process-document
process-document copied to clipboard
tc39
Document describing the process for making changes to ECMA-262
It seems that this document is inadvertently recommending that folks publish polyfills in stage 1, which is incredibly dangerous for web compat, rather than in stage 3, which is the...
I can't find this requirement documented anywhere, but honestly, I can't recall how I came to believe that it is in fact a policy. @ptomato or @justingrant may have some...
In the recent process update, I wrote down that we do not have a formal concept of rejection. However some things should have a strong message from the committee that...
Fixes #17. Preview at http://ljharb.github.io/process-document/ I'm thinking that if we get this text right, we can be sure that a) nothing gets in without at least 1 unflagged browser, and...
We discussed #15 in TC39, and several committee members (including @wycats @ljharb @zbraniecki and others) had this great suggestion: When moving from one stage to the next, or any time...
Process documents seems to be invalid in regard of champion required. See tc39/proposals#71 for details.
Once a proposal reaches stage 3, it makes sense to file implementation tracking bugs for ChakraCore, JavaScriptCore, SpiderMonkey, and V8, and to link to them from the proposal repository’s README....
