content(blog/events): Dublin collab summit 2024

[AugustinMauroy]

Description

Writting a blog post to summarize the summit.

The aim is to enable people who are not involved in the project to find out what's going on. And to make this post familiar in the way it is written.

Check List

• I have read the Contributing Guidelines and made commit messages that follow the guideline.
• I have run npm run format to ensure the code follows the style guide.
• I have run npm run test to check if all tests are passing.
• I have run npx turbo build to check if the website builds without errors.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
nodejs-org	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Nov 14, 2024 9:56am

[JakobJingleheimer]

Awesome! Thanks for this. I'll try to flesh out my section in the next day or so.

[RedYetiDev]

Commit cotent -> content

[RedYetiDev]

Love it :-)

[AugustinMauroy]

Commit cotent -> content

BTW, we use squash and merge for pr so just the title is important 😄

[AugustinMauroy]

Should we keep that ? or we will have somewhere on GitHub.
cc @joyeecheung (who write the big part of theses minute meeting)

[AugustinMauroy]

Joyee's feedback on slack:

While I appreciate the detailed notes, it seems a bit too lengthy for a blog posts to go into every “A asked something, B answered something, C pointed out something”…I would usually expect it to be “We discussed something and agreed something/We brainstormed ideas about something/we discussed something with notable highlights ABC..” and leave the more detailed back and forth in the notes for curious readers to dig into. If someone had the floor for many minutes about a point then it is good to highlight what they talked about, but it seems in quite a few points in the draft, the person only had the floor for a couple of seconds. Then IMO it is fine to leave out the details and just describe the conclusions we reached.

and

Also the diversity section has more details than I remember how it was done, it seems extended by some personal understanding instead of what was actually discussed at the summit (and to be fair we didn’t really discuss much in that session, it was only 30min and we spent most of the time distributing/writing/collecting/reading post-its without really digging into them). Like I remember Robin and James merely quickly went through the keywords on the post its, they never went into details about what “chaotic” “scrappy” means, only mentioned those keywords and moved on, and we never discussed what/why/how about those keywords (I remember myself googling “scrappy” on the spot because I didn’t know what that word means as a non-native English speaker and nobody explained or discussed it at the session to give me any clue, either, but somehow it has a spot in the draft explaining what it means which is pretty strange). The blog post IMO should merely reflect what happened, without adding additional details that were never discussed.

[RedYetiDev]

Throughout the doc, first names are used, why is it different here? (And in a few other places)

[AugustinMauroy]

I based myself on the minute meeting (split the screen). so I used what was in it/what I had in front of me.

[RedYetiDev]

I would also like to echo @joyeecheung's feedback that the average user may not know who the collaborators are, and may not be interested in who-said-what. as mentioned, just saying "we discussed ..." may be better

[ovflowd]

I would also like to echo @joyeecheung's feedback that the average user may not know who the collaborators are, and may not be interested in who-said-what. as mentioned, just saying "we discussed ..." may be better

We should not name people here IMO, should be anonymous.

[AugustinMauroy]

We should not name people here IMO, should be anonymous.

IDK, in the other there are certain name.
https://nodejs.org/en/blog/events/collab-summit-2024-london

[RedYetiDev]

Take the following excerpt from the one you linked:

Jean Burellier (@sheplu) presented the recent development in the Web server framework working group. We discussed ideas for the next generation of the HTTP stack. In particular we brainstormed about higher-level APIs that can abstract over three different HTTP stacks (1.1, 2 and QUIC), and lower-level APIs that empower frameworks to maximize performance and do request injection without having to monkey-patch. The next-gen HTTP parser milo may also be part of the picture. Iteration of the API design will continue in the Web server framework working group after the session.

Note the following:

1. "Jean Burellier" is the presenter, and a link to the Github profile associated is included.
2. Following that, deliberation is shown as "We discussed ...", not "John mentioned ..., while Jane added ..."

Comparing this to a snippet of yours:

The documentation session focused on improving the "Learn" section of the Node.js website, aiming to make it more accessible and up-to-date for newcomers and experienced developers alike. The discussion was initiated by Stephen and taken up by Claudio (a maintainer of nodejs.org).
...
...
...

• External Content and Verification: Alexander suggested pointing to external content from the website, but Claudio raised concerns about the difficulty of verifying the quality and relevance of external resources.

Note the following:

1. The presenters are @ovflowd and Stephen, but Github links are not provided
2. The deliberation is presented in a format with specific names.

This could be changed to be parallel with the first format:

The documentation session focused on improving the "Learn" section of the Node.js website, aiming to make it more accessible and up-to-date for newcomers and experienced developers alike. The discussion was initiated by Stephen (<Link Here>) and taken up by Claudio (<Link Here>)
...
...
...

• External Content and Verification: It was suggested pointing to external content from the website, but concerns were raised about the difficulty of verifying the quality and relevance of external resources.