Charter Undici WG

[Ethan-Arrowood]

Ref: nodejs/undici#580

Not sure what else we'd like to add the responsibilities of this WG.

@ronag @mcollina @dnlup @delvedor feel free to comment with additional ideas.

[Ethan-Arrowood]

@mcollina should we (myself, ronag, and dnlup) plan on attending the next TSC meeting or is that not necessary?

[mhdawson]

I'm not sure it needs to be a WG to get the work done, but not in opposition either.

[Ethan-Arrowood]

I'm not sure it needs to be a WG to get the work done

I wasn't sure how much to expand in the responsibilities section, but I imagine this WG will be responsible for any all http client related pieces from the Undici module & maybe even node core. One such piece would be a fetch implementation I'm going to contribute to undici core in the coming weeks.

[mhdawson]

The responsibilities should cover everything that the WG would be "delegated" responsibility for. That is the main difference between a team and a WG. A WG has been formally delegated the responsibility outlined in their charter.

[Ethan-Arrowood]

Just added another line. I encourage the other members of this WG to add things as well 👍

[MylesBorins]

@Ethan-Arrowood fwiw the nodejs/modules team was never a chartered working group. Release only became a working group after we realized that "oh this really is owned by them".

In general the working group chartering is to bestow ownership / responsibility from the TSC to that group. At this time is doesn't seem like the Node.js TSC has authority over the undici project even though it is within the org... but with that in mind this is a very interesting pattern with a number of other projects in the org such as llhttp.

My gut is that it might make sense for their to be a WG that is chartered with the responsibility of maintaining / overseeing the general direction of http clients in Node.js, and that undici could be part of that scope... but unclear if there are a group of folks who fit into this category or if there is even interest in that scope.

To be clear I'm not intending to block this nor am I against the idea... just trying to fit this into how we've done things historically

[jasnell]

I'd actually prefer that we move away from the notion of working groups in favor of more ad hoc, less process-heavy processes around this stuff. If a team works, then let's just go with a team, and forgo all the machinery around ownership and charters and etc

[Ethan-Arrowood]

I have no strong opinions either - just started the formal process initiated by nodejs/undici#580

I'll let @mcollina take it from here 🙂

[mcollina]

The key reason Undici should be chartered as a working group is that Undici is really owned by the team maintaining it. The biggest form of independence that Node.js project provides is a chartered working group, so here it is.

We can call it "Next Generation HTTP clients for Node.js" - This will likely include some form of fetch() implementation in the future.

[mcollina]

Anyway, it seems there is more resistance than I anticipated. We should go with a team for now.

[MylesBorins]

To be clear I have no resistance, I just never assumed the TSC had any authority or oversight over the project to begin with.

If the team wants to be chartered and it helps them feel independent I'm +1

[Ethan-Arrowood]

FWIW: https://github.com/orgs/nodejs/teams/undici now exists (thank you @mcollina for setting it up)

[BridgeAR]

If the team wants to be chartered, that's fine for me.

[MylesBorins]

LGTM

[mhdawson]

LGTM

[mcollina]

Here it is: nodejs/undici#626

[mhdawson]

This looks like it should be ready to land. I'll do that next week unless somebody objections or lands it before I get to it.