forked from mimblewimble/grin-pm
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Merge pull request mimblewimble#411 from lehnberg/gov_notes
Add Mar 16 governance notes
- Loading branch information
Showing
2 changed files
with
191 additions
and
1 deletion.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ | ||
| # Meeting Notes: Governance, Mar 16 2021 | ||
|
|
||
| Development meeting held @ 3PM [UTC](http://www.timebie.com/std/utc.php) in [grincoin#general channel on Keybase](https://keybase.io/team/grincoin). Meeting lasted ~ 50 min. | ||
|
|
||
| Notes are truncated, and conversations sorted based on topic and not always chronological. Quotes are edited for brevity and clarity, and not always exact. | ||
|
|
||
| **Community attendance:** | ||
| - antiochp | ||
| - anynomous | ||
| - bladedoyle | ||
| - cekickafa | ||
| - dburkett | ||
| - defistaker | ||
| - dtavarez | ||
| - geneferneau | ||
| - goyle | ||
| - hendi | ||
| - joltz | ||
| - lehnberg | ||
| - mcmmike | ||
| - mo5itoo | ||
| - phyro | ||
| - quentinlesceller | ||
| - renzokuken | ||
| - smokeking80 | ||
| - trevyn | ||
| - vegycslol | ||
|
|
||
| _(apologies if I missed someone - submit a PR or contact @lehnberg to add)_ | ||
|
|
||
| ## Agenda points & Actions | ||
|
|
||
| ### 1. Agenda review | ||
| The [proposed agenda](https://github.com/mimblewimble/grin-pm/issues/403) was reviewed and accepted without any changes. | ||
|
|
||
| ### 2. Action point follow ups from previous meetings | ||
|
|
||
| - _lehnberg:_ We're finally up to speed on financial reports. It took me a while and I almost went slightly mad but there's a small discrepancy happening sometime in Q4 2019 or earlier that caused numbers not to add up. Details here, https://github.com/mimblewimble/grin-pm/pull/402 Roughly USD 125 at the time. antioch has been paid, but I've not yet update the log for that I just recalled, so need to do that. And Q1 2021 report will be due in April. | ||
| - _antiochp:_ Thanks for doing those @lehnberg | ||
|
|
||
| ### 3. @ndcroos [ledger bounty](https://forum.grin.mw/t/available-support-ledger-wallet/8517/13) | ||
| - _cekickafa:_ It looks like he can do the job.but you are the experts. | ||
| - _mcmmike:_ I really like the idea of bounties and if someone can evaluate the developer I would say lets do it. | ||
| - 👍: _renzokuken, anynomous_ | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ Regarding ledger Bounty I think we should lock the bounty for markholis. He seems serious and motivated. | ||
| - 👍: _phyro, antiochp, cekickafa, joltz, mo5itoo, dburkett, mo5itoo, hendi, goyle, lehnberg, vegycslol, mcmmike_ | ||
| - _anynomous:_ Good, should the bounty be split in sub tasks? | ||
| - _phyro:_ Also seems honest so far | ||
| - _mo5itoo:_ He's also very active in the community i can say | ||
| - _dtavarez:_ It would be nice to see some code though | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ I think the purpose of the bounty is that mark managed as he pleased and he'll paid based on the deliverables given. | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ Where is that? | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ We should lock the bounty for X months if it's not done we unlock it. | ||
| - 👍: _anynomous, phyro_ | ||
| - _mo5itoo:_ On telegram @lehnberg | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ Ah nice | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ Very little risk for us @dtavarez | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ Yeah so wasn't aware we'd do locking, but I suppose that's fair? I really don't mind either way - just not familiar with how things are done here usually? | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ The concern without locking is that there's duplication of effort? | ||
| - 👍: _quentinlesceller_ | ||
| - _phyro:_ Also competition and shipping fast to deliver first which should probably not be encouraged | ||
| - 👍: _vegycslol_ | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ I mention assigning in the forum post sorry if that wasn't clear. | ||
| - _bladedoyle:_ Will we add any more bounty projects? Is there a list? | ||
| - _antiochp:_ We'll probably end up learning as we go here as well - maybe he needs more people involved, maybe others have good ideas etc. | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ cool sounds good, so what's a fair time to lock it for then? | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ Feel free to suggest some more | ||
| - 👍: _bladedoyle_ | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ Does it come with some expectation of a progress update? | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ 6 months ? | ||
