doc: add minutes for meeting 2024-02-08

Closes: #980

doc/meetings/2024-02-08.md

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+# Node.js  Release WorkGroup Meeting 2024-02-08
+
+## Links
+
+* **Recording**:  https://youtu.be/w2wqWAbV-L8
+* **GitHub Issue**: https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/980
+* **Minutes Google Doc**: https://docs.google.com/document/d/12mIcpnvo_hWi61AnHRDjfmcT7BfWmQigC40cQrCllB0
+
+## Present
+
+* Release team: @nodejs/release
+* LTS team: @nodejs/lts
+* Ruy Adorno @ruyadorno
+* Marco Ippolito @marco-ippolito
+* Richard Lau @richardlau
+* Ulises Gascon: @UlisesGascon
+* Juan Arboleda: @juanarbol
+
+## Announcements
+
+* Marco: Security release may be delayed due to issues on Node.js 20. Decision to be made later today.
+* Ruy: Collaborator Summit is happening next month in London (3 - 4 April), we should propose a working group session there. Looks like we’ll have a quorum from the release team.
+
+## Agenda
+
+### nodejs/Release
+
+* Release plan - v21.x Current #932
+  * Marco willing to help with Node.js 21 release but not yet a releaser so will need a releaser to pair.
+  * Action item: Find an available releaser to pair with Marco on a v21 release.
+* Release plan - v20.x Active LTS #855
+  * Node.js 20 and 18 has a npm10 regression on signals that will be fixed landing the update to npm10.3.0 but that needs to be released in a current release first.
+  * Richard volunteered to work on the next v20 and v18 releases.
+* Release plan - v18.x Maintenance LTS #737
+  * Richard volunteered to work on a release to fix the npm regression mentioned above and will be looking at what else in terms of backport PRs to land. Since this is a maintenance release line it’s up to the releaser to decide on what commits goes in that release.
+* proposal for new release schedule / users are not interested in releases that will not become LTS  #953
+  * We need to discuss the proposal as a group and ultimately that decision needs to be made in this Working Group since it has been chartered to make these decisions.
+  * Richard: We also had a prior proposal from James to implement a more dynamic release schedule in the past that we decided to not move forward with.
+  * Richard: Disagrees that the current release schedule needs to be changed, noting that data might be highly biased due to CI. We do currently get regular bug reports from folks using the Current release line.
+  * Ruy: Agree with the points raised by Beth in the GitHub discussion, would like to highlight that changing the release schedule is not something that should be done lightly and would need a very compelling reason to outweigh the disruption, unlearning and tooling / infrastructure changes required to implement it.
+  * Richard: It’s too late to adopt any change for Node.js v22.
+  * Marco and Ulisses do not disagree with Richard and Ruy line of thought.
+  * Action item: Ask the group if anyone strongly disagrees with the points made by Richard and Ruy in the call today, if not let’s form a consensus and close the issue.
+* PGP keys verification #965
+  * Ulisses: Just want to make sure every releaser has their key properly assigned to them on GitHub. Should probably close this issue after that.
+
+## Q&A, Other
+
+* Meeting issue was not populated with agenda items. Richard to reopen #147
+
+## Upcoming Meetings
+
+* **Node.js Project Calendar**: <https://nodejs.org/calendar>
+
+Click `+GoogleCalendar` at the bottom right to add to your own Google calendar.
+