TC39 Delegates on 2024-04-27

02:38	<Aki>	Attention speakers from the April TC39 meeting: if you haven't recorded your conclusions yet, it is now too late. I mean, if you update the google docs no one will see them. Message me if you have edits to make to the notes
03:44	<Aki>	☹️ almost no one provided either a conclusion or a summary, not even the proposals with stage advancement got a summarized for the notes.
03:49	<Aki>	missing conclusion and/or summary All status updates (probably fine) Joint-iteration (Michael Ficarra) [continued on thursday, still lacks conclusion or summary] Promise.try for stage 2.7 (ljharb) ESM source phase status update and layering change (guybedford) Atomics.microwait for stage 2 (shu) AsyncContext Stage 2 updates (Justin Ridgewell) Deferred import evaluation (nicolo-ribaudo) Treeshakeable/deferred re-exports status update (nicolo-ribaudo) Iterator.range for stage 2.7 (Jack Works) Reality and spec differ on property key resolution timing for o[p] = f() ( rkirsling) Intl.MessageFormat status update (eemeli) [this one is confusing AF, maybe you can help ryzokuken?] Discard Bindings for Stage 2 (rbuckton) Extractors for Stage 2 (rbuckton) [continued, still lacks conclusion/summary] eval/new Function changes for Trusted Types as Normative PR or Stage 3 ( nicolo-ribaudo) Array.isTemplateObject next steps (littledan) Module sync assert for stage 2 (Jack Works) bringing back Error.isError, for stage 1 or 2 (ljharb) Decimal for stage 2 (Jesse) Shared Structs Discussion (shu) Strict Enforcement of 'using’ (rbuckton) Stop Coercing Things pt 4 (bakkot) Signals for stage 1 (littledan and Jatin Ramanathan)
03:49	<Aki>	enjoy your weekends and then message me on Monday
03:54	<rkirsling>	did I misunderstand a process change?
03:55	<rkirsling>	result for mine is just "got consensus"
03:55	<Aki>	cool! great!
03:56	<Aki>	everyone who presented should always be glancing at the notes to make sure their thoughts are well-represented, and someone (a notetaker if the notetakers have the time and space to do it, the presenter if they do not) should just note that
03:56	<Aki>	maybe it's a bulleted list with a summary of stuff that came up. maybe it's "achieved consensus for stage 3"
03:57	<Aki>	i'm in archivist mode now
03:57	<Aki>	and if there's really no summary worth noting, just write that. "no summary" or whatever.
03:57	<Aki>	something to indicate someone glanced it before it goes on the record forever
04:01	<Aki>	also Ross consensus on what. can't deduce from your title + "got consenus". it doesn't have to be a novel, just like "got consensus to align with original declaration" or whatever (i have no idea, i missed that section and can't read all the notes right now)
04:08	<rkirsling>	oh yeah no I mean
04:09	<rkirsling>	I fully rewrote my words
04:09	<rkirsling>	but I haven't presented in a while and I thought the conclusion was just sorta in there
04:11	<Aki>	It’s definitely super helpful from a paperwork standpoint to have it super clear without skimming the whole transcript
04:35	<Jack Works>	missing conclusion and/or summary All status updates (probably fine) Joint-iteration (Michael Ficarra) [continued on thursday, still lacks conclusion or summary] Promise.try for stage 2.7 (ljharb) ESM source phase status update and layering change (guybedford) Atomics.microwait for stage 2 (shu) AsyncContext Stage 2 updates (Justin Ridgewell) Deferred import evaluation (nicolo-ribaudo) Treeshakeable/deferred re-exports status update (nicolo-ribaudo) Iterator.range for stage 2.7 (Jack Works) Reality and spec differ on property key resolution timing for o[p] = f() ( rkirsling) Intl.MessageFormat status update (eemeli) [this one is confusing AF, maybe you can help ryzokuken?] Discard Bindings for Stage 2 (rbuckton) Extractors for Stage 2 (rbuckton) [continued, still lacks conclusion/summary] eval/new Function changes for Trusted Types as Normative PR or Stage 3 ( nicolo-ribaudo) Array.isTemplateObject next steps (littledan) Module sync assert for stage 2 (Jack Works) bringing back Error.isError, for stage 1 or 2 (ljharb) Decimal for stage 2 (Jesse) Shared Structs Discussion (shu) Strict Enforcement of 'using’ (rbuckton) Stop Coercing Things pt 4 (bakkot) Signals for stage 1 (littledan and Jatin Ramanathan) I added mine
04:35	<Aki>	My hero!!
04:46	<Ashley Claymore>	I feel like there is a challenge with how we utilise time boxing. Is the time box only for presentation+discussion - or should it also account for the extra few minutes of conclusion capturing?
04:48	<Ashley Claymore>	As we've been trying to capture conclusions for over a year now, I think we have strong evidence that if we don't do it live then it rarely is added "offline"
04:54	<Aki>	Truth. Though genuinely I think “review the notes for your presentation, however briefly” has been a request since time immemorial
04:57	<rkirsling>	again, I thought it was "review what you said" not "add new content to the doc"
04:57	<rkirsling>	but I have added said new content
05:17	<ptomato>	I've found it helpful to write the conclusion that I want ahead of time, and put it on the final slide. that makes a good starting point for adapting it to reflect the actual summary, as well as a natural reminder to do it
16:32	<ljharb>	Aki: added those sections for my two items, day 1 and 3 i think
21:52	<Aki>	In case I buried the lede: the notes are formatted and ready to go to Ecma. I'm holding them back for a few more days on the hopes more people want to and are able to add conclusions and/or summaries. if you DO add them, let me know so I can go fetch them and update the formatted documents. i will not notice any changes on my own.