| 04:44 | <ryzokuken> | Should we use labels instead of prefixes for tracking the type of PRs? |
| 04:44 | <ryzokuken> | or I suppose we could do both like 262. |
| 04:45 | <ryzokuken> | I'm adding the labels now, since I doubt someone would mind them, but let me know if anyone has any concerns |
| 04:49 | <leobalter> | I use prefix as it follows the commit message but that’s more up to you |
| 04:49 | <ryzokuken> | oh right, the commit message needs to have it too, makes sense. |
| 04:49 | <leobalter> | No One Will mind the labels for sure |
| 04:50 | <ryzokuken> | no, you're right. Let's just do both like 262 does |
| 04:50 | <ryzokuken> | I like labels, since github lets me use them to do filtering and stuff, but prefixes are important too I just realized |
| 04:50 | <ryzokuken> | thanks leobalter 😀 |
| 05:12 | <ryzokuken> | leobalter: Richard Gibson sffc https://github.com/tc39/ecma402/issues/584 seems like an important issue to have some discussion on. Would you folks mind a small meeting next week to discuss this and a few other similar issues or should we try to cover this in the TG2 meeting instead? |
| 05:13 | <ryzokuken> | specifically, that issue plus https://github.com/tc39/ecma402/issues/580 and https://github.com/tc39/ecma402/issues/588 |
| 08:18 | <zbraniecki> | leobalter: Richard Gibson sffc https://github.com/tc39/ecma402/issues/584 seems like an important issue to have some discussion on. Would you folks mind a small meeting next week to discuss this and a few other similar issues or should we try to cover this in the TG2 meeting instead? |
| 08:19 | <ryzokuken> | Is that a dupe of https://github.com/tc39/ecma402/issues/105 ? |
| 08:19 | <zbraniecki> | Sorry, that's for 580 |
| 08:19 | <zbraniecki> | ryzokuken is there something we can do to make existing issues easier to find? |
| 09:22 | <ryzokuken> | 580, 584 and 105 are all mostly similar |
| 09:23 | <ryzokuken> | zbraniecki: for some reason, we don't use the "featured issues" feature of GitHub |
| 09:23 | <ryzokuken> | I think maybe putting up these common/big-picture/existential issues up there would improve their discoverability. |
| 09:23 | <ryzokuken> | actually, I will do that right now, until someone objects. Please feel free to unpin issues that you think are less relevant and replace them with others. |
| 15:29 | <sffc> | We have the "priority issues" list in the agenda board for this purpose |
| 15:29 | <sffc> | Though I don't really see how these three issues are "existential" |