Node.js Foundation Modules Team Meeting 2019-02-27

[MylesBorins]

Time

UTC Wed 27-Feb-2019 20:00 (08:00 PM):

Timezone	Date/Time
US / Pacific	Wed 27-Feb-2019 12:00 (12:00 PM)
US / Mountain	Wed 27-Feb-2019 13:00 (01:00 PM)
US / Central	Wed 27-Feb-2019 14:00 (02:00 PM)
US / Eastern	Wed 27-Feb-2019 15:00 (03:00 PM)
London	Wed 27-Feb-2019 20:00 (08:00 PM)
Amsterdam	Wed 27-Feb-2019 21:00 (09:00 PM)
Moscow	Wed 27-Feb-2019 23:00 (11:00 PM)
Chennai	Thu 28-Feb-2019 01:30 (01:30 AM)
Hangzhou	Thu 28-Feb-2019 04:00 (04:00 AM)
Tokyo	Thu 28-Feb-2019 05:00 (05:00 AM)
Sydney	Thu 28-Feb-2019 07:00 (07:00 AM)

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Modules%20Team+Meeting+2019-02-27&iso=20190227T20
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=08PM+UTC%2C+Feb+27%2C+2019+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gXpUwJGPAgHNLqbOdqKEoRQsbdQwqgXAC2kC_tyQ6Tk/edit
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AFnHc85SzFZFUqL6xL7xTDOmFB9FM6q9yapjYGQiXi0/edit

Agenda

Extracted from modules-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Invited

• Modules team: @nodejs/modules

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with modules-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Note

This is an out of band follow up to last week’s meeting. The majority of this week’s discussion will be based on the following doc

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DSWrdV1fzXvlOdTZ5MngDX7v6CU4ZUheJ7ysOZ2uK0w/edit?usp=sharing

Discussion in this issue

#261

We will walk through contentious subjects, attempt to reach consensus quickly, otherwise move towards a vote. We will then review the resulting implementation and attempt to reach consensus that this is what we will move forward with.

Review Open PRs (15 minute timebox)

All discussion are limited to 5 minutes and will be ended early if it is obvious there is no consensus

• -m alias for --type=module #39
• Exports main #41
• esm: add experimental .json support to loader #43
• Warn about --type with shebang #37
• ESM_FORMAT: Avoid reading package.json when extension is unambiguous #33

Discussion (40 minutes)

• Review last weeks discussion
  • 5 minute timebox
• What is an MVP to upstream?
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Minimum to release? #253
    • Entry points proposal spec and implementation #32
    • Import file specifier proposal implementation #256
    • Mode: esm proposal #247
• Loaders
  • 5 minute timebox
• File Extension Resolution
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • File extension/directory index resolution in ESM #268
• CommonJS interop
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Proposal for dual ESM/CommonJS packages #273
    • CommonJS import interoperability decisions #264
    • Make an update to Dynamic Modules Development in Node.js #24894
    • Import named vs default from CommonJS packages #260
    • Moving forward with Dynamic Modules? #252
    • CJS named exports via two-phase execution #31
    • WIP [Do not merge] - Irp type dynamic modules #29

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/656987750
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

[ljharb]

I may or may not be able to attend tomorrow; but if we end up with extension lookup, the "exports" field would be unnecessary, so I think it needs to be blocked on that decision. Similarly, I still feel that the "mode" field should be built on top of a more granular mechanism, and should not ship until one exists.

(not trying to discuss this here, but if i can't attend, i want my viewpoints accessible)

[GeoffreyBooth]

Submitted nodejs/ecmascript-modules#45, can we please replace nodejs/ecmascript-modules#39 on the agenda with it?