2026-03-02 [14:50:26.0181] Michael Ficarra ping on https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/3000#discussion_r2844075496 [14:52:05.0488] also you should stamp https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/3733 if it's ready [15:02:58.0431] so no editor call next week? [15:07:41.0261] nope, plenary next week [15:08:38.0114] I'll also be out the following week due to wasm.io 2026-03-05 [15:26:01.0809] updated the PR for putting built-in functions in the biblio to include accessors, think it's ready https://github.com/tc39/ecmarkup/pull/676 [15:26:36.0728] fun fact: we only have two setters in the spec, and they're both horrible (`Object.prototype.__proto__` and `Iterator.prototype[Symbol.species]`) 2026-03-06 [16:45:21.0066] I think you mean `Iterator.prototype[Symbol.toStringTag]`. And there's also `Iterator.prototype.constructor`. [17:14:28.0803] sorry yes those [17:14:40.0838] (which is indeed three, not two) [17:20:05.0452] +1 for horrible [20:37:00.0599] i see the ipr check is broken, again [21:06:19.0087] yeah; the last merged PR's author hadn't signed [21:06:26.0423] i'll give it a day or two, then i'll push up an exception [08:22:03.0220] btw Michael Ficarra did you cut the spec? should be announced this meeting so the opt-out can begin [08:23:47.0749] in theory, there's at least 3 things that could land following the meeting [08:24:04.0093] I think we'll start the opt-out via Reflector thread in the week or two following the meeting 2026-03-07 [17:36:29.0704] (lmk when to cut it) 2026-03-08 [19:34:15.0918] ๐Ÿ‘‹ please lmk who will be presenting the update at plenary next week and timebox required 2026-03-11 [15:25:48.0487] is pr #3000 close to being approved? Just wondering if i should prioritize a review of it. 2026-03-14 [07:19:39.0515] possible topic for editor call: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-await-dictionary/issues/29#issuecomment-4057977946 [07:45:47.0844] So was it decided how Temporal text will be maintained/published? [09:35:42.0986] jmdyck: yes 2026-03-16 [17:28:41.0953] ljharb: > [npm] Please note that on March 22, 2026 (7 days from today) the following granular access token(s) will expire. > ecma262/ecma402 biblio publish token time to land https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/3706 ? [10:27:45.0851] Now that we have different editors can we find a new (earlier) time for the editors call? :) [10:38:17.0000] anything up to 6pm UK (UTC/UTC+1) is fine by me as a start time [10:40:23.0999] also fine with a biweekly different schedule if needed as long as there's some overlap and we don't just end up splitting into two groups [11:12:21.0004] reminder: I will not be able to attend this week [11:12:31.0456] I'll be on my way to wasm.io [11:13:41.0086] topics: ACE's question above about writing to closed-over aliases in ACs, reviewing/merging JSON source text access, cutting the new spec, finding a new editor call time (probably 10:00A Pacific is the earliest to accommodate West coast US people) [11:14:04.0112] also https://github.com/tc39/ecmarkup/pull/678 [11:20:54.0958] someone will need to update https://github.com/orgs/tc39/teams/ecma262-editors [11:23:53.0342] I think ljharb is the only one who can do that [11:25:48.0872] also if any of the incoming editors haven't read the editorial conventions yet, please familiarise yourself: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/wiki/Editorial-Conventions [11:26:29.0788] they're not hard rules, and we can always change them or add to them, but they're a good baseline [11:37:18.0790] Iโ€™ll do that shortly [13:48:12.0349] due to some very fortunate timing, I actually *can* join today's editor call, but I'll have a hard stop at the end as I'll have to run to catch my flight [14:04:57.0881] k i think i added the right people - total of 6? [14:23:35.0688] yes 2026-03-17 [01:54:13.0167] FYI I've added these new editorial conventions: * captured aliases in ACs should not be written to, even if the write is only observed within the AC * aliases that are captured by an AC should not be written to outside the AC after their capture 2026-03-18 [13:05:40.0879] Table to see when would be a good time to schedule our meeting: https://timeful.app/e/32BdD - I took a random week in April to make sure that it's considering the right difference between Europe and US - If needed we can alternate between two meeting days/times, especially given it sounded like shu was the one with most constraints and he's only joining half