From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TWRsn-0004fa-Pw for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:10:57 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.215.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.47; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com; helo=mail-la0-f47.google.com; Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com ([209.85.215.47]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1TWRsi-0002GZ-6m for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:10:57 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id h5so2140448lam.34 for ; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 05:10:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.114.100 with SMTP id jf4mr7541498lab.47.1352380245482; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 05:10:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.43.138 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 05:10:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 14:10:45 +0100 Message-ID: From: Wladimir To: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0408386b221dfd04cdfb90e7 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (laanwj[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1TWRsi-0002GZ-6m Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: IRC meeting agenda, 18:00 UTC Thursday X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:10:57 -0000 --f46d0408386b221dfd04cdfb90e7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: > I won't be able to make it this time. My feeling is IRC is a good place > to bounce ideas around when time and people happen to be available, but > having meetings there will inevitably lead to decision making that's better > done in a slower manner via email. Well I think regularly scheduled IRC meetings are a good idea, as for some smaller decisions quick brainstorming tends to work better than long e-mail threads. But indeed big and important decisions should be posted on the mailing list too. > Comments: > > BIP process: are we happy with how it is working? What can we do to improve > it? > > Needing some kind of process to allocate a number is over the top. I > skipped this for the bloom filtering BIP. We should take off the part of > the {{BIP}} template that says "don't just pick a number and add a bip" - > that's exactly what people should do. I'm not sure there's any need for an > editing role either. > Agreed in that we don't need a "number allocation king". But some rules for the numbering can be good to keep sanity. What about very simply "everyone that wants to create a BIP picks the next available number and reserves that page on the Wiki?". > > Is it time to feature-freeze 0.8 > > I'd like more time to get the bloom filtering work in. It'll be easier to > promote the 0.8 release if we can sell it as "important > scalability/performance improvement for the network, upgrade to help > Bitcoin keep growing", as whilst there's no real auto update or organized > people who religiously update promotion is very important. I think > ultraprune + bloom filtering is the two major scalability improvements we > have right now. > I'm not sure about a full feature freeze. I agree it could be wise not do any more changes of the scale of ultraprune before 0.9, to give some stability to fix the kinks in the current version. Wladimir --f46d0408386b221dfd04cdfb90e7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Mike Hearn <mik= e@plan99.net> wrote:
I won't be able to make it this time. =C2=A0My feeling is IRC is a good= place to bounce ideas around when time and people happen to be available, = but having meetings there will inevitably lead to decision making that'= s better done in a slower manner via email.

Well I think regularly scheduled IRC meetings are= a good idea, as for some smaller decisions quick brainstorming tends to wo= rk better than long e-mail threads.

But indeed big= and important decisions should be posted on the mailing list too.
=C2=A0
Comments:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0BIP process: are we happy with how it is working? What can = we do to=C2=A0improve it?

=
Needing some kind of process to allocate a number is over the top.= I skipped this for the bloom filtering BIP. We should take off the part of= the {{BIP}} template that says "don't just pick a number and add = a bip" - that's exactly what people should do. I'm not sure th= ere's any need for an editing role either.

Agreed in that we don't need a &= quot;number allocation king". But some rules for the numbering can be = good to keep sanity. What about very simply "everyone that wants to cr= eate a BIP picks the next available number and reserves that page on the Wi= ki?".
=C2=A0

=C2= =A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0= Is it time to feature-freeze 0.8

I'd like more time to get the bloom filtering work in. It'll be = easier to promote the 0.8 release if we can sell it as "important scal= ability/performance improvement for the network, upgrade to help Bitcoin ke= ep growing", as whilst there's no real auto update or organized pe= ople who religiously update promotion is very important. I think ultraprune= + bloom filtering is the two major scalability improvements we have right = now.

I'm not sure about a full featur= e freeze. I agree it could be wise not do any more changes of the scale of = ultraprune before 0.9, to give some stability to fix the kinks in the curre= nt version.=C2=A0

Wladimir


--f46d0408386b221dfd04cdfb90e7--