1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
|
Return-Path: <luke@dashjr.org>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C073CC0001
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:38:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B56C383440
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:38:00 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.502
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dashjr.org
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id fxAmvWRCQXwF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:37:59 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [IPv6:2001:470:88ff:2f::1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7873482DDE
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:37:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ishibashi.lan (unknown [12.190.236.209])
(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5AE938A009D;
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:37:39 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dashjr.org; s=zinan;
t=1615837076; bh=mABYvEDjtJtpDLAz5pFZsxUim++tPLFymPH9PARer00=;
h=From:To:Subject:Date:Cc:References:In-Reply-To;
b=lsrAkf8SwWwLw7dbuOR8adQz/ItFfMsFn6F9097Rh4myaG4uZg4yrdvjpY50JhGoA
sKKpL4QjqyUiNAXUg8b+Mu5PEcvjdRqBlgbTNW0lkx1xgEium5U8STEEB5FGLFmDfU
s4OnwgYzK9DS4/Mo4BOtfizq6J0WrMM8CYS4nOR4=
X-Hashcash: 1:25:210315:jlrubin@mit.edu::5mzYqAcBVt4IbO4M:ayHS4
X-Hashcash: 1:25:210315:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::BgmwF6oy2MFCz64t:alP22
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: Jeremy <jlrubin@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:37:37 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10
References: <202103151720.04687.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAD5xwhginOaKomLnFML77JpGyd3hMRe2+Ep=ZGbVaa2yRj_eKw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD5xwhginOaKomLnFML77JpGyd3hMRe2+Ep=ZGbVaa2yRj_eKw@mail.gmail.com>
X-KMail-QuotePrefix: >
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <202103151937.38260.luke@dashjr.org>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Taproot activation meeting on IRC - Tuesday 16th
March 19:00 UTC
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:38:00 -0000
While I agree 24 hours is too short notice, if someone wishes to insist on
keeping the current timeline, software supporting it should be released
_today_. Putting the meeting off a week would almost necessarily imply
rejection of any desires to stick to the original plan.
So for that reason, I think we need to at least try to have a meeting
tomorrow, at least to give anyone who won't agree to such a delay a chance to
speak up before it's too late, and have his argument fairly considered.
We can still have a meeting next week. The idea of having one every other week
seems like a good idea to avoid this in the future, too.
Luke
On Monday 15 March 2021 19:14:02 Jeremy wrote:
> Please announce such meetings with more than ~24 hours notice -- this has
> happened several times and while I recognize the pace of development on
> this issue I think that slotting a consensus meeting with less than 24
> hours is inappropriate.
>
> I think we should proactively postpone it a week so that there isn't an
> arbitrary "too low turnout" measure and instead anyone who really wants to
> be present for the meeting can plan to be.
>
> So as not to lose momentum on having a discussion, I propose to plan to
> hold a general discussion tomorrow at that time and a meeting (with the
> intent of resolving issues in a more binding way) next week. It may be a
> good idea to hold the time slot every other week for the next while so that
> we can avoid this 24 hour thing altogether.
>
> It sucks to lose another week but a precedent of 24 hour notice meetings
> for non urgent changes is very negative.
>
> (This isn't any comment on if ST is OK or not -- the schedules proposed for
> ST thus far seem acceptable to me)
>
> Best,
>
> Jeremy
> --
> @JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
> <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 10:20 AM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <
>
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > At the previous meeting, there was consensus for BIP8 activation
> > parameters
> > except for LOT, assuming a release around this time. Since then, a
> > release has not occurred, and the new idea of Speedy Trial has been
> > proposed to preempt the original/main activation plan.
> >
> > It's probably a good idea to meet up again to discuss these things and
> > adjust
> > accordingly.
> >
> > Agenda:
> >
> > - Speedy Trial: Can we get a comparable consensus on the proposal?
> > (Note: current draft conflicts with original plan timeline)
> >
> > - Main activation, post ST: Moving startheight (and timeoutheight?) later
> > is probably a good idea at this point, both because too little progress
> > has
> > been made on it, and to avoid the conflict with the current ST draft.
> >
> > - Making progress: To date, too few people have been involved in
> > materialising
> > the main activation plan. If it's going to move forward, more people
> > need to
> > get actively involved. This should not wait for ST to complete, unless
> > we want another 4-5 month slip of the timeline.
> >
> > This meeting is tentatively scheduled for *tomorrow*, March 16th at the
> > usual
> > time of 19:00 UTC, in freenode's ##Taproot-activation IRC channel. If
> > turnout
> > is too low, we can postpone it a week, but it'd be nice to get things
> > resolved and moving sooner.
> >
> > As a reminder, the channel is also open for ongoing discussion 24/7, and
> > there
> > is a web chat client here:
> >
> > https://webchat.freenode.net/?channel=##taproot-activation
> >
> > Luke
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