of the meetings [13:06:10.0574] * Table to see when would be a good time to schedule our meeting: https://timeful.app/e/32BdD - I took a random week in April to make sure that it's considering the right difference between Europe and US - If needed we can alternate between two meeting days/times, especially given it sounded like shu was the one with most constraints and he's only joining half of the meetings - There is a dropdown at the bottom to choose your timezone - I accidentally added Sundays and Saturdays, ignore them [13:07:16.0651] * Table to see when would be a good time to schedule our meeting: https://timeful.app/e/32BdD - I took a random week in April to make sure that it's considering the right difference between Europe and US - If needed we can alternate between two meeting days/times, especially given it sounded like shu was the one with most constraints and he's only joining half of the meetings - There is a dropdown at the bottom to choose your timezone - To mark things as "if needed" you need to use the toggle on the side - I accidentally added Sundays and Saturdays, ignore them [13:09:52.0176] For the upcoming week let's keep the current schedule [13:10:14.0648] * Table to see when would be a good time to schedule our meeting: https://timeful.app/e/32BdD - I picked a random week in April to make sure that it's considering the right difference between Europe and US - If needed we can alternate between two meeting days/times, especially given it sounded like shu was the one with most constraints and he's only joining half of the meetings - There is a dropdown at the bottom to choose your timezone - To mark things as "if needed" you need to use the toggle on the side - I accidentally added Sundays and Saturdays, ignore them [13:10:19.0049] and yet it shows current time zones for locations and not what time zone it will be in april ๐Ÿ˜… [13:10:30.0951] Ughhhh [13:10:35.0695] Ok ignore this [13:10:51.0439] I'll look for another tool [13:22:24.0301] I mean, we're going to be meeting every week for a year [13:22:35.0530] depending on how we schedule it, it's going to shift an hour for some people [13:22:54.0591] twice, no less [13:23:09.0393] Yes but I prefer to schedule based on how the alignment will be 95% of the time [13:23:37.0692] And not based on the 4 or so week per year where US and Europe are not aligned [13:23:38.0390] ๐Ÿคทโ€โ™‚๏ธ [13:24:47.0891] I wonder how difficult it is to build a tool like this in google sheets [13:28:51.0228] this tool is *already* the result of someone going "how hard could it be to build one of these?" [13:37:37.0346] * Table to see when would be a good time to schedule our meeting: ~~https://timeful.app/e/32BdD~~ https://timeful.app/e/b9dc2c - I picked a random week in April to make sure that it's considering the right difference between Europe and US - If needed we can alternate between two meeting days/times, especially given it sounded like shu was the one with most constraints and he's only joining half of the meetings - There is a dropdown at the bottom to choose your timezone - To mark things as "if needed" you need to use the toggle on the side - I accidentally added Sundays and Saturdays, ignore them [13:37:48.0463] * Table to see when would be a good time to schedule our meeting: https://timeful.app/e/32BdD https://timeful.app/e/b9dc2c - I picked a random week in April to make sure that it's considering the right difference between Europe and US - If needed we can alternate between two meeting days/times, especially given it sounded like shu was the one with most constraints and he's only joining half of the meetings - There is a dropdown at the bottom to choose your timezone - To mark things as "if needed" you need to use the toggle on the side - I accidentally added Sundays and Saturdays, ignore them [13:40:33.0116] Ok well I created a new one in the same tool, Linus and I need to make sure to select the currently wrong timezone: https://timeful.app/e/b9dc2c 2026-03-20 [10:58:33.0641] https://github.com/tc39/how-we-work/blob/main/management.md Hello editors! I was updating this page โ˜๏ธ to update the editors list and noticed this line: > The editor group runs on an internal consensus model, requiring the sign-off of each editor to merge a pull request. My understanding is that, as written, it is not entirely accurate. Not a big deal, but I defer to you all on how/whether to update it. ๐Ÿ™ 2026-03-23 [10:40:24.0174] Michael Ficarra rbuckton Richard Gibson shu [10:40:43.0333] here the full