We had a very productive meeting today. Here is a summary of the meeting -- I've done my best to
summarize in an unbiased way. Thank you to everyone who attended.

1. On the use of a speedy trial variant:

- There are no new objections to speedy trial generally.
- There is desire to know if Rusty retracts or reaffirms his NACK in light of the responses.
- There is an open question of if Rusty's NACK remains if it is sufficiently addressed.
- There is no desire to wait for Rusty's response if he does not respond (but please don't leave us in suspense).


2. Selecting between heights and MTP:

- There is not robust consensus on either
- There are two NACKs, one (luke-jr) against MTP, one (jeremyrubin) against height. More on this in
 agenda item 5.
- No one has an issue with the technical safety of MTP/heights on their own.
- There is an open question of the additional review required to ensure height based activation is
 safe.

3. Parameter Selection

- There is broad agreement that we should target something like a May 1st release, with 1 week from rc1
 starttime/startheight, and 3 months + delta stoptime/stopheight (6 retargetting periods), and an
 activation time of around Nov 15th.
- If we select heights, it looks like the first signalling period would be 683424, the stop height
 would be 695520.
- If we select times, we should target a mid-period MTP. We can shift this closer to release, but
 currently it looks like a 1300 UTC May 7th start time and stop time would be 1300 UTC August 13th.
- The activation height should be 707616 (about Nov 15th) for either proposal.

(please check my math, if anyone is superstitious we can add a day to times...)

4. Parameter Flexibility

- We may wish to adjust the schedule a little bit -- either back 1 signal, or up 1 signal.
- There's concurrence that regardless of pushing the start or stop dates, we should hold the
 November 15th date steady as slipping past Thanksgiving turns to Christmas turns to New Years
 turns to Chinese New Year and we're looking at March as the next date people would want to
 schedule.
- There's concurrence that as long as we're getting to a release sometime in May (with a very strong
 preference for Mid-May as opposed to End of May) that we don't need to re-evaluate. There's
 limited belief that we could stretch this into June if needed.
- There's belief that we should be able to get a release with ST Taproot on the timeline suggested
 by topic 3.

5. Simultaneous UASF*

- luke-jr believes that a UASF client must be able to release before the ST client releases in
 order for people to use it
- no one else in attendance seemed to share this sentiment, a UASF can proceed independently of ST.
- UASF is compatible with a MTP based ST by selecting whatever height the ST MTP started at
 (and a stop height farther in the future with LOT).
- luke-jr NACK of ST MTP: ST with MTP means that UASF must release after ST releases, which limits
 UASF adoption.
- jeremyrubin NACK of ST Height: if using height means that we'd see a marketed push to launch a
 UASF client before ST is given a chance, ST fails its goal for avoiding contentious forks.

* For the avoidance of doubt, theUASF client would include logic to be compatible with ST's minimum
 activation height and may be variously called a "UASF", "BIP8 LOT=true w/ minactiveheight for ST
 compatibility", "ST + BIP8", or some other combination of phrases in different places

Best,

Jeremy