| - _phyro:_ My question would be how would we get this reviewed. It's definitely something that would need a deep review in the end. | ||
| - _geneferneau:_ I would like to suggest a bounty project, is now the right time? | ||
| - _mo5itoo:_ I think i he should first give an estimation for the work first, and keep the community updated once a week or something and get paid once he's done. | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ Like if we lock for six months, it's not great if someone gives up and then we only realize it's not happening in six months | ||
| - 💯: _cekickafa_ | ||
| - _dburkett:_ Nah, too long. We should at least evaluate after a month or 2 | ||
| - _anynomous:_ Maybe it would be good to include at least an adviser who has more experience. | ||
| - _mo5itoo:_ 6 months is too much | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ 6 months to do the full ledger support? | ||
| - _dtavarez:_ he could join keybase and ask freely | ||
| - _dburkett:_ He's welcome to take 6 months or more, but we should keep checking in to make sure there's steady progress. | ||
| - 👍: _mo5itoo_ | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ yeah so if we "evaluate the lock" 2 in months than that's cool | ||
| - 👍: _anynomous_ | ||
| - _bladedoyle:_ I think shorts lock time but maybe extended if progress is shown? | ||
| - 👍: _dburkett_ | ||
| - _anynomous:_ 6 months is ok, but can be reconsidered after 2 or 3 months if there is no progress or any reason for concern | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ "status check re the lock in 2 months to see how you're getting on" | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ I'd say evaluate the lock in 2 months yes. ok | ||
| - 👍: _cekickafa, bladedoyle_ | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ Or why not even do a monthly check in? is that really that bad? not like a report. Just ask "hey how are things going". Proof of life, that kind of thing | ||
| - 👍: _antiochp, phyro_ | ||
| - _antiochp:_ no I think interim checkins should be encouraged | ||
| - _cekickafa:_ Monthly check is cool | ||
| - _antiochp:_ at least informally | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ For sure. That'd be great. | ||
| - _cekickafa:_ monthly update | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ so: lock for now → monthly check in on the forum post? | ||
| - 👍: _antiochp, anynomous, dtavarez, phyro, cekickafa, joltz_ | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ yes | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ if awol, we unlock again | ||
| - 👍: _quentinlesceller_ | ||
| - _mo5itoo:_ can he start by giving an estimation ? | ||
| - _bladedoyle:_ Estimates are hard. | ||
| - 👍: _renzokuken_ | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ I mean the purpose of the bounty is flexibility. It is you either deliver and get paid or not. | ||
| - 👍: _mo5itoo_ | ||
| - _anynomous:_ Ok, although I guess there are checkpoins for the bounty, like finishing sub tasks? | ||
| - _renzokuken:_ How about an agile / scrum kind of approach? smaller deliveries but more often and each of them needs to bring value ( to the community instead of to the company ) That would be evaluation more often, say every 2 week-long sprint. | ||
| - 👍: _mcmmike_ | ||
| - _vegycslol:_ I don't think putting pressure on him is good | ||
| - _bladedoyle:_ Nobody wants to be a scrum master 😩 | ||
| - _dtavarez:_ Who is going to be the scrum master? | ||
| - _renzokuken:_ Btw who are we talking about? I though we discuss general approach and not a particular individual, sorry | ||
| - _antiochp:_ I think the person undertaking the bounty should be free to propose something along those lines - but it would be up to them | ||
| - 👍: _vegycslol, phyro, dtavarez, cekickafa_ | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ Indeed | ||
| - _antiochp:_ We are open to different approaches. and flexible | ||
| - _hendi:_ Exactly. If he has issues with "50k once done" he's free to propose checkpoints | ||
| - 👍: _antiochp, vegycslol, bladedoyle, phyro, mcmmike_ | ||
| - _quentinlesceller:_ yes | ||
| - _antiochp:_ lets not overthink this | ||
| - 👍: _quentinlesceller, hendi_ | ||
| - _goyle:_ I think the Ledger bounty feels less like a bounty and more of a regular funding request since its such a big undertaking | ||
| - _joltz:_ The difference is with former payment is made after work done, latter payment made before work done | ||
| - 👍: _goyle_ | ||
| - _goyle:_ it's like a bounty request for another GUI wallet | ||
