Changed Agenda reference numbers for team schedule

[cadenramey]

Fixes #8451

What changes did you make?

• I updated the Agenda reference numbers in two files pertaining to the 2026 schedule

Why did you make the changes (we will use this info to test)?

• I made these changes because we're in a new year. The new number now sends notifications reflecting this for Monday Dev/PM meetings.

CodeQL Alerts

After the PR has been submitted and the resulting GitHub actions/checks have been completed, developers should check the PR for CodeQL alert annotations.

Check the PR's comments. If present on your PR, the CodeQL alert looks similar as shown

Please let us know that you have checked for CodeQL alerts. Please do not dismiss alerts.

• I have checked this PR for CodeQL alerts and none were found.
• I found CodeQL alert(s), and (select one):
  • I have resolved the CodeQL alert(s) as noted
  • I believe the CodeQL alert(s) is a false positive (Merge Team will evaluate)
  • I have followed the Instructions below, but I am still stuck (Merge Team will evaluate)

Instructions for resolving CodeQL alerts

If CodeQL alert/annotations appear, refer to How to Resolve CodeQL alerts.

In general, CodeQL alerts should be resolved prior to PR reviews and merging

Screenshots of Proposed Changes To The Website (if any, please do not include screenshots of code changes)

• No visual changes to the website

[github-actions]

Want to review this pull request? Take a look at this documentation for a step by step guide!

---

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.

git checkout -b cadenramey-update-agenda-issue-num-8451 gh-pages
git pull https://github.com/cadenramey/website.git update-agenda-issue-num-8451

[myronchen-git]

Since there is now a github-actions/utils/_data/static-issue-nums.json that stores the agenda issue number, should we import the issue number into github-actions/trigger-schedule/list-inactive-members/create-new-issue.js, instead of changing the variable in that every year? This would also help reduce adding trivial commits to the file.
@t-will-gillis
@cadenramey

[abinetabate1]

Looks Good. Thank you!

[abinetabate1]

Since there is now a github-actions/utils/_data/static-issue-nums.json that stores the agenda issue number, should we import the issue number into github-actions/trigger-schedule/list-inactive-members/create-new-issue.js, instead of changing the variable in that every year? This would also help reduce adding trivial commits to the file. @t-will-gillis @cadenramey

@myronchen-git - what do you mean when you say "import". Are you suggesting some kind of automated mechanism...like a github action to take the data from "static-issue-nums.json" and "update create-new-issue.js". Or maybe you want to update the js code to pull from the .json. Would like to understand exactly what you are proposing. Perhaps a different issue needs to be created for your proposal. This approach seems like a good quick fix for now and we can follow up with your suggestion later. Just a thought.

[myronchen-git]

Since there is now a github-actions/utils/_data/static-issue-nums.json that stores the agenda issue number, should we import the issue number into github-actions/trigger-schedule/list-inactive-members/create-new-issue.js, instead of changing the variable in that every year? This would also help reduce adding trivial commits to the file. @t-will-gillis @cadenramey

@myronchen-git - what do you mean when you say "import". Are you suggesting some kind of automated mechanism...like a github action to take the data from "static-issue-nums.json" and "update create-new-issue.js". Or maybe you want to update the js code to pull from the .json. Would like to understand exactly what you are proposing. Perhaps a different issue needs to be created for your proposal. This approach seems like a good quick fix for now and we can follow up with your suggestion later. Just a thought.

It's retrieving the data from the JSON using the keyword require. This also does not require a separate issue, as it is a small task, like changing a variable declaration from using var to let.

[abinetabate1]

Since there is now a github-actions/utils/_data/static-issue-nums.json that stores the agenda issue number, should we import the issue number into github-actions/trigger-schedule/list-inactive-members/create-new-issue.js, instead of changing the variable in that every year? This would also help reduce adding trivial commits to the file. @t-will-gillis @cadenramey

@myronchen-git - what do you mean when you say "import". Are you suggesting some kind of automated mechanism...like a github action to take the data from "static-issue-nums.json" and "update create-new-issue.js". Or maybe you want to update the js code to pull from the .json. Would like to understand exactly what you are proposing. Perhaps a different issue needs to be created for your proposal. This approach seems like a good quick fix for now and we can follow up with your suggestion later. Just a thought.

It's retrieving the data from the JSON using the keyword require. This also does not require a separate issue, as it is a small task, like changing a variable declaration from using var to let.

Since there is now a github-actions/utils/_data/static-issue-nums.json that stores the agenda issue number, should we import the issue number into github-actions/trigger-schedule/list-inactive-members/create-new-issue.js, instead of changing the variable in that every year? This would also help reduce adding trivial commits to the file. @t-will-gillis @cadenramey

@myronchen-git - what do you mean when you say "import". Are you suggesting some kind of automated mechanism...like a github action to take the data from "static-issue-nums.json" and "update create-new-issue.js". Or maybe you want to update the js code to pull from the .json. Would like to understand exactly what you are proposing. Perhaps a different issue needs to be created for your proposal. This approach seems like a good quick fix for now and we can follow up with your suggestion later. Just a thought.

It's retrieving the data from the JSON using the keyword require. This also does not require a separate issue, as it is a small task, like changing a variable declaration from using var to let.

Thanks for explaining. I learned something. That said, I'm going to defer to @cadenramey and @t-will-gillis as to how we move forward. At a minimum, I would suggest that the existing issue get updated to reflect the new approach.

[ryanfkeller]

I'm agreed with both @myronchen-git and @abinetabate1 -- I think that Myron's suggestion of importing the issue number is the right call, but also that #8451 would need to be updated to account for that (just so this PR doesn't wind up doing something different than the issue requires). I'll bring it up in the meeting tonight. Thanks to you both for having a productive discussion!

[ryanfkeller]

Got feedback from @daras-cu , we'll go ahead and review/merge this issues as is and add a new ER to implement Myron's suggestion since we SHOULD do that suggestion, but it's a bit out of scope for this issue.

[ryanfkeller]

Looks good, thanks for making these updates @cadenramey!