Tracking issue for TC39 process requirements
jamiebuilds opened this issue · comments
Stage 1
- introduced to TC39
- champions identified (@jamiebuilds && @hemanth)
- initial explainer (Explainer)
Stage 2
- committee approval
- spec text written
- spec reviewers selected (@gibson042, @ljharb)
Stage 3
- committee approval
- spec editor sign off
- spec reviewer sign off
- received developer/implementer feedback
Stage 4
- committee approval
- implemented in two browsers
- write test262 tests
- merge test262 tests
- prepare ecma262 pr
- editor-approved ecma262 pr
Working on a presentation to bring this proposal to the October meeting: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Au8FP1xTuXb52d6kG1fxX5Cxl3J-02h3FAaq8tMEtn8/edit?usp=sharing
This proposal moved to stage one at today's TC39 meeting.
@robpalme Did I hear correctly that you offered to be a reviewer?
Reviewers aren't needed or assigned until stage 2 (i'm happy to be one at that time)
Did I hear correctly that you offered to be a reviewer?
It is Richard Gibson who showed the interest.