description [10:56:19.0453] i *had* a doodle clone in a google sheet [14:21:17.0158] @linusgroh:matrix.org do you feel strongly about this? https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/3714#discussion_r2948881086 [14:21:32.0884] if not, we can skip it for now and merge the PR and make the 2026 cut [14:22:20.0030] no strong feelings, let's go ahead with it [14:34:48.0539] link to search for PRs in need of another approval: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc+-reviewed-by%3A%40me+-author%3A%40me+review%3Aapproved+-label%3A%22editor+call%22+draft%3Afalse+-label%3A%22ready+to+merge%22+-label%3A%22pending+stage+4%22+-label%3A%22needs+consensus%22 [14:54:54.0182] okay priorities for next week: final reviews of JSON parse with source text, create the es2026 branch, notify start of opt-out period on the Reflector, decide on new editor call schedule going forward 2026-03-26 [10:22:05.0972] we haven't decided on a new time yet, right? next week's meeting is still 2pm PT? [10:29:19.0219] correct, that's why it's part of next week's agenda I posted above [10:29:44.0457] Yes sorry, I've been on holiday since Tuesday and didn't look at what time we could actually do yet. 2026-03-28 [08:46:37.0398] https://github.com/tc39/ecmarkup/issues/682 2026-03-30 [13:47:45.0819] linus / shu Any change you could select a few more timeslots? [13:54:31.0958] i'd be fine adding another hour but that doesn't gain us anything [13:54:46.0753] and i'm already in all the green slots [13:57:57.0035] * and i'm already in all the most green slots [14:40:57.0500] we were all just kicked from the meeting? [14:41:02.0488] Yes, reload [15:33:03.0054] https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/3787 the PR removing the assertion [15:33:19.0103] I'm going to sleep now, if there are review comments that need to be resovled quickly feel free to just push there [15:50:06.0899] cool, of course it's resolved now [16:49:16.0983] @rbuckton:matrix.org @gibson042:matrix.org do either of you want to review @nicolo-ribaudo:matrix.org's PR? [16:50:58.0571] approved [16:54:01.0108] thanks 2026-03-31 [20:16:12.0493] i rebased https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/actions/runs/23778570093/job/69285769804?pr=3714 and the later version of ecmarkup is failing. Itโ€™s on grammar nodes so the fix isnโ€™t obvious to me. [20:19:38.0652] > error: duplicate definition "PropertyDefinitionNodes" looks like it might be a bad rebase. I moved that SDO earlier today: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/commit/a6a9c7b3c62802b67cca325013d332f85832bb9c [20:25:07.0043] Crap, my bad. in that case, can you rebase it so itโ€™s just the two commits, but working properly? feel free to start with the previous tip [20:42:31.0814] just pushed [20:43:38.0755] relevant checks passed [20:46:30.0805] other checks passed as well [21:01:10.0331] ljharb :+1: [21:01:50.0242] * ljharb ๐Ÿ‘ [22:52:35.0394] Michael Ficarra: we still need the ES2026 blurb for the bottom of the intro - if you push to a branch (no PR needed) i'll pull it in and cut the edition tomorrow [23:09:59.0627] also, shouldn't https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/3759 be included as well, since it has stage 4? or was that not in time for ES2026 [23:26:33.0007] nope, Temporal was not going to be reviewed for es2026 [23:26:58.0372] that was part of our discussions with the Temporal champions months ago [23:38:01.0098] I've made the 2026 branch: https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/tree/es2026 [23:38:43.0544] I'll post the opt-out review period thread to the Reflector tomorrow morning (Tuesday, 31 March) [23:39:29.0331] one thing we forgot to do was add an update blurb to the end of the introduction and update the editor list [23:39:30.0541] we still need to update the intro before cutting the edition tho [23:39:41.0020] ^ [23:40:51.0537] we can take care of that at the next editor call, or if anyone's feeling ambitious, they can start a draft and send a PR [23:41:30.0819] iirc the optout can't start until the actual candidate is out, and that needs the blurb [23:41:35.0438] I have no problem with us making that change during the review period, as it's all non-normative [23:41:46.0916] yeah, i suppose i can finish cutting it now and just update it later [23:42:23.0427] we make other small non-normative things when needed, that's not unusual [00:37:13.0976] https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/releases/tag/es2026-candidate-2026-03-31