Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • Feb 28 19:45
    @Arachnid banned @merkle_tree_twitter
  • Feb 17 00:56
    @jpitts banned @Aquentson_twitter
  • Apr 09 2018 04:14
    @holiman banned @JennyJennywren_twitter
  • Oct 21 2017 19:12
    @Arachnid banned @Musk11
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
someone has to start work by picking disparate EIPs, articles, and put them together
what I needed is a group that can support such work on initial stages, and that looked like a group that could provide that
Martin Holst Swende
@holiman
@5chdn we have daily geth-team standups. Sometimes, we even talk about Ethereum. Should we post minutes every day?
5chdn
@5chdn
If you make decisions about Ethereum's future in Geth standups, yes?
Not sure if you are trolling
I question two things here:
  • Who chooses who knows about these meetings
  • Why are the notes being kept secret
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
Just tuning in, but IIUC the problem that @5chdn has is not that people are meeting and discussing things, but that they are making decisions and choosing course of action for the Ethereum protocol.
jwasinger
@jwasinger

have to say I'm a bit disappointed to be seemingly-uninvited from subsequent meetings after the first even though I just want to listen in. The responses I get when talking to others who have attended said meetings range between "oh it was ad-hoc.. sorry", "sorry I didn't feel like it was appropriate to invite a +1 to the meeting".

My saltiness aside, I can understand that it is easier to iterate when the spotlight is not shining on your every movement. Godspeed with the research and I look forward to implementing the changes once they are made public and agreed upon!

Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
Parity dev team meeting to discuss how to architect Parity, or Geth dev team meeting to discuss how to architect Geth is fine, no need to announce or publicize anything. The problem is when you get core developers meeting and deciding how to change/alter the protocol, concensus rules, etc. in private or without a mechanism for people to join/participate.
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
@5chdn Ok, it was probably by my request that the knowledge of this meeting was not shared widely, and I take responsibility for that. Now, how do you want to punish me for that? Call me bad names? :) My main reasoning is this - I find it frustrating, that on public call it is literally impossile to find out what people really think (as opposed to what they can say on record). It is even hard when you speak to them in small closed groups. Without this knowledge extraction, we will never get even at the stage where we have proposals to discuss with public!
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
That being said, if it is just a handful of people coordinating a plan to prototype something on their own dime/time, with no expectation that it will eventually make it into the protocol I don't think that is a problem and there is no need to publicize.
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
The goal of the working groups mentioned in the meetings is actually to produce something that will be publicly discussed - there is no way around that
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
Sure, but are you expecting that the public will agree to it once you propose it?
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
But actually producing higher-quality knowledge requires some work in more closed groups
5chdn
@5chdn
I'm no further commenting this. I made my points. I'm not interested in calling anyone names and feel offended you are proposing this.
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
@MicahZoltu Not necessarily - public can disagree
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
Or are you just wanting to get it more solidified before discussing it publicy, knowing full well you may be wasting your time?
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
Yes, I want to get things more solidified before proposing
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
I have no problem with that rationally. Though, I do worry that the people involved will be over-zealous about pushing through once they have sunk time into the project (whatever it is).
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
I found it in the past that otherwise, if the things are not solid enough, they are quickly whittled down by endless discussions and meandering. I can incorporate critique from 5-10 people and iterate quickly, but I cannot do it quickly with 100 people
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
It is easier to sway someone's decision before they have put a lot of their own time/energy into their opinion/view/belief.
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
@5chdn Sorry Afri, I meant calling me bad names as a joke, it was probably a bad joke
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
@AlexeyAkhunov It is unclear to me what you gain by keeping things private/close to your vest.
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
In fact, I even regret having this organised as a meeting with notes etc. All I wanted is to have a chat with 10 people about Ethereum :(
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
Why not just ask the questions in a public forum, and then filter out the noise yourself?
That seems simpler than trying to filter down to the right people and then accepting all noise from those people.
jwasinger
@jwasinger
that sounds exhausting
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
@MicahZoltu There is no gain to me in keeping it private
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
Is there gain to someone else?
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
I believe that we should try all different ways of organising ourselves in this can help Ethereum improve
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
:thumbsup:
So you aren't arguing that this mechanism is better, only that we shouldn't be opposed to trying various forms of collaboration?
ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
Yes, public discussion should definitely take place all the time. But my personal observation is small groups can often move along faster to get to a goal, and I want to utilise that
and the goal is not to make secret changes in the protocol. The goal is to make high-quality proposals
Greg Colvin
@gcolvin
Weird. I shared a link. I
Ben Edgington
@benjaminion

Coindesk wrote:

a previously undisclosed upgrade

Hey, I disclosed it nearly two weeks ago! These guys really need to keep up to date with "What's New in Eth2": https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oMi-0ZbCD5SdBtMxtHC5gaiflX8MnXGF1_Nk-_gGIUI/edit#heading=h.7kxmdua1kdlr

ledgerwatch
@AlexeyAkhunov
Ok, no problem :) victory for the freedom of press, I guess
Lane Rettig
@lrettig
@/all Meeting begins in three minutes. Sharing the link to join again: https://zoom.us/j/867663881
Greg Colvin
@gcolvin
I didn't think sharing a public link. Amounty to publishing.
Péter Szilágyi
@karalabe

@5chdn The first secret meeting was an ewasm catchup with totally random people sitting on the floor in devcon in one of the public rooms (Fredrik was there too), where we talked whether ewasm could help Ethereum get a bit more performant. That devolved into me telling people about ideas I've been sitting on for data reduction, and all the complications why it's hard. Alexey lso had some ideas he's been sitting on. We agreed to follow up.

[The second secret meeting was Me, Felix and Martin discussing ideas at dinner that day.]

The 3rd secret meeting was actually organized by the research team to talk on the Ethereum 2.0 progress Parity and Pantheon has been making, and how to motivate it. Hence why Joe was there. Fredrik was again there. I hijacked that meeting and told people that Eth 2.0 is nice and all, but can we try to do something while 2.0 arrives so that 1.0 gets better and doesn't just survive? The meeting wasn't organized to talk about these things. Ihijackedthemeeting**

We totally ran out of time (had 1h), so agreed to pick it up the next day, when we were kicked out again from the building, so we delayed again and had our 5th "secret" meeting at 9am the next day. Since we couldn't figure out anything meaningful, we agree to try to dream up some EIPs, but since it's a lot of work for a single person, we figured we can form groups to pop ideas back and forth. That's what's been "decided", to draft up an initial idea to publish publicly.

The last secret meeting was a handful of us sitting in the "food court" at devcon (where everybody else was, ate, etc) and talked about how we could solve some problems.

That's your conspiracy theory.

Hudson Jameson
@Souptacular
Greg Colvin
@gcolvin
Thanks Peter. I never suspected or alleged conspiracy. Just a mistake.
5chdn
@5chdn
I don't have any conspiracy theory. I just asked questions. The answers, however, where unexpected and somewhot shocking.
Hudson Jameson
@Souptacular
I think Coindesk made a bigger deal than they should have.
Added the coindesk article as an agenda item.
Péter Szilágyi
@karalabe
@gcolvin @5chdn I apologize for calling it a "conspiracy theory". That was unwarranted for.
Greg Colvin
@gcolvin
No problem Peter. I am hoping someone provides a better report than these mintes.
Your comments help a lot.
Alex Beregszaszi
@axic
I wonder what is the definition of “core developer”.