Skip to content

Commit 935673f

Browse files
github-actions[bot]ESLint Bot
and
ESLint Bot
authored
Add TSC meeting 28-November-2024 transcript (#551)
Co-authored-by: ESLint Bot <eslint[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
1 parent 70fbf43 commit 935673f

File tree

1 file changed

+108
-0
lines changed

1 file changed

+108
-0
lines changed

notes/2024/2024-11-28-transcript.md

+108
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
1+
# 11/28/2024 ESLint TSC Meeting Transcript
2+
3+
**mdjermanovic:** Hi!
4+
5+
**fasttime:** Hi!
6+
7+
**mdjermanovic:** nzakas will not be present today, so we can start
8+
9+
**fasttime:** Yes, just the two of us today
10+
11+
**mdjermanovic:** Let's start with statuses. I made a follow-up refactor PR that adds missing properties in `meta.defaultOptions` of core rules and simplifies getting options in several rules. Also added new `ignoreComputedKeys` option in the `sort-keys` rule and enabled `eslint-plugin-eslint-plugin` in `@eslint/*` language plugins.
12+
13+
**fasttime:** I've been adding type tests for the language plugins and triaging several issues. I'm also working on preparing an RFC for multithread linting.
14+
* 👍 @mdjermanovic
15+
16+
**mdjermanovic:** RFC Duty schedule
17+
18+
**mdjermanovic:** This week: @fasttime
19+
December 2: @nzakas
20+
December 9: @mdjermanovic
21+
December 16: @fasttime
22+
* 👍 @fasttime
23+
24+
**mdjermanovic:** We had an action item from the meeting before the previous one, to compare performances starting from ESLint v9.11.1
25+
26+
**fasttime:** Ah yes
27+
28+
**mdjermanovic:** I did some testing: https://github.com/eslint/eslint/pull/19042#issuecomment-2500523800
29+
30+
**mdjermanovic:** Some observations:
31+
32+
**mdjermanovic:** 1. Per the "Multiple Individual Files" test made for that PR, the config caching problem introduced in v9.12.0 has been fixed in v9.14.0.
33+
34+
**mdjermanovic:** 2. Interestingly, on the other hand, all of our standard performance tests, which are Loading, Single File (one big file), and Multi Files (450 files matched by a glob) show notable performance improvements in v9.12.0. This was unexpected, but welcome 🙂
35+
36+
**mdjermanovic:** 3. Surprisingly, the effects of Node.js compile cache, enabled in ESLint v9.13.0, aren't noticeable in test results.
37+
38+
**mdjermanovic:** 4. There seems to be a small but noticeable degradation in Loading and Multiple Individual Files tests in v9.15.0
39+
40+
**fasttime:** I thought the compile cache was only enabled when launching eslint from the CLI
41+
42+
**mdjermanovic:** I'm not overly confident in the validity of my testing as 2-4 were unexpected, so I'll doublecheck.
43+
* 👍 @fasttime
44+
45+
**mdjermanovic:** Yes, doesn't the Loading test run CLI?
46+
47+
**fasttime:** So mocha tests would not count unless they run `eslint` as a command
48+
49+
**fasttime:** I think tests in `tests/lib/cli.js` do
50+
51+
**mdjermanovic:** I was mostly expecting to see the effects in the Loading test, as in the PR that enabled the Node.js compile cache: https://github.com/eslint/eslint/pull/19012#issue-2580716644
52+
53+
**mdjermanovic:** Anyways, I'll repeat the tests and try to figure out if I'm doing something wrong
54+
55+
**fasttime:** I'm not sure what the reason could be. You could try to run a profiler if you haven't yet. But well, perhaps the effect of the compile cache is just not that noticeable for our setup.
56+
* 👍 @mdjermanovic
57+
58+
**fasttime:** Are you planning to open a new issue to track your results?
59+
60+
**mdjermanovic:** I'll post new results on the same PR, and if something doesn't seem right I'll open an issue (or issues)
61+
62+
**fasttime:** Sounds good, thanks.
63+
64+
**mdjermanovic:** We don't have any issues/PRs tagged for this meeting. Are there any issues/PRs you would like to discuss today?
65+
66+
**fasttime:** Nothing in particular from my side I guess.
67+
68+
**mdjermanovic:** Nothing from my side as well.
69+
70+
**mdjermanovic:** So, we can talk about release
71+
72+
**fasttime:** I could do the release tomorrow.
73+
74+
**mdjermanovic:** Thanks!
75+
76+
**fasttime:** It looks like we will have just `@eslint/js` and `eslint` this time.
77+
* 👍 @mdjermanovic
78+
79+
**mdjermanovic:** I think the same
80+
81+
**fasttime:** I will be probably ignoring browser test errors because those are very unreliable lately, and I think it's not useful to retry running failed jobs until the browser test happens to pass.
82+
83+
**mdjermanovic:** Yeah, we can check locally and if it works then we can consider it successful (interesting that it usually works locally, at least for me, but not in CI)
84+
85+
**fasttime:** For me, the browser tests works locally on Windows. It fails always on MacOS.
86+
87+
**fasttime:** But yes, seems good to run the test locally.
88+
* 👍 @mdjermanovic
89+
90+
**fasttime:** Especially if doesn't pass on CI.
91+
* 👍 @mdjermanovic
92+
93+
**fasttime:** Okay, I don't see any issues that should be included in tomorrow's release. Do you have any?
94+
95+
**mdjermanovic:** I don't see nothing in particular either
96+
97+
**fasttime:** Alright. Anything else we should discuss?
98+
99+
**mdjermanovic:** Nothing in particular for today from my side
100+
101+
**fasttime:** Nothing from me either. We can call it a meeting 🙂
102+
103+
**mdjermanovic:** Yes 🙂
104+
105+
**mdjermanovic:** Thanks! 👋
106+
107+
**fasttime:** Thanks! And thanks for the notes @sam3k_
108+
* 👍 @mdjermanovic

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)