official” registry client, it has a
+  paid team to maintain. npm does self regulate, respected engines, it will warn or error if the
+  package manager does not match. Data shows it has not prevented other managers from
+  entering a competing products.
+* Ruy, concerned it’s too much scope to pull into the runtime, Ruy, maybe adding other
+  package managers to other containers might be a better way than building into the runtime
+  Itself. Anecdotal correlation: Yarn v1 is currently shipped with our Docker image and it’s
+  also the leading package manager showing up in data shared by the npm registry team.
+* Steven, the whole anti-competitive nature, but key problem it solves it choosing the right
+  version of the package manager which the other tools don’t fix. Seems like this has been
+  overlooked
+* lib: promote process.binding/_tickCallback to runtime deprecation [#50687](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/50687)
+  * skipped not enough time this week
+* lib: rewrite AsyncLocalStorage without async_hooks [#48528](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/48528)
+  * skipped not enough time this week
+
+### nodejs/admin
+
+* Redesign of Node.js Website [#818](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/issues/818)
+  * Claudio Wanted to give a quick overview and have space for some discussion on key
+    questions/concerns
+  * Claudio, showed what the flagged (not visible) version of the home page shows
+  * Michael, does it work across all platforms, Claudio, yes.
+  * Michael, would it make sense to add another line after the “Downloads …” which says
+    something like Downloads for other platforms are available here”
+  * Geoffrey, we need to change/agree on description of Node.js before landing
+  * Claudio, learn section, moving a bunch of the guides over to new section.  Plan is to release
+    website mid this year,
+  * Claudio, Took us through many of the pages, likely separate meeting on the downloads page.
+  * working on adding search bar
+* Events / Collaborator Summits for 2024 [#814](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/issues/814)
+
+## Strategic Initiatives
+* skipped this week
+
+## Upcoming Meetings
+
+* **Node.js Project Calendar**: <https://nodejs.org/calendar>
+
+Click `+GoogleCalendar` at the bottom right to add to your own Google calendar.