| - _cekickafa:_ fund split and new members added.thats all.rest is details:smile: | ||
| - _dburkett:_ Also, it allows those who maybe haven't had a chance to prove themselves yet to get funded without risk to the council money. | ||
| - 👍: _vegycslol, phyro, goyle_ | ||
|
|
||
| ### 4. Community funding | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ So far there's been four volunteers for signers: anynomous, davidtavarez, hendi, mcm-mike. there's two weeks left of march, and we said in april we'll review the list of volunteers. Anything we need to do at this point in time? | ||
| - _antiochp:_ if anybody else is thinking of volunteering then please do so | ||
| - _mcmmike:_ I just wanted to let everyone know, if you have any questions about me ask me on the forum post , here or in private if needed. | ||
| - 👍: _quentinlesceller, renzokuken, defistaker, cekickafa, mo5itoo_ | ||
| - _anynomous:_ Same here, and if anyone has a problem with me being anynomous (although I Doxed myself many times), let me know. | ||
| - 👍: _renzokuken, mcmmike, cekickafa, mo5itoo, defistaker_ | ||
| - _dtavarez:_ same here | ||
| - 👍: _renzokuken, cekickafa, mcmmike, mo5itoo, defistaker_ | ||
| - _anynomous:_ How many candidates are we looking for, the more the merrier? | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ Yes. If there's anything else to discuss on this, remember that there's #community_fund to raise questions and ideas in. | ||
| - _hendi:_ we should try to get more than us 4, otherwise voting makes hardly sense | ||
| - _anynomous:_ Yes, 5 would be ideal, at least an uneven number | ||
| - _cekickafa:_ i would like to be volunteer as a voting,but i dont like to be involved in mulitisig stuff | ||
| - _mcmmike:_ are we looking for 3 or 4 signers? | ||
| - _phyro:_ I think 5 is a good number | ||
| - 👍: _anynomous_ | ||
| - _cekickafa:_ then you be the 5th | ||
| - _vegycslol:_ 4 of 6 seems fine | ||
| - 👍: _phyro_ | ||
| - _anynomous:_ Should the grin council maybe have some backup signatures, e.g. 4 out of 8 (2 from the Grin council)? | ||
| - _hendi:_ yes. depends on the splitting though. The council should definitely be able to help out if 1 or 2 sigs are missing | ||
| - _mcmmike:_ in total we will have 6 signers where 4 from the community and 2 from council , was this the original proposal? ( I need to look it up) | ||
| - _phyro:_ agree, also solves the 2 going missing | ||
| - _hendi:_ "4 of 6, 2 for council" sounds good to me | ||
| - 👍: _phyro, anynomous_ | ||
| - _vegycslol:_ Is that a 4 of 8? | ||
| - _hendi:_ that's 4 of 6 (4+2). (for the current situation where we have just 4 volunteers) | ||
| - _vegycslol:_ But since council members don't vote, how do you vote with 4? | ||
| - _hendi:_ you don't, we need more volunteers for that. though voting is separate from multisig | ||
| - _antiochp:_ I'd keep the multisig as a detail to be worked out later | ||
| - 👍: _hendi_ | ||
| - _anynomous:_ Yes, I also do not mind not having one of the signatures as long as there are enough members who hold one | ||
| - _hendi:_ ^ my point here was the volunteers should be "voted in" by the broader community, (not the fact that we need more than 4 or an odd number) | ||
| - 👍: _antiochp_ | ||
| - _mcmmike:_ but at the end the council will decide , we can only offer our help at the moment. | ||
| Also I do see the need for more peolple volunteering. | ||
| - _anynomous:_ Based on my experience an uneven number works better, so I hope some more candidates step up. | ||
| - _hendi:_ @lehnberg already mentioned the call for volunteers in his newsletter. Maybe we can get some more outreach, Twitter, Telegram channel? | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ With four signers, I don't see how we could give a lot of funds to such a group. 3 of 5 would be minimum imo. And ideally, if we're to pick 5, we'd have a bigger pool than just 5 to pick from haha | ||
| - 👍: _anynomous_ | ||
| - 😄: _phyro_ | ||
| - _anynomous:_ @cekickafa said he/she was interested right? | ||
| - _lehnberg:_ so please, do whatever you can to shake out more applicants from the trees | ||
| - _cekickafa:_ i volunteer voting. but phyro wants 5th multisig better | ||
| - _vegycslol:_ I was hoping for at least 4 needed "yes" votes :) | ||
| - _hendi:_ @cekickafa can you please post your application on the forum? | ||
| - _cekickafa:_ ok | ||
| - _anynomous:_ In any case, I think it would be best not to give a lot of funds, simply allocate money and transfer a buffer to begin with | ||
| - 👍: _hendi_ | ||
|
|
||
| ### 5. RFC Update | ||
| _None._ | ||
|
|
||
| ### 6. Other questions | ||
| _None._ | ||
|
|
||
| **Meeting adjourned.** |