| 02:01 | <jschoi> | Is there a particular reason why withdrawn proposal-operator-overloading’s repository hasn’t been archived? littledan withdrew it about a year ago, but various people have still been posting to it since. |
| 02:03 | <jschoi> | (It would also be good to link prominently to https://github.com/tc39/notes/blob/main/meetings/2023-11/november-28.md#withdrawing-operator-overloading from the explainer.) |
| 02:04 | <jschoi> | Ditto goes for proposal-extended-numeric-literals, though that’s been getting less community traffic. |
| 08:14 | <Ashley Claymore> | Good spot. A withdrawn proposal could be re-started. So I don't necessarily think they need to be archived, unless the champions wish to. But an updated README and a pinned issue makes a lot of sense |
| 11:38 | <eemeli> | Renaming the repo with a withdrawn- or similar prefix would make the status a bit clearer. |
| 11:51 | <Jesse> | AFAIU the tc39 organization in GitHub can define a label (e.g., withdrawn) that can be used on repos within the organization |
| 13:00 | <ryzokuken> | Hi everyone! For folks interested in visiting us for the hybrid plenary in May, we're working on organizing a community event in collaboration with local communities along the same lines as the recent SeattleJS event you might remember from the last hybrid meeting in Seattle. I've posted a call for participation here: https://github.com/tc39/Reflector/issues/556, which allows you to volunteer for a talk or a panel but we're also open to new ideas. Basically if you're up for it, let us know through the spreadsheet form or just informally since it'd help us plan. |
| 16:32 | <ljharb> | they should be, it just slipped through the cracks. repos can be unarchived if needed |
| 17:16 | <Chris de Almeida> | 📢 REMINDER! 📢 The deadline for advancement for the April meeting is just ~20 hours from now! |
| 19:31 | <jschoi> | It’s been a long time for me, sorry—what’s the deadline for new agenda items that do not advance a proposal? |
| 19:32 | <ptomato> | before the draft schedule is published? |
| 19:46 | <Rob Palmer> | We still encourage early posting. |
| 20:11 | <Michael Ficarra> | we formally accept an agenda at the beginning of a meeting, but that hasn't stopped us from making updates during the meeting |
| 20:11 | <Michael Ficarra> | 3. Adoption of the agenda |
| 20:22 | <shu> | do we really |
| 20:22 | <shu> | like does someone say "are there any objections to adopting this agenda" |
| 20:38 | <bakkot> | at literally every meeting, yes |
| 20:39 | <shu> | i evict memories of the start of tc39 meetings almost immediately after they occur |
| 21:06 | <bakkot> | that's what the notes are for https://github.com/tc39/notes/blob/main/meetings/2024-12/december-02.md#:~:text=.%20Are%20there%20any%20objections%20against%20proceeding%20with%20the%20current%20agenda%3F%20None%3F%20Okay.%20We%20have%20adopted%20the%20agenda. |
| 21:08 | <shu> | look, i'm not even in the list of attendees, it checks out |
| 22:43 | <Michael Ficarra> | there's a lot of things on the agenda for stage advancement with no links |
| 22:44 | <Michael Ficarra> | reminder @Mathieu Hofman @erights that links to review materials should be provided before the advancement deadline |
| 22:46 | <kriskowal> | Mark’s been working to produce material all week. I’ll pass on the reminder, and you can expect links soon. |