block scope + direct non-strict eval

[Claus Reinke]

>> Okay, that wasn't clear to me from the meeting notes. In general,
>> I've completely lost track of what ES6 is going to look like: too
>> many variations and re-designs in the mailing list threads, no way
>> for me to distinguish member preferences from committee
>> agreements. As the wiki no longer seems to represent the latest
>> agreements, I'll have to wait for your next spec update (and hope
>> that there isn't another thread that obsoletes the spec update).
> 
> In general, the most definitive information is from Waldemar's notes
> from the face-to-face TC39 meetings.  Much of what is discussed isn't
> in the latest spec drafts (modules, for example), and the wiki is both
> potentially out of date (sadly, this is especially true in things I'm
> responsible for) and does not necessarily have the consensus of the
> committee.  It's very rare that final designs can be gleaned directly
> from the mailing list, even the mailing list posts of TC39 members.
> 
> Ultimately though, the overall shape of ES6 is fairly clear (see the
> harmony:proposals page); conversely, many of the fine details haven't
> been fully decided, so it's not possible to know how they'll turn out
> yet.

If I could make a suggestion: 

    directly after each f2f meeting, TC39 could go through the 
    harmony:proposals page and annotate every proposal that is 
    affected by decisions of that meeting (just the proposal entries
    on that single top-level page, not the proposal texts).

For instance, if the no-opt-in decision means giving up on some 
proposals, annotate those with "obsolete after 19/01 meeting".
Similarly, annotate other proposals as "needs update after 19/01" 
and add placeholders (eg. "no-opt-in") for "new proposal after 
19/01", as needed.

That way, even if it takes time to update the actual proposal
texts, the harmony:proposals overview page would always reflect 
the latest agreements and action items. Once the proposal texts
are updated, change the annotations on harmony:proposals to 
"last updated 19/01" or whatever meeting last affected that 
proposal. In the same direction, have an icon for proposals
that have been integrated into the latest spec draft.

Using the harmony:proposal page as the main "whiteboard",
with links not only to proposals, but also to spec drafts and
meeting notes, and with status/todo annotations, might help 
to put everyone onto the same page.

Claus