Proposal describes: https://github.com/nodejs/node-eps/blob/master/002-es6-modules.md#5-semantics … some are node's decisions like 5.1 and 5.2 but spec also involved
-
-
you mean the CTC's decisions, which doesn't speak for all of "node"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
define all of node? This style of argument is less than productive.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
sorry I didn't mean a style of argument. I just mean the current governance doesn't represent everyone.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats @bradleymeck and
you are welcome to join TC39 (and I understand that you plan to). Am I welcome to join the CTC?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
you should be if you go through the process. Though reqs are more on the side of contribution than pay to play.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
during the .mjs debate, people repeatedly claimed that
@littlecalculist,@caridy and I were interlopers2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats @CEubanksTCB and
and I have been called out for not being on TC39 before.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bradleymeck
whoever did that shouldn't have done that. What did they mean?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats
unsure honestly, though assumption is that I didn't have any affect on consensus? was upsetting. \1
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
hm. which assumption was that?
-
-
Replying to @wycats
the assumption about: what my relevance on not being on TC39 was.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.