Core team meeting 2015-04-22

README.md

@@ -116,7 +116,12 @@ here.
 * [weekly-meetings/2013-01-15](weekly-meetings/2013-01-15.md) (tree status; assert and log; #cfg conditions; function unsafe; trait bounds contexts; unsafe pointer indexing; static array bounds; removal of both type and trait impls; Eq and Ord reform)
 * [weekly-meetings/2013-01-08](weekly-meetings/2013-01-08.md) (region syntax; inherited mutability and write barriers)
 
-## Older Meetings
+## Core team meetings
+
+* [core-team/meeting-2015-04-22.md](core-team/meeting-2015-04-22.md)
+  (1.0 status, 1.1 planning, RFC discussion, minuting)
+
+## Older meetings
 
 * [Meetings 2012](Meetings-2012.md)
 * [Meetings 2011](Meetings-2011.md)

core-team/meeting-2015-04-22.md

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+# Core team meeting 2015-04-22
+
+Attending: aturon, brson, acrichto, pcwalton, huon, steveklabnik
+
+# 1.0 Status report
+
+What is the status of the 1.0 release?
+
+Done with fast-forwarding beta to master; all cherry picking from here on.
+
+Doc fixes continue to come in for APIs. In the future, we probably
+won't cherry pick these. But for 1.0, we want to. (Currently bare doc
+URLs go to nightly docs, but this may change, and people coming in
+from homepage could end up on stable docs regardless).
+
+A few nominated 1.0 PRs already, plus some anticipated ones:
+- brson has fixes for packaging
+- Sync bound on Error
+- Reflect/downcasting for Error (no PR yet, waiting for Niko)
+- Felix may have a few
+
+# 1.1 planning
+
+Given the 1.0 status, it's time to start focusing on 1.1 beta. Several
+RFCs have already been merged, others are near consensus, e.g.:
+
+- Socket timeouts ([RFC 1047])
+- Extend with Clone ([RFC 839])
+- Duration ([RFC 1040])
+- std::fs ([RFC 1044])
+
+Need to communicate this shift in focus to broader community.
+
+# RFC discussion
+
+Discussed:
+
+- Governance RFC ([RFC 1068]). Surprisingly little discussion here. All
+  existing comments have been responded to.
+
+- mem::forget ([RFC 1066]). *Lots* of discussion happening on thread,
+  including proposals for sweeping changes to `Rc`, and concerns about
+  the status of RAII. Most points raised have been responded to, and
+  it seems clear that the RFC (which just recognizes the status quo)
+  is the only option for 1.0. Other avenues, like `Leak`, can be
+  explored later on.
+
+- Reserve async/await keywords ([RFC 1083]). Suggests reserving `async`
+  and `await`, but we have previously determined that we will need
+  some way to add un-reserved keywords without breakage (either
+  contextually, or by a crate-level opt-in). RFC should be closed with
+  an explanation of the policy. We should probably have a FAQ for this
+  kind of thing.
+
+# Minuting
+
+After requests on the governance RFC, we decided to go ahead and
+publish meeting minutes/summaries like this one, regardless of any
+other governance changes.
+
+[RFC 1047]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1047
+[RFC 839]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/839
+[RFC 1040]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1040
+[RFC 1044]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1044
+[RFC 1068]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1068
+[RFC 1066]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1066
+[RFC 1083]